What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study: Natural Law

Entire Natural Law Seminar In One Document - Parts 1, 2, and 3

1.66MB ∙ PDF file

Above feudalism video on youtube

Note: clicking the below underlined text links,
jumps up and down the, 
Table of Contents (TOC).

Please be patient, 
as there can be several seconds delay each way.

Also note that clicking the underlined timestamp links,
will forward the video to that spot BUT,
you will have to manually re-position
to the text spot you desire.

1) (00:00:00) Mark jumps right into victimless crimes, delegating wrongdoings, group violence, equal rights for all, and turning right into wrong and wrong into right (aka, commonsense truths people simply refuse to accept)

2) (00:02:33) Beliefs versus eternal truths

3) (00:03:45) Visualization test to determine whether or not actions are in harmony with natural law

Note: aka, where two or three are gathered in the name of Truth, there Truth exists in the midst

4) (00:08:54) Taxation fails the visualization test

5) (00:13:37) The world lives under Feudalism, NOT democracy, constitutional republic, or any other euphemism

6) (00:21:44) Prohibition also fails the visualization test and is another form of slavery

7) (00:23:10) Licenses and permits also fail the visualization test

8) (00:29:28) The difference between force and violence

9) (00:42:24) The two pillars of true enlightenment

10) (00:46:54) Earth can be likened to a prison for thieves

11) (01:00:19) Man’s laws are both redundant and immoral

12) (01:10:11) Government is based upon the false notions of authority and jurisdiction

13) (01:17:22) The One True religion and the One True divide

14) (01:20:41) The unholy trinity of government, religion, and finance killed Christ (Truth), and they’re still killing Truth with the modern worldwide control mechanisms of Washington (violence enforcement), Vatican city (lies propagation), and London (financial oppression)

15) (01:35:07) Death of the imagination is total mind control

16) (01:40:53) If anything you do requires following orders, you are NOT following conscience

Note: website author’s commentary here, that I think it’s a little more complicated than Mark presents

17) (01:59:30) The self-loathing of order followers

18) (02:06:31) The lost word, pronounced NO and KNOW

19) (02:17:42) What is the True Great Work?

(ONE)→ Carl Jung video on the disagreeableness of the Great Work2

Note: website author’s personal testimony here of family IGNORE-ance of truth

20) (02:24:02) Winning the true spiritual war

(TWO)→ Emotional mind control4

21) (02:34:42) Microcosmic parental abandonment AND macrocosmic extraterrestrial abandonment is largely the root cause of mankind’s refusal to grow up, reject government, and take personal, individual, responsibility

22) (02:58:29) How the Creator manifested the physical universe and natural law

INTRODUCTION

Okay, so we ended, before the dinner break, (……I hope everyone enjoyed their dinner……), at the concept that if there is no victim, if no actual wrongdoing has taken place, resulting in harm to someone else, there is no crime.

And many people are, you know, being jailed for victimless crimes, that they’ve actually never actually harmed another being, and yet their freedom has been taken away.

Another aspect about this concept of the difference between right and wrong behavior is we have to understand that there is no such thing as the ability to delegate a wrong to someone else. No one can say to someone, you may harm him, unchallenged or unaccosted, that you’re allowed to do that morally.

No more than anybody can say a group of people may commit a wrongdoing and they have the moral right to commit it, to commit that wrongdoing. There’s no such thing as that.

So this is what many people who believe in things like government believe in, that we can delegate to a group of people who are calling themselves a government, something that is not a right, and agree, all come together and agree upon, they now possess this right.

Rights can’t be granted by human beings to other human beings. Everybody is born with the same rights, because rights don’t come from human beings. Rights, like the laws of nature, come from the Creator of the universe. They don’t come from human beings. Human beings don’t make up what right and wrong are. Right and wrong are inherent to creation and are up to us to discover and recognize what they are and then live in accordance with those principles.

So, if a specific action is not a right for any individual, that action cannot be “delegated, granted, or licensed” to any other individual or group and magically called a right. It does not become a right. If it’s wrong, it remains a wrong, no matter how many people believe they can do it or delegate it or otherwise.

Similarly, a right can’t be turned into a wrong. If it’s a right and you’re not harming somebody by doing it, somebody can’t magically say, well that’s a wrong and you’re not allowed to do that. And yet we have things that go right hand in hand with that and it’s called government. An action that is a wrong would forever remain a wrong under natural law.

(00:02:33) So how do we know what rights are?

Part of knowing rights is understand that natural law, the difference between right and wrong, always holds true regardless of a population’s belief system. Like natural law being in effect, the difference between right and wrong are not dependent on anybody’s belief. They are eternal truths that need to be understood.

So this means it does not matter how many people agree that a wrong can be turned into a right or that a right can be turned into a wrong. Such things can never be done in reality. We can believe we can do that and act like that, but in reality it cannot actually be done.

A right forever remains a right, a wrong forever remains a wrong.

People can only believe that they can claim such reversals and that this will magically make it so. Unfortunately, most human beings erroneously believe that it is morally possible for them to create and delegate “rights”, which do not exist, or to take away actual rights from people which do exist. They believe we can do that.

(00:03:45) So when in doubt as to whether an action is or is not in harmony with natural law, the visualization exercise that I always ask people to do is:

to imagine a scenario of a planet, a world, where there is only two people, where only two people exist on an entire planet
if the behavior in that circumstance, in that visualized instance, is either a right or a wrong, in that instance, it remains a right or a wrong in any size population, regardless of how many people may believe otherwise
so if a right is a right for one person to do toward another, or if it’s a wrong, the actions are wrong for one person to take toward another
population is irrelevant

People will say, well, yeah, if there was a couple of people, that would be okay, but in a world of seven billion people, we can’t let people do that. Well, this has nothing to do with what right and wrong is, as if they’re changeable. Let’s look at this scenario.

So there’s our world, and there’s two people, two well-groomed businessmen, and we’re gonna look at an instance. Let’s look at taxation, the concept of taxation. Is taxation of any kind a right or a wrong? Is it morally acceptable and justifiable? Or is it something that is actually a wrong? So let’s look at what taxation really is. And again, we’re not gonna euphemize. We’re gonna talk about it straight on.

So here’s what taxation is. It’s not what I believe it is. I’m getting down to the heart of the matter and describing what it actually is. Taxation is the claim that a specific group of people who call themselves government have been given a “right”. They’ve been delegated a right. We’ve written down a law and we say these people calling themselves government and the IRS have a right to do this particular action, this activity, this behavior.

They’ve been given the right to confiscate, unwillingly, I might add, an arbitrarily chosen percentage of the product of another individual’s labor. Now, let me just start with this, right?

You ask anybody, how many are you going to voluntarily pay more taxes? Nobody will raise their hand. And you say, why not? Well, because I can barely afford to pay the ones I’m paying now and I don’t wanna volunteer any more money toward that endeavor. Quite frankly, I want my resources for myself, to use as I see fit, voluntarily.

But if the government then said, well, your taxes are going up by 5%, how many people would pay them? Most people would. Because subconsciously or consciously, they recognize this is, they’re under coercion. They’re actually under duress. They’re being told that if they don’t give this at the command of the people who are confiscating it, that some form of violence will be conducted upon them, whether through the form of finding them and saying, we’re gonna take more of your resources, whether by saying, we’re gonna throw you in a cage and make you stay there for as long as we say you need to stay there. Or by actually conducting actual physical harm upon them.

So, again, we’re saying that this “right” is given to individuals who call themselves government, and then they have the right to confiscate this arbitrarily chosen percentage of the product of another individual’s labor, because that’s what money is.

Whatever we make through what we work, that’s the product of our labor. We work and then we get compensated for it. So that’s an exchange for labor that we have done. That’s our property, because we gave labor in return for that. So, this is done whether or not the other agrees to share that product voluntarily.

It’s not a voluntary process. Coercion is involved. Taxation is enforced by the threat of violence, which is behavior that will result in bodily harm, or imprisonment, which is the taking away of physical freedom of movement, if those from whom the product is being seized attempt to resist this confiscation.

This practice is always “justified” and the word justify actually breaks down etymologically……it means……the word justify means to create a right. That’s what justify actually means. Jus in Latin means right or law, and then faccio, facere, means to create or to make.

So to justify means to create right, to make a right up and conjure it into existence. So it’s always justified or made into a “right”, by those who claim that such a practice is necessary and required to “uphold the common good”. This is the justification offered for the seizure of the product of people’s labor, involuntarily.

(00:08:54) Now, if we are honest with ourselves, if we define the concept of slavery, and I think this is a good definition for slavery: would it be fair to say slavery is the involuntary confiscation of 100% of the product of the labor of another human being?

That be a fair definition? You’re saying, you’re working. I’m going to take whatever you generate as a result of that work that you’re doing. It doesn’t belong to you. The product of your labor doesn’t belong to you. All of it belongs to me. So you work for me. I take everything that you have been able to amass or create through the labor that you have done. I think everybody here would agree that’s slavery. That’s as good as a definition of slavery as you’re probably going to get. I mean, we can come up with some other definitions that involve coercion and physically shackling and keeping people, but if we really are honest with ourself, what is the purpose of slavery to begin with is to make others work for free and then take all of the product of the labor. That’s what slavery was conducted for.

So, If we’re defining slavery as the involuntary confiscation of 100% of the product of the labor of another human being, we should be able to clearly see that there is no magical percentage to which we could lower this number that would no longer make it slavery.

So I ask people, if the person who’s saying I’m going to confiscate 100% of your labor and keep it for myself would say, well, I’m going to take 75%. I’ll take three quarters. You can keep a quarter of what you’ve created. Would that no longer constitute slavery? And I don’t care what you say I’m gonna use the 75% for.

If you’re telling somebody you have no choice, 75% of your labor belongs to me, would that no longer be slavery just because they allow them to keep 25? Let’s lower it to 50. Is it still slavery? OK, well, what percentage could it possibly be lowered to for it not to be slavery anymore? Only zero.

There is no percentage that it could be lowered to for it not to constitute slavery, and again, if we’re being honest with ourselves! Many people want to justify this in many ways by saying, oh, it’s used for services, services which someone doesn’t have a right to refuse.

You know, I tell people, hey, if I said to you, I’m a computer technician……you own a computer? Okay, I’m now your computer technician. You’re not allowed to refuse my services. Just think about that for a moment. You may not refuse that I am now providing the service for your computer, to keep it in good shape.

First of all, what have I just taken from that gentleman? Right to choose, free will. Right there, that’s slavery. I don’t even have to keep going and say, hey, if you refuse, whether you want or don’t want my computer services, I’m now your technician. And I need $200 every year. I’ll come over a couple of times. I don’t care whether you’re happy with my service or not. And if you don’t pay me, I’m coming and taking the computer.

Now, is that really your property if you’re living under that kind of duress? Or am I just a violent criminal who’s saying, I’m going to steal your stuff if you don’t give me what I say? I’m holding you under extortion.

That’s duress. That’s called duress!

It means I am threatening violence unto the person unless they conform to my will. And that’s what we’re all held under. We’re held under duress. All forms of taxation are duress. It is a master class telling people you have no right to refuse the arbitrarily set confiscation of your labor that I deem is going to be necessary, for what I say it’s necessary for.

So how could you possibly claim that your home belongs to you, if you’re paying something called a property tax? That somebody is saying, for the services we provide in this community, you must pay us this percentage, and if you don’t pay it, your house is gonna be turned over to the government.

You know what that’s called? There’s a term for that.

When a society doesn’t actually have true private property ownership rights, and a higher class of masters actually owns the land, and owns the property, and only allows the peasant class to live upon the property, for as long as they pay tribute to the master class, who can tell me what system of government that is?

(00:13:37) That’s called feudalism.

And that’s the United States government and just about every government on the earth. You live in feudalism. There’s no such thing as democracy. There’s certainly not a constitutional republic. That’s for sure.

The de facto state of government, which means in deed, in action, is feudalism. And feudalism is just another euphemism. It’s a euphemism for slavery. Because slaves aren’t allowed to own property. Slaves aren’t allowed to keep the product of their labor. That’s all it really is.

If we’re being honest with ourselves!

Once again, there’s my catchphrase for this section. We want to euphemize it. Justify it. Call it something else. I said this to that new age woman at the UFO conference. And she said, again, I prefer not to see it that way. Well, you’re not being honest with yourself. You’re lying. It’s called lying to yourself. That’s what cognitive dissonance is. It’s called lying to yourself.

So, if we’re being honest with ourself, taxation’s merely a euphemism for theft, violence, and slavery, the practices upon which it is actually based, and since no individual anywhere on earth has the right to claim ownership of the product of another’s labor, such behavior can never be “delegated” to a group of people and called a right.

Therefore, it follows logically that all forms of taxation……I don’t care what they are, excise tax, property tax, you know, gift tax, inheritance tax, income tax……I don’t care what form it is…… taxes on corporations even……all forms of taxation are always wrong according to natural law, because they are all based in the destruction of free will. They are based on coercion, and they are ultimately based upon violence, all of which are wrongdoings, all of which are forms of theft, and all of which not one individual has the right to perform upon another.

And this is what people want to justify and believe can be magically turned into a right. Just because they want to euphemize it and call it taxation. Let’s look at another example.

Prohibition. One of my favorite. It’s one of my pet peeves. You know, I’m big into health, into eating right. I’m huge into juicing. You know, it’s one of my favorite things to do. Purification of the body is part of purification of the mind. But I’m gonna tell you, I’m 100% for anybody being allowed to put anything into their body because they own their body. If I wanna break up this remote control in little pieces and eat it with a sprinkling of pepper, then that’s my right to do so, regardless of what the chips may do to my intestinal tract. There’s a reason I have the right to eat this remote if I want to. You want to know why? My body is my property. It belongs to me.

Now, we did this in the natural law seminar. We asked people, do you own your own body? Almost every single student in the seminar……now, of course, they immediately answered, yes, I own my own body……the students grasped this……the people they were asking the questions to, because the students were doing the tabulation of accumulating the answers from people that they asked the questions to……and one of the questions I asked them to ask people is, “do you own your own body?”

Almost every student in my first natural law seminar, when they asked people if they owned their own body, they came back to the next class and almost every student said, almost everybody they asked that question to paused for a long time and thought about it. Had to sit and think about this question. Could not immediately spit out, absolutely, my body is my property.

Because I think people want to overthink things and say, well, am I going to own my body forever? I’m going to die one day. Does that mean I don’t own it now? What’s the over-intellectualization and mystification of this concept? I tell people, I recognize fully I’m going to die one day and this flesh is going to crumble and pass into the earth. Does that mean I don’t own my body right now? I’m using my body right now. That’s why I own it, specifically, specifically, because my consciousness inhabits this body and I’m using it as the vehicle for the expression of my consciousness is the very reason I own my body. And people can’t spit that out. It’s like unfathomable to me. The ridiculousness of some of this that the human mind could be worked into the situation that it has been is almost incomprehensible.

So let’s go forward with prohibition. It’s the claim that a group of people who call themselves government have been given the right to prevent others from putting any given substance into their own bodies, and if others refuse to comply with those terms, that they will be fined or imprisoned. And it should be self-evident that if an individual’s body is actually their own property, and it is, then that individual always maintains the natural right to decide what will or will not be put into their property, which is their body.

Why can you put what you want into your car or your home? Because you own it. It’s your property, technically. It should be. I mean, you know, technically it isn’t really, but my whole point is nobody else can tell, no other individual can tell you what you can and can’t put into your home. You know, could I tell you, hey, I don’t want you putting that jacket in your car. You’re not allowed to put it in there.

Well, who am I to tell you you’re not allowed to put that in there? It’s your property. So why would we accept that, not accept that, but we would accept I can’t put something in my own body that I deem that I want in it? Because people can’t separate the act of imbibing the substance or putting the substance into the body from the action that people may subsequently take. And they’re two different things.

So somebody might go out and want to get smashed tonight and do a bunch of drinking. But if you then go out on the street and start clubbing somebody with the nearest available blunt object, you don’t have a right to do that. You had a right to go drinking, any more than you would have a right to go snort some cocaine or bang some heroin into your arm. I don’t think those two things are particularly good ideas, but I support your right to do it.

But hey, if after you do those things you go and hurt somebody else, you’ve got to be held accountable for the actions you just took. That’s what personal responsibility is all about. And these two things need to be delineated from each other. We have to clearly be able to separate the act of the right to put something into my body and me still being personally responsible for what I do with my body.

So understanding that this is a claim made to tell people that I’m gonna make the decision about what you put into your body, we can easily see this claim of this right to command what will or will not be put into the body of another person, what it actually amounts to is a claim of ownership upon the body of another person.

If I’m telling you you can’t drink orange juice, I’m making a claim, your body belongs to me, because I’m going to decide what goes into it or what does not go into it.

So if I say carrots are off limits for your consumption, sir, and they may not be ingested, I’ve just made a claim that I own your body. Well, what’s the claim on the ownership of another person’s body called? Slavery. If we’re not euphemizing it and if we’re being honest with ourselves.

(00:21:44) Prohibition is merely the claim of ownership upon another person’s body, is called slavery.

Therefore, prohibition is merely a euphemism for slavery that is backed by violence, regardless of the justifications made by those who claim such practices are “necessary” for the common good. That’s always the justification.

Since no individual anywhere on earth has the right to claim the ownership of another person’s body, such behavior can never be delegated to a group and magically termed a right. Therefore, all forms of prohibition are always wrong according to natural law. Doesn’t matter what the substance is. Doesn’t matter what it is, how destructive it may be to the body or brain.

Look, if I want to go under my sink, take some cleaning supplies and make a nice cocktail with some lye and some roach poison and some rat poison, stir it up in a water solution and go glug, glug, glug, glug, glug. That’s my right. Want to know why? Because I own my body. I own my consciousness and my body, period, the end. So if I want to do that, that’s my right to do so. Nobody has a right to tell me what I can and cannot put into my body.

Yet we accept this because of these justifications that, oh, it’s for the common good. Forget what rights are. It’s for the common good. We need to accept slavery for the common good. Yeah, it works out like that.

(00:23:10) So how about licenses and permits?

These are claims that a group of people who call themselves government, and again, we’re going back and visualizing. Imagine one person trying to make this claim to another person. Nobody would find it legitimate. Nobody would find that one person may make that claim to another person. Yet we think these other people called government have rights that individuals don’t have. That’s what we think. That’s called mind control.

Mind control is getting people to accept some people have rights that other people don’t have. That’s what it is. So go back to that visualization exercise. Can one person make that claim over another and have it be legitimate? Of course not. So if nobody has that right, how could that right be delegated to somebody else? It can’t.

Licenses and permits. They’re claims that a group of people who call themselves government have been given the right “the right” to prevent others from exercising specific behaviors, even if such behaviors cause no harm to others or their property, unless those others petition, meaning beg, or pay the government for permission. That’s what a permit is, it means permission, to be allowed to exercise those behaviors.

This amounts to the claim that rights are actually merely privileges that may be granted or revoked by government at any time, based upon the people in government’s preference their discretion, all right?

Remembering that the definition of a right is any action which does not cause harm to another living being or their property, there is no such thing as the “right”, to stop another person from exercising a right. If something is a right, meaning it doesn’t cause harm, there is no such thing as someone’s right to stop you from performing that action. That would be called coercion, which is a wrong.

So the actual ingestion of, let’s say, marijuana, for example, harms no one else. You can put that into your body, sit there perfectly peacefully, and not cause harm to another living being. That’s called a right for the very specific definition that it caused no harm.

I would not have the right to tell another individual, you may not do that action. That would be a wrongdoing. Well, it’s the same thing for something when it comes to licenses and permits. You’re telling people, hey, if you pay me $50, I’ll let you smoke that marijuana without doing violence to you……unless I change my mind, and then I won’t give you a permit. I’ll just say, hey, you’re not allowed to do that. Even something that is a right, like assembling and speaking, like what was done in the state of Pennsylvania a few years ago when the G20 visited it in the city of Pittsburgh.

The city telling people, we have revoked the right to assemble and speak and petition for grievances. You don’t have the right to come and speak. No protests will be tolerated or we’ll hit you with sound and water cannons. And people just laid down and accepted it, the whole city of Pittsburgh, because, oh, we’re gonna go and ask them for a permit. And they just said no. No, you don’t have that right anymore. We find you on the street, you’re getting blasted with a sound cannon and deafened. Some people went permanently deaf, permanently deaf, lost their hearing from what happened in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

You see the stuff that was happening in, it wasn’t Egypt, where they were hitting people with water cannons recently and killing some of them. It was in the Middle East somewhere, Turkey, correct. Hitting people, some people died getting hit in the eye with such pressure it hits the brain. People are dead from water cannons they call these non-lethal weapons. They’re telling you, you may not speak. You may not assemble. We’re gonna revoke that right……really?

See, there is no right to stop someone from exercising a preexisting right. That’s you making the claim: “I own your rights”. That’s what that’s really doing. That’s saying: “I’m God. I get to grant what a right is or revoke what a right is in any given time”.

It’s basically what it is. It amounts to someone claiming to be God. The claim over the rights of another person is called slavery. Even more so, it is the claim to be God. The claim that the rights of another flow from you. Therefore, licensing and permits are merely other euphemisms for slavery, regardless of the justifications made by those who claim such practices are “necessary” for the common good.

Since no individual anywhere on earth, no single individual, has the right to claim the ownership of another person’s rights, such behavior can never be delegated to a group and magically called a right. Therefore, all forms of licensing and permits, according to natural law, are always wrongdoings because they are always based in coercion and the theft of someone else’s rights.

So again, that’s the visualization exercise. There’s three quick examples. You have to envision there’s only two people. Would one person have a right to conduct that action against another? If the answer is no……the right cannot be……there’s no such thing as calling it a right and delegating it to other people and telling them now you’re allowed to perform that behavior. It’s always a wrongdoing. But people, because of this idea, this mind control called government, wanna believe that that right exists, that we can delegate something that is a wrongdoing.

(00:29:28) Force versus violence.

We need to understand that these concepts are complete opposites of each other. They are not the same. The terms should never be used interchangeably with each other, because not only are they not even remotely similar, they’re direct, diametrically opposed opposites. Let’s look at the difference. They’re often spoken about as if they’re the same and they’re used interchangeably, when in fact they are actually diametrically opposed to each other.

Force, the definition of force, is the capacity to do work or cause physical change in the physical world. For any change to be created in the physical world in any capacity, force must be used and applied. There’s nothing you can do that doesn’t require force if you’re gonna make a change happen in the physical. So to set up this equipment, force was required. We had to lift it, we had to set it up, we had to plug in the cables, force is required to do all those things. It’s the capacity to perform physical activity, physical work.

Action, force is actually action which is in harmony with morality and natural law because the taking of it, the usage of it, doesn’t violate rights of other people. So as soon as you’re stepping over the line into coercive usage of force, that becomes violence. The initiation of force for coercive reasons, for coercive applications, becomes violence. That’s what makes it violence. Force itself is not violence.

As such, force is action which one always possesses the natural right to take, and this includes the defense, the physical defense of someone’s person, their body, against the act of violence. Force may be applied in that situation. When you are accosted with violence, you do reserve the right to use physical force defensively against such an assault.

Violence on the other hand (……and this is the key to keep in mind with violence……), it is the immoral initiation of physical power to coerce, compel, or restrain, unrightfully. No one has the right to ever enact violence, because violence is always starting it. Initiation, that’s the key word there. It’s the immoral, the unrightful initiation.

So teachers in schools will, if there’s a skirmish that happens between a couple of male students one day, they’ll say, it doesn’t matter who started it. All that matters is who started it. All that matters is who started it! All that matters, because the person who actually conducted violence is the person who struck first. They initiated the immoral use of physical behavior, of physical force, physical power to coerce, compel, or restrain. Therefore, when the person beats back that physical assault with force, they have not committed an additional wrongdoing.

It’s difficult for many people to understand who are in right brain imbalance. They don’t want to acknowledge that you maintain the natural right to use force when you are accosted with violent behavior. If someone just came up to me on the street and started swinging, because they want something I have or just because they don’t like the look of me, for whatever reason, they don’t have the right to do that. If I replied by beating back their attack with sufficient force to put that action down, how many wrongdoings would have been committed? One. Correct. One. Not two. One.

Because I maintain the right to defend myself with physical power, with physical force when necessary, when violence, meaning someone else, started the immoral behavior. That’s what matters, the initiation. Who started it is all that matters. All that matters! And again, it’s a very difficult thing for the ego to comprehend. The ego doesn’t want to hear that. It’s been conditioned so long that responding with force is also violence. We are verbally and mentally equating these two things. And when they, in fact, they are actual complete opposites.

If a kid got hit by somebody else in a school, and then that other kid maybe even said once, stop what you’re doing, and then when the other kid wouldn’t stop, he punched him and knocked him out. I would ask other people, who struck first? And if the kid lying on the floor struck first, I’d say, you got what you deserved. That’s it. Because that person had a right to defend themselves. You had no right to strike them. You initiated the violence. He responded with defensive force. Many people don’t want to hear that because they’re very conditioned.

And I’m not saying you have to do that. You also reserve the right not to do that, but the right does exist. Both rights exist. You would have the right to not respond with physical force, but you would have the right to respond with physical force. See, that’s a free will decision that the person has the right to choose between those actions. I don’t even look at either one of them as the high road.

Personally, I think if somebody keeps beating somebody and keeps conducting violence to them and the other person keeps accepting it and never rebels against it and never uses any force to put it down, I almost look at that as the low road. I’m not a pacifist, not a pacifist. I am 100% about nonviolence, meaning don’t initiate harm to other people. Don’t start it. Don’t start none, won’t be none, in street lingo. That’s how it really is.

But if somebody else starts it, they’re asking to be put down with the amount of physical force that is required to put down the act of aggression. Violence is coercive action. See, that’s the key. It’s always coercion, saying you’re gonna do what I want you to do or then I’m gonna strike, then I’m gonna commit the act of violence. It’s coercive. It’s action which is always in opposition to morality and natural law, for the very reason that it involves the violation of others’ rights.

That’s why it’s called violence. It’s a violation.

The act of violation caused, it resulted in violence. Your rights have been violated. That’s why it’s called violence. It’s the same root word. Violence is action which one never possesses the right to take, ever. There is no such thing as the right to commit violence, doesn’t exist, because violence is the immoral initiation of physical power to compel, coerce, restrain, which no one has the right to do……no, you don’t have the right, no one does have the right to initiate that type of action.

Force, on the other hand, there is a time and a place to exert that force in a defensive capacity. All right, so we’ll talk about that here. This piece of trash comes up to somebody on the street and says, give me everything that’s valuable. I want your shoes. Oh, they’re leather? Take them off. Take the wallet out, all the jewelry. Give me your purse. Give me your wallet. It’s called a thug. Nobody would believe he has the authority or the right to do that, and we would have the moral obligation to obey this criminal.

If the criminal started calling himself government, we might start believing him.

But let’s say somebody on the street saw what was being done, took out their own nine millimeter and blew this guy away. How many acts of violence were committed? One. One.

I understand.

(Note: an audience member said something faintly, and I suspect that it was “the authorities don’t see it that way”).

But again, that’s somebody saying, I prefer not to see it that way. Again, perception and reality do not really align in many cases. They’re not the same. That person is incorrectly perceiving what is. They’re not seeing the truth. And many people don’t wanna hear that that’s the truth, because they’re very conditioned and they are very well behaved slaves. As harsh as that is to say, they don’t wanna understand that the inherent right to use force against violence exists and is always our right, always.

Now I’m not telling you go out and immediately do that either because the perception is so screwed up in the body of humanity that the majority of people don’t believe that would be a right. And they’ll persecute you for doing it. You see, the self-defense principle is continuously being eroded.

Human beings possess the natural right to defend themselves from violence with defensive physical force. A person who is accosted by violence possesses the right to stop the person who is conducting the violence, from continuing to do harm to them, with any amount of force that is necessary to stop the attack, or the assault, up to and including deadly force.

