|
home | what's new | other sites | contact | about |
||
|
Word Gems exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Tyranny Adrian Smith, JD
from https://aprisonforthemind.blog/2025/05/26/sleepwalking-to-dystopia-with-eyes-wide-shut/
With eyes wide shut we make a conscious choice to stay unaware, even when the situation is clear. Many sources of information are unreliable, and others tell the truth. Museums, archives, court records, the legislative output of Parliament, these are considered reliable. Hansard is the official record of proceedings in Parliament. Hansard does not lie, so when Parliament gave two standing ovations to a wanted Nazi war criminal for his “heroic fight” against the Russians in World War 2, the only solution was to erase the whole embarrassing episode from the record. They tried but failed. Damage to the larger war narrative was not fatal, however – the deeper truth hidden in plain sight. Hidden in plain sight means hidden but easily discoverable for those who want to know. You won’t learn much from corporate or state media – two horns on the same goat. You can search the record and/or hear different points of view. This is essential to avoid dystopia. The Canadian “Online Harms Act” (Bill C63) protects us from “harm”, they say. State media reinforces the narrative. A tearful mother is interviewed, recounting her daughter’s suicide when compromising pictures were circulated on the internet. A distraught black woman complains of racial slurs. A child’s Lego set is regulated, so why not the internet, they say? Sounds reasonable, until you dig deeper. The harms which the Online Harms Act seeks to address are already prohibited by the Criminal Code of Canada. It’s already an offence to post non-consensual sharing of intimate images or content which incites racial hatred. Nothing new in the Online Harms Act when it comes to actual harm, except the harm it causes. So, here’s what’s new but left unreported by a compliant Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Under the pretense of protecting children, the government would give unprecedented powers to a Canadian Human Rights Commission, a body exempt from the normal rules of evidence. You could be liable to pay $50,000 to the federal government and $20,000 to a “victim” who felt offended or hurt by what you said. Legal costs are added but the complainant (victim) pays nothing, whatever the outcome. The tribunal can even prosecute based on an anonymous complaint. In our common law tradition, representing 1000 years of constitutional evolution, you have a right to know who your accuser is, you have a right to confront your accuser and to question him (her) or have your representative do it for you. The alleged “victim” was once called the “complainant”, preserving a presumption of innocence, but all these things are up-ended by the Online Harms Act. Even if found innocent, the process is the punishment. Denunciation is usually enough for a politicized kangaroo court. This has happened before – the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, Stalinist Russia and Hitler’s Germany. In Hitler’s Germany you could easily dispose of an unwanted spouse by complaining to the police that he insulted Hitler. Denunciation was enough and the accused would disappear forever. Imagine a new army of deeply offended busybodies filing thousands of complaints, including anonymous ones, against ideological opponents or someone they just don’t like. No need for evidence, only that they were “offended”. Imagine the chilling effect on free speech. Being offended is an emotional state, not a rational argument. Emotional states do not operate at the level of objective reality which the law requires for the protection of all. Similar legislation and procedure is rolling out across the anglosphere. According to The Times of London, 30 people are arrested every day for offensive online comments. In these cases, the complainant is always referred to as the “victim”. From The UK College of Police, “the perception of the victim is the defining factor——. The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception.” Denunciation is enough. But it gets worse. By mending Section 810.012 of the Criminal Code, judges will have the power to violate the liberty of Canadians based on what they might say in the future. We have officially entered the dystopian sci-fi world of P.K. Dick, who describes a fictitious “Department of Pre-Crime” in his sci-fi short story “The Minority Report”, which was also made into a feature film, Minority Report. For the world management team, perception management is everything. There is no truth, only narrative. Psychiatrist Scott Peck describes these imposters in his book People of The Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil. They may own all the channels of communication, yet truth is discoverable, albeit disturbing. The black magic spell is reinforced by participating in a lie. Whatever we can face will break the spell.
|
||
|
|