I would say if you want to be nice about it, give the person one verbal warning to stop. Say no once. After that, it’s on. That’s it, and that’s really my policy. That would be my policy on the street with an individual. The problem is here, the so-called authorities of the government, like you say, don’t want to see it that way, and they’re constantly trying to take this right away from somebody. They’re constantly trying to say, no, we own the monopoly on the usage of force, and all you may do is wait and be accosted and assaulted until one of us shows up.

Well, you know what that’s called? It’s called a big crock of bullshit, is what that’s called. And it shouldn’t be accepted by anyone who has any common sense. It shouldn’t be accepted by anyone. Unfortunately, again, like I said, people are very, very well conditioned. And they think that this is an example of two wrongs don’t make a right.

There’s no two wrongs committed there. There’s one wrong committed, and then there’s a right that is being exercised. Big difference between exercising a right that involves the defensive use of force and committing a wrongdoing which involves the initiation of violence. And people gotta get clear on this. They have to get clear on it.

So the question becomes, does violence magically become a right when it’s conducted by government? When they shut down people’s free speech rights and assembly rights? Or when they conduct direct theft from people through what’s this euphemized form of slavery called taxation? And like I said, I’m not asking you to accept or believe taxation is slavery. I’m telling you if you don’t understand that, you’re wrong. I don’t care what you think. I’m telling you it is that way in truth and in reality.

Taxation is slavery. Shutting down a people’s rights is slavery. Telling people what they may or may not put in their body is slavery. It’s not my perception. That’s what is, okay? And that’s what we’re accepting as a people. We’re accepting that.

These people have no more right to do it than any other individual would. And this concept brings us to what my, the way I try to define and explain to people what real spiritual enlightenment is. Because what the New Age community is telling you that an enlightened being looks like is equally as a big crock of bull of what people who don’t understand the self-defense principle believe.

Enlightenment is not what this New Age nonsense community is trying to tell people that it is. It’s not about not taking action and sitting under a tree and meditating until you’re magically enlightened. Enlightenment means knowing what’s going on around you. Enlightenment means knowing what’s going on within you. Enlightenment means truly knowing the true objective difference between right and wrong and living that in your life on a daily basis. Enlightenment means, not aggressing upon your fellow human beings, but not agreeing voluntarily to be aggressed upon by them either.

(00:42:24) There’s two pillars, two dynamics that go hand in hand with real enlightenment. I call this the two pillars of enlightenment.

So here they are. The first pillar is the sacred feminine principle. This has been called the non-aggression principle. All right? It is the simple, simple law, of don’t engage in violence. Or, quite simply put, don’t steal. Don’t steal. We talked about that. That’s what all spiritual law can be boiled down to. Don’t steal from other people. Don’t take what isn’t yours. Don’t take life that isn’t yours. Don’t take property that isn’t yours. Don’t take rights that aren’t yours. They’re the property of others. Respect their ownership.

Most people can grasp this pretty readily. And even in the New Age movement, they grasp this. In other words, don’t immorally initiate non-rightful use of physical power to coerce, constrain, or compel the rightful physical behavior or free will choice of another sentient being. Respect other people’s free will, their rights, their property, their life, period. Real simple. It’s the golden rule. Don’t do things to other people that you don’t want done to you. I always state it in the apophatic, in the negative. It’s much more powerful that way.

But there is a second principle, a second pillar or tenet of enlightenment, if you will. This is the sacred masculine principle. This is what religions of the world, whether they be governments, organized religion of different regions of the world and cultures, the New Age movement. This is what they want, they are seeking to suppress (ie suppress 2nd principle of self-defense), because religions are right brain modalities. They’re right brain methods of mind control. Just like government who thinks it’s a monopoly on the physical use of force, that’s a left brain imbalance mindset.

The second pillar of enlightenment is the sacred masculine principle which is also known as the self-defense principle. Your body’s your property. You have a right to defend it when it comes under attack by violence. This principle states, sentient beings have the inherent right to use force to defend themselves from violence conducted upon them by another. This is the part many people don’t get.

That’s why we’re not rebelling against our slave keepers, our slave masters who are masters of other people in their own sick, distorted, psychopathic minds and are nothing but thugs and criminals, that people magically believe have the moral authority to continue to do what they’re doing, just because they euphemize slavery and call it government now. That’s the sacred masculine principle.

There is no such thing as an enlightened being that doesn’t fully grasp both of these principles, anywhere. Never has been. There’s no such thing as half measures. You gotta get them fully, both, or you’re not there. And that’s the problem. We’re not all the way there. If people were already there, they wouldn’t be tolerating what we’re putting up with.

More aggression against people’s rights is being conducted in this country than when the founders of this nation actually separated from England. And they would have been horrified. I tell people, look, not to get nasty, but I tell people if the founders of this country could magically come back to life somehow and see what’s going on in this country, they’d take a piss on people. That’s what they would do. That’s how much disrespect they would have for what we’re putting up with.

Again, to just say it the way it really is. That’s what they would want to do to us. Because they would tell us, we warned you about all this. We warned you about it all. And you know what you did? You ignored it. Ignored it. So what did all those people who died in that revolution die for?

We have to understand true ownership, real, deeply, not peripherally, super deeply. We gotta know what we own and what we don’t own. We have to understand why is this our current condition? That’s the question we asked at the beginning. And here’s the reason.

(00:46:54) The reason our species continues to experience a systematic and growing loss of freedom is because we collectively do not deeply understand ownership and we continue to commit and condone theft.

This is a prison for thieves. That’s what Earth is. It’s a prison for people that don’t want to respect ownership. They want to take things that aren’t theirs. And that’s what we’re here to learn. We’re here to learn that there’s only one natural law. Stop stealing from other people. Stop taking things that you don’t own. Stop condoning theft of things that other people don’t own. Don’t condone that activity, that behavior either.

So what is ownership? What’s the definition? What does it entail? To own a thing means that regarding that thing, an individual maintains three basic things regarding it:

The first is rightful possession. It means you acquired it without doing harm to somebody else. You rightfully own it. Lawfully own it. You’re in possession of it. You have it in your possession. It is yours.
The second thing is you control its usage. So your house, you control its usage. Your car, you control its usage. Your clothes, you control their usage. My computer is mine. I control its usage. I’m using it. Control of the usage of something means that you own it.
And most of all, maintaining personal responsibility for that possession is the third aspect of ownership.

So to own something means I’m in lawful, rightful possession of it. I control the usage of that thing, and I maintain personal responsibility for it. All right? And this is what we have to understand.

Natural law can be essentially reduced to one single spiritual law. I gave you the working definition, the soundbite definition before. Here’s the super simplified two-word concrescence of all of this information. Natural law gets boiled down to two words: don’t steal. That’s it.

You want the key out of the prison? You gotta understand property. You gotta understand all rights are property rights. Stop taking the property of other beings. Stop condoning the taking of the property of other beings. The end. You know? I could just say, I could just get up here and say, don’t steal. The end. Everybody go home. Should be that simple.

That’s the key, folks. That’s the key to the prison door. And what we’re really talking about here is common sense. That’s what conscience is. People don’t think of conscience as common sense. You know, they don’t think of conscience as knowledge. Conscience is knowledge. It’s not action. It’s not behavior. It’s knowledge. Again, knowledge is the way out of this. And this is the knowledge that has to be developed.

Conscience comes from the Latin prefix con, meaning together, and the Latin verb sciere, meaning to know or to understand. You put them together, to know together, to understand together. Conscience is common sense, common sense knowing, common sense knowledge. Literally, from the etymological breakdown of the word, con together, science to know.

That’s why the problem is people don’t have common sense. That’s why I’m sitting there almost laughing hysterically that I need to try to teach common sense to people. The ridiculousness of it. What we all need to be doing is doing that work. I know you guys get a lot of this. We need to start reaching out to other people. I’m gonna talk about that in a moment.

Conscience, the definition of it, is the definitive knowledge of the objective difference between right and wrong according to natural law. Objective. Definitive. It’s not up for debate. It exists inherently and objectively. It can be understood, known, discovered.

This is different from action.

Conscience is the knowledge. Then we act upon it. So it’s different from understanding something and acting upon it. To have conscience is to have common sense. It’s to know the difference between right and wrong and understand that difference deeply. Then we’re gonna convert that into action. We exercise conscience. The exercise of conscience is actually action.

The exercise of conscience is the free will choice of right action over wrong action, once the definitive knowledge of the objective difference between right and wrong, according to natural law, has been acquired and integrated into the being. We acquire that knowledge first, understand it, then we act in either accordance with it or disharmony with it.

If we act in accordance with it, it’s called the exercise of conscience. That’s action. The law of freedom. This is one of the basic laws within the body of natural law. It’s real simple. The law of freedom states that freedom and morality are directly proportional. It’s a mathematical equation that works 100% of the time flawlessly.

As morality increases, freedom increases. As morality declines, freedom declines. This means the more moral a population is, the freer it becomes. The more immoral a population is, the deeper into bondage and slavery it goes. Another way of saying this is to say that the presence of truth and morality in the lives of the people of any given society is always inversely proportional to the presence of tyranny and slavery in that society.

The more truth and morality there is, the less tyranny and slavery there is. The less truth and morality there is, the more tyranny and slavery there is. That’s the law of freedom. And many people don’t want to understand that, that these two things are inextricably interwoven and connected and can never be separated from each other, the presence of truth and morality in a society and the presence of freedom or its lack in a society.

True freedom can never exist in a society that embraces moral relativism, which is the idea that there is no inherent and objective difference between right and wrong. So humanity may just arbitrarily create or decide right and wrong for themselves. That’s the ideology called moral relativism. As I’ve said before, it is the second tenet of the satanic religion, and it is deeply entrenched in this country and in the world.

In our polls that we conducted, the psychological little tabulations that we did asking several people questions, two-thirds of people were moral relativists, 66%. Think about that. Two out of three people believe there’s no such thing as an objective difference between right and wrong and feel these are just constructs that exist by human beings, and we get to make up what’s right and what’s wrong. Two-thirds of people. That’s where we’re at. That’s where we’re really at.

Natural law versus man’s law or government. Here’s the differences. Natural law is based upon principles and truth, meaning things that are inherent to creation and are not made by humankind. Natural law can only either be harmonized with due to knowledge and understanding or rejected due to ignorance.

So it’s not something that is based on compliance because we fear the punishment that would result of not understanding it. If you don’t understand it and live according to it, the result is inescapable. Because men and women are not actually creating the result. The universe is bringing that result to us, intelligently and dynamically. All right, in other words, once again, this is about consequences. You behave a certain way, there’s certain consequences. You change the behavior, you’ll change the consequential results.

Natural law is universal, which means that it exists and applies anywhere in the universe regardless of physical location. There is no place you can go in the physical universe to escape natural law. Let me know if you find a way out of this universe and into another where natural law no longer applies, and we’ll take a look at it together. But until you figure out the way out of this universe and into a place that’s not governed by law, you’re bound by natural law.

Natural law is eternal. It will exist for as long as the universe exists, and it is immutable, exists and applies for as long as the universe exists and cannot be changed by anything humanity is capable of doing or any other species in the universe is capable of doing, for that matter. Man’s law on the other hand, let’s look at how this contrasts with natural law.

It’s not based on principles and truth. It’s based on dogmatic beliefs, that are programs that are running in the human mind. These are constructs of the mind that operate like programs.

Man’s law is complied with due to the fear of the punishment that will be conducted upon people who attempt to not comply with it. It’s most of the only reason people ever comply with the law of man. And that’s a very low state of consciousness, fear. That really is only gonna get you all the negative things that we say we don’t want, if we’re in that vibration.

Man’s law differs with location based upon the whim of legislators, like prohibition. Well, I’m allowed to smoke marijuana in one state, and then I can be jailed for it in another. My freedom can be taken if I cross this imaginary line? I’m a gun owner. If I take certain weapons that I own across an imaginary line, I could be jailed for years. But over this side of the imaginary line, it’s okay. And you’re just exercising a right.

Over here, it’s morally wrong. We’ll cage you for it. Over here, yeah, you’re allowed to do that. You can have that high-capacity magazine. But over here, you’re going into a cage for it, just by crossing an imaginary barrier called a state border. And people think that makes sense. They think the moral relativism of man’s law makes sense. They actually believe something can be moral in one place and immoral in another place.

That’s cognitive dissonance. That’s holding two contradictory notions in the mind simultaneously and accepting them both when they’re clear contradictions with each other. It’s called lying to yourself. Let’s be honest about what it really is. It’s called lying to yourself.

Man’s law changes with time based upon the whim of legislators, which is also moral relativism. Prohibition in the 1920s. Well, it was legal to possess and consume alcohol. Then for years it became illegal to do so. Then it switched back to becoming magically moral again. We won’t cage you for doing it. Well, it changes over time based on our preferences and likes and dislikes. Yeah, we get to make up what law is, what right and wrong are. It’s called moral relativism, all right? And it’s one of the tenets of Satanism.

So what does this mean for the law of man, actually? You know, that people seem to have so much respect for. You know, we’re a nation of laws written by men. You know, we don’t give a damn about moral law. We don’t really give a damn about what’s right and wrong, but we have so much respect for the law of man, which people actually believe is somehow based in morality, when nothing of the kind could be further from, couldn’t get any further from the truth than that. It’s based in moral relativism, which is about the whims of the legislator at any given time or place.

You listen to certain forms of music in certain countries in the Middle East, you could be jailed for years, just by putting a certain song on. Imagine this. And we would think that’s unacceptable and deplorable. Yeah, we think you have this 30-round magazine here. This state only allows 10 cartridges to go into a magazine. I bring the physical object, even if it’s not loaded with any ammunition, into another state, I can be put in a cage. Physical piece of plastic. You know, it’s just total nonsense.

Either something’s a right and you’re allowed to own it, and you need to be responsible for it. Or it’s not a right because you’re harming somebody. It doesn’t get any simpler than that. So what’s this all mean for man’s law?

(01:00:19) In light of natural law, what does it mean?

To understand natural law, what does that mean for the laws of man here on earth? What it actually means, it’s simple if-then logic to apply. If a particular man-made law is in harmony with natural law, then it follows logically that it is redundant. It is stating the obvious. It is stating what is already known. It’s like saying, I’m gonna write down, yes, during the day the sky refracts a blue frequency. The sky is blue. I’m going to write that down and make it so. Well, it’s redundant. It’s self-evident. You can go out in the sky and look at the natural color of the sky on a clear day and see what the frequency is with your own eyes. You don’t need to have it written down.

It’s a redundancy.

So if it’s in harmony already with natural law, it’s stating a truth that is already there. It’s an inherent truth. It’s pre-existing. It’s self-evident. Therefore, the writing down of that concept and calling it a law is irrelevant and unnecessary.

Now let’s look at the opposite. What if something that man writes down as a law is in direct opposition to natural law?

So if a particular man-made law is in opposition to natural law, it follows logically that it is both false, meaning that it is incorrect……okay, that’s what natural law is……it’s based in truth, that which is. And it’s also immoral. Because if it’s not based in natural law, it means that it is doing something that is actually harming somebody by taking something from them that doesn’t belong to you. Like taxation. Like permits and licensing. Like suspending rights that do already exist, et cetera, so forth.

So, therefore, it’s wrong, and it cannot be legitimately binding upon anyone. You can’t write down a wrong and say, this is morally binding upon you, even though it creates harm. It causes harm, yet you must follow it. And people believe this.

We asked in the Natural Law Seminar, how many people believe that if a law is passed and it restricts a right that you feel you have naturally, because that action that it’s saying you may not do causes no one else any harm, do you have any moral obligation to obey that law until you can find a way to get it changed? And over two-thirds of people said, yes, you have a moral obligation to obey that law. Because these people have the moral right to issue commands and write down laws that constrain you, even if that behavior actually doesn’t harm anybody and therefore is a natural right. You would still have to try to find a way to get that law changed.

Nonsense. Nonsense!

No one can be legitimately bound to a dictate of man that prevents somebody from exercising a natural right. It’s called mind control is what it’s called.

So in light of the differences between man’s law and natural law, in light of natural law, man’s law is both irrelevant and unnecessary, as it is either redundant, because it is in harmony with natural law, or it is completely immoral because it is in direct opposition to natural law.

This is a system of slavery that is not needed. There is equality under natural law, perfect equality. Everyone has the exact same rights. No one has any more or less rights than anyone else. Also, since rights are not created by humanity, and since they are the birthright of humanity, gifted to us by the creator of the universe, no human being or group of human beings is actually capable, in reality, of granting rights to anyone else, nor is any human being capable of revoking rights from anyone else.

Everybody has the same rights. No one can make up a new right. No one can grant a right to somebody that is actually a wrong. Does not exist, never has existed, never will exist. This is an illusory belief system. I’m not telling you people don’t believe that can be done. I’m telling you in reality, in truth, it can never be done.

Chris Lyspooner phrased it pretty well. He said, “Government is nothing but men acting in concert. The morality and value of government, like any other association of men, will be no greater and no less than the morality and value of the men comprising it. Since government is nothing but men, its inherent ‘authority’ to act is in no way greater or different than the ‘authority’ to act of any individuals in isolation (……like that example of two people on the planet……). Government has no magic powers or ‘authority’ that is not possessed by private individuals. Let he who asserts that government may do that which the individual may not do assume the onus of proof (……that means the burden of proof……) and demonstrate his contention”.

And you know what?

There’s nobody on this planet that can do that. Because when it comes down to it, if you’re telling somebody else, they may either commit a wrong against somebody else or prevent someone else from exercising a right, that’s a lie. And that does not exist. Not in reality. It exists in a diseased mind is where it exists. Only in a sick mind is where that belief exists. You have to be imbalanced in the mind, in the psyche, to believe that that’s true. It’s a mental illness. I mean, that’s what it really is.

The word government, you break it down. People say this word every day almost, and yet they’ve never looked at the etymological roots of the word. It comes from the Latin verb gubernare, once again, no V in classical Latin. No V, okay? So again, V’s were rendered as either B’s or P’s in classical Latin language. So, you could write this in what would be more modern Latin as guvernare, with a V.

But in classical Latin, or ancient Latin, there is no V, so it would have been rendered with a B, gubernare. Now, what’s the election of a governor called? It’s called a gubernatorial election. Gubernatorial, gubernare is in there. Gubernare means to control. The verb gubernare in Latin means to control. The Latin noun mens, which is where the second part of the word ment is derived from, means mind. So you put these together and the word government actually literally, from its etymological roots, means to control the mind, or in other words, mind control.

Now, I’m gonna put something else up here for a moment. The etymological origin of the English suffix ment, M-E-N-T, is often debated in this etymological breakdown, all right? And I’ve gotten stuff about this constantly and I’ve told people I’m not interested in hearing about it anymore. I know where this comes from. I know why the creators of the English language made it so, made it like this.

It is overwhelmingly clear, by people who have studied linguistics and the origins of words in English from ancient languages, that the creators of the English language deliberately chose the Latin noun mens, meaning mind, to represent or mean, in English, the state of or the condition of.

And this was done in direct keeping with the first principle of natural law. As we’ve already discussed, the principle of mentalism, which demonstrates that in order for any particular thing, event, or circumstance, any state or condition to exist in manifested reality, as it currently does, which is known as the plane of effects, it must have first existed in the plane of causality or the mental realm, the mind. We’ve already looked at that principle of natural law.

So, anything that ends in ment, the original etymological derivation means that it was made that way first by a state of mind, which led to its creation in physical reality. Any word you can think of that ends in M-E-N-T, meaning the state of or the condition of, means it happened in mind first and therefore it led to the state of or the condition of in physical reality.

So, when I say that government means mind control, it literally does, and that is an accurate etymological breakdown. The word mens was deliberately chosen for specific reasons, and I just explained the reason of that meaning, the state of, or the condition of. Many people want to hotly contest that. I’m telling you, outright, they’re wrong. They don’t understand why that was chosen. Mens, meaning mind, was chosen deliberately to mean the state of or the condition of.

(01:10:11) Government is based on this illusory and false concept called authority.

People think certain people are authorities, that they actually have rights that other people don’t have, the right to command, compel, coerce, and tell people, this is right. This is what you’re gonna do, and if you disagree, I have the power to actually compel, coerce, or constrain you against your will, if you’re not harming anybody even, in the taking of that action.

Authority is based upon an equal illusion that is called jurisdiction. Now if we break down this word, it comes from the Latin noun. Jurisdiction comes from Latin, jus juris. Jus juris in Latin means law. Juris is the possessive case. And the Latin verb dictere. So, jus dictere, juris dictere, jurisdiction. Dictere means to say or to speak.

Thus, jurisdiction literally means to say what the law is. Or in other words, we get to make up what the law is. The law is not something that exists in nature and is based upon right and wrong and truth and morality. No, we get to make it up. We’re God. We get to say what’s right and what’s wrong. And therefore, since we make the law, we’re the owners of these people. They’re in our jurisdiction. You know, we own them. And we get to make up what they’re allowed to do and what they’re not allowed to do.

Authority ultimately is an illusion, again, of a diseased mind, a diseased psyche, based entirely in violence and built upon the erroneous and dogmatic belief that some people are masters who have the moral right to issue commands and others are slaves who have a moral obligation to obey the commands of the masters.

I don’t care what you want to call it. You can euphemize it any way you want. I call it what it really is, slavery. That’s what it really is. Doesn’t come down to anything else. You can call it whatever you want, euphemize it, try to make it sound as nice or as pleasant as possible. It’s all one thing. It’s called slavery. It’s always immoral and it needs to be ended.

That’s it.

And we have to develop the knowledge and the courage to end it. The knowledge, the care, and the courage to end it. The belief in the legitimacy of “authority”, this illusory nonsense notion, is the belief in the legitimacy of slavery. Anybody who believes in, that authority is legitimate and government is legitimate……whether they want to admit it or not, or know it or not, or understand it or not……I don’t care what they believe……they are advocating the legitimacy of slavery.

That’s not my belief. I don’t care who calls that my belief. I’m just looking right into the camera and saying this, because I know the people in this room know that that’s not my belief. I’m telling anybody who’s listening to this, that’s not my belief. That’s eternal truth. Eternal truth. Okay?

You believe in these concepts, you are a supporter of slavery. The end. That’s how it really is. Not because I said so, because that’s how it really is. And that’s called mind control. For somebody to believe that slavery’s legitimate, you gotta be under deep mind control. You gotta be either that or a sick, psychopathic, absolute piece of garbage. One of those things or another is true, if you believe in those concepts.

And again, I’m not afraid to tell it to somebody right to their face like that. I don’t care. I’m not here to serve truth, make friends, or be liked. I’m here to tell people the truth. I’m sorry……I’m not here to serve human beings, make friends, or be liked. I am here to serve the truth. Whether it will be accepted is not up to me. I’m doing what I’m charged to do by creation. Whether it’s accepted is somebody else’s karma, not mine.

Ultimately, authority is the idea that man can become God and through “jurisdiction” dictate the law. What the dark occultists of this world……(who are behind ostensible governments in the world, you know……they set up all of these institutions as temples, right?)……what this sick psychopathic priest class ultimately believes is they’re gonna become God. We’re gonna turn natural law on top of its head and we’re gonna rule in hell.

That’s it.

We’re gonna rule in hell. It’s a religion. This is a religion. Government’s a religion. The concept of authority is a religion. Most people don’t see it that way, and I mean religion in the term of false religion.

It comes from the Latin religare. I laugh when I hear people say it comes from relegare, or relegare, R-E-L-E-G-A-R-E, or relegare. Which means to read over again. To go back over something that you’ve already read and read it again. It’s the most ridiculous, nonsensical derivation I’ve ever heard for the word religion. To reread.

I mean, please, let’s put this to bed, folks. Religion does not mean to reread. It doesn’t come from relegare or relegare……I can’t remember which infinitive is used for that verb off hand but……it comes from religare, hence religion, R-E-L-I-G-A-R-E. Religare means to tie back, to hold back, or to thwart from forward progress by tying or binding, tying up so that you can’t move forward.

That’s what religare is and that is the etymological root of religion. Because a false religion is a system of control that is based in unchallenged dogmatic belief which keeps the mind in a prison in order to hold back the progress of consciousness. And that’s where the bulk of humanity is at, in a brain cage. They’re in the mind cage.

There is a positive connotation of religion. It also means to reunite with. And what we need to reunite ourselves with is the truth, and common sense, and natural law, and a knowledge that there’s no such thing as legitimacy to slavery. That’s what we need to reunite with. And then we’d be living with true religion. We’d be practicing true religion instead of fake religion.

(01:17:22) We gotta stop trying to make our religion truth, and we gotta start making truth our religion.

That’s what needs to be done.

So what’s the one true divide that exists in humanity? People say, oh, this is separation talk. We’re all one. No, we’re not. There is one true divide that does exist in reality, and here’s what it is. The one true divide that separates humanity into two distinct types of individuals. The criteria for this divide is whether or not an individual believes in “authority” and therefore believes that there is legitimacy to slavery. The two groups of people are the people who know slavery is never legitimate and people who believe that it can be legitimate. That’s what actually separates humanity. That’s the……

See, all the other things, divide and conquer……race, religion, sexuality, income, religious belief systems……these are all divide and conquer techniques. There’s one real difference, whether somebody believes in slavery or not. And of course people have called these, the difference, statists and anarchists, right?

So here’s a couple of memes that I picked up on Facebook.

“Statism is the brilliant idea that we give a small group of people the right to kidnap, imprison, harass, steal from, and kill people, so that we can be protected from people who kidnap, harass, steal from, and kill people”.

Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense, if you ask me. I think it’s going to work out brilliantly with that system in place.

An anarchist, I couldn’t find any good pictures of anarchists, because they’re all fake anarchists who want to destroy property and think that they’re somehow doing the world some good. The black block, they’re really communists in disguise. When you really boil down to it, they don’t know what anarchy is at all. They’re just some Marxists who think that that junk ideology is some kind of a pathway to freedom.

It’s a bunch of left-brained clowns who have no understanding of natural law. Go put your polka dot jumpsuit and some floppy shoes on and go get yourself a nice clown nose. Seriously, because that’s what those people are. They’re a joke. They’re a joke. They don’t know the first thing about what freedom is. Not the first thing. So I was looking for good pictures of anarchists.

So I was going to put, like, you know, maybe myself, Larkin Rose, Freeman, you know, Fredericks, people who get all this stuff, who I personally like their work. Michael Tessarion, et cetera. David Icke. But I said, hey, let’s put a meme up there that really expresses it.

So I found this picture of Jesus, a meme that says, “I’m an anarchist, but most of my followers are statists”.

People who are these fake-ass Christians who believe they somehow are following the teachings of Christ, and they believe in government? They believe in financial institutions? They believe in organized religion?

Click to open above post in same window

(01:20:41) These are the three things that killed Christ, if you even accept the historicity of the event.

Who was Christ waging basic conflict with? The Pharisees and Sadducees, the organized religious order and controlling religious orders of his day. What really got him into deep trouble (……he was pissing them off, but they were already on the wane……the old world order was on the way out, and the new world order was already on the way in at that time……), he got himself in real trouble when he went against the financial institutions, the money changers at the temple, taking people for a ride for temple coins, right?

And he flogged their ass. He took out the switch on them, right? Not somebody who never got angry, who accepted evil and said, oh, it’s just an experience. None of it matters. Took out the switch and beat their ass for usury.

And then who finally put him to death? The police of their day. The Roman Empire. Roman centurions. The operating standing army and police of their day. The government.

So who is he waging spiritual warfare against to try to bring righteousness into the world? And again, I don’t care whether you accept it as historical fact or spiritual allegory. Could care less. Believe what you want. It doesn’t matter. All that matters is the teaching.

He was waging spiritual war against the three entrenched mind-control religious establishments of his day: organized religion, organized finance, and government.

And people don’t see it that way, so-called Christians, you know? Because they’re not interested in the real teachings. They just want to call themselves something and identify it and say, oh, that magically makes me this, you know?

Because you go to church on Sunday, it doesn’t make you a Christian. No more than going to a synagogue would make you align with the true teachings of the Torah. No more than attending a mosque would align you with the true teachings of Islam or any other religion……to take the core essence of the teachings of morality from those systems. They’re all people who claim these faiths in name only, when they don’t understand real freedom.

So a statist is an individual who erroneously believes there’s such a thing as authority that is vested in certain human beings, magically giving them the right to rule over other people. This authority means that certain people, who we call government, have the “moral right” to issue commands to those whom they rule, those under their jurisdiction, and that their subjects or slaves have a ”moral obligation” to obey the arbitrary dictates or “laws” that are set by their masters.

Most simply put, a statist is nothing more than someone who believes in the legitimacy of slavery. Conversely, an anarchist, a true anarchist anyway, is one who knows that there could never be legitimacy to authority or government because those terms are simply euphemisms for violence and slavery and coercion, which are always immoral and in opposition to natural law.

Let’s look at what the word anarchy really means. Again, you gotta break it down. From the Greek prefix an, which means without or the absence of, and the Greek noun, archon, there written in Greek script, which means master or ruler. And again, I mean externally, one who externally rules another or claims to be the master of another. That’s what the term archon means in its connotation.

Anarchy, as we can see by putting these together, does not mean without rules. The word archon does not mean rules. Because there’s always going to be rules in effect called natural law, the laws of morality. It means rulers, imposed rulers. That’s what archon means in Greek. It literally means……anarchy now, putting it together……an, absence of, archon, master or ruler, the absence of masters or rulers, externally imposed, masters or rulers. Meaning, when we put it together, it means without rulers, without masters.

Now, if you give people that term, no masters, no rulers, no masters, no slaves, what word are they going to associate those phrases with? Freedom. But if you tell people what does anarchy mean to you, what do you associate it with? What are they going to tell you? Chaos, which is the exact opposite. That’s in that other column.

They have deliberately obfuscated the meaning of the word through a mind control technique called endless repetition. If I could keep telling you a word doesn’t mean what it means……that’s not a projector……that’s a hammer. Hey, could you check out my hammer over there and make sure it’s projecting the image on the board correctly? You know, the bulb burned out in my hammer. I might need to go buy a new hammer. If I kept doing that endlessly, endlessly, endlessly for years and years and years, people would start calling that device a hammer, if I got enough people to keep calling it that.

So they’ve gotten enough people to call freedom chaos!

Think about that. They’ve gotten enough people to believe that the absence of the state of slavery means chaos instead of freedom. It’s almost unfathomable. It’s almost incomprehensible. The mind job that’s been done on this species. It’s almost incomprehensible.

Anarchy is the state of existence where there are no masters and no slaves. Therefore, what it really means is the absence of slavery, or in other words, true freedom. That’s all it means. I prefer to call it anarchony, keeping the entire word archon instead of taking out the O-N. If we keep that there and call it anarchony, and I say I’m an anarchonist, people will ask, well, what the hell is that? And then you could really break the word down and say the absence of archons, the absence of those who would claim to be masters over a population of slaves. That’s what an anarchonist is. It’s saying, that’s illegitimate. That’s unnecessary, and that we need to do away with that state of existence.

So we look at these two, this true divide again, the statist and the anarchist. I call the statist the archonist. This is somebody who believes in the legitimacy of the archons, the rulers. And I’ll be talking about in a future presentation the concept of the archons more in future presentations.

And the anarchist, as it’s been called, I think should be called the an-archonist. Because that’s somebody who knows that there’s no legitimacy to the mastery over other people. Or the rulership externally over others, keeping them as slaves or subjects. There’s no legitimacy to that.

And that’s the one true divide that separates all consciousness here on the earth. The real divide and the real enlightenment comes: do you understand there’s no legitimacy to slavery or do you continue to believe that there’s legitimacy to slavery?

That’s the divide in consciousness, that has to be bridged, the fear of chaos. This is what keeps this system going. Chaos can’t be viewed as something to fear. It’s got to be viewed as a teacher, a harsh teacher, but a teacher nonetheless.

See, chaos teaches us through the apophatic process what not to do.

That’s a bad idea. You probably shouldn’t do that, if your desire is not to burn your hand to the point where it’s blistering and flesh is starting to peel off of it.

If you don’t care about whether that happens, by all means, keep it right on that stove, right on that electric stove. But see, if you say, I don’t want to be burned, there are requirements for obtaining that condition. It means you can’t keep your hand on something that is extraordinarily hot, or natural law will take over and burn your flesh. Doesn’t require your belief. That’s how it works.

Well, this is humanity. Humanity is the little child that is a little slow, and they want not to be burned, yet simultaneously they insist, no, I want to put my hand on the burner while the range is on and not be burned simultaneously. Well, good luck with that, folks, because it doesn’t work that way. You don’t want to be burned? The hand can’t be kept there while the stove is on. The end.

You don’t want negative, self-inflicted suffering and chaos in your life? You’ve got to align your behavior to natural law, which means you’ve got to know the difference objectively between right and wrong, and willfully, through your free will, choose, deliberately choose, the right action over the wrong action. Then you won’t be burned.

But as long as you have your hand on that stove, which means you’re in opposition to natural law, enjoy the burn. Enjoy it. Right? Get used to it until the flesh melts off the bone and then the bones turn into dust. Because that’s what you’re going to get. That’s how it works.

And again, nobody wants to hear that. They don’t want to hear that the natural laws don’t care about you. They work flawlessly all the time, and bring you the result that you’re creating. The control and slavery system is actually about the limitation of free will through the destruction of possibility.

See, all they’ve done, right, the old world order used to be religion, and priest kings, right? We’re in between you and God. We’re the intercessors, the intermediaries. We make the law. You’re our subjects. You’re our slaves. You obey, or it’s our wrath. All they’ve done is take the concept of a singular ruler, which was the old world order, and they’ve converted it into the concept of now there’s a ruling class called government that gets to make up what we tell you you may or may not do. And they’re up here at the top of the pyramid now. That’s all.

They turned it from a monarchy to somewhat of an oligarchy. But it’s the same concept. We’re the moral masters that you have a moral obligation to obey, and you’re the slave class that has an obligation to obey our commands. That’s it. Nothing changed. All they did is say, well, people no longer believe in the priest king, so we need to create an institution where this “authority” is seemingly diffused through many people.

It’s always been nonsense. It’s always been mind control. It’s not gonna be anything else other than that until it goes away. True freedom includes infinite possibility, because infinite possibility, by definition, includes the possibility for chaos. For real freedom to exist, we have to accept, hey, things might not go right all the time. We live in a physical domain, a physical world. Hey, there could be dangers.

Nothing could ever be sanitized or made completely safe as far as physical world activities are concerned. There’s always going to be the possibility something could happen, go wrong, somebody could get hurt, chaos could happen. If you live in that state of fear that that’s gonna happen, what is that? Is that high consciousness or low consciousness? It’s low consciousness. Low consciousness can only create what? Chaos.

The fear of chaos itself can only get you more chaos, because it’s based in fear.

Just keep referring to that expression chart. Go online. I have slides of it online. It’s in videos I’ve done. Print it. Read it. Look at it. Print it and stick it up in your home. Understand how that chart works, you know, those expressions that I went over, those 10 expressions.

The possibility of chaos from manifesting, the possibility that it may manifest has to be embraced without fear, if we’re going to be truly free. It must be embraced. You have to say, I am going to allow for the possibility that chaos may occur, because that’s getting out of the consciousness of fear, which that’s what will lead to freedom, removing that fear.

The fear of the possibility of chaos is actually equated to the fear of true freedom. When somebody says, I can’t ever believe that a system with no masters could work out; I can’t even envision how it could work out. What’s that called? What’s been deadened in that person? What have they lost? Imagination. There it is. That is actually the equivalent of the death of the imagination.

(01:35:07) Now, what is the imagination?

The imagination is the powerful ability of the human mind to envision a different state or condition than the one which is already manifested in the present.

So imagination must first be present in the mind in order to create a different state of existence than the one currently being experienced. And this is because, according to the principle of mentalism, for any different state to manifest in the physical world, the plane of effects, it must first exist within the mind or the plane of causality.

If the imagination is stifled or destroyed (……and the destruction of the imagination is what I refer to as total mind control……you can’t go into any more total mind controlled state as the imagination being dead……), if that happens, any positive change to our state of existence becomes completely impossible. And this is where many people are already at.

The fear of the possibility of chaos is more than even the fear of true freedom. It is the death of the imagination. It is putting the mind permanently in the cage. You can’t let that force within us called the imagination, die because that’s the only way to envision a way out of the prison. You have to envision it first, then you have to put those thoughts and emotions that you used for that envisioning process into actual action, so that it becomes manifested in the physical world.

Through their fear of the possibility of chaos, which is actually the fear of true freedom, most people advocate the legitimacy and continuance of authority in government and are therefore actually advocating the legitimacy and continuance of violence and slavery. Those who believe that authority is necessary, and that it must continue because of this fear of chaos, have actually been duped into believing that human slavery is necessary, and get this, folks, human slavery must therefore continue in order to prevent chaos.

Now imagine that, Imagine that. That’s what statism is though. That’s what the religion called the belief in government or statism is. It is the belief that human slavery is necessary and must continue indefinitely in order to prevent chaos from manifesting.

Now, tell me how that could possibly work. Can violence and slavery (……which is actually what government is a euphemism for, statism and government are just euphemisms for violence and slavery……), can violence and slavery ever possibly prevent chaos? Why? What? Why can’t it?

Because they are chaos. Violence and slavery are chaos. We are already in the state of chaos. Being held under the threat of violence and duress, which is slavery, is the state of chaos.

So forget about fearing chaos coming on. You’re in it now. Surprise, surprise. Hate to break the news to you all. We’re already in the state of chaos. We need to create real order by getting rid of violence and slavery.

Order followers—these are the people who keep this system of slavery in place. They’re the people who keep this system of slavery in place. Let me just say this again. Order followers are the people who keep the existence of slavery in place, not the ruling class, not the masters, not the so-called elite, which aren’t the elite of anything but the bottom of a trash can.

The people who keep slavery in place are the people who willfully follow their orders. Nobody wants to hear that. And people will hate you for saying it. Following orders means, by definition, doing what you are told to do without judging for yourself whether or not that action that you are being ordered to carry out is actually right or wrong. That’s the definition of following orders.

I mean, can anybody refute that? Is that not the actual definition of following someone else’s order? By definition, if you’re following the order, you’re given the order and then you just act. You just do it, because you’re following the order. You don’t sit there and go, is what that person told me to do right? Do I have a right to do that? Is that moral? Should I do that because, you know, it... it’s okay and it doesn’t hurt somebody else? Or should I not do that because it actually does cause harm?

It’s not what an order follower does in their mind. An order follower says, yes, sir, and follows the order. That’s why it’s called an order follower. That’s why it’s called following an order. So that’s the definition of what an order follower is. It’s not my perception of what an order follower is. It’s the actual definition of order following.

(01:40:53) If an individual……this is key to understand……if an individual is performing the task of following orders, by definition, that individual cannot be exercising conscience, since, by definition, exercising conscience means that one is willfully choosing through their free will for themselves right action over wrong action.

Website author’s note: I think it’s a little more complicated than Mark says, although police & military might fit Mark’s definition the most closely. I say ALL formal groups, such as corporations, have hierarchical & compartmentalized structures that require you to TRUST your leaders’ “orders”, to a great degree, because nobody has total knowledge to make 100% independent decisions. Nobody can know everything, so most of the time you are expected to trust & follow the guidance (ie orders) of appointed group leaders. Sincere intentions (even with police & military) buys you much grace from the Creator, IMHO.

Only the Creator can reads minds and can correctly judge hearts, as to whether or not you were mindlessly following orders OR sincerely trusting your leaders, while attempting balance in doing what you thought was right. I used to work as a corporate pharmacist (don’t do that job anymore, and never will again, because I learned about Big Pharma’s intentional criminality), and I had to trust the doctor’s drug “orders” most of the time. I would sometimes question the doctor, if the drug issue seemed major enough, and changes might be made, but not all that often, due to various constraints.

So the concept of following orders is completely polar opposite to the concept of exercising conscience. You cannot be doing the same things simultaneously. It’s impossible to do those two things simultaneously. They are contradictions in terms, by definition. Most people don’t grasp that.

By definition, if you’re following orders, you cannot be actually exercising conscience, which involves free will choice based on the knowledge of right and wrong. Here’s what order following gets us as far as a nation is concerned, not that we’re not already there, not that these people already didn’t take us. Because we’re taken by them already, covertly. They took us through the school systems.

They couldn’t beat us militarily. So they said, well, let’s send our ideologues over there and get into the minds of their children. And if you don’t believe that’s what happened, you’re very, very, very naive. Not only the Nazis, but the communists as well. Because really, it’s all just forms of socialism. That’s what feudalism is, worldwide socialism is: there’s no such thing as private property. State owns everything. Rights don’t exist. Property rights don’t exist. Everybody’s a feudal serf again. It’s called neo-feudalism.

I don’t care which branch you come at it from. You wanna come at it from the left, that’s called communism. You wanna come at it from the right, that’s called national socialism. Communism’s international socialism. They’re both the same force. It’s called feudalism. Let’s just call it what it is. It’s called feudalism, which is in itself just another euphemism for slavery. They want neo-feudalism, which is the new world order of slavery. And it’s already here. It’s not something that’s coming. It’s here now. The object is to get out of it.

This is the result of following orders. That’s what following orders gets to society. Following orders should never be seen as a virtue. Following orders is evil. I don’t care if somebody who is considered a holy man gives me an order and I follow it. I’ve just committed an act of evil, as far as I’m concerned. If I’m acting based on solely what somebody else has told me to do, that’s evil. There’s no morality in it at all, at all, at all. It’s not a virtue. It’s evil. Let me just make that so abundantly clear and state it so unequivocally. There’s no such thing as any possible moral following of orders. The two terms are contradictory, all right?

I was just following orders is never a valid excuse or justification for immoral, criminal behavior, and this lame attempt to abdicate personal responsibility should never be accepted as a valid excuse for such behavior. And why it’s done is through justification. And again, that means to create a right, from jus, meaning right or law, and the Latin verb facere, which means to make or to create. And this is what they say, I was just following orders.

I was just doing my job. I was shutting down your protest. You don’t have a right to speak. The politicians commanded me so. So I just came out and I was just doing my job, hitting you with a sound cannon. Just doing my job, just following my orders. It’s a justification. You’re a criminal. There’s nothing moral in that. There’s nothing virtuous in that. It’s called criminal behavior, criminal activity. And what they do is try to create it into a right, make it into a right by a justification. And nobody should ever accept their justifications.

Because you know what their justifications is? You know what they are? It’s called a 100% crock of bull that is a complete lie. It’s a lie. They’re just straight up looking you in the face and saying, I’m not responsible for that. I just did it, but I’m not the one who’s responsible for it, because I was acting on orders.

Well, see, this defense didn’t work as the Nuremberg defense, and nobody in America should be accepting it. Nobody in America should be accepting it, because they believe in the legitimacy of authority in government through mind control. They believe it. They believe there’s legitimacy to it.

Most people actually believe that there’s legitimacy to this criminal behavior, because a class of people calling themselves government have magically been imbued and gifted with such “rights”. They believe they have rights other people don’t. They themselves believe it, but worse is that the people who are actually affected by that criminal behavior, they believe they have the authority to do it.

Gandhi said, “You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul”, which means saying no.

Moral culpability. What does this mean? The determination of who is ultimately at fault or deserving of blame. Again, this is a legitimate and real concept. There is fault. There is blame. We gotta get over this new age nonsense that nobody’s at fault, nobody’s to blame. You should never say, hey, you shouldn’t have done that. That caused a lot of chaos and trauma for other people. You’re not to blame. It just happened. No, wrong. The people who did the behavior are to blame.

Who carried out the Holocaust in Germany? The people who followed their orders to do it. That’s who carried it out. Order followers is the answer. Who carried out the purge of political dissonance in Soviet Russia? Order followers. And they’re always in the form of police. Why do you think they call a totalitarian system a police state? Why don’t they call it a banker state? How come they don’t call it a politician state? What about a lawyer state? How about a judge state? Why not call it any of those things? You want to know why? Because none of those people are ultimately responsible for bringing that condition into manifestation through their behavior. They’re the order givers.

The older followers carry out their commands and through their behavior make that condition a reality. That’s why it’s called a police state. Because every police state that has ever existed has always been created by police, who follow their orders because they don’t want to take responsibility and think for themselves and know the difference between right and wrong for themselves, like an adult. Instead, I want to be a child who obeys daddy because I have daddy issues. All right? And that’s what it’s really about, folks. We’re going to get to that.

There is such a thing as blame for the commission of actions which have resulted in harm or loss to others. This is what culpable means. It comes from the Latin culpa, meaning fault or blame. It means at fault or deserving of blame. Now, who’s more morally culpable? The order giver or the order follower? And please recognize I’ve underlined and capitalized the term more.

I’m not telling you the order givers are not morally culpable. They are. That’s not the question. Are any of these people morally culpable is not my question. My question is……look at the full question……who is more morally culpable, the order giver or the order follower?

Note: faint audience voices said “follower”.

Always, always, at all times and places, at all times and places. I put this meme up on Facebook, and I mean I got some hate back for it. People don’t wanna hear this.

Like I said, I’m not here to be popular to make friends. I’m here to tell people what the truth actually is, and they have to accept it or reject it on their own. I made this meme and put it up on Facebook, and it had politicians on the left that said, “My actions, underlined and capitalized, didn’t cause that”. And then there were some soldiers or marines, whatever they are, order followers on the right side, and they’re also saying the same statement, “My actions didn’t cause that”. And then at the bottom, I just put this question.

Oh, I’m sorry, looks like, oh, I’m sorry, at the top I put this question. Who is lying and who is telling the truth? So who’s lying here? And if people can’t see, I hope that they can see this horrific picture. This is the result of bombings that took place in the Middle East around, I think, around Iraq. And it’s a father carrying his dead child in his arms. Maybe if bombs were raining down on our children, we might think differently about going in and waging imperialism on other nations. I don’t know. Maybe we might think differently about it, right? But when it happens to somebody else’s child, that’s okay. That’s done in the name of freedom.

Well, who caused this? Did they cause it (pointing at the politicians)? No, they didn’t cause it. They are not the actual cause of this. Because you know what all they did? They signed some pieces of paper wearing their expensive suits. And they told these guys, they said, well, you’re under our orders now. Go and bomb these people. And you know what these people did? Say, yes, sir, and go and drop the bombs. And fire off the ammunition.

These are the people whose actions create things like this (pointing at soldiers). Not these people. All they’re doing is speaking into somebody else’s ear. All they’ve done is speech. Speech, not actions. See, again, really look. My actions didn’t cause that. Yes, it is. If these people are saying my actions didn’t cause that, they’re lying.

Very, very, very painful and difficult thing for people to comprehend and accept. I’m not telling you you shouldn’t feel bad hearing this, but I’m telling you it’s true. The painful truth, the order follower always bears more moral culpability than the order giver, for the reason that the order follower is the one who actually performed the action, and in taking such action, actually brought the resultant harm into physical manifestation.

Order following is the pathway to every form of evil and chaos in our world. It should never be seen as a virtue by anyone who considers themselves a moral human being. Order followers have ultimately been personally responsible and morally culpable for every form of slavery and every single totalitarian regime that has ever existed upon the face of the earth. That’s the painful truth that people don’t want to accept, because they want to believe the absolute nonsense that order following is a virtue of any kind. And it needs to be obliterated from the face of the earth because it’s not the way to any kind of virtues or order. It’s the pathway to evil and annihilation. That’s what it is.

Responsibility versus abdication. So why don’t these people want to think for themselves? It’s too easy to just follow the orders of somebody else. They believe somehow magically this absolves them of personal responsibility to choose right from wrong. An individual’s personal responsibility to choose right action over wrong action for themselves always belongs to that individual, and that responsibility can never be given to another person or passed along.

One can only claim and imagine that they can abdicate their personal responsibility for such choice to someone else. It can never actually be done in reality. You’re only making a claim: I’m not responsible for that behavior because this person told me to do it. That’s just a claim. And moreover, what it really is, is it’s just a damn lie.

More simply put, an individual is always personally responsible for their own actions, period, in the end. If you did it, you’re responsible for it. There are no cop-outs. Stop trying to make excuses or justifications for criminal behavior. Own up to personal responsibility. If you did wrong action, you did it. You caused it. I like how David Icke words this.

He says, “Accept responsibility for yourself and your actions, thoughts, and words. You alone make these choices, so you alone are answerable to the consequences of your behavior. The feeble excuse that your boss required it, that the establishment expected it, holds no truth or justification”.

What is the point of having principles if you allow others to dictate your behavior? Really, those who allow others to dictate their behavior don’t have principles. And there’s a reason they don’t have principles, because they hate themselves. They’re in psychological self-loathing, and there’s a reason they’re in that state, which my future work is going to cover in depth, in extensive depth and detail.

At the end of the day, you will judge your performance and the contribution you’ve made to creation. It will not be based on what another expected of you or what you did because you felt trapped.

Like, oh, there’s no other way. I can’t envision my way out of this. I can’t envision doing something else. I might have to get another job. I might have to read and learn. I can’t envision becoming a different person than the identity I’ve already forged for myself. How could I possibly imagine that? I have all my eggs in this basket. My whole ego identity is all wrapped up in my job and what I do. That defines who I am. You know, I can’t go against that.

It’s all nonsense. It’s all what people are doing just because they feel trapped and they can’t imagine that there’s another way.

Most people erroneously believe……this is the second part of the abdication of responsibility on the part of the people……most people erroneously believe that they can hand over their natural law right to defend themselves to another individual group or entity. In making such a false claim that somebody else is my protector, somebody else, it’s their responsibility to protect me, and defend me, they have attempted to abdicate a personal responsibility which actually always belongs to them and can never be given away.

That’s the self-defense principle. You own it. It’s yours. You can’t give it away to somebody else. Shock and amazement. That is your responsibility already. And guess what? You know what? They’re all too happy. These controllers are now even all too happy to say, it’s not our responsibility to protect you. Because what their actual goal is, is they’re just revenue men for the new king. That’s all they are. And to slap people back in the line if they try to exercise rights that the new king called government has decreed that they may not exercise. That’s what their real role is. They don’t serve and protect the people. They serve and protect the ruling class. And they don’t want to admit that to themselves. You know why? Because they’re liars, most of all to themselves. It’s a bunch of childish liars.

Franklin said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither and will lose both”.

And this addresses the fear of chaos and the desire to abdicate your personal responsibility to defend yourself to other people just because you’re afraid and you don’t want to take the responsibility of doing it yourself.

You want to stay in that mindset? I’ll give up my freedom to be safe? Well, enjoy your safe slavery. I, for one, will take my dangerous and chaotic freedom. I’ll take the absolute cannibal lurking around every corner, and I’ll take my chances, thank you very much. Give me my freedom and my assault rifle, and I’ll take my chances, thank you.

So the idea that you just want to be kept safe and you’ll give up your freedom to do so, it’s just a child. That’s how a child thinks. And that’s what this is really about, not wanting to grow up and become adults. And again, there’s a reason for this. This is the underlying psychological reason, but there’s an even deeper one. But I’m gonna touch on this one first.

(01:59:30) Self-respect versus self-loathing.

People who don’t want to take personal responsibility and become an adult are in this psychological condition. It’s called self-loathing. What it means is you hate yourself. Nobody who wants to perpetuate slavery can possibly like themselves. They cannot love themselves. It’s impossible. You are already in a state of self-hatred if you believe in government, if you believe in its legitimacy. Because you believe in slavery and therefore you’re in that slavery system and you want it to continue. How could you possibly love yourself? It’s not possible.

Self-loathing is the underlying psychological condition that causes people to attempt to abdicate their own personal responsibility to exercise conscience and fall into patterns of order following and justification. Just as it is not possible for an order follower to truly be exercising conscience, it is not possible for an order follower to truly love themselves.

These two states cannot exist simultaneously. You cannot be an order follower and love yourself. It is impossible. They are contradictory psychological conditions.

Here’s what a self-loathing person really is. They’re trapped in a trauma-abuse-victim cycle. A trauma happens. There’s an abuser. There’s a victim, and then it repeats itself, because often the one who’s abused becomes the traumatizer and then the cycle repeats again. Talked about this pretty extensively on my podcast series, all right?

That’s what self-loathing……that’s what this mind state……this is a golem creature. It’s a 100% programmed and lifeless thing that is imbued with the ability to actually move like a robot. You can liken it to a flesh robot. And it’s a concept in ancient dark occultism, all right? And the golem is driven by the force of self-loathing. And that’s what the order followers are. They’re golems. I’m not saying this to insult people. I don’t really care how people take it.

I’m telling them what they really are and what the dark occultists think of them. They call them their dogs and their pets. That’s their name for the police and the military. I did a whole series on that. And I’m not telling you that from book knowledge. I’m telling you that from their lips to my ears. That’s what they call them.

The golem is in this mindset. Since I have suffered, I will cause suffering to others. Since I can’t deal with my nested psychological traumas, and childhood issues, and inadequacy issues, I’m going to take out all of that nested, subconscious, psychological frustration on other people that I have no right to take it out upon. That’s the golem mindset.

Self-loathing is created when an earlier trauma has been suppressed and buried deeply into the subconscious. That’s the role of the subconscious, to protect the conscious mind from traumatic experiences so that the conscious mind doesn’t keep reliving it and therefore re-experiencing it in the physiology.

However, if we never bring up that shadow material to the conscious level, it builds and builds and builds until it ultimately destroys us, psychically and spiritually. Instead of confronting, dealing with, and healing that trauma, people don’t want to do that work. It’s too hard to dredge up that shadow material. It’s hard work.

Believe me, to come out of the mind state I was in, I had to do that shadow work for years, years of more suffering and pain, saying, what do I have to look in the mirror and confront about myself, and then work to change? And admit thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of times I was wrong. I was wrong. I was wrong. I don’t know how many thousands of times I had to look in a mirror and say that to myself, sometimes to a point where I was so depressed I couldn’t get out of bed for days.

I would just sit and lay in bed and play doom metal all day. Literally, endlessly, repetitively. And just sitting there in that condition of total self-loathing and total depression because of what I know I took part in. And that I know was still my mental makeup, was still my psychological makeup that was gonna take years to get out of. And I’m trying to explain this to prevent people from having to go through all that suffering. This knowledge can be gleaned without having to go down that path. It can be done. I’m not telling you that’s easy work, but it is possible.

Such trauma could take the form of feelings of inadequacy, whether they are real or imagined. And you know what that mind state ultimately is? It’s self-prison. That’s somebody putting themself in a cage. These people who want to take out their psychological frustrations on other people, they’re prisoners. They are in the cage and they love being in the cage. They don’t have any desire for freedom. The only kind of person that would have no desire for real freedom is a person who’s in the psychological state of self-loathing and hates themself and does not love themself.

Now, what heals self-loathing? Self-respect. And we have to know what the word respect means. And this is about looking at yourself. Introspection. Respect comes from the Latin re, meaning again, and the Latin verb spectare, which means to look at. You put them together to look at again, to take another look at. Or what are you taking another look at?

You’re taking another look at yourself. That’s what respect starts as. You can’t give something to somebody that you don’t have. If I don’t have $10 in my pocket, I can’t give it to you. If I don’t have a coin in my pocket, I can’t give it to somebody else. You gotta have it first to give it.

So nobody can give respect to anybody else unless they first develop it inwardly. Self-respect has to come first. And that’s why these people don’t respect anybody, order followers, most of all themselves. Until they do that work of self-introspection, they’re not gonna develop that self-respect. And again, I’m not telling you that’s easy work. It’s hard work that can take a lot of time, and it’s dredging up shadow material that most people want to run away from. They don’t want to confront that about themselves.

Only self-respect can heal self-loathing and therefore help to put an order follower on the path to conscience. We need to take another look at ourselves. The lost word. This is the end of the natural law segment, and I’m just going to talk about solutions toward the end a little bit.

(02:06:31) The lost word.

It’s a concept in esoteric Freemasonry, which represents a state of consciousness that has been largely “lost” to the majority of human beings. In order to speak the “lost word”, a human being must work upon themselves in order to achieve a state of equilibrium or balance between the left and right hemispheres of the brain.

In such a state of balanced consciousness, the being has come to know oneself, as well as the working operations of the macrocosm, meaning natural law. In doing so, that person has also come to understand the objective difference between right and wrong, or as these concepts are referred to in the tradition of Freemasonry, they have come to understand the difference between light, which is right, and darkness, which is wrong, or light, which is knowledge of right and wrong, and darkness, which is ignorance of right and wrong, respectively.

What is the lost word, though? That’s the lost word, ladies and gentlemen (ie no). You know the knowledge of the highest levels of Freemasonry now. Most actual Freemasons in the lodge system don’t know the lost word. The lost word is no. And I would suggest to you, it is a dual word.

The lost word is dual, meaning it’s two things. It’s not just one. It is the word no, N-O, and it is the word know, K-N-O-W. Those are the lost words. In the enlightened state of consciousness generated through the knowledge of natural law, a human being is finally able to speak the so-called lost word, which is no.

No is the word of all power. Only when we say no to those who would claim to be our owners, those who would claim that it is they who will decide which rights we have or do not have, do we stop externalizing our power to anyone outside of ourselves, and in doing so reclaim all of our rights, all of our property that has been taken without right?

Sadly, very, very few people in our world have the knowledge, care, and courage that is required to do this. This is why this all-powerful word is considered lost. And there’s the other variant of the lost word, know. Know your rights.

The reason you have to know what the difference between right and wrong is and therefore know what rights you have and what rights you do not have, is because those who do not know those things will never say the lost word to someone who claims to be their owner. They will not say no, N-O.

So let’s look at some solutions. I call this section teaching natural law to others. Because as we’re talking about, education is the only solution. Knowledge is the solution. The propagation of that knowledge is education, which means to lead out from. Educare in Latin means to lead one out from something. And what is education?

It means to lead one out of darkness, out of ignorance. That’s what a real teacher does. It doesn’t push somebody out. It says, I’m going to go first and show you the way, and you can follow, if you feel that this is the accurate path. But you can do the same discovery process. It’s a repeatable process. That’s what a science is, which I’ve said this is not a belief system or a religion. It is a science.

This is also known, teaching natural law to others, which is what I am doing, has been called in all of the positive occult traditions, the great work. And I call it the true great work, because the dark occultists take everything and twist it around, and they have their own variant of the “great work”, which is creating a world of total slavery. That’s the dark great work. I call this the true great work or the light great work, however you want to refer to it as. It’s just a piece of jargon. It’s just a tag that we put on it.

Shift happens. Well, maybe, but maybe not. The result’s not guaranteed here, folks. The New Agers want to tell you it’s all guaranteed. It’s all in hand, you know. The Zeta Reticulians are going to be coming in from orbit any moment here, give us all the secrets to the universe, save us from our own ignorance. You just got to wait a few more years or decades or millennia. But they’ll be here soon.

A quantum shift in human consciousness is required for humanity to become free of its self-imposed state of slavery. Unfortunately, this great change is not an automatic process, nor is it guaranteed to happen at all. We can be in this condition for a very, very, very, very long time. Or it can snowball and lead to total annihilation and the extinction of the human species. The positive outcome is not guaranteed. Anybody who thinks it is, is very naive and extraordinarily right-brained and overly positive.

I’m not telling you the negative outcome is guaranteed either. I’m telling you it can go either way depending on how consciousness goes. How many people in quantum numbers are going to choose truth over deception. That’s what’s going to guarantee, that’s what’s going to determine the outcome.

Whether or not it will occur is a function of the human will to learn the truth and to teach it to others. This involves enormous effort, enormous dedication, and most of all, enormous persistence. You can’t give up. Continuous application of will is required. Continuous work. In alchemy, there’s a saying. It’s like the catchphrase for the alchemical tradition: Labore et constantia.

It means work and constancy. Continual efforts. That’s what’s gonna get this boulder up the mountain. That’s it. And it’s gonna go kicking and screaming, folks, because of the level of calcification the human mind is at. I don’t expect this to be an easy process. I’m not blowing smoke up your rear end and telling you, hey, come over and do the great work. It’s gonna be so much fun. It’s gonna be so easy. We’re gonna get it done real quick, and everything’s gonna be fine.

If I was some new-age guru who was trying to get you all to believe what I’m saying, that’s what I would tell you. Because all I’d be worried about is how popular I am and how many followers I can accrue. I’m not interested in that. I’m interested in telling you how it really is. That doesn’t make me popular. As a matter of fact, that makes me hated by a lot of people. This is not going to be easy.

A quantum shift has requirements. Quantum, the word quantum is derived from the Latin noun quantum. It’s the same word in Latin as it is in English. Quantum in Latin means an amount of something. In order to tip the scales of truth and justice back to balance, a certain amount of people actually need to be doing the great work to help others to receive truth.

If we don’t have enough people doing that, those scales are not gonna tip in the opposite direction. Got news for you. We need to hit a critical mass number. Numbers are required. The New Age movement wants to tell you, no, numbers aren’t required. A tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny portion can make great, great, great change happen. Nonsense. It’s not called a quantum shift for no reason. It’s called a quantum shift because quantum means an amount. You need to put enough force on that scale to get the truth to tip in the other direction. If you don’t have that amount, it’s not gonna tip, all right?

So individual behavioral choices, they are either based in harmony with natural law or opposition to natural law. They combine in their energy and effect and in the aggregate, meaning in the sum total. They influence the quality of the manifested shared human experience. That’s how reality is created. We’re not……very contradictory to the new age notion, each individual is NOT creating their own reality. In the aggregate, humanity is creating, co-creating, the collective shared experience that we are all undergoing.

We collectively create our shared experience. Not each individual creates the reality that everybody experiences.

Yeah, you do create a microcosmic aspect of how you experience your life, whether you’re experiencing self-inflicted suffering, large amounts of it or not. That’s how the laws of attraction work at an individuated level. But at a mass level, they work in the aggregate.

We need a population who understands and lives in harmony with natural law, and numbers are required for that to happen. This dynamic acts as a perfect expression of the principle of correspondence. As above, so below. As below, so above. As the individuated units of consciousness are co-creating reality, so the macrocosmic reality shall become and shall be experienced. Decisively, contrary to the New Age view, in order for a quantum shift to take place, numbers are required.

So what is the true great work? The true great work can only be performed after one has already realized the truth regarding natural law and brought oneself, one’s own……one’s own actions into alignment with natural law. That’s when it begins because once you do that and you’re no longer in that internal contradiction or opposition, that’s when you can legitimately start teaching it to other people because you know it deeply enough and you’ve actually aligned your behavior to it. So the true great work is what comes after that, and here’s what it is.

(02:17:42) This is actually what the true great work is now.

It is the arduous task of influencing other people to go through the very same process of change, of positive change in consciousness that you have gone through. It is to help them to realize that in supporting and condoning the legitimacy of authority and government, in other words, man’s law, that what they have actually been supporting and condoning is the legitimacy of slavery, and that they were immoral for having done so.

Now that is hard work because people don’t want to hear this. They want to believe what they want to believe. They want to be true what they want to be true. They filter their perceptions through those lenses.

In short, what the true great work comes down to is to actually get people to abandon their religions, their false religions, really I should make this slide say, the false and dogmatic beliefs which hold back the progress of consciousness by impeding the reception of truth and natural law. Their calcified religious belief systems. That’s what has to be broken down and abandoned.

Carl Jung described the great work beautifully. I consider him a modern-day alchemist, as I consider many other teachers of the great work. He said, “One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious”……making the darkness conscious!

Not wishing for it to become conscious, not meditating upon it, by making it happen through an act of will. And that can only be done if enough people are doing the great work. This latter procedure that he’s just described, he says, however, is disagreeable and therefore not popular.

Jung video below, about just HOW disagreeable is the great work

Above Jung video on youtube

So few people are doing this work. The answer is to actually become the teacher. I don’t do this because I want a lot of people to be students and follow what I’m saying. I could care less whether you follow me. Believe me. I’m telling you the wrong thing to do would be to follow me. That’s a bad example. You follow me, you’re going to go down a deep path of suffering for many, many years before you come out of it. It would be a bad choice. I’m telling you to follow truth, to know truth. It has nothing to do with me. All right?

When people hear that’s what the great work is, to help change other people’s minds, once you change your own? It’s like this. Let me run away from that as fast as possible. Are you crazy? You want me to do what? That’s the hardest thing there is to do. Exactly. That’s why so few people are doing it.

Many hands make light work.

If we had more people involved in the effort, it might go smoother. It might go faster. Jefferson said, “Educate and inform the whole mass of people. That is the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty”.

Education is the answer. Researcher Donald McAlvany said in his book “Toward a New World Order”:

Toward A New World Order (Donald McAlvany)
12.5MB ∙ PDF file
Download
Download
“In every declining civilization, there is a small remnant of people who adhere to the right against the wrong, who recognize the difference between good and evil, and who will take an active stand for the former against the latter. There’s a small group who can still think and discern for themselves and who will courageously take a stand against the political, social, moral, and spiritual decay of their day”.

Brilliant. The words that are attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew, and many people will never have heard this quote. He says, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. We’re going to talk about who the enemy really is. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me. Anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it”.

These are words attributed by Jesus, but what you want to put in place of Jesus is the word truth, the way, the truth, the light, knowledge, knowledge of natural law, Christ consciousness. He’s telling you, there are gonna be people in your own family that aren’t gonna align themselves with right over wrong. They’re gonna continue to choose slavery. They’re gonna continue to advocate slavery.

These aren’t people who you wanna continue to align yourself with, if you have made an effort to truly explain what’s really taking place. See, this is the concept of true forgiveness and turning the other cheek. It doesn’t mean turn the other cheek and continue to ignore evil and excuse evil indefinitely while it destroys you. It means you have to give people who you’re close with and you have an affinity with, more chances than you would give just somebody who you don’t know to learn the truth.

It’s like saying, because I really care about this person personally, I’m gonna keep going back, keep going back, keep going back, and I’m gonna keep hitting them with the truth. And eventually if they come over to the side of truth and right, fine. But what he’s saying here is eventually this spiritual war is gonna go hot, so to speak. And the people, even who are closest to us, if they don’t align themselves with right, are the people who are ultimately continuing the evil in the world. They’re the real spiritual enemy.

Website author’s note: I can relate to this, as my “blood” family (which means little to me these days) is IGNORE-ant and refuses to hear/consider any uncomfortable truth, even the extreme Epstein shit coming out, which they know about and accept is true, but refuse to talk about it, nor do they want to think about such “negative” things.

Well, who does? Grow up. Mature, responsible adults, must grow up and deal with reality. But, like Mark says, the true negative is to reject truth and continue ignorance, which continues the slave system, and more extreme stuff than even Epstein can dream up, will only continue, and grow and get bigger, and grow and bigger, bigger, and bigger etc...that’s why the world is so screwed up and moving towards self-destruct.

Truly, as Mark says later below, your real enemy is the sleeping masses and members of your own physical family.

(02:24:02) What will this battle really be against, this spiritual war?

Well, I say it will really actually be against inner demons that exist in the psyche of mankind. And these inner demons are egos that are hardened into what I’ve referred to as negative knowledge, emotional mind control, and the fear of true freedom.

So negative knowledge is the concept that somebody already knows.

They don’t want to look at something because, hey, I already know what’s really going on. It’s the illusion of knowledge. The greatest enemy may not be ignorance, but rather the illusion of the actual knowledge; and people don’t have the truth……(and not only don’t they have the truth, so they’re at zero there, right?)……they’re at the zero point there because they haven’t really started looking in the truth for themselves. But they’re attached to all this stuff that isn’t true.

So that puts them in the negative. They gotta do work to get back to zero of knowing nothing. That’s why I call it negative knowledge. You gotta do hard work to get back to a clean slate to start taking in some good stuff. Many people are in that state and the people who are in that state largely are the overly intellectual, the super left-brained, the left-brained prison folks.

Emotional mind control is the second inner demon.

I encounter this all the time through people with my work. Many people don’t have the thick skin to listen to somebody like me, and that’s okay. That’s all right. Again, what Art talked about is that in the ancient traditions, they talked about reserve the meat for the strong men and furnish the milk for the babies, all right?

I’m not here to convert the babies. I don’t have the patience for that. I don’t have the energy for that. What I’m trying to do is get the other teachers ready who might have the energy and patience for that, because that’s not me. And I’m being 100% perfectly honest with you that that’s not me. I’m not here to do that. I’m hoping to bring some other people that are most of the way there, all the way there, so they can start doing that on a wider scale. They’re going to be the people who are going to work with people like that, not me. I’m just being honest with you about it.

Emotional mind control comes in a couple of forms. Well, if this is unpleasant, the new age variant is this right here. If it’s unpleasant, I don’t want to hear it. I don’t want to see it, and I certainly won’t want to tell others about it. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. I’ll just ignore it and it’ll go away on its own. Well, what happens when you do that with any kind of a sickness or a problem? Does it get better? It gets worse.

The second form of emotional mind control is people have a problem hearing truth because they don’t like (or prefer) the way it’s delivered. I’m NOT gonna stop delivering truth the way I deliver it. This is my style. I like my style, personally. I don’t think I have a problem at all in the way I present. I listen back to my presentations, and I don’t totally pat myself on the back, but I say, I did a damn good job there. I’m proud of how I did, personally. I’m making an honest assessment about how I present.

And again, I realize my presentation style is mostly for the thick-skinned. It’s not for the people with super delicate sensibilities. So be it. That’s not really who I’m trying to reach. I’m trying to do vertical integration, not horizontal integration. Build up the community of people who really get it, and they can start propagating it to the masses.

This concept is about the attractive newscaster on the nightly news. She can whisper sweet nothings in your ear all night with the blue frequencies behind her and say, two plus two equals five. Two plus two equals five. And she’s going to get a lot of people to believe that nonsense. Right? But the person who’s actually telling you the truth that you might not like the sound of his voice, you might not like the harshness that he comes to you with the truth with. He might be screaming through a bullhorn and saying, “Hey, you’re in danger. You are actively in danger”.

There is an imperative here. There is a time consideration here. You don’t have all the time in the world to correct this. All right? People say, well, I don’t like the way he said that. That comes off as negative to me. I think he’s fear-mongering or making a bigger deal out of this than it is. They’re not interested in the content, the actual information.

They’re saying: the way that was said offended me. I don’t prefer the sound of his voice or the tone he just took. Well, does that have any damn thing to do with whether the information was true or not? The people who are in this mind state are under emotional mind control. They believe you can determine the veracity of informational content based upon how it makes you feel. And this is a logical fallacy. That cannot be done.

You cannot think with the emotions, and I’m not telling you to disregard the emotions. They’re unbelievably important. They are our compass for morality in our lives. They’re the compass through which we should set the direction of our behavior. But you can’t come to determine and analyze and break down what’s true or not, and make a filtering system, based on just how the information made you feel when you heard it.

You have to actually think with the mind, with both hemispheres of the brain, with true intelligence, to come to filter and determine what’s true. No matter how much anybody wants to give you that soft, sweet, pleasant, emotional voice, that person’s still lying to you. And no matter how much the person who comes with an abrasive, harsh, nasty, or scratchy voice might keep telling you two plus two equals four, and you don’t personally like their tone, guess what, folks? It still equals four at all times and places. That’s the truth. No amount of pleasantry or wrapping up the lie is ever going to make this statement on the left here true. Ever. But yet, that’s what people would rather prefer to hear, if it’s told to win in a nice, pleasant tone.

“Truth is belligerent” (……as I said at the beginning of the presentation……). It is, by its very nature, at war with the forces of falsehood and deceit”.
-Brecht (ie Bertolt Brecht quote)

“We literally believe that we are in the right to ignore a message of truth, if the messenger is somehow distasteful to us. I would argue this to be a symptom of total madness”.

That’s an anonymous quote I also found on a forum. And that’s a great piece of wisdom. That’s a gem of wisdom right there. It is total madness to disregard truth just, because we don’t like the way it was said. It’s called emotional mind control. It’s been a big part of my work that I’ve tried to explain to people.

Where does the fear of true freedom come from?

And this is gonna lead into my future work, which is a whole other series of presentations. I’m gonna go deeply into this, in the future. It’s very difficult to see here. There’s actually a tree there. It’s kind of in a deep red, because I’m gonna put some text over top of it.

I should have started it in a more bright red and then faded it into the background, but forgive that on this slide. You can look it up here at the top of the tree. There’s the leaves, all right? The leaves are one’s refusal to own their own personal responsibility.

Now, you would think, oh, that’s way down at the root. No, that’s the symptom that’s manifesting up at the top of the tree. That’s actually the leaves on the tree, the leaves and the twigs. Then we get down to the big branches in the trunk of the tree. We’re getting closer to the heart of the real psychological issues that are at work driving the negative aspect of the problem. And this we’ve already talked about, self-loathing due to lack of self-respect.

Now, what am I really describing here? What have we actually been describing? What kind of people want to live in perpetual refusal to own personal responsibility because they have some nested traumatic issues that have led to self-loathing and lack of self-respect? What am I really describing there? What? Well, yes, it’s a slave mindset, but there’s something else that I’m describing. What kind of person is that? A child. Thank you.

We’re talking about people who are psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually immature. They have not grown up. They have not accepted personal responsibility, which is a hallmark of true adulthood or maturity. And this is due to the trauma that they’ve undergone that’s led to self-loathing, and the lack of self-respect, which is why they don’t want personal responsibility. They want to remain an eternal child.

Now, let’s find out what is at the root of this tree of evil. Because until we go into this space, into this causal factor of these other manifesting psychological conditions, we’re not actually hitting the actual root of the problem. If a child doesn’t like themselves……they hate themselves. They feel they’re not good enough. They’re not worthy. They have all these imagined feelings of inadequacy and self-loathing, and that’s expressing their refusal to grow up and take personal responsibility for their selves in their adulthood. What kind of trauma, specifically, has that child more likely than not psychologically undergone?

They’ve gone through a specific type of childhood trauma, and I would argue that most people on Earth have gone through this type of trauma. And that type of trauma is called: abandonment.

(02:34:42) The human species is suffering from very deeply seated parental abandonment issues that lie at the very core of the psychological condition that we call the human condition.

Until we deal with that nested psychological trauma that has been created through abandonment issues, we’re not hitting the roots of the tree of evil. We’re not getting down to the very core issue that needs to be understood. My future work……I’m going to be presenting this on December 12th in Philadelphia for anybody who’s in the Philadelphia area.

It’s going to be what I would call a synthesis, an explanatory synthesis, of why this is the root psychological condition of humanity. I call it “Cosmic Abandonment”, and this is gonna be one of the biggest, biggest, aspects of the next part of my work.

I think it’s gonna really set my work apart from others in the truth and freedom community and the alternative research community. Until we wrestle with those psychological abandonment issues, we’re not getting to the heart of what’s causing these other problems in the human psyche, like self-loathing, the lack of the development of self-respect, and the refusal to own the responsibility for one’s own actions.

And I’m going to connect this with human origins. And I’m going to make the case that it has always been like that. It has always been like that. We have been children on this planet since we have been on this planet, and we have never actually psychically, psychologically, and emotionally, and spiritually, grown up, because as a species we have undergone what I term cosmic abandonment. So that’s gonna be coming up in future aspects of my work.

What will be required on the part of those performing this great work? And you know it is like Sisyphus rolling that boulder up the hill. We just gotta get it up to the top, and give it that one last push, so we don’t have to keep doing it again. Who knows how many times we’ve already tried to do this, and it’s ended in failure.

We need the knowledge of the real enemy, the real enemy. And we’ll get to what that is. We need to devote ourselves to service to truth, not even service to humanity. I’m not saying that’s not a great virtue to have and to enact. I’m telling you, we need to go beyond that. This isn’t about service to me, you, or any other individual. It’s about service to truth and principles, first and foremost, and we need courage and persistence, and then we need practical, real-world skills.

The knowledge of the real enemy needs to ultimately come first. And this isn’t it, folks. This priest class that goes and meets and has the rituals at Bohemian Grove, I’m not telling you they’re not evil. I’m not telling you they’re not psychopaths. I’m not telling you that we don’t need people like that in the world. I’m telling you that in this spiritual war, this is a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, insignificant, as far as numbers are concerned, fraction of the totality of the human population, that could not possibly control the minds and the behaviors (and therefore the behaviors) of the masses of people, without our compliance, without our ignorance.

So, while I’m not telling you I like these people, do I have respect for them as an opponent? Oh yeah, you damn well better believe I do. I don’t underestimate these psychopaths, not a bit. Wanna know why I worked with them? I know what their will is like. I know what their intellect is like. And I’m telling you, don’t underestimate either one. I’m telling you, don’t underestimate their care. They don’t have, like I said, they don’t have care in the terms of compassion and the normal range of human emotions like we do, but don’t think that means they don’t have care.

They deeply care about what they’re enacting, what their agenda is, and they have the will to carry it out, and they’re not slowing down. They’re unified. They’re on a unified front. They’re on the same page. Believe it. Know it. I’m not telling you that from, like I said, reading about it or book knowledge. I’ve been around these psychopaths. Haven’t specifically been to this psychopathic gathering, but I’ve been around them, enough. That’s not the real enemy, that is.

The sleeping masses, hypnotized masses. They’re your enemy.

See, people will say, the Illuminati enslaves humanity. No, it doesn’t. Humanity enslaves the real Illuminati. Think about that for a little bit.

Do those psychopaths in the last slide really enslave us? And first of all, people who call them the Illuminati, there’s no such thing. Illuminati means that you’re enlightened, the illuminated ones. You wanna know who’s the enlightened ones? They’re in this room. We’re the Illuminati. The people who know what I’m talking about here are the Illuminati. They’re the illuminated ones. They’re the ones with the light. They’re the ones with the real knowledge. They wanna refer to themselves as the enlightened ones. They might have the dark sun. They don’t have the true sun. They’re imbued with the black sun. That means it’s all intellectual knowledge, and then you’re applying it for the totally immoral wrong reasons, which is to control and manipulate other people. There’s nothing illuminated about that.

So the real Illuminati? They’re not the enslavers of humanity. The dark Illuminati are not the enslavers of humanity either. Humanity enslaves itself and they’re enslaving the true Illuminati, the teachers, who are actually living under the conditions of slavery, because they’re here with the ignorant people. That’s who’s being enslaved by humanity. Humanity are the enslavers. And this is another thing that’s highly unpopular. People don’t want to hear it.

They want to think we’re powerless victims. There’s no choice involved here. This is something that’s just being done to us. And I’m here to tell you, free will is always in existence. And it’s a matter of changing one’s thoughts and therefore changing one’s choices. And that’s our own personal responsibility that can never be given away or shirked or shunned. You are always responsible for what we’re doing.

Service to truth is required. Truth itself is eternal. It can never be destroyed. But you know what? Humanity can be destroyed. We can be destroyed, when we refuse to act in service to truth as her defenders. People say, oh, truth doesn’t need to be defended. Nonsense. Truth needs to be defended at all times and places, because the attack on it is never-ending and nonstop, continuous.

And if we don’t come to her defense, you know what happens? The voice of untruth and deception and evil and mind control rules the day, and the voice of truth doesn’t get heard. Because the truth itself doesn’t have a physical voice in the physical domain. You know, we have to be its mediums and we have to be its voice.

It’s possible for us to co-create a positive outcome in this scenario, but this can only be accomplished if we care enough to learn the truth ourselves, and then we develop the courage to continuously speak it to other people, until our voice of truth becomes a non-stop chorus, like the voice of lies and deception and mind control has been for millennia on this planet.

Courage is required. Samuel Adams encapsulated this brilliantly. He said:

“The liberties of our countries are worth defending at all hazards. It is our duty to defend them against all attacks. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without any struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men.
If you love wealth greater than liberty, if you love the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, then go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you are ever our countrymen”.

Now that’s about as powerful as it gets, as far as I’m concerned. Because he’s telling you: if your allegiance isn’t to the truth and freedom, I don’t want to know you. I don’t want to know you! And we hope history forgets that you ever were with us at this time and place in history. Because you deserve to be forgotten. That’s what he’s saying here. You know, I couldn’t agree more.

Persistence is required, constant effort. We are the actual vehicles by which truth operates in the world. Therefore, it is our shared responsibility at this time to help to awaken others by continuously speaking the truth, even if we feel burdened by this task, even if we feel no one is listening, and even if it makes all involved in this process feel uncomfortable. It’s not about feeling comfort, folks. It’s not about staying complacent. It’s about shaking things up, making people feel uncomfortable.

Who said, who ever told anybody that the truth would make you all warm and fuzzy inside? Who ever told anybody that? Why do people wanna believe that? Who ever said that that was the case? The truth is horrible and yet needs to be embraced as a lover, with dedication to it, even in its full horror.

Thomas Paine, who I feel was the most enlightened person on the continent at the time of the American Revolution personally, he’s one of my personal heroes, and walked in the vicinity where I walk sometimes now. He said, “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country. But he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny like hell is not easily conquered. Yet we have this consolation with us that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph”.

I think he was one of the true anarchists that was living amongst us in the colonial days. Words attributed to the Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama. He said, “There are only two mistakes that one can ever make on the path to truth. Not starting and not going all the way. All the way”.

I wrap up a lot of my podcasts with this quote, because I love it so much. It’s about persistence. It’s not about saying, hey, I went this far, and now I’m uncomfortable to see the rest of the picture. I made it three quarters up the mountain. That’s far enough. Let me set up my base camp here. I’ll pitch my tent, and I’m staying here. No farther. I don’t want to see the peak.

Until we become fully enlightened and go all the way to the summit, don’t expect things to change. Don’t expect them to get better. The truth has to be taken in its fullness. We need real-world practical skills. This isn’t just about, oh, I know this now, and I don’t actually need any skills.

To communicate truth, skill is required. Knowledge is required. To reach a good amount of people, yeah, you can just talk to the people around you. You can communicate to a small fraction of people that way. I’m not saying don’t do that, even if you don’t have these other skills.

I’m saying if you want to get it out in a big way to the masses of people, and in the new form of media, which is doing things like this, through the correct and positive and empowering use of technology. People wanna say, oh, there’s no, technology’s not, you know, there’s no role for it, we gotta get rid of technology.

Technology is a thing that improves life at every scale and level. It’s a tool. It’s how it’s used, exactly. We’re using technology for a powerful and enlightening purpose right now. And that’s its intended use. It’s to serve humanity and to serve truth.

So real-world skills in the technological era, I feel, are absolutely required, and here’s some of them. You need good organizational skills. Like, hey, Art and Chris did this right today. They set this up right. I’ve seen people set things up real badly, and I’ve seen it done the correct way, which is this way. And Richard and Lisa, they’ve done a brilliant job here getting this all on film, and this will be going online, and reaching a ton, a real wider base of people as a result.

All right, so you need organizational skills.

Some people are better than that with others. I’m pretty good with organization. I feel I have good, powerful organization skills. Communication skills. You need to have a way with words. You need to have a good vocabulary. You need to organize words correctly. You need to be able to communicate concepts in often a very linear fashion to people so that they can readily absorb it easily.

If you’re all over the place, you’re not gonna get the concept. You need graphic design skills in many cases. I couldn’t build a presentation like this without my background in graphic design. And thank God I have it. It’s like I got jobs like I did in the past and sort of they prepared me for everything that I was gonna do in my future. Synchromistically worked out like that. But you at least gotta know how to lay out a flyer, folks. How many people here can lay out a simple flyer? That’s awesome.

I’m so highly impressed by that. I’m telling you, I’ve asked people that in other presentations, like two people raised their hand. That’s awesome You should be proud of that. Presentation skills, like putting something like this together. How many people have basic presentation skills with a computer? A little less, but not bad either. I’m impressed.

Audio skills. Sometimes you gotta work with audio, podcast audio, et cetera. Video, video editing skills. I know Rich is a master at that. Website development. This was laborious in the past, just 10 years ago. We have free open source content management systems now that make this almost a breeze. It’s just somewhat a little bit of a learning curve, but once you get there, hey, you’re off to the races. You can maintain multiple websites then. Right? So how many people can build a simple website by a show of hands? That’s also awesome. I mean, you know, kudos. Whoever hates that word, you know, whatever.

But I’m telling you, that’s impressive. For an amount of people in one room to have all those skills, I’m impressed. It’s very rare, all right? Networking skills. I mean literally like people skills. I’m weak on this. I can do it. I don’t like doing it. I don’t like marketing and promotion either. I’m not a good marketer of my work. I’m trying to get better at that, but I need some work with that. Maybe there’s people that can help me with that.

I have a good chunk of all these skills. I could do all of them. I’m not so good on the last two. I need more work. You know, if most of us don’t have these skills, we’re not gonna be reaching the optimum number of people. We need to become the new media that is dedicated to truth, and put that out there for other people’s consumption and other people’s edification, all right? We are the answer.

We are the illuminators, the ones who will help to enlighten other people, once we’ve taken this knowledge into ourselves, and then that’s only the beginning, folks. You got to put it back out there. I tell people the story. I had all this knowledge for a long time, sitting on it, doing nothing with it, just taking more in. Oh, I want to make sure I got it all right. I want to make sure I got the whole picture.

I go to a meeting in the state of Virginia. Virginia, virgin, the goddess. Care. Very synchronistic. A woman comes up to me, she says, “You’re one of the most knowledgeable people I’ve come across, what are you doing”?

I said, “What do you mean, what am I doing”?

She said, “I mean, what are you doing with all the knowledge you have? I’m doing lectures, presentations, videos, audio, what are you doing?”

“I’m not doing any of those things. I’m just taking a lot more in, downloading a lot more videos”.

She goes like this, and it’s just so matter-of-factly and harshly, “What makes you think you have the right to do that? What makes you think you can keep taking all of this in, all of this in, all of this in, and not put any of it back out? What makes you think you even have a right to do that”?

I was like, it was like somebody hit me in the face.

She said, this was her phrase. She said, I’ll never forget it. “You’re Niagara Falls in a water balloon”.

You’re taking all this in and all this pressure, pressure, pressure building up. It’s got no outlet. It’s gonna burst.

She said, “You have to put an outlet valve on that knowledge and let it flow out of you and go out to others, and then more will come in. Right now, there’s no pressure release valve. Your Niagara Falls in a water balloon”.

It’s like a truck ran me over, you know? Literally like, ok, I got hit by a truck.

I came up with the idea for What on Earth is Happening a couple weeks after that, because that’s all I could think about. All I could think about is what she said. It kept echoing in my head. What makes you think you have a right to do that? And didn’t say it nice.

Said it like, you know, you’re not doing the right thing here. Get up off your ass and do something. That was the tone it was set in. And I totally appreciate it. Who knows, man, if that wasn’t said to me at that time, I might not be doing anything. I might not have done a thing. You never know. I like to think at some point I would have, but……

At the crossroads. This is the last section. Then we’ll get to some questions. Quote by R. Buckminster Fuller:

“The dark ages still reign over all of humanity, and the depth and persistence of this domination are only now becoming clear. This dark ages prison has no steel bars, no chains, or locks. Instead, it is locked by mis-orientation and built upon misinformation. Caught up in a plethora of conditioned reflexes and driven by the human ego, both warden and prisoner attempt meagerly to compete with God. All are intractably skeptical of what they do not understand. We are powerfully imprisoned in these dark ages simply by the terms in which we have been conditioned to think”.

The conditioning of our thought is what has kept us in this prison. And only now, the actual depth of the dark ages that we are in are starting to become clear to some people.

We are in the time that I call the apocalypse, and actually, I wanna start rephrasing this. I wanna actually explain to people we’re not in the apocalypse anymore. We are now in post-apocalyptic times. We are living in post-apocalypse. The apocalypse has already occurred. It’s over. We are living in the time after the apocalypse. And what do I mean by that?

Well, we gotta look at the meaning of the word. From the Greek prefix, apo, which means away from, off of, or removed from. And then the Greek verb, kalyptine, which means to cover or to conceal or to hide. So, Apocalypse means literally to take the cover off of, to remove the veil from, or to take something out of hiding. Well, ladies and gentlemen, another big surprise. The veil has already been lifted. The truth is already out there. It’s out. The truth about what’s going on here and has been going on here on the earth is out.

It has been de-occulted. Not just by me, by many, many other researchers. There’s a laundry list of them on my website and I talk about it in the podcasts.

It’s all out there. It literally means to reveal or to take out of hiding. The apocalypse is the great revealing of the truth to the masses of people, or it is what I simply refer to as the process of de-occulting the truth, removing it from being hidden.

What humanity needs to do is make what I call the cosmic apology, and I’ll get to what that means. See these words right here? I was wrong. That’s the most powerful phrase that can ever be said by a human being. The second most powerful phrase I would say, I would acknowledge, is I love you. But this is more powerful than even that, because this is about internal change, not just a dynamic or an interaction or a relationship with another. This is about an internal metamorphosis.

When you say these words, this is the phrase of all power. No is the word of all power by which we reclaim our power, but this is the phrase of power, all right? The word apology comes from Greek. Apo, meaning away from, off of, or removed from, as we’ve just seen. And the Greek noun logos. Logos means word. So hence, an apology literally means to go away from the word or to give back the word. You are taking it back.

So if I make an apology, I said something. I didn’t really mean it, or I want to retract it. An apology means, let me take back what I just said. I’m taking it back. I’m removing the word. I’m going away from the former word or phrase that I just said.

That’s an apology in the standard colloquial English understanding sense.

Let’s look at what I call the cosmic apology and where this term really comes from, what it really means. See, the Greek noun logos, which is written there in Greek script, which means word in Greek, it comes from the Greek verb lego. Lego in Greek means to speak or to say. It’s where we get the English word lexicon from. The Latin noun lex, legis, is related to the Greek verb lego, to say.

(02:58:29) Again, because who put the laws into manifestation?

The Creator did. How did the Creator manifest the physical universe and all the laws? Spoke it into existence. Reality and truth are spoken into existence by the power of vibration, the vibratory power of voice. So the Creator created the universe by the phrase fiat lux in Latin. It means let there be light.

The Latin noun lex legis meaning law is actually derived from this Greek verb lego, meaning to speak or to say. God and not man is the logos, the author of law, the one who spoke the law into existence at the creation of the universe, because natural law is the boundary conditions of the manifested reality called the physical universe. These are the boundary conditions which govern it.

Humanity’s work is to learn to listen to God’s word, not man’s word, not man’s law, natural law, spiritual law, moral law, God’s law, karmic law. I don’t care what you want to call it. Call it whatever you want. Consequentialism. This is the truth. You want to talk about what all these phrases really mean? It all comes back to the word truth. That’s it. It’s the truth about what is, what’s operating here. And humanity needs to align its behavior to this law: God’s law, natural law.

Without alignment of its behavior (ie human behavior) to natural law, don’t expect a thing to change here. Expect it to rapidly grow worse. Humanity must make a cosmic apology by giving the word, which means the authorship of creating law. See, we think we’re the authors. We’re the authorities. That’s what author means, right? Author. What’s another word for author?

This is how mind control through words works, right? An author is a what? A writer. Well, what are you saying there? An author who has authority……they are authoring something……is a writer. They are a write, R-I-G-H-T dash E-R. They’re making it into a right. This is what you hear when you hear the word authority.

You hear author, which means a writer, meaning one who makes rights, which means someone who believes they’re God. That’s all this really comes down to. In a nutshell, we’re up against a class of people who believe that they can be God, and own and rule everybody else. That’s all the dark occult comes down to, folks. People who believe they’re God. Sick, psychopathic lunatics who think they’re God and are gonna rule the hell of the prison world that they’re gonna create, that they call their dark new world order.

We need to give the word back. That’s what an apology is. And who it needs to be given back to is the Creator of the universe, because that’s the author of the law.

That’s its rightful owner. The Word doesn’t belong to us, folks. The Word belongs to God. That’s why it says at the beginning of the biblical text, in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God. That’s what the Logos is, natural law.

God is law. You want the best definition I could ever give you for the word God? Law. People don’t want to look at it like that. Very few people ever look at it like that. That’s what the force of creation is. It’s natural law. It’s how we co-create our reality, whether we do it consciously or unconsciously.

This apology is accomplished when we open our minds and hearts to truth and we start saying the lost word, no, to evil, to the presence of evil in our lives. See, this is an initiate inside what was known as the Jed or the De-Jed pillars, depending on how certain people pronounce it. And these Jed pillars represented stability and enlightenment. And they represent the two principles, the sacred feminine principle of non-aggression and the sacred masculine principle of self-defense.

The initiator is the enlightened one who has incorporated and bridged both pillars and has come to the place of cosmic illumination, which is represented by the winged disc of Ma’at in the Kemetian tradition, which is over the lintel between the two pillars. That winged disc of Ma’at.

Ma’at was considered a great mother goddess in the Kemetian, the ancient Egyptian traditions. She was the force. She was a personified deity. The ancient Kemetians didn’t actually worship a physical woman. It’s not what this was. It was the personification of truth and justice and order and natural law that was encapsulated as the sacred feminine essence. And she was above all the other deities in the pantheon of Egyptian deities, of Kemetian deities.

Ma’at, there was no god or goddess higher.

And how they looked at alignment with Ma’at is, if you wanted to have order and you wanted to avoid chaos, you learned the teachings of Ma’at, because she was the goddess of justice and she was the goddess of righteousness. She was the goddess that brought order, if you aligned yourself to her teachings and her teachings were natural law.

So that’s what this is here. This is saying we need to take away the word. It’s not saying remain silent and don’t use your voice. It’s not what it’s ever been saying. This is a symbolic allegory for the apology, right? You know what else the G in the middle of the compasses and square is? Apollo-gy, the sun, the light, the generative principle. We need to make the Apollo-G, all right? That’s what the G in the middle of the compass is, in square, in allegory also represents, because one of the big deities, the Greek deities that is often kind of exemplified in the Freemasonic tradition is Apollo. He was a sun god, and he was a corollary to Horus in the Egyptian tradition, and Jesus in the Christian tradition, and Mithra in the Persian tradition, and many other sun gods that represented truth and light.

So that’s the middle way, the middle pillar. That’s what the initiate represents. I started this presentation with the slide before we begin. Now we have begun, and it’s up to you to take it further. What you’ll do with this knowledge is entirely up to you.

See, this is a painting by Alex Gray that shows the worldview schism. Are we gonna stay embedded in the left brain and in other forms of imbalance, and we’re gonna create the negative worldview, right? Or are we gonna live in harmony with natural law, which can create this path, when we incorporate the creative and nurturing and sacred feminine aspect of our beings.

Natural law, living in harmony with it, can only lead to these conditions. Freedom, peace, prosperity, the continuation of our species, our actual physical survival, and our evolutionary progress in consciousness. That’s what living in harmony with natural law leads to.

Conversely, living in opposition to natural law will get us this side of the world tree. It’ll bring this world, this hellish world of chaos and destruction. Because living in opposition to natural law can only lead to these states. Control, enslavement, war, chaos, evolutionary stagnation, and ultimately the extinction of our species.

Which will we choose?

You know, that’s still up in the air. I can’t tell you that. Only each individual can make that decision for themself, and then that will play out in the aggregate, in the mass consciousness, the numbers.

Thomas Jefferson said, “A free people claimed their rights as derived from the laws of nature……(and this was also embedded in the Declaration of Independence)……the laws of nature and of nature’s God and not as the gift of their magistrates.

John Locke said, “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule”.

Former Grand Master of the Order of the Rose Cross, the Rosicrucian tradition, Francis Bacon said, “Nature to be commanded must first be obeyed”.

If we want the forces of the cosmos on our side, we have to learn and adhere to the principles of natural law. If we do not align our behavior to that, nature will not stand with us. It will continuously stand against us, and it will itself create more strife and suffering in our lives. And we certainly won’t command it. We won’t command its forces with things like free energy used for any positive purpose. It’ll only be used for destructive purposes.

The psychologist Alfred Adler said, “There is a law that man should love his neighbor as himself……(and he’s referring, of course, here to the golden rule)…… In a few hundred years, it should be as natural to mankind as breathing or the upright gait, but if he does not learn it, he must perish”.

And you know, folks, I would really hope this is gonna take less than a few hundred years, but based on where we’re at, I’m not so sure, you know? I think we could do it a lot faster than that, if we accept the key that’s been shown here today that, as I said before, has the power to unlock all the locks on all the doors to all the cages. And that’s what the knowledge of natural law comprises.

Will we make the choice to climb the ladder of consciousness through an act of our own free will, choice, and effort? It’s not a simple climb……I mean……it’s a difficult climb. It’s not overly complicated to learn these concepts, to learn these truths. It involves abandoning many things that we’ve already been conditioned with that don’t serve who we are.

But I’m not telling you it’s going to be easy. It involves a lot of deep introspective work. But if we do it, we can step out of the prison that we’ve imposed upon ourselves, by balancing the sacred feminine and masculine forces within each one of us.

And by recognizing our own inherent sovereignty and that there is no legitimacy, and never has been any legitimacy to slavery, and control, and the external rulership of human beings as subjects. That recognition of sovereignty has to go hand in hand with our knowledge of natural law. It’s a totally integrated component of it.

This was the title slide. This card, this tarot card, was on the title slide. When you understand (……and I’ve talked about this in some of my work online……), when you understand the deep connection to the tarot tradition and other mystery tradition teachings, specifically its very deep interwoven relationship to the Kabbalistic tradition of the Middle Eastern mystery traditions, all right, you understand that this card right here actually represents the will of creation and what creation itself (……what the mind of the universe itself……) ultimately wants to manifest in physical reality, not in some other worldly dream world or fantasy realm or spiritual reality that is to come or not come, right here in the physical domain, which is not separate and distinct from the spiritual domain. They are one and the same.

This card is known as the justice card. And it’s based on the Latin word jus, which means right or law. That’s where we get the English word justice. This card represents balance between the pillars, as you see on the right side of the king, holding the sword of truth in hand, and the scales of truth and justice have been perfectly balanced and are in the other hand. And it represents sovereignty. And it represents alignment with natural law, and most of all, it represents alignment with truth and the manifestation of order.

That can only happen when we align our behaviors to the principles of natural law. Only then will we see the manifestation that the universe itself wishing for us and trying to help us create, which is justice and order.

If we let go of the things that are holding us back and break our mental chains of bondage, we can create a world that is based in actual real freedom. It is possible. I’m not telling you it’s not gonna be arduous work or a difficult journey, but it can be done.

If we choose to do that, we’re gonna see advances and things that are going to be created that the world is going to look so drastically different, if we go down that middle path, to the truth and to order and to justice through the understanding of natural law, and actually applying it and living it in our lives, that the changes we’re gonna experience are gonna be so positive and so transformative that we can scarcely even imagine what the world will be like on the other side of that work, on the other side of that transformation.

Will that be done? Maybe, maybe not. The answer will come from what you see in the reflection of that device right there. That’s what will determine it. Nothing else. It’s up to each individual.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for your kind attention today.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that. Finally, this right here, Lex Rex, simply means the law is king. The law is king. Lex Rex. That’s my final slide. Thanks so much. Let’s do some question and answer.

How much time do we have, by the way? Did I run way over or did I leave some? Oh my God. Hey, I’m very happy that the venue allowed us to go over by this much. And that they didn’t just come in and say, you gotta get out of here.

So I really did want to leave time for questions, but I think it would be, I don’t know if it would be really just, you know, intrusive and ignorant at this point to just stay even beyond this time.

So maybe we should start packing it up, all right? I apologize for going so far over.

I think the information speaks for itself and is worth it, and I hope I was clarified on that. Listen, I’ll tell you what. Anybody has specific questions? Since there’s no time for questions, let me just get this across. Since there’s no time for questions, I’ll make a personal effort.

I rarely tell people I will respond to email questions. Tell me specifically that you attended this seminar here today in an email. And if you have a specific question, get to the specific question quickly in your email, and I will make the time over the next few weeks to try to respond to everybody.

I’ll promise that.

How’s that? Does that sound okay? All right. All right. Great. Thank you. Thank you guys all so much for being here, for staying for the whole thing. Thank you. I’m very impressed with you guys today. That takes a tremendous effort of will and attention. So thank you guys so much.

redpilloftruth.com","photo_url":"https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/15b96b43-08b8-4091-8be2-91eb4af97ce6_700x700.png","bio":"Former pharmacist and computer programmer / web developer, now mystic and writer. Parables re: sim theory, Gnosticism, covid-19, New World Order, UFO-spirituality-God connection regarding ancient mysteries-religion-evolution linkage(s).","profile_set_up_at":"2022-05-02T05:34:06.334Z","reader_installed_at":"2022-12-01T23:19:41.583Z","publicationUsers":[{"id":812959,"user_id":89344047,"publication_id":872122,"role":"admin","public":true,"is_primary":true,"publication":{"id":872122,"name":"WritePharma Parable Publishing-stories with mystical meaning","subdomain":"theredpilloftruth","custom_domain":"www.writepharmaparablepublishing.com","custom_domain_optional":false,"hero_text":"Parabolic teaching stories about simulation theory, Gnosticism, covid-19, New World Order psychopaths, and the UFO-spirituality-God connection regarding ancient mysteries-religion-evolution linkage(s)","logo_url":"https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/cc679e00-75e8-43e9-b005-067971066f0c_700x700.png","author_id":89344047,"primary_user_id":89344047,"theme_var_background_pop":"#67BDFC","created_at":"2022-05-02T05:36:54.519Z","email_from_name":"WritePharma Parable Publishing","copyright":"Dennis Gilmour","founding_plan_name":"Founding Member","community_enabled":true,"invite_only":false,"payments_state":"disabled","language":null,"explicit":false,"homepage_type":"newspaper","is_personal_mode":false}},{"id":2894209,"user_id":89344047,"publication_id":2065097,"role":"admin","public":true,"is_primary":false,"publication":{"id":2065097,"name":"What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study","subdomain":"whatonearthishappening","custom_domain":"www.whatonearthishappening.wtf","custom_domain_optional":false,"hero_text":"Mark Passio's work in written AND audiovisual form.","logo_url":"https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/e6965c83-7c6b-415b-8988-b28b65929f10_256x256.png","author_id":178188648,"primary_user_id":178188648,"theme_var_background_pop":"#6C0095","created_at":"2023-10-28T16:47:12.939Z","email_from_name":null,"copyright":"Dennis Gilmour","founding_plan_name":null,"community_enabled":true,"invite_only":false,"payments_state":"disabled","language":null,"explicit":false,"homepage_type":"newspaper","is_personal_mode":false}}],"twitter_screen_name":"dennis_gilmour","is_guest":false,"bestseller_tier":null,"status":{"bestsellerTier":null,"subscriberTier":1,"leaderboard":null,"vip":false,"badge":{"type":"subscriber","tier":1,"accent_colors":null},"paidPublicationIds":[706779],"subscriber":null}}],"utm_campaign":null,"belowTheFold":true,"type":"newsletter","language":"en"}" data-component-name="EmbeddedPostToDOM">

WritePharma Parable Publishing-stories with mystical meaning

The parable of, "The Revolution of Natural law"

I suggest to fully digest Cathy O’brien’s story and consider for yourself whether or not government is slavery, as Mark Passio says. I will pull out the forward from Cathy’s book, because I think it’s important to consider before reading the rest of this post…

2 years ago · Dennis (redpilloftruth.com)

<- Previous

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Anchor tag jump point

Natural law seminar part 2

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Fri, 13 Feb 2026 19:40:56 GMT

GOTO Introduction","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Skip preamble-> GOTO Introduction

There sometimes seems to be a bug that suppresses the picture-in-picture (PIP) feature when accessing this website indirectly through a link. The PIP feature is normally available in the bottom right corner of the above video.

Also, the substack app seems to suppress the PIP feature much of the time, so I don’t suggest using the substack app, but rather directly access this site through a web browser, WITHOUT clicking a link. Simply type whatonearthishappening.wtf into the browser URL and PIP should work.

Using the PIP feature is the best way to assimilate this site’s information, IMHO, because you can scroll the video with you, as you read along. NOTE: you must also have PIP feature turned on in the settings for your browser.

Entry video on WOEIH.COM

Natural Law Seminar Part 2

825KB ∙ PDF file

Entire Natural Law Seminar In One Document - Parts 1, 2, and 3

1.66MB ∙ PDF file

Above Chase Hughes video on youtube

NOTE: clicking the below underlined text links jumps up and down the Table of Contents (TOC). Please be patient, as there can be several seconds delay each way. 

Also note that clicking the underlined timestamp links will forward the video to that spot BUT you will have to manually re-position to the text spot you desire.

INTRODUCTION, BY CHASE HUGHES

1) (00:01:03) Basic brain structure

2) (00:13:01) Schism within individual consciousness

3) (00:20:33) Brain schism leads to worldview schism

Note: video by Clif High on Karma

4) (00:30:51) Determinism and free will work together

5) (00:34:07) Nature versus nurture debate

6) (00:38:28) The ways in which humans are like programmable computers

Note: Donald Hoffman commentary

7) (00:44:47) The computer-like human process of input-processing-output

8) (01:00:53) The 7 Hermetic principles of natural law (plus the lost eighth principle that Mark has found)

(ONE)→ Mentalism 2

(TWO)→ Correspondence 3

Note: Michael Talbot video on Holographic universe

Note: Powers of 10 video clip

(THREE) Vibration 4

(FOUR) Polarity 5

(FIVE) Rhythm 6

(SIX) Cause and effect 7

(SEVEN) Gender 8

(EIGHT) Care, the generative principle 9

9) (01:39:58) How the real law of attraction (LOA) works

10) (01:47:42) The only two true spiritual “currencies”

11) (01:51:30) Investing in true spiritual currencies returns true spiritual vision, the ability to discern truth from lies

12) (01:58:58) The different names for natural law throughout history

13) (02:03:17) The positive and negative aspects of the 5 expressions of natural law

(ONE)→ Generative expression: love versus fear 10

(TWO)→ Initiating expression: knowledge versus ignorance 11

(THREE)→ Internal expression: sovereignty (internal monarchy) versus confusion (internal anarchy)12

***Note: internal anarchy means no ruler within (ie no self-mastery), which is NOT good versus internal monarchy means you are master of self***

(FOUR)→ External expression: freedom (external anarchy, as in NO rulers) versus externally imposed control (external monarchy, as in somebody rules/owns you)13

***Note: Here, I provide the two books that Mark highly recommends (The End of All Evil, AND The Most Dangerous Superstition)***

(FIVE)→ Manifestation expression: order (true justice brings balance) versus chaos 14

14) (02:47:36) What does it mean to live in harmony with natural law?

15) (02:53:54) The 4 pillars of Satanism

16) (03:12:55) The 5/7 transgressions of natural law

(ONE)→ Murder 15

(ONE-S, as in subsection of MURDER)→ Assault 16

(TWO)→ Rape 17

(THREE)→ Theft 18

(FOUR)→ Trespass 19

(FIVE)→ Coercion 20

(THREE-S, as in subsection of THEFT)→ Lying 21

Note: Mark blends murder & assault, and also blends lying & theft, so technically only 5 transgressions, but generally, most accept the list of 7

17) (03:27:16) Mark’s quick & simple summation of this entire 3.5 hour presentation

INTRODUCTION

Good intro summary to natural law, by Chase Hughes

Okay, welcome back everyone. I hope everybody had a really good lunch and is energized for the afternoon session. We’re gonna have, I’m gonna go until about 3.20 p.m. in the first part of this and we’ll take a 10 minute break there and then we’ll start in again about 3.30 and we’ll go until five and then we’ll come to our dinner break.

So let’s pick up where we left off. I was talking about brain structure and human behavior and how these two things are completely interrelated. Brain health plays a critical role in human behavior, so it is extremely important for human beings to become familiar with the brain’s basic structure and function.

Now, I’m not telling you that this is the totality of neuroscience, what I’m gonna show you here today. I’m saying that this is the basics, it’s the essence of how the brain structure works. So this is part of understanding the physiological aspects of how consciousness works.

(00:01:03) So, there’s three main complexes, structures, that comprise the total human brain.

The first is the R-complex, or the reptilian brain. So this part of the brain facilitates basic survival functions. It’s the part of the brain that goes to work and becomes active when we’re in what’s called fight or flight mode, when survival is at stake. It also controls basic motor functions and respiration.

The second part of the brain is above the R-complex. This is called the limbic system. It’s also known as the mammal brain, the mammalian brain. This part of the brain facilitates human emotions and it makes human emotion possible to be felt in the physiology. It does this by releasing what’s known as neuropeptides into the bloodstream through different glands that comprise the limbic brain or what’s called the midbrain also.

So the final part of the brain, the highest structure, structurally, and the newest part of the brain, evolutionarily, it’s called the neocortex. Now really what this part of the brain is really called is the telencephalon. That’s what we traditionally think of as the gray matter of the brain, with the hemispheres.

The neocortex is where all of the actual electrochemical activity that comprises our human modes of thought takes place and that’s in the outer shell of the telencephalon which is known as the neocortex. So this part of the brain actually facilitates all human functions of thought, what we consider the things in thought that make us a human being and separate us from the animal kingdom: higher thought functions, logic, intuition, creativity.

So we’ll break down these parts of the brain and give you some visual understanding of them. So down here, which, sorry. Down here is the reptilian brain. It’s comprised of the brain stem right here, and this part of the brain is called the cerebellum. These two components together essentially comprise the R-complex.

So again, the R-complex is the lowest consciousness part of the brain. We don’t do any thinking with this part of the brain. It’s the reactive part of the brain. It reacts to stimulus. It’s the stimulus response mechanism.

Now up here in this middle part of the brain, these are all the different glands like the hypothalamus, the thalamus, the pituitary and pineal glands, et cetera, that comprise the midbrain or the limbic system. All human emotions are facilitated, are made possible by this part of the brain. So this part of the brain, if it wasn’t working properly, you would not be able to experience a normal range of human emotions. This is part of what psychopathy is.

Psychopaths, this part of the brain is not functioning properly. Whether it be from a birth disorder or whether it be from conditions over one’s life that if someone has stayed in chronically, has numbed out this part of the brain and it is not functioning properly anymore, so the person’s not actually experiencing a normal range of emotions.

This part of the brain, which again is the telencephalon, this gray matter part with all of the grooves, et cetera. That’s the neocortex. The neocortex is the outer casing, basically, of the telencephalon, the higher brain. It’s the human brain. Neo means new, so it’s the newest part of the brain structure as far as evolutionary development of the human being goes.

So this part of the brain facilitates all higher-order thinking. Now, if... what you have to understand about the telencephalon, or the hemispheres of the brain, is that they’re, first of all, bilaterally symmetrical, and they generally control different functions of thought.

Now I’m not telling you it’s 100%. Neuroscience is more complicated than that. But in general, the left part, the left hemisphere of the brain is what governs logic, analytical thought and scientific and mathematical thinking. And also linear thought processes. Physical world tasks and details. Being able to break things down and analyze them.

So this is taking things apart, breaking them down into smaller components and analyzing the pieces. That’s what the left brain does. You can look at it as... you can look at it as a series processor. It has to go into this part first, then here, and then here, and then we can spit out the output. A linear process, like a series processor.

The right side of the brain, the right hemisphere, governs or generally facilitates and makes possible human creativity, our emotional makeup, all the emotional dynamics of the human being, holistic thought, being able to see the big picture, big picture thinking, pattern recognition, and then things like compassion, nurturing, care, ethics to a large extent. And I would say ethical thinking comes from a balance between the two, as we’re going to get into.

Now, if this left part of the brain here becomes chronically dominant, the masculine part of the brain, and again, I’m putting these symbols here. This is an ancient archetypal symbol called the blade. It’s a simple upward-pointing triangle, and this downward-pointing triangle is another ancient archetypal symbol that was referred to in the ancient world as the chalice, the cup, et cetera.

This was a rudimentary phallic symbol, and this was a rudimentary womb symbol, representing the male and the female, or the masculine and feminine, more accurately, components of the consciousness. The idea is to keep a balance between these two.

When we have a balance between the two, that’s when we’re operating on all cylinders, so to speak. That’s when real consciousness and pattern recognition is developed, and that’s when real morality and ethical considerations are also created within the personality, within the being.

If this part of the brain is chronically dominant, the left part of the brain, what happens is the right side of the brain is imbalanced. It’s not really functioning at a higher level, and the limbic brain will actually suffer that effect. It will also start to shut down.

So you will have a lot of left brain patterns going on and a lot of left brain processing going on, but if that’s all that’s happening and we’re not using this part of the brain equally, the R-complex of the brain is what essential executive functions are going to be routed to. We’re gonna be living from the R complex in a kind of stimulus response only mode instead of living from a holistic brain balanced mode, which is when we’re in that balanced state the neocortex which governs higher order thinking and makes higher order thinking and ethical thinking possible is what rules the personality.

Now, conversely, if the right side of the brain is chronically dominant, so let’s put it this way. The left side of the brain being chronically dominant, you have the controller. That’s the master mentality. The right side of the brain being chronically dominant, that’s the slave mentality. That’s the I won’t stand up for myself and I’ll just accept everything, the total new ager, in other words.

So this part of the brain, if it’s chronically dominant, the opposite happens with the structures of the brain. The R-complex will shut down. It will suffer. It will not work properly, which the R-complex is necessary. It makes you stand up for yourself when you’re under attack. Again, it’s the fight-flight response.

In a dangerous situation, you’ve got to know whether you’re going to fight whatever’s attacking you or whether you’re going to get out of dodge and run away. That’s a survival mechanism that’s necessary when there’s danger. So when this part of the brain is chronically imbalanced, the R complex gets shut down.

People freeze, essentially, and they don’t stand up for themselves and take action.

What’s happening is they’re being ruled by their emotions. And again, the limbic brain governs all emotions, positive and negative. So that’s compassion and that’s fear. It’s any possible human emotion. The midbrain is what’s ultimately facilitating that emotion in the physiology.

So if this part of the brain is chronically dominant, the opposite happens. You go into slave think, you shut down, you freeze, you’re ruled by the emotions, and you don’t stand up for yourself.

So, the neocortex of the brain has two hemispheres. The left brain largely facilitates logic and scientific thought, while the right brain hemisphere largely facilitates creativity and compassion. When both hemispheres are in balance, the neocortex acts in its proper role as the executive command center of the whole human brain, and that’s when true intelligence is born.

Now, true intelligence is a concept that I think more people really have to understand. People have equated intelligence with intellect, especially in the Western society, all right? Intellect is not intelligence. Let me say that again. Intellect is not intelligence. Intelligence comprises more than intellect. Intellect is left brain understanding.

True intelligence is holistic understanding with the right brain included in the process, the nurturing, compassionate, creative, and intuitive sides of the consciousness together with the intellectual aspect of the consciousness. And you can see this in the word.

Intelligence, right? Intelli is where intellect comes from, okay? And gence, G-E-N-C-E, comes from the Latin verb genere. Genere means to generate or to create. So it’s the creative aspect of the personality or the right brain. So intellect plus creativity, right? Logical thinking plus nurturing and compassion, that’s real intelligence, holistic intelligence. And most people in our society are not in holistic intelligence. They’re in one form of brain imbalance or the other. So let’s look at how this manifests.

If a human brain’s left brain hemisphere becomes chronically dominant, the R-complex will take over executive function of the brain, and the person will become ruled by selfishness and base desires. And they will develop a personality that is based in domination and control.

Conversely, if a human being’s right brain hemisphere becomes chronically dominant, the limbic system will take over executive function of the whole brain, and the person will become ruled by their own emotions and develop a personality that is based in submissiveness and naivete, the slave think mentality.

(00:13:01) The schism of the individual.

And this is critical because this is not only a schism within the individual consciousness, it’s a schism of worldview, of the way we view ourselves in the world, and the way we view our relationship to others in the world. So I call this the mental schism. And it highlights basically what will happen, what kinds of thinking will manifest when certain types of brain imbalance are present.

So when we’re in this schism, and again most of humanity is, if we’re overly intellectualizing everything and we’re too much in the masculine hemisphere of the brain, we’re not using the right or intuitive capacities of the brain, the right brain hemisphere. What this can lead to in the world is, again, rigid skepticism.

Now what did we say about that? It’s not conducive to learning.

People aren’t really going to learn when they’re rigidly skeptical. This is a hallmark of scientism. Scientismists, I don’t know what other thing to call it, worshipers of the altar of scientism. They have this rigid skepticism because they’re purely intellectual. They’re not really intelligent. The creative aspect is missing from their personality makeup.

Atheism is a hallmark of overly dominant left brain thinking because that shuns all aspects of spiritual reality. There is no spirit. The universe is a grand cosmic accident. From there, you get things like solipsism. People will say, well, isn’t solipsism purely left brain? No. It is right brain……I’m sorry……is it purely right brain? And I say, no. It is left brain imbalance as well.

Solipsism can be generated from both forms of imbalance, of believing nothing can actually be known. There is no truth. Truth is a dirty word to many left brain individuals, you’ll note. So solipsism plays into left brain imbalance as well.

All of these states here inevitably lead to these things down here. Moral relativism comes next. The idea that there’s no such thing as the difference between right and wrong, that we just get to make those things up. They don’t exist inherently in nature. We just can decide on what’s right and what’s wrong for ourselves and make it up randomly. So very, very dangerous ideology which we’re gonna be talking about a lot.

Social Darwinism inevitably comes after that. This is the idea that a certain class of society can get to direct how the lives of everybody else will go, because they’re the intelligentsia, so-called (……we’re the intellectual people, really is what it is, the over-intellectualizing……). And we’ll direct society because we’re the fittest. Like Darwinism postulates the survival of the fittest. Well, social Darwinism postulates the survival of the most socially ruthless. And many people believe that’s the natural order. They believe that’s the natural order and nothing could be farther from the truth. What that is, is it’s the psychopathic chaos, has nothing to do with nature and it has nothing to do with order. It’s the exact opposite.

So this state, and these are hallmarks of dark occultism as well. I think I should know a thing or two about it, as I was a priest in it for almost 10 years. I might know a couple of things about Satanism. So moral relativism is one of the big tenets of Satanism. It’s actually one of the pillars of Satanism.

Social Darwinism is highly praised and valued in Satanism, and eugenics. Because if people don’t understand what eugenics is, eugenics is basically people who have gone so deep into this form of left brain imbalance that they believe they’re God and they get to decide who lives and who dies. That’s really what it is. We will control who breeds and who does not get to breed, who gets to live and who does not get to live. That’s essentially eugenics in a nutshell.

And again, these are all authoritarianism, forms of authoritarianism. And it’s the idea that man is the author. Man is the creator. Man is the God. Man will make the law. an will decide life and death at any given moment. We will decide what’s right and wrong, et cetera. That’s essentially what all of these forms of thought are. Extreme left-brained imbalance. And I was there. I was in this state in my life. I was in it for years, for years. Let’s look at the other form of imbalance.

If the right side of the brain is chronically dominant, this leads to similar kind of imbalance, but in the exact opposite form. The brain is still completely imbalanced, therefore the person’s not in a high state of consciousness. They’re completely unconscious to what’s really going on within them and around them, but the manifestation is generally the opposite of the left brain forms of imbalance.

So, if you’re in real right brain imbalanced state of consciousness, this will lead to naivete, believing anything you’re told, accepting things from “official channels and official sources”, without actually checking into them for yourself. Blind belief. You’ll believe the next religion that comes along. We just have to tell them what they want to hear. I’ll believe that.

New Agers are basically in this category, naivete and blind belief. People who trust government, of course, are in that category, because again, it’s about creating the masters and the slaves. That’s what brain imbalance is for, and that’s why the controllers wanna propagate this imbalance and keep it in place.

Again, religious extremism, that’s hallmarks of right brain belief, right brain imbalance. Solipsism, no such thing as truth, you know, all from right brain imbalance as well. Feelings of unworthiness, self-loathing, accepting orders from other people, being an order follower. We’re gonna have a whole section on order followers later, and how this is the exact opposite of anything virtuous.

For people that believe order following is some kind of a virtue, I don’t know what to tell you, but it’s the thing that leads to all evil in the world, is accepting somebody’s orders and not actually gauging for yourself whether the activity, the behavior, is moral or not. And it creates a willing slave. This form of imbalance is ultimately generating a willing slave, whereas this form of imbalance is ultimately generating a psychopathic master. And they’re all forms of mind control.

It’s just another aspect of how mind control works. The propagators of mind control are just doing this to keep that imbalance present in one form or another. They don’t even care which it is. As long as they have some that are imbalanced toward one direction and some imbalanced toward the other direction, that’s how the dynamic plays off against itself. And you have a world that is continued to be kept under lockdown.

(00:20:33) So let’s look at the worldview schism that goes hand in hand with the brain schism or the mental schism.

Again, worldview is exactly what it says. How do you view the world? How do you view yourself in it? How do you view others in it?

When there’s chronic left brain dominance, the worldview that emerges is one of randomness. And again, this is a hallmark of scientism. The world is this grand cosmic accident, all right? The whole universe is a grand accident. There’s no purpose. There’s no Creator. Everything just magically manifested on its own for no reason from a singularity, a single point in space-time for no reason. You give me that one and I’ll tell you everything else that happened after that. But you gotta give me that one. And I have some bridges to sell you.

So there’s no underlying intelligence in nature. Nature is dead. That’s what this worldview is about. Nature is dead. It’s a dead thing. It’s a mechanized machine that is there for no reason. There’s no such thing as the spirit at all. No such thing as spiritual dimension. No such thing as natural law, certainly. Because for one to accept natural law, well, where does it come from?

I ask people whether they accept that natural law exists or that there’s actual objective truth and morality. And two-thirds of people don’t accept it. They don’t believe that it exists. They don’t think there is objective reality and objective truth and objective morality, you know. They think it’s all relative and we get to make it up.

I’ve actually done a psychological, small psychological profiling or study, you know, just asking people this question at random and collecting results and analyzing them. We’re at about two-thirds of people who are moral relativists and believe that truth is relative also, that it’s not objective.

Okay? You ask the same people, do you believe in karma? 88, almost 90% of people believe karma is real and it exists. So I’m like, I can’t believe this. You’re gonna tell me that there’s no such thing as a difference, real difference between right and wrong. They’re constructs in the human mind is what they think, right? And simultaneously holding in their mind the idea that karma exists.

Well, I ask them the question, what put karma in place then? You believe it exists? What force created it? What made it? What put it in place? And they have no answer for that. They intuitively believe karma exists but can’t answer where did it come from, because that would involve a Creator. And somebody in left brain imbalance can’t acknowledge that.

Video below: Clif High on karma

Above Clif High video on youtube

So to a left brain imbalance person, there’s no such thing as spiritual or natural law. It doesn’t exist. As a matter of fact, all of existence has no purpose other than to continue its existence. See, survival is the highest aspiration to a left-brain and balanced individual. Right and wrong have no bearing. There’s no point in even discussing it. Because right’s what’s right for me, if I’m super left-brain and balanced. Wrong is whatever affects me negatively. It doesn’t matter what’s actually moral. It’s all subjective to a left brain imbalanced individual.

And to them, nothing has any purpose. Since it’s all a grand cosmic accident, how could there be a purpose for existence? Without a Creator, who’s gonna create the purpose for it, you know? So it has no purpose other than to continue surviving. And again, right there is proof they’re in the R complex, they’re in the base brain. Survival is the highest goal. Survival is the only aspiration.

Now, in Satanism, it’s about as left brain imbalanced as it gets, folks. You know what their number one law is? Survival. Survival is the highest law. And we hear about this in Darwinism too. The ultimate purpose of the being is to continue to survive. I would highly debate that. I would highly disagree with that. There are laws higher than survival.

But in Satanism, they simply refer to it as self-preservation. And that means preservation of systems of belief, as well. Systems that are serving the self, the egoic self, they must continue to survive. Self-preservation as the highest law, that’s the number one tenet of Satanism. And it doesn’t matter who you need to step on to do it, who you need to step on to get one up on somebody else. This is extreme left brain imbalance worldview.

All of these characteristics in the randomness worldview are hallmarks of scientism, atheism, totalitarianism, and dark occultism, you could add to that list. Whether you refer to it as Satanism, dark Luciferianism, it doesn’t make a difference. It’s the hallmarks of the dark occult.

On the other side, on the right brain imbalance side of the worldview, there’s another worldview called determinism.

Determinism is based in right brain imbalance and is defined by, in general, helplessness, religiosity, and the dismissal of free will. This worldview will eventually lead to a society of blind order followers and willing slaves, who accept their conditions as their lot in life.

So hallmarks of deterministic worldview. God controls every event in creation. Nothing happens at random. There is no free will. So you can never throw anything a curveball through free will. Every event is preordained. And religionists believe in this.

See, I like to say, my presentation’s going to piss everybody off. And that’s what it should do. Because if you’re in one of these forms of belief systems, it represents one form of imbalance or another.

So people who believe in government and science are in that left brain imbalance. They’re going to get pissed off that I’m talking about that form of imbalance. And then the people who are in religion and the New Age movement, they’re in that right form of imbalance, so they’re going to get pissed off at that.

Good, let them all be pissed off. The truth will piss you off and then it will set you free, if you accept it. So all occurrences are preordained. Free will is an illusion.

No. You know who just said this in his latest book? Stephen Hawking, who you would think is the most left brain person that you can think, worships at the altar of scientism, believes the universe is a grand accident, and a mechanized machine. He, it’s like this comes full circle. It feeds off of each other like a feedback loop, these forms of imbalance. He went so far through left brain imbalance, he’s so in the left brain that he actually developed the hallmark of right brain imbalance, which is that there’s no such thing as free will. No such thing.

Since it’s all a mechanized machine and there’s no consciousness, there can actually be no choice. We are actually robots controlled by matter. Hawking believes this. He actually wrote this in his book. He said free will is as dead as God, and millions of people buy this moron’s books, and I’ll call him a moron right to his face.

There’s not a drop of intelligence in that man, and people think he’s one of the most intelligent people in the world. You might be one of the most overly intellectual people in the world, but you have no wisdom at all, zero, if that’s how you think. And again, put him in front of me and I’ll tell it to him to his face.

Because these people actually believe he’s smart. That person isn’t smart, he’s dumb. He’s intellectual, but that doesn’t make you intelligent. He has no part of the big picture, none. Just because you can theorize something and visualize it and calculate it mathematically does not make you an intelligent person. That means you’re great at using the intellect. You’re great at mathematics. You’re great at linear and logical thinking. That does not make you wise.

To continue with the right-brained, imbalanced worldview, since God controls everything in creation, nothing is possible to change. Human beings are powerless to create change. Everything is being made to be this way by God. This is what religionists and right-brained, imbalanced people think.

So therefore, why take any action? Action is ultimately meaningless. A big hallmark of the New Age community, because it’s a religion. The “Course in Miracles”. Oh, we just need to accept everything the way that it is, right folks? Doesn’t make a difference if evil is running amok in our midst. No, accept it all. Don’t try to change a damn thing. Take no action, just observe. And see how far deeper that gets you into bondage. Because that’s the best way to get real deeper into chains.

So these are all hallmarks of religious extremism and what I call simply slave think. Because that’s what it is. Let’s not euphemize anything. Let’s call them what it really is. This is master think. That’s slave think.

And if you want a world that continues to propagate slavery, you’ll stay in one of those forms of brain imbalance. And this right brain imbalance in addition to religious extremism and slave think is the hallmark of the New Age movement and their followers, their religious followers. Now, there’s a balance that is struck between these, okay? And that’s what everything really is ultimately about, creating a balance. Because there are components to these two worldviews that if they come together, it shows us what the truth is. And here it is right in the middle here.

(00:30:51) There is a deterministic component to reality, and there is a random component to reality, existing in cooperation with each other, in conjunction with each other.

The deterministic component is what I’m talking about here today and referring to under the banner of natural law. That is determined. It is law. It is set. You’re not changing it. It works that way flawlessly 100% of the time. That’s determined. Natural law is determined.

It’s the deterministic component to reality. Then there is a randomness component to reality that works continuously in conjunction with natural law. And this is a little thing called free will. Our ability to choose our behaviors, to do certain things and to not choose to do certain things, and we have it. Every individual has it, no matter what position, no matter what situation they’re in. I don’t care what institution you’re in. I don’t care who you’ve listened to up to this point. I don’t care what background you come from. I don’t care what economic class you come from. Every single solitary being that is capable of thinking at all, is gifted with free will.

You have free will to choose your behaviors and so does every other human being. Everyone, okay? It’s a gift of creation itself. We can choose what we will do and not do. Nobody can actually make anybody do something like a robot. Oh, believe me, there’s people who are trying. You know, like Art talked about, Jose Delgado, was searching for means to electronically, directly control through chip implants and stimulus through chip implants in the brain, human behavior, like a robot, to put a technology into the brain to control the behavior of the individual.

And that went on right here. This is where that took place, folks. Right on Yale’s campus, okay? Read some of his stuff. You want to be disturbed? You think, what I’m telling you is somewhat disturbing, read some of Delgado’s material. He was telling people, we’re gonna show you that free will doesn’t exist. We’re gonna show you there’s no such thing as rights, that we make up what rights are. The ruling class makes up what a right and a wrong is. We tell you what it is, and you have no choice. And he was telling you, we’re gonna show you you have no rights, that you’re our slaves. Yeah, read some of his material.

An excellent book, Art recommended too. Jim Keith, “Mass Control, The Engineering of Human Consciousness”.

Mass Control - Engineering Human Consciousness by Jim Keith

10.7MB ∙ PDF file

If you haven’t read that book, get it and read it. And that’s just an introduction. And many people think he was murdered over it.

Truth lies in the middle of these world views. There’s a deterministic component called natural law. There’s a random component called free will, our ability to choose our behavior, freely.

(00:34:07) So let’s look at this debate that’s been going on since time immemorial of human nature versus human nurture.

And again, I’m getting ready to piss everybody off. This debate’s been going on forever. Which is it? What’s human nature really look like? What’s its essence? Is it angelic or demonic?

I would say it’s neither. It’s neither one of these things. It’s not both. It’s neither. So nobody wins here who falls on one side or the other. And it’s a very difficult thing for people to accept as well, because when we ask the question, what is the nature of a human being, it’s a very similar question to asking: what is the nature of this computer up on this platform? What is the nature of that projector? What is the nature of those cameras?

Well, is there, can I actually say what a nature, what the nature of these things is? It’s a computer.

Its nature is to compute information. What is the nature of that projector? Is it good? Is it bad? Is it angelic? Is it demonic? Is that projector demonic? No, its nature is that it projects imagery. What is the nature of these cameras? They capture imagery. That’s all. So what’s the nature of a human being?

The nature of a human being is that it takes in information. It processes it, and then it outputs it through behavior. And as we’re going to see, that’s very much like a computer. I’m not saying that it is a computer. I’m saying it’s like one.

So human nature is neither inherently good nor inherently evil, as many people think fall on one side of this argument or the other. Instead, we should consider the operating conditions, or the environment in which human beings exist, which influences behavior to a great extent, thus creating the current human condition.

That’s why it’s called the human condition.

It’s not called……the situation we’re in is called the human condition. It’s not called the human nature. It’s called the human condition. There’s a reason it’s called a condition. For any condition to be in place, well, hey, what condition is my computer in, right now? What condition is my projector in? What position is Richard’s camera’s in?

They’re in operating conditions. They’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing because they’ve been kept up in good condition. In the example of my computer, it has a working operating system without malware on it. It has software that does the job, that does what I’m asking it to do properly without bugs. Those are the conditions. The operating conditions will determine how does it perform. What kind of output can it put out into the world?

Again, what I’m saying here is that human beings are like computers, not that they are computers. Let me just state that emphatically. We’re not computers. We’re like computers. We are programmable. That’s the nature of a human being.

How many people have ever heard anybody say that the nature of a human being is that a human being is programmable? To my knowledge, I’m the only person or researcher that is calling that human nature. Our nature is that we can be programmed. That’s another thing people don’t want to hear. They don’t want to hear this because, again, they liken it to a mechanized machine. And I’m not saying, again, to emphasize, I’m not saying we are computers. I’m saying we’re like them in the ways that we can be programmed.

So what gets put into a person through the environment, which is called the culture, and becomes their programming, determines what they will output onto the screen, which is called human life. And that will create the human condition, in the aggregate, as more and more people operate that way. So let’s look at how this works.

(00:38:28) Human beings are programmable much like computers.

Like a computer, if a human being has a bad file system format. That’s the first thing you do, when you’re gonna get ready to use a computer. You have to format the drive. How many people here are somewhat techy? Not many, okay, about a quarter to a third. All right, so some people will know what I’m talking about here. For the others, excuse the jargon for a moment, all right? I’ll explain what it is.

Donald Hoffman on programmable humans creating (programming) our virtual reality simulated “universe” on the fly

Above video on youtube

The Case Against Reality (Donald Hoffman)

9.83MB ∙ PDF file

Above video #1 on youtube

A file system format is you gotta format the hard drive so you can prepare it for a specific operating system, which is basically the task controllers that’s gonna control what happens on the computer, how programs get launched, how memory is used, et cetera, in a nutshell, all right? I do this for a living, so I know all the technical stuff. So I’ll try to keep it simple.

So if the human being has a bad file system format, this is akin to the operating conditions during a child’s formative years, the first six years of their life, essentially. Now, think about it. We call this their formative years. Their formative years, like a format on a hard drive. Because this is what puts the file system into the human being. That prepares it for its operating system.

So, largely, what programs the child at this stage is the parents, and what they will see in their immediate environment and home and during their very early years in “schooling”. Now, like a computer, if a human being also has a bad operating system……now this is like Mac OS, Windows, Linux, etc., Android, iOS, these are operating systems.

Again, they are basically providing a platform that other programs will run in, and they’re providing a graphical user interface. This is your culture. The operating system is the culture in which the programs run. Okay, so let’s say if you have a bad operating system, meaning you’re already surrounded in a bad environment, in a bad culture, right? That’s also gonna negatively impact the output. And then they have bad software programs. Now these are the programs that you run.

Now if I didn’t have a good presentation, my presentation might come out sloppy. It might crash in the middle of it. It might not display the graphics or the text properly. So you gotta make sure you’re working with good, reliable software as well. Now what the software is, is the belief systems, what the person has taken into the mind and has processed and made part of themselves.

Now, if all of those things are bad……we have three bad components:

the format is bad, the file system format, which is the formative years of the child
the culture is bad, meaning they’re already growing up in a bad culture or in a culture that condones moral relativism, et cetera, and doesn’t understand natural law
and the software programs that have been input into the child are bad, meaning they’re belief systems, okay, what do you think the output of that “computer” is going to be like?

Is it going to be good? Is it gonna be chaotic? If I screw up my system’s hard drive format, if I put an operating system that is like at alpha state and it’s not ready for prime time, because the development’s not finished, it’s half-baked, okay, and then I load crappy software that’s full of bugs and the developers didn’t really care about programming them correctly, do you think that computer’s gonna operate properly and give me the output on the screen I’m looking for or output on the printout I’m looking for or output on the internet that I’m looking for?

Good luck.

If you know a little bit about computers, you’re laughing now because it would be ridiculous to assume that it could do that. Well, why do we think that we’re going to have that in our environment when all of these things are badly programmed?

See, the output onto the screen is also going to be horrible if all those three things that determine how the system works... are also bad. So it will continue, it will contribute to deteriorating conditions on a mass scale. Like a computer, the behavior of a human being largely depends upon its programming. And its programming is the quality of the information that is being input into it, the quality of the information it’s taking in. The quality of the information it’s taking in is going to determine the quality of the information it’s outputting, like any other computer.

So if garbage goes in, surprise, garbage is gonna come out. If good information goes in, quality goes in, quality will come out, and the output will be as one wants it to be. It will be able to process and create efficiently, effectively, not chaotically. Here’s a very simple diagram.

Again, if people understand it, they really get how natural law functions. And again, it’s very unpopular. People don’t wanna look at what the bottom base foundation or platform of this structure is. Because once again, this idea that knowledge is what’s required makes many people upset, because they want to believe they’re gonna achieve these things they say they want without doing the work to acquire that knowledge, and therefore understand the requirements for obtaining those conditions.

So we start with available information, and when people look at what I’m going to describe here, they will recognize it as something, and I’ll hold what that is for a moment. Available information is what you’re starting with. This constitutes potential knowledge, and it can become knowledge if it’s taken in, if it’s amassed, if it’s aggregated. It can be gathered. It can be processed. It can be understood, and then it can be acted upon.

(00:44:47) You could call this the grammar stage of this three-part process I’m going to explain.

You could also refer to this as the input stage. If we’re looking at it in a computer model, this is the stage of inputting information or programming something.

Now the next step that’s built upon this is once you’ve taken information in, necessary information, you then come to a position of understanding it. You know what it means, you recognize the patterns. So this is the second step in this process. Now, your understanding or lack of understanding……now in the first stage, your knowledge or lack of knowledge is going to lead to understanding or lack of understanding.

If you have understanding present, your decision-making processes are going to be in harmony with what you say you want. You’re gonna understand, here’s what I want, this is what’s necessary to get that, to make that happen, to manifest it. That’s understanding. It’s a decision-making process that happens within the mind.

These processes take place in the human mind and are chosen by each individual based upon available information. So again, you can see, if information is held back, if it is occulted, or even if it’s just people are dissuaded from taking it in, because people will say, no, there’s nothing there, there’s nothing to it, right? You could see how they’ll never get to this step. They’ll never understand. They’ll never get to the second level of creating our reality. All right? Effectively, efficiently.

The third stage to this process is what you do with what you have come to understand, to know and understand. So this is the action stage. Each individual’s behavior, the behaviors that they choose through their own free will, is based upon the quality of their decision-making processes that are happening within the human mind. That process, as we’ve already seen, is in return based upon the quality of available information.

So this is behavior.

See, people don’t think of wisdom as behavior. They don’t think of wisdom as action. They think of it as something that you just know. No. Wrong. Wisdom is not knowledge or understanding. Wisdom is action. Let me say this again. Wisdom is action. It is knowledge and understanding that has been applied. Application. That’s the program that you’re going to run on the computer that you’ve put an operating system on and formatted properly. The application is the action.

When you’re working in a computer doing things, you’re working in an application. You’re not building the things you’re building with the operating system. The operating system’s what’s supporting the program that allows you to be creative. And in return, the file format supports the operating system.

So, we start with available knowledge. That can be converted in……available information……which can be converted into knowledge, which can then, through decision-making processes and filtering of that information to eliminate inconsistencies, can lead to an understanding. In continuation, the understanding can then lead through our free will decision-making processes to be converted into behavior, into action in the world.

When it’s done properly, it’s wisdom. When it’s done with morality and ethics in mind, it’s wisdom. When it’s done without that, it’s folly. And it leads to more and more chaos.

So based upon these three concepts, processes, something is generated, something is created in the physical manifestation, physically manifested reality, the real world, so to speak. So the manifested reality is based upon the aggregate behavior. Aggregate behavior! No one person is creating the reality we are experiencing; it’s another fallacy of the New Age movement and thinking.

In the aggregate, we are creating our shared reality. All the behaviors put together creates the output on the screen with a generated result. Is it orderly? Is it chaotic? Well, that’s going to be based upon whether someone took in the information, processed it efficiently to come to an understanding, and then acted upon it.

The manifested reality is the quality of the condition which manifests in any given society based upon the aggregate quality of human behavior within that society. This is how our reality is actually created, the conditions that we experience as the daily events of our life. It’s a simple three-stage process that leads to a result.

And for many people here, you will recognize if you’ve looked into this discovery process and this creative process, is known as the trivium. This is what the trivium is. In the ancient traditions, this is what the Trivium was labeled. It was labeled knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.

In the later aspects, when they passed out of mystery school tradition hands and went into some other think tank and society hands, the knowledge of the Trivium was termed grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Grammar being the knowledge stage of aggregating available information, logic being the understanding stage of using processes to analyze and filter said information and come to an understanding of it,and then the rhetoric stage was the application, the action, taking action based upon what you’ve come to understand.

Now, there’s a third way of looking at the trivium in computer jargon. And that is input, processing, and output. And then you get the result on the screen, which is called life. Any way you want to look at the trivium, I don’t care. But understand it, know how it works. Because this is why……a big part of why we’re in the situation that we’re in……is that the trivium methodology of truth discovery has been completely obliterated from public consciousness. Completely obliterated!

And I ask people how many people have even ever heard the word trivium. Raise your hand if you’ve heard the word or not. So a good portion of the people here have. Many people have never heard the word. And if you do a Google search on it, most people are gonna get back the band, the metal band, the trivium, which is not a bad band.

But the whole point here is the results that are gonna come back through Google or Bing or Yahoo or whatever are gonna give you a metal band, a heavy metal band, instead of the trivium method of learning, the classical liberal arts education methodology. Because they wanna try to sanitize that as much from human consumption as possible. They don’t even want you to understand how that works at all. And that’s why it’s been removed from public schooling. And that’s why, as long as this society stays the way it is, it’ll never be put back into public schooling.

You know, I tell people a little anecdote. When I was in high school, and thank God I went to the high school I did, because they really hammered Latin and Greek into you. You were gonna know your Latin and Greek when you came out of my high school. For whatever other indoctrination they put into you, that’s a different story.

But I’ll tell you what, you came out of there knowing your ancient languages. It was still part of the curriculum when I was in high school. And again, I think I came out better out of there because of simply the linguistics knowledge that I gained from it. And we read Gaius Julius Caesar’s war journals in their original Latin and translated them. And in one of them he’s talking about, he’s absolutely lambasting one of his centurions. They’re on a campaign in Gaul, which is France now, and Caesar is making his rounds of his troops and they’re getting ready to push deeper into Gaul. And he finds, when they would have their encampments, they would have a lot of slaves of the Roman Empire that they would take with them on their campaigns that would do a lot of the lifting of the equipment and the carrying of the equipment for the centurions to do battle in the next battlefield location, and the slaves would have to do all that manual labor.

And Caesar says to one of his centurions, he’s passing by their encampment, and he sees one of the actual centurion leaders teaching one of the slaves the trivium method, and he flips out on him in this journal. He says, I caught one of my centurions teaching the trivium, and freaks out on him. How dare you teach a slave our method of learning? Soon they won’t want to be a slave anymore. There’d be an uprising if they knew what we knew, if they knew our truth discovery methodology.

He said, I think, I forget how it really ended, but I think how it ended was he told this centurion, if I ever catch you doing this again, I will personally throw you, cast you into the wilderness of Gaul and let the Gaulians deal with you, who knew that the Roman Empire was trying to conquer their people at that point, which is basically saying it would be a death sentence, but I won’t even carry it out, I’ll let our enemy carry it out on you.

That’s how much he didn’t want their slaves to understand their methodology for learning. And that’s the trivium. And that’s why most people have never heard the word. So you gotta look into it and understand how it works. That’s all I can say about it. It is how we build our reality, either efficiently or destructively.

So let’s look at some of the principles of natural law. Now, in my extended seminar, which goes over a six-week class of lessons, I get into these principles deeply in an extended form. We’re not gonna do that today because time doesn’t allow. I’m gonna briefly touch on each one. The word principles, let’s define it.

Principle comes from the Latin noun principia. Principia means first, foremost, leading, chief, or most necessary. It is that which matters most. It is the first things that must be understood before anything else can be understood. Principles have to come first. And this is the problem. Our society does not put principles first. It puts trivialities first, and we’re no longer a society that even cares about principles or first things.

So first things first. First things or principles have to come first. So let’s look at what the principles that underlie natural law. These are the things that are most important. That’s what principles should mean to people.

If we ask people to find what a principle is, first thing they should say, that’s the most important thing. The most important thing in my life. Now in the natural law seminar we did a homework assignment, we asked people what the most important thing was to them. Very few responded with principles. Most people responded with saying that people or the family was the number one response. The familial connection was more important to them than principles.

Now when people hear me say that that’s backwards, they’ll say how cold are you? That’s so cold, okay? What I’m telling you is that the familial connection, no matter what it is, between a mother and a son, a mother and a daughter, a father and a son, father and a daughter, husband and wife, doesn’t matter as much as principles. I’m not telling you they don’t matter at all. I’m telling you you have to put principles first, otherwise those relationships are just meaningless. They don’t really have any real value unless they’re based upon principles first, which is why so many relationships are dysfunctional. Principles have to come first before you can even build a solid relationship with another human being.

So, let’s look at what some of the principles of how natural laws work first before we can actually find out what the expressions of these laws are in our lives, which will be the next section. These are what I call the general principles of natural law. Natural law is expressed through seven basic underlying principles, plus what I have referred to as an eighth or hidden principle, which you hear very few other researchers, even people who are studying this from the occult perspective, who are studying this from the consequentialism perspective, you very hear them incorporate the eighth and all-encompassing principle, which I’ll get to last here.

This eighth principle, which I call the lost principle, binds all the other seven principles together. These principles together constitute a master key through which universal wisdom, including the knowledge of the requirements to obtaining what we desire, is then unveiled or de-occulted. When people ask me, well, what do you consider yourself in your performance of presenting what you present? I tell them, I consider myself a de-occultist. I’m no longer an occultist. I’m a de-occultist.

I’m attempting to take this information out of hiding. It’s been hidden. The hiding of it is destroying the fabric of our society and putting us into bondage. It needs to come out and be non-hidden. It needs to be unveiled and shared widely and freely with anybody who’s capable of accepting it and comprehending it now, because we’re not in a position where we could wait longer. We’re at the precipice. There is a moral obligation to bring this information to the public now.

So I consider myself a deoccultist, one who takes things out of hiding and presents them openly. These are the seven general principles of natural law. Many people who have studied some variants of occultism may recognize these as what are known as the Hermetic principles. Hermetic essentially comes from Hermes, Hermes Tres Magistus, the thrice great one, as he was referred to in the ancient Greek mystery traditions.

He was considered a messenger of the gods. He brought the wisdom of the gods down to humanity. In the ancient Egyptian and Kamesian traditions, he was the scribe of the gods known as Thoth. He has other incarnations as well. But the Hermetic tradition is named such because it’s hermetically sealed, like natural law is. Natural law is hermetically sealed. It is binding principles that are immutable. They are laws that are in operation that cannot be changed, hence they are hermetically sealed.

(01:00:53) So these seven general principles, they are:

mentalism
correspondence
vibration
polarity
rhythm
cause and effect, which is a huge one, which we’ll be getting into,
and gender

So I’m gonna briefly describe what each of these are and what they are about.

The principle of mentalism states that the all, everything in creation, is actually a manifestation of mind.

The all is mind. What this means is everything that happens has to be a result of a mental state which preceded it. Everything. For anything to exist, thoughts had to form first, and then they formed the physical reality after.

The universe itself is a mental construct of the Creator. Thoughts lead to the manifestation of things and events. Thoughts create conditions. Thoughts create things and conditions. They cannot just magically manifest themselves. Thought comes first. Thoughts create our state of existence and the quality of our experience here on earth, ultimately.

Therefore……be responsible for everything……we should be responsible for everything that we create by being responsible for that which we think. Because the thought processes are what are driving the behaviors. People behave the way they do because they have certain belief systems embedded in the mind and running like a program. Their thoughts and their emotions are driving their actions.

So the behavior’s not magically suddenly gonna just change. The thoughts and emotions have to change because they’re the driving force behind the behavior. That’s when reality will change. See, people don’t wanna hear that, once again. They don’t wanna hear, if you wanna change reality, you, yourself, have to change the way you think, because the way you think is not conducive to the requirements for getting what you say you want. They’re doing the exact opposite of that in many cases. So that’s the principle of mentalism.

The principle of correspondence states that that which is above is similar or like to that which is below.

So what this means is……that which is below and……that which is below is like that which is above. It’s a mirror. The above is like the below. The below is like the above. The above, in this case, is the macrocosm. The laws of the very large things, the laws that govern the creation, which we consider is seemingly outside of ourselves. We know at the deepest level that it’s not, that we’re one with it, but we perceive this as out here, the laws that govern the large aspects of things.

So the macrocosm or the very large, the totality of everything, and the microcosm, which is the very small, or the individuated units that comprise the whole in their aggregate, they are reflections of each other. They cannot be separated from each other. As one goes, the other goes.

The universe is actually a holographic system.

Above video: Michael Talbot interview on Holographic universe

The Holographic Universe (Michael Talbot)

3.83MB ∙ PDF file

Above video #2 on youtube

A hologram is an image. You pass a laser through it and it then projects a 3D image. It’s like a flat image and it projects a three-dimensional image. But the aspect, why they call it a hollow, like holistic hologram, holistic image, is if you break a hologram into multiple components by cutting it. So if I take a hologram and I cut it in four pieces, you don’t have a quarter of the image on one part of the hologram and a quarter on the other and a quarter on the third and a quarter on the fourth. You have four whole images that only lose their resolution by a quarter.

So everything is contained in all the smaller parts. That’s like the reality that we’re living in. Our universe is a holographic one. So the universe is inside the individual, and the entire universe is like an individual. They’re reflections of each other. To know the workings of the individual will help lead us to an understanding of the macrocosmic laws.

Similarly, to learn the macrocosmic laws will help us to learn the way that consciousness within the individual functions. These two things cannot be separated from each other. And once again, as I said near the beginning, that’s what occulted knowledge is. The knowledge of the occult is how the microcosmic world works, which is the individuated consciousness, and how the macrocosmic world works, which is natural law.

So the other part of the principle of correspondence is that our reality is also fractal in nature. Now, if you studied fractals, these are self-similar mathematical generated patterns. We see this through things like Fibonacci sequence in mathematics, and this is repeated endlessly throughout nature.

So you look at the structure of the atom and it’s similar to the structure of the solar system, which is similar to the structure of the galaxy. They work the same way. They look the same. You pull back enough, you’ll keep seeing the same pattern repeat.

Anybody ever see the movie that was done in, I think, the 1970s or 80s? It’s a short, like, 10-minute clip.

It’s called Powers of Ten, right? Has anybody ever seen this? Couple people.

Above Powers of 10 video on youtube

Watch this movie, Powers of Ten, and you’ll understand what I’m talking about when I say that the universe is fractal in nature.

Brilliant movie. It will blow your mind. Real short, 10 minutes long, something like nine or 10 minutes long. They basically zoom up into the cosmos to show you how everything is self-similar. Then they zoom down into the cells of a human being and into the atoms that comprise the hand and cells of the hand and show you how everything is similar there. All the way down to the atomic level, and the subatomic level.

So, the universe is both holographic, meaning that the whole is contained in the parts and vice versa, and it is fractal or self-similar across all scales of its existence. That’s the principle of correspondence.

The principle of vibration simply states that there is no such thing as rest, as dead or non-motion.

Death, in that sense, is an illusion, because true death would be the cessation of all motion and energy. There is no such thing. It doesn’t exist. You cannot go anywhere in creation where something is at complete rest. And I joke around about this. Barb tells me funny stories when she comes home from work and she’s trying to enlighten some of the other RNs that she works with. And she was trying to explain to one of the other nurses, “You know, that desk has atoms in it and they’re not at rest. They’re like in crazy, chaotic motion, especially the electron clouds of the atom. And if you look at it at a deep enough level, you would see it’s like chaos going on and it’s all kinds of motion happening, seemingly at random”.

And the other nurse goes, “Barb, you’re so crazy”.

What I say to that is, how could you have made it to nursing school and not ever have even considered the concept of the atom? Right, you know, and it’s amazing. She actually thinks perceived stillness is actual stillness and didn’t comprehend. If you zoom into that with a powerful enough microscope, you’re gonna see all kinds of motion and nothing’s at rest. And she thought Barb was the weird one for trying to explain that to her. Okay, so there is no such thing as true rest, doesn’t exist.

If something’s in existence, it’s in motion. Everything moves, everything vibrates, and at the most fundamental level, the universe and every single thing which comprises it is ultimately pure vibratory energy, that is manifesting itself in different ways, different frequencies, different vibratory forms.

The universe has no true solidity as such, as we imagine solidity at the macrocosmic level. Matter is merely energy in a state of vibration. And what this is, if we truly understand this……and many sciences are now finally really understanding this and trying to propagate this knowledge out into the public……we will come to the understanding that this is a spiritual construct for experience to be gained, to have an experience and learn and grow in consciousness. That’s what the purpose of this whole thing is for.

So nothing is truly solid. Again, like we say, we are spirit having a human experience. The whole universe is spiritual, having an experience in solidity. That’s how you have to look at the principle of vibration.

The principle of polarity states that everything has a dual nature to it.

There are polarities in everything that exists. Everything has poles, everything has its pair of opposites. However, opposites, they are identical in nature, but they’re different in degree. So let me give you an example of what that means.

Are hot and cold really opposites? Or can we simply look at them as the presence of heat energy or the absence of heat energy? Meaning that they’re the same thing, energy. And whether it’s concentrated in a specific area, which would make it hot, or whether it’s absent from a specific area, which would make it cold.

That’s what hot and cold are at the fundamental level. At our level of perception, they’re opposites, but at the fundamental level, they’re the same thing, energy or lack thereof. Just like those three stages of the trivium. Are knowledge and ignorance the same thing? Yeah, actually they are, because truth is always present. It’s a matter of whether it’s taken in and processed or whether it’s refused to be taken in and it’s not processed.

So it’s just like that. They’re identical in their natures, but they’re different in their degree. Extremes can meet and blend and play with each other, like as depicted in the yin-yang symbol, masculine and feminine, they need to be blended. And at some level of reality, everything that is seemingly contradictory may be reconciled.

Now again, I stress the term at some level. At the unified field level, everything is consciousness, pure consciousness. However, at this level, there are differences in consciousness. At this level, there are things that are taking place that we need to understand. At this level, there are things that we need to set right and rectify, because it does matter. It does matter!

So, again, be careful with some of the new age-isms that get put out there. Yes, can all paradoxes be reconciled? At some level. In this realm, we need to have our feet on the ground in the physical domain. This is the concept in the Hermetic tradition, which is where a lot of this understanding derive from, out of ancient Egypt, what was known as Chem, the land called Chem, was what the actual Chemitians referred to it as.

The word Egypt is a bastardization of the capital, the Greek pronunciation of the capital city of Chem, which was Memphis at one point, and that city was referred to as Hegeptos in Greek, and that became Egypt in English. But the original name for Egypt was Chem. That’s simply called black or dark in their language. It was the black land. And we get the word alchemy, which means, again, al-from. It means from the black land, al-chemet, which is where alchemy comes from. And that means out of darkness, this knowledge will come and bring light, because a lot of these mystery tradition teachings do come from chem.

And also the people who took it from chem and started to propagate it in other areas were the Greeks in the Greek mystery traditions. And again, there was light sides and dark sides to all these mystery traditions. There were some who used the knowledge wisely and tried to propagate it and tried to elevate human consciousness, and there were those who wanted to use it selfishly for their own benefit and to control others.

So my point was that in the Egyptian mystery tradition, I lost my train of thought there, I’m sorry. I was talking about all paradoxes may be reconciled at some level. I brought up the mystery traditions.

I can’t remember why I went into that, so I’ll just keep going.

Let’s look at the principle of rhythm.

Everything flows out and in. Everything has its tides. All things rise and fall. So everything has a rhythm to it or a swing to it. There’s tendencies that exist in energy.

The pendulum swing manifests in everything that we undergo, everything we perceive. The measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left. It’s just an opposite, it’s perceived as an opposite. Rhythm will compensate. Now, how this should be understood when we are talking about natural law is many people will say, “Well, that’s just the way the tendency is moving us. It’s just the way the tide is taking us”.

But that’s not really accurate. We can’t look at these things as that the rhythms are set in stone and it has to be this way now. One of the things that a lot of the Hermetic tradition taught regarding these laws, these principles, were they can be overcome, by higher levels of consciousness. This one was one of them.

Rhythm is a principle that is a tendency for something to swing a certain way. Let’s liken it to genetics. If you look at some newer biology, a lot of modern biologists are suggesting consciousness plays into whether a gene activates or not and expresses a certain condition. Well, this is the same way. There’s something that can be done about the swing or the tide.

Let’s look at it as you have a boat. You want to row the boat out to sea, right? You have to get past the tide. You have to get past the breakers and the waves. And if that tide’s really strong at high tide, it’s gonna be very much more difficult. You’re gonna have to expend more energy to get it out to sea. If, however, you were taking it when the current’s moving out to sea, there’s a flow that’s moving outward deeper into the ocean, and you start rowing that boat then, you’re gonna be able to do it much more easily.

So if there’s winds pushing along a plane, it’s going to have to expend less energy. It’s going to get there more quickly because it’s adding to the energy. If, however, you’re flying against the wind, you’ve got to expend a lot more energy. It’s just a tendency. You can still get to where you want to go. You may just have to exert more effort.

Right now, we’re in a tendency of things are not flowing. It’s an ebb, all right? And it’s something that needs to really have more energy put into it, if we’re going to resist the tendency. It doesn’t mean nothing can be done about it. It doesn’t mean it can’t be overcome. It means at the time we’re living in, we want to make this motion go in this direction, but its tendency is to move in this direction.

So more will is required at this time to move the consciousness. At other times, the consciousness may be flowing in a positive direction and it may take much less energy in order to move that consciousness forward. However, we’re not living in that time.

We are living at what many researchers have called the Kali Yuga, or the age of darkness and destruction. This is the point that resists the flow in consciousness the most, and it’s gonna take an enormity of effort to break down these preexisting belief systems that don’t serve who we are.

So that’s the principle of rhythm.

This is the principle here in natural law that most fits in with how I’m using the term natural law today, cause and effect. Many people, again in the New Age community, don’t want to believe that there’s causes and effects, and that effects are driven by causes that come first and then manifest conditions.

So the principle of cause and effect simply states that every cause has its effect and every effect has its cause.

Every single thing that occurs happens according to law. Chance is a name for a law not recognized. There are many planes of causation, but nothing escapes the law. So again, is there free will?

Yes, there is free will. But is there free will to ignore law without consequence? No, there is not. That’s the limit of free will. Free will is operating within boundary conditions that I’m referring to as natural law. It’s a series of laws, actually.

Free will operates within these parameters or boundary conditions that cannot be exceeded or gone beyond without consequence. Oh, yeah, you can break natural law. Yes, you can break it. But you cannot break it without consequence. You cannot break it without consequence, negative consequence. And that’s why this body of knowledge has in the past been referred to as consequentialism.

It is the knowledge of how consequences are generated by our free will decision-making processes within the boundaries of natural law. So this is the law of cause and effect, the principle of cause and effect. And I think this image……I was searching for images that encapsulate cause and effect……and I found this cartoon, and I think it does it brilliantly. Most of all, because will the effect happen immediately? No, it will not happen immediately. There is a time lag.

You set the cause into motion. The universe is going to intelligently bring to you, through a rearrangement of all the dynamics that it needs to rearrange, the effect of what you’ve generated by setting that cause into motion, and there is a time gap between the cause going into place and the effect coming around and hitting you. This is why the pattern recognition of cause and effect is more difficult because it is separated by a time lag, by what we perceive as linear time.

Now, If you did a wrong to somebody and immediately you were stung by a wasp (……every single time you did a wrong to somebody……), it showed up and bit you immediately within two seconds of you hurting somebody, stealing from somebody, lying to somebody, et cetera. Would you start to connect the stinging to the wrong that you did?

I think most people would see the pattern. They would recognize the pattern. But since that doesn’t happen, and there’s a time lag to experiencing something harmful to ourselves once we do something harmful to other people, it’s very difficult for people to see the connection through the time lag.

Most, and moreover, it doesn’t exactly happen in a one-to-one ratio like this. Karmic consequence is more complicated than all of that. What’s happening is that all of us are experiencing in the aggregate the wrongs that the human species is conducting on a daily basis, which we do not attempt to rectify and stop.

Through our inaction, karma is being accrued. People think that karma can only be accrued from action. No, it cannot. It can be accrued from inaction as well. And that’s where many people in our society is. They’re not taking any action and they’re willing to let evil run unchecked.

So this is ultimately gonna come back and bite us. And what we set into motion is gonna actually topple over onto us, if we don’t change our thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. Nothing escapes law. We are bound by it eternally. You know, let me just go back. I’ll leave it on this slide for a moment.

You know, for some people familiar with my work, you’ve seen me break down the Matrix trilogy.

And the law of cause and effect is brought forward extensively in the second Matrix movie, The Matrix Reloaded. And the scene that encapsulates this the most is the character of the Merovingian, who tells to the heroes who want to be free from the Matrix and its control, “You are coming to me without an understanding of why you are in this position. You don’t understand the causal factors that have led to the current conditions that are in place. Therefore, you are coming to me with no power to effect change. You are powerless. So why should I help you”?

You’re powerless because you lack knowledge and understanding of what set these events into motion. Why? The question ‘why’, he says, ‘why’ is the only source of real power, without ‘why’ you are powerless?

He’s talking about cause and effect and he says it specifically. Causality, he calls the only real truth. And this is the villain. The words of truth come through one of the……it’s a big technique in Hollywood, too……the words of truth are spoken by the villain in the movie or in the series.

But if you listen, and there is a twist, a dark twist to what he says, he says, “Free will is like an illusion”. No! It is not. That’s where the dark occultist is trying to trip up the heroes. There are both free will and natural law. He tries to say free will……

The Morpheus character says to him, “Everything starts with choice”. And Morpheus is correct. Our choices set that causality into motion before it becomes an effect. And the Merovingian tries to tell him, no, there is no free will. That’s where the dark occultist will give you the bulk of truth and then poison it with that one thing he wants to get you to accept.

The next thing that needs to be understood is the two planes. There’s the plane of effects, and then there’s the plane of causes. No power to affect any change lies on the plane of effects, which is the physical manifested reality.

Again, what already is, nothing can be done about. What already is, you cannot change. You cannot change the past. You can change what it is starting now and make sure that it gets changed in the future. But right now, what is, is the truth, and all you can do is accept that or reject it. You can’t change the past.

So the physical world that is manifested up to this point happened because of things that occurred in the past. The causes happened in the past. Nothing you can do about that right now. The plane of effects or the physical world is where manifested realities have already occurred, have already taken shape, have already formed due to their underlying causal factors.

The plane of effects constitutes that which has already occurred. As such, no power to effect change lies here because that which has already occurred cannot unoccur. That which has occurred can’t undo itself. It happened. It’s already done. It has become that which is, or truth.

Human consciousness seems to be trapped upon the plane of effects, meaning that humanity as a whole remains ignorant of the underlying causes, which they themselves have set into motion and which lead to self-inflicted suffering in their lives. So if you’re trapped at this level, what you’re doing is you’re looking at the symptoms, and you’re stuck looking at the symptoms.

This is everybody:

oh, there’s a political solution to this, we need to vote in the right people.
oh, here’s a financial solution to this, we just need to set the right monetary policy.
no, there’s a scientific solution to this, and technological advancements are gonna be made that suddenly save ourselves and make the world any different.

And they think all of this is gonna be done while slavery is still in place. Well, again, good luck with that and let me know how it works out.

I speak at free energy related events. I work with the Tesla Science Foundation. I speak at MUFON related events that talk about disclosure of extraterrestrial presence. Both of these communities don’t understand: the things that they say they want are impossible! And I’m gonna start talking about them in this way more openly, you know.

Because I’ve kind of like given them some soft teachings and I think they need to hear it a little bit more harshly. Because both of these communities are not talking about morality to the extent that they need to. They think we’re gonna have free energy, but nothing’s gonna change as far as the social structure of the world goes.

We’ll just develop free energy, and that’ll magically save us. We’ll still have slavery, but free energy will be here, and the world will be a magically better place. The UFO community, they often think, oh, we’re gonna get disclosure. They’re gonna come out and tell us everything they know about other intelligences that are out there in the galaxy and in the universe with us. And they think they’re gonna get that in a climate of slavery.

Well, good luck with all those things. You gotta take down the existing structure first. People think, oh, we gotta build the new world while the old one decays. You have to destroy the existing power structure with the power of truth before anything new is gonna grow here.

Because this place is a garden full of weeds, of poisoned ideologies and completely erroneous belief systems that have no bearing on truth whatsoever and cannot get us what we say we want. Until those thoughts are changed, don’t expect the results you want.

So to the free energy movement, I say you’re never gonna get free energy in a climate of slavery. To the UFO community, I say you will never get disclosure in a climate of slavery. Slavery has to end first. Then you can get what you say you want.

So, again, no power to effect any change lies in the world of effects. Cannot be done. You are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic while it sinks. You’re not creating any change doing those things, because the underlying causes aren’t changing, and the underlying causes are how we think, how we feel, and how we behave. And no one wants to look at that.

They want to think all those things can stay in place and I can magically get what I want. I want to keep my hand over the fire, but I don’t want it to burn and blister. Well, enjoy. Find out what you get when you do that. Because that’s what we’re doing when it comes to natural law.

So let’s look at the plane of causality. This is the other plane. This is the mental realm, the mental world. Again, according to the law of mentalism, the first principle of natural law, everything that manifests must first manifest in mind before it can manifest physically.

So again, if the plane of causality is the mental world that’s generating the causes in mind, everything is happening there first and then it is trickling down to the physical domain. It is manifesting in the physical domain only after it has manifested in the mental world.

The plane of causality is where causes are set into motion prior to those causes manifesting as formed realities in the plane of effects. This plane of causality constitutes the causal factors, the why, which underlies and precedes all manifested things and events. All power, all power, to effect change lies on this plane of reality.

Human consciousness must move away from the plane of effects and to the plane of causality in order for human beings to understand the causal factors of the conditions which they are collectively manifesting in their lives. Only then will humanity be able to co-create their shared reality on a conscious level, meaning with an understanding of how natural law operates, rather than on an unconscious level, meaning that we don’t understand how natural law operates.

And I just look at it in a simple graphic, in a simple chart or graph. This is the higher realm. This is the world of causality, the mental world, the why, the underlying causal factors that precede conditions which are manifested.

This is where our consciousness has to go because this is where all power to affect change is at, in the understanding of why that manifested to begin with. So these are the symptoms. This line could be looked at as the diagnosis.

You have to make that diagnosis and get to the underlying causal factors that lead to the symptoms. The plane of effects, on the other hand, meaning the physical world, is the manifested realm, that which has already occurred, that cannot be undone, at least in the present moment.

You could start in the present to undo it in the future. But as far as the present moment and all moments in the past go, you’re not changing that. That’s truth. That’s what is. That’s already manifested. You can’t change it. No power to affect change lies in continuously analyzing the symptoms.

You gotta do that long enough that you know where the problem’s at. You’ve made the diagnosis. Now you can get to the causal factors, and start going to work changing those causes. Unfortunately, this plane, the plane of effects, seems to be where human consciousness in the aggregate is trapped. It can’t seem to get past there.

Even if it recognizes the problem, it wants to keep describing the problem. It wants to keep describing the prison. It doesn’t want to look at the causal factors, because it’s afraid of what the causal factors are. It doesn’t want to acknowledge the causal factors lie in how we think, feel, and act, and until those things are changed, the external manifestation cannot change. That takes responsibility.

The final principle of the seven principles of natural law, at least the formalized ones, are gender.

Again, I’m gonna talk about an eighth lost one. Gender exists in everything. Everything has its masculine and its feminine components or principles. We’ve already seen that when it comes to the human brain, consciousness, worldview, et cetera. Gender manifests on all planes of existence: spiritual, mental, physical, everything. Very simple concept.

What I want to briefly talk about is mental gender. Mental gender is the state of coexistence between the masculine and feminine aspects of the mind. Again, we’ve already looked at this. We looked at the breakdown of the physiology of the brain, at least of the higher order part of the brain, the neocortex.

Our left brain hemisphere largely facilitates the masculine aspects of the mind or the intellect, logic, analytical thought, linear thought processes, while the right brain hemisphere largely facilitates the feminine aspect or intuition, meaning creativity, compassion, and holistic thought processes.

This next section is what I call the lost principle.

This is the eighth principle of natural law, which binds all of the other principles together. It is what I would call the encapsulating principle. It’s the container inside which all the other principles fit very nicely and neatly.

However, it’s lost because we’re not exercising it. See, we already looked at one, two, three, four, five, six, seven principles of natural law. And there they are represented by these circles overlapping each other. Can anybody see an eighth circle anywhere? You got it. Correct. Here’s the eighth circle. And this might look familiar.

You might have seen this somewhere. This pattern is called something. Does anybody know what this pattern is called? What is it? Not the flower of life. The seed of life. The seed of life! Now, what happens from a seed? It grows. It generates something. It creates something.

A seed has an outer casing, an outer shell. Then if you’re gonna get to the inner core of it that contains all of the creative, genetic, generative material, that shell has to be there and intact. You break the shell of the seed, the creative essence of the seed is gonna be gone.

Now, what is that principle? Here’s what that principle is. It’s the eighth or what I call the lost principle. And it’s the thing that has to be present in order for any change to manifest itself. And it is not what most people think of it as. Even when I tell you what this is, I guarantee you there will be an inaccurate connotative meaning for what people think this means.

Here’s what the eighth principle is. It is known as the generative principle, or the principle which governs creation, which actually is the causal factor that goes into effect and generates the result that we say that we want. But what’s the real term for it? Who can guess what the actual term, what the generative principle of creation actually is?

No, it is not action. Now most people will say it’s love. I want to distinguish it from the concept of love, even as I’m going to describe love in this presentation a little bit later on. What is it? No. What? Somebody said it. Somebody said something else. No. Who? Care. There it is.

The (eighth) generative principle is care.

Now, this is different than compassion. People say, why don’t you use the word compassion? Because that’s not what I’m talking about. It is a different concept than compassion or even what I would describe as love.

Care, and I mean care with a capital “C”, and here I didn’t even put it with a capital “C”. I’m just putting it in all uppercase. All uppercase CARE. Distinguish this from care with a lowercase “c”. This means:

what are you giving attention and helping to grow?
what are you focusing upon?

Because what focus you’re focusing upon, that’s what’s ultimately getting generated, getting created, and growing. And this doesn’t mean be ignorant of what’s going on in the world and don’t look at anything that’s negative, because you’re gonna feed that and give power to it. That’s not what it means.

That means, you know what you’re feeding?

In that instance, if you want to do that, you’re feeding ignorance, and that’s what’s going to grow. It’s the exact opposite that the New Agers want you to believe that it is. By ignoring the negative, you are ensuring that more of it occurs. You are fueling it by ignorance, ensuring that it grows and takes over.

What care has to be looked at here as is, this is what you’re giving your energy to. This is what you’re focused upon. This is what you actually care enough about to do, to spend your time on, to put your attention on, to manifest in the world.

That’s what I’m talking about as care. That’s what generates our experience in the aggregate.

Most people don’t care about what’s really happening. Therefore, it is an impossibility for us in the aggregate to change the direction of energy, to change the direction of consciousness, and ultimately to get what we say we want.

(01:39:58) That’s how the real law of attraction works.

Here’s how it actually operates. The lost principle is the dynamic of care. What we care about on a day-to-day basis acts as the driving force of our thoughts and actions.

What did I say we need to develop? The heart, mind, guts. Heart, mind, guts, in that order. Care comes first. You gotta care enough to know, to develop the knowledge. Then you gotta act on it and put it into practice. Apply it.

So that’s the order. Heart, mind, guts. Care, knowledge, action. Those are the steps. And all three of those have to be in place. All three! That’s what unity consciousness is. It’s unifying thoughts, emotions, and actions, the three aspects of consciousness, such that there is no contradiction between them. Our thoughts, what we think, how we feel, and how we act are one and the same.

There’s no contradiction. That’s unity consciousness.

Therefore, since care is the driver of our thoughts and actions, it ultimately can be seen as the generator of the quality of our shared experience here on the earth. Care is what generates the whole thing. Hence, it has been called the generative principle—like in the heart……to a pump in the body.

Well, what does a pump do? It’s a generator. It provides energy. It moves the life force through the blood, in the body. In every ancient tradition, they talk about the life force being in the blood. The heart is what pumps that through the whole physiology and enables us to continue to sustain life. The heart is the generator. It’s the pump. It’s the center of the being.

As important as the brain is, which we just talked about the importance of it, the heart is ultimately what’s generating the experience because what we care about determines what we think about on a daily basis most of the time and therefore how we behave, all right?

This principle has often been referred to as the generative principle. Anybody familiar with the compasses and square symbol of Freemasonry with the “G” in the middle? Well, that’s what the “G” stands for at the highest level. They’ll talk about many porch masons. These are the exoteric masons that are given the teachings of the profane and they think they’re in the know.

They’re given the information, well, this only means geometry, it only means God, etc. One of the things they’ll tell you it means at a slightly higher level is that it means gnosis, knowledge, which we saw the meaning of in Greek earlier. At a higher level, at illuminated levels of Freemasonry, which are above 32nd degree, they will give you what the real meaning of the “G” inside the compasses and squares, and it is the generative principle.

It means genesis, creation, and yeah, you can tie that right back to God. I’m not saying those things are different. And the forms that get created in the physical manifested world are geometric forms. So it is geometry as well. It’s all these things. But at the highest level, it’s the generative principle. That’s what that “G” really stands for in esoteric Freemasonry.

It’s called the generative principle because that means to create. The word generative comes from Latin. The verb genere, as we’ve already talked about, means to create. The generative principle is what we create through.

And it’s lost because people don’t care. They don’t have care. Hence, it’s the lost principle. Here’s how it works, folks. What we care enough to put our will behind. So again, heart, mind, guts. Guts is the will, the action, the masculine principle. That’s what gets things done ultimately in the physical domain.

What we care enough to put our will behind (……and that’s driven by the care, that’s the generator or the pump that drives the will……), what we care enough to put our will behind is ultimately what gets created or manifested in our world. The world is the way that it is because most people do not care enough, even if they say, they pay lip service, and say that they want things to be different.

They don’t care enough to actually change it through their actions. Because, again, when it comes all down to it, and I said this in my New Age BS seminar or lecture. What it comes down to is preventing action. Preventing action. That’s what the New Age community is designed to do. They want people inactive because the dark occultists know that the thing that is ultimately generating our reality is behavior, as you saw in that simple four-part chart, that little building block chart that I put up there.

Action is what’s generating the reality. That gets generated through what we care about because our cares and our desires drive our actions. So most people will say they want things to change, but then when you say, what are you doing to make that change happen? Not a word. Silence comes back on the other end.

So they don’t care enough to change it through their actions. That’s what the generative or loss principle is about. And until that principle is regained and people get out of their laziness and most of all get out of their cowardice. Again, in that New Age lecture, I’m talking about what it ultimately comes down to in the New Age movement. And I’ll look at any New Ager in the eyes. They’re cowards. Cowards.

Ultimately, they know the evil that we’re up against, and they intend to do not a damn thing about it. That’s what it really comes down to. And anybody telling you it’s different than that is lying to you. They’re cowards. Period. And I’ll say it right to any of their faces.

Anything I say up here, anybody that believes in that nonsense, come and bring them to me. I’ll tell them right to their face. Straight and open, just like I said it here. Because I don’t care. I don’t care about their nonsense. I care about what’s real.

So I’m telling you, this religion has to go. It’s got to go. If people are gonna make real change happen, the idea that it can’t be done……that it can be done without taking actual real world action has to be purged from human consciousness. Reality does not work like that, period, the end. And I can’t make you accept that.

I recognize I can’t make anybody in this room accept that. All I can do is put it out there for your consideration, and if you have some common sense and really, really, think about it, you’ll understand what I’m saying here is absolutely the way it is.

Many people want to deceive you through these religious notions, which is all about getting people to stand down and accept their chains. That’s what that religion’s in place for, all right?

(01:47:42) This next section I call spiritual currency or spiritual currencies, all right? There’s two spiritual currencies, time and attention.

Now, look, we can readily see this, right? Time is money, people say. It’s currency, all right? What am I gonna spend my time on? What am I going to pay attention to? Pay attention! You pay for something. You get something in return when you pay for something, right? That’s what attention will get you here. It will get you something in return. You pay attention, you’re going to come out of here with a lot of understanding.

There’s two spiritual currencies, time and attention. This analogy can be seen very readily in the saying, spending time and paying attention. Whatever information or endeavors we put our time and attention toward, we end up getting something in return for that investment of these currencies. This is what real money is, folks. Real money! This will get you real money. One eye, mon eye.

If you want real money instead of the fake Federal Reserve nonsense fiat paper currency money that isn’t worth the paper it’s printed upon, then keep thinking that that has value. And people who say gold is value, gold is real money, yeah, well, I ask people, what intrinsic value does gold have? And they say, well, oh, it’s been traded with throughout time immemorial. People have valued it all the time. Does that make it intrinsic?

You answered my question.

It’s like saying, why does that projector have intrinsic value? And you say, because I find it valuable. No, that projector has intrinsic value because it’s capable of projecting an image. And if I want that task done, that’s what I use a projector for.

Well, what’s gold used for? Can you build clothing out of it? Can you build a house out of it? Is it malleable enough to be molded into a weapon of some sort? You’re going to take shelter under it? Maybe if you have enough of it. The whole point is there is no intrinsic value to this. It’s something that’s……the idea of any precious metal having intrinsic value……other than, okay, in a technological society it’s used for computers. This is true. But I’m talking about in nature.

Where would this idea of intrinsic value of gold come from in the ancient past? People say it’s used as a medium of exchange. Money is not a medium of exchange. People think of it as a medium of exchange and it’s not. It’s incorrect.

Money is the limiter of energy in the system.

See, people think of money as currency. Even the name is a mind control technique because it’s supposed to be about, it’s the current in the energy system. This is the current. It’s the amperage, right?

No, it’s not. It’s not the capacitance either. It’s not a store. That’s another thing people will tell you money is, what they say is real money. It’s all fake. It’s all fake! It’s not a store either. You know what it is?

It’s the resistance in the system. It’s the resistance to change in the system.

It acts as the resistor because as long as that modality of slavery called money continues to exist, it will always be extraordinarily difficult to create real lasting change.

So again, I piss off everybody. Religion’s gotta go. Scientism’s gotta go. New age thought’s gotta go. Money’s gotta go. All of it’s gotta go. You know why? It’s all religion. It’s all religion, and the word religion means to hold one back, to tie one up and keep them where they’re at, as we’re gonna get to in a few moments. So let’s get back to spiritual currencies.

(01:51:30) We end up getting something in return on what we put our investment of spiritual currencies toward.

And you know what that……if it’s put toward the right goals……the end result is true money, one-eye. True spiritual vision, the ability to see, to unoccult something and see it for what it really is. That’s what comes from truly putting time and attention onto the right things.

This return could come in the form of knowledge. It could come in the form of understanding. It could come in the form of skills, expertise, and empowerment, but only if we invest these two spiritual currencies wisely. And let me tell you something, folks, that’s why most people don’t have any money.

They got nothing to pay for it with. See, you pay attention and you get money. You spend time and you get money. I’m talking about the real thing. Cool. We’re gonna take a break in about five to 10 minutes, okay? So we have to invest our spiritual currencies wisely.

We should seek to improve our quality of attention by placing it upon information that is capable of improving both ourselves and the human condition as a whole. Give me a heads up in about eight or nine minutes, thank you.

Such an effort would also constitute a valuable investment of our time. We should ask ourselves, what am I spending my time on? What am I spending my time doing? And what am I paying attention to? That’s where you will find whether you’re investing in real value, something that is truly valuable.

If most of the time we’re spending our time on nonsense and trivialities and divisive things and TV and sports and all other kinds of entertainment and distraction, well, you’re going to have a return on that investment, and that return’s going to be low. It’s not going to result in much money, real money.

Most importantly, we need to ask ourselves, what kind of quality am I getting in return for my investments of time and attention? These are the spiritual currencies, and that’s what most people don’t want to give. They don’t want to give these freely for a return on investment. They don’t want to pay attention to the right things. They don’t want to spend time on the right things.

This is a simple chart of how our quality of our attention (……and again, this is in the aggregate, but it’s created by all the individuals……), how the quality of our overall attention as a species will affect our world in accordance with the principle of correspondence, which states, as goes the microcosm or the microcosmic units, so will become the macrocosm.

So over here we have a pure information stream. This is good information. This is information that is capable, that resonates with truth and is capable of helping to develop wisdom or right action within the being. This over here is the poisoned information stream like we get from the mainstream media, from scientism, from the New Age movement, from government indoctrination centers called schools. This is the poisoned information stream.

Now, everybody’s gonna take in some form of a mixture of both of these streams. What the goal needs to be is to purify. Just like, hey, you take in bad food, you’re gonna have bad health. You take in bad information, the output through behavior is gonna be bad. So you gotta purify.

Meaning, if there’s valves here on the individual buckets (……these are called the individual people, and they’re all coming together with the quality of their water, right?, what they’re holding within their consciousness……), and that’s all going into the big pool called the world (……everybody’s bringing their bucket to the pool, they’re pouring it in, and then they’re jumping in, that’s the world, that’s the quality of the world, right?……), the quality of this whole thing here is going to be based on how much poisoned polluted information was in your bucket, compared to how much pure information was in your bucket.

So there’s valves over here. We’ve got to shut this one off, this brown muddied valve over here, and we’ve got to open this one up. If we do that, the world will be purified and we won’t be creating self-inflicted suffering. We don’t do that? We’re going to be swimming in brown muck and generating all kinds of problems for ourselves.

So how are we spending our time? What are we paying attention to? Is this what we’re doing with our time and attention? Sitting behind the hypnosis box? Which means suppression of knowledge. Hypnosis is the suppression of knowledge or the suppression of spirit.

Or, are we going to devote our time to some pursuits of wisdom? Which means developing knowledge, converting it to understanding by processing it accurately, and then converting into wisdom through action, through right action. And you gotta read, to do this. People don’t wanna hear that either.

Reading is required.

The ancient Romans had two words……the same word……that meant two different things in their language. The word was liber, L-I-B-E-R. Liber meant free, as in not a slave. A free being would be described as liber, free. It’s the basis of the English word liberty, liber-ty, liberty, freedom.

They had the same word also meant a different concept. So the word liber didn’t just mean free. If it was used in a different context, does anybody know what else the word liber meant? L-I-B-E-R meant in Latin? Book. It meant book. Does that tell us something? They associated, the Latin word for book also meant free in their language. And again, liber is the basis for the word library. Liber-ary. Where you can go to become free, if you read the right books. And again, the world is our library now.

We’ve reunited all the parts of the big library that were cast to the four corners of the earth. The mystery traditions are available at your fingertips now, which hasn’t been the case at any time in human history. And what are we doing? We’re playing Farmville on Facebook. You know? So we have to ask ourselves, what are we spending our spiritual currency on, and are we investing it wisely for a return of real money, which is actually spiritual enlightenment?

I’m gonna take a quick break right there, and we’ll pick it up with the next section in 10 minutes, 10 minutes, right back here to continue, thank you.

(01:58:58) So natural law has been called many different things in different traditions throughout the world at different times in history.

Let’s look at what some people have called it. It’s been called the law of cause and effect, or the laws of cause and effect. And there’s a scientific connotation to this concept of cause and effect too. Even scientists will say an effect invariably follows a cause. And they’ll also say things like for every action there is an equal, there exists an equal and opposing reaction. So there’s a consequence when an action is taken.

In the more New Age circles, you’ve heard it referred to as the law or laws of attraction. I call this presentation the real law of attraction. However, there are some good things that the New Age community, and I don’t tell you it’s all bad. I don’t make that blanket statement. It is a religion in many respects, but however, there are some truths embedded in it that can be taken on their own and that can be value can be gleaned from.

So one of those sayings is the energy that we emit is the energy that we attract. This is true. What we’re putting out into the universe is what we’re getting in return from the universe and what we’re creating in our reality. Energy flows where attention goes. I just talked about this in the last section. What we put our attention on is what ultimately gets manifested in the world. As you think, feel, and act, so you shall be. You know, some of the teachers of different variants of law of attraction teachings have only put the first part in that. As you think, so you will be. No. As you think, feel, and act, so you will be. And most of all, as you act, so you will be. Most of all.

So, it’s been called karma. It’s been called moral law, as I talked about before. And this is captured beautifully by the phrase, what we sow, we reap. The seeds that you scatter, that’s what’s gonna grow, and that’s the fruit that you’re going to harvest. So a very accurate way of looking at it.

Again, it’s been called consequentialism. That’s another thing I could put into this chart. In other words, that there is free will, but there is no free will without consequence. That’s called consequentialism. That would be another very accurate way of referring to natural law.

And finally, the golden rule, it’s been called. And it’s been stated in the affirmative as do unto others as you would have done unto yourself. I find this much more powerfully stated in the negative or what I call the apophatic variant. And we’ll talk about what apophatic and apophysis means in a few moments. I think it would have been much less ambiguous, the golden rule, if it was said like this: Do not do to others as you would prefer not to have done unto you.

Now the ambiguity goes away because people want to be treated slightly differently. Hey, a masochist might want to get beaten by a sadist. But that doesn’t mean do that to others because you like it. But people know what they don’t want. They don’t want their rights taken. They don’t want their property taken or damaged. They don’t want to be harmed in their person. They don’t want any of those things. They don’t want to be lied to. They don’t want to be deceived. So don’t do those things other people.

So let’s jump into the, this is the heart of the presentation here. It’s how natural law actually works in our lives. What are its expressions? How can we come to understand how this operates? There are ways of knowing, and they’re through these expressions of natural law. So we defined what natural law is. We talked about the underlying principles that it’s based upon. Now we are gonna talk about how it works in our lives.

So we’re gonna build a chart of the natural law expressions in a moment. What these expressions are, are the recognizable workings in our life, and they take place through five basic expressions.

(02:03:17) Each of the five expressions of natural law have a positive aspect and a negative aspect.

So that gives us a total of 10 overall natural law expressions, and we’re gonna build a chart regarding these expressions. So here’s the expression, and then there’s a positive aspect to the expression, and there’s a negative aspect to the expression.

The first expression of natural law is known as, and again, this is what I call these things. There’s no hard and fast rules. It’s just terminology. It’s jargon to try to explain them in words. These are unseen concepts and laws in reality, in nature, in the nature of the universe. These are just English word terms that I’m applying to these concepts.

So the first principle of natural law I call the generative polarity.

Or in other words, this is the force or energy that we are using at the base level to start the process of creation, or you could say of co-creation. We’re co-creating the reality that we experience with the laws of nature.

So, you can look at the first principle, first expression of natural law, which is the generative polarity, as the force that we use to set all of the other events which are to come, which are to manifest in our lives, into motion. Or in other words, what we use, the force that we use, to generate or create the quality of our experience. That’s the generative polarity.

The positive expression of the generative polarity is love. Now, this is not what many people think of as love. It’s not familial love. It’s not relationship love. It’s not Hollywood movie variant of love. It’s not romance novel variant of love.

I call love consciousness: love is the force which helps us to expand consciousness and become open to truth, if we are in it. If we are in that vibratory energy, we become open to truth.

So here’s what it looks like visually. I try to put a visual aspect to all of these concepts. And people would think I’m going to put two people together kissing or hugging or something like that. Love is inside each individual if it’s present. It doesn’t depend on any other person. You can express love with another person and there’s no problem with that. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing. That’s a great thing, if it’s present in your life. The capital L, capital O, capital V, capital E definition of love that I’m giving here is not that.

It is this force that opens up our consciousness.

It’s the flowering expression of consciousness. So how I word this is, the positive aspect of the generative polarity, the first expression of natural law, is love. In regard to natural law, love should be seen as the expansive force for consciousness. It is the force which helps us to become open to truth and expand our awareness. That’s the connotation that I’m giving for the concept called love here. That’s the positive expression of the The creative polarity.

Now, the negative expression of the creative polarity is the exact opposite of love. So people will automatically think, well, that’s hate. And it is not. Because the thing that puts consciousness in a box and prevents it from growing and keeps it where it’s at is what? There it is: fear. Fear is the basis for unconsciousness. You cannot be unconscious of anything in particular unless you fear it. That’s what shuts consciousness down. And here’s my visual for it.

Fear.

I don’t want to look at that. That’s too horrible for me to contemplate. That can’t be true. I don’t want that to be true. That’s all fear. Okay?

The negative aspect of the generative polarity is fear. Fear is the contractive force for consciousness. Fear is the force which influences us to become closed to the truth, and it is the force which ultimately shuts down our awareness. That’s why so many people are unconscious, because they are fearful. They are fearful of the responsibility that comes with knowledge, and most of all, they are fearful of having to act based upon knowledge, because that requires courage.

The second natural law expression is the initiating expression, what I call the initiating expression, just my term for it.

The initiating expression is the first stage of tangible and recognizable results which we produce in our lives after we have, “set the ball rolling”. Set the dynamic in motion by choosing between the generative polarities of either love or fear.

So, we choose love and something starts to happen. We become open to truth, right? Well, love is the expansive force for consciousness that opens our minds to the truth and awareness. So what do we gain as a result of accepting or existing in the vibratory energy called love? We gain knowledge, which is the acceptance of truth.

Since love opens us up to truth, knowledge is its reception. It is the receiving of truth. We come to know.

So that’s how it starts. I call this the initiating expression. Now, of course, there’s a negative initiating expression. If we are existing in the vibratory dynamic of fear, that would be the opposite of knowledge. What is it? Ignorance, right.

Now, this is what I put forward as knowledge. This is my imagery for knowledge. That’s a being who knows themself. And as the mystery traditions of Greece put forward at the Delphic Oracle, know the self and you will know the universe. In other words, know the microcosm and you will know the macrocosm. Know thyself.

The positive aspect of this initiating expression is knowledge or the acceptance of truth. Knowledge positively influences the quality of our lives because it positively influences our decision-making processes that lead to understanding in every area of our lives. You want to know how something works and ultimately create something good? You have to have knowledge. You want to know how a car works? Keep it running in good order. You have to have knowledge. You want to know how a computer works? Keep it running in good order. You have to have knowledge. You want to know how the human psyche works and keep it running in good order so the conditions on earth manifest the way you want them to manifest? You’ve got to have knowledge.

Not getting out of this condition without learning. Learning is the key. It’s the answer. Knowledge is the answer, and people don’t wanna hear that. They don’t wanna hear it! They wanna think we’re magically gonna manifest the desired conditions that we say we want without learning a thing. It doesn’t work that way.

So again, the negative initiating expression is ignorance. Ignorance is the refusal of truth. It is the refusal to gain knowledge, because we are in fear. So here’s what I put as the image for ignorance. The population that is hypnotized, that wants to keep paying attention to nonsense and trivialities, feed themselves tons of GMO food that is crap for the physiology, pay attention to distraction, entertainment, mainstream news and media.

It’s all there to just shut the consciousness down and keep people in a depressed psychological state and keep them in a state of psychological infancy.

The negative aspect of the initiating expression of natural law is ignorance or the refusal of truth. Ignorance negatively influences the quality of our lives because it negatively influences these decision-making processes that lead to understanding in every area of our lives. If you’re ignorant about how anything works, you can’t create the desired condition. It’s just not possible.

It’s important to remember, again, that ignorance should be distinguished from nescience, which means not knowing because necessary information is not present or was unattainable. Ignorance, on the other hand, means not knowing even though necessary information is present because that information has been willfully refused or disregarded.

And again, to keep us in ignorance, they don’t need to hide the information anymore, because it’s not hidden anymore. It’s out. And once again, it’s available at your fingertips for free, if you have the desire to take it in. But, now, the manipulation mechanism that is used is, to dissuade people from looking at it, provide endless entertainment, provide endless amusement, provide endless distraction, and say there’s nothing to any of that stuff. That’s just some old crazy religion that you don’t need to understand. It’s no different than any other religion, believing that natural law exists. That’s what people will insist on telling you.

So people will be dissuaded from ever looking into it and they’ll disregard it on their own choice.

Thomas Jefferson said that if a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. Freedom and ignorance are antitheses of each other that can never coexist simultaneously. That is an impossibility in natural law. I’m gonna put up a couple other quotes on ignorance.

Samuel Adams said, no people will tamely surrender their liberties, nor can any be easily subdued. When knowledge is diffused, that means it’s everywhere present, and virtue is preserved, meaning morality. On the contrary, when people are universally ignorant and debauched in their manners, meaning purely selfish and only worried about themselves, they will sink under their own weight without the aid of foreign invaders, meaning the society will turn inward on itself and collapse and destroy itself just based on the fact alone that the population is ignorant and they are ensconced in moral relativism and other forms of debauchery and just self-pleasure as their highest virtue, their highest desire.

Socrates said that the only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance. And this is a quote I’d like to be remembered for. Willful ignorance in the presence of knowledge is the measure of a bad person. And people will say that’s extremely harsh. That’s true. That doesn’t make the statement untrue. The statement is true as well. It is a harsh statement.

See, people in my family will ask me, why don’t you have anything to do with me anymore? I’ve deliberately cut off many members of my own family. Because many members of my own family say, I know what’s going on and I don’t care. I don’t intend to do a damn thing about it. Worried about me, myself, and mine, and I don’t care what’s happening in the world.

Well, you know what that’s called, folks? That’s called a bad person. Let’s not mince words. Let’s not euphemize. Let’s call it what it is. That’s called a bad person. And I don’t want anything to do with bad people in my personal life. I don’t hang out with bad people. I try to surround myself with good people who care. Because they’re creating, co-creating wisely.

I tell family members who I’ve cut off association with, because you do not care is what makes you a bad person. I don’t want anything to do with you until you start caring about what’s going on in the world. Then we could talk again, and I’ll welcome you back with open arms and forgive you. But not until. You wanna stay in that level of consciousness? I want nothing to do with you. I don’t wanna be around people like that. They’re bad influences and they do bring other people down.

So, I’ll still put out the information. It’s there any time for free that they wanna go and engage it. And I tell them all, anytime you want to ask me and come over and engage directly with me, I’ll make the time for you. But until you want to do that, until you develop that desire, I don’t want to be in your presence.

So maybe, I don’t know if that’s going to be effective. I don’t know. And guess what? I don’t care whether it’s going to be effective because I’m not going to surround myself with bad people until they decide I want to make myself a better person. Then I’ll engage them and speak the truth to them. But until then, I’ll put this out there for all, for free, and they can engage at any time they want. But in my personal life, I can’t make time for that. I don’t have energy for that. I barely have energy for this.

An anonymous quote, I believe this was from some internet forum. I don’t know what the gentleman’s name was, but it was a great quote. Ignorance is the root cause of all evil. And since only knowledge eradicates ignorance, it is our duty and moral obligation (……there’s that term……) to educate ourselves as well as the masses around us. That’s a moral obligation, if you’re in a position of knowledge.

And once again, that’s why I do what I do. I don’t do it because I like people. Believe me, Barb will tell you how much I like people. I don’t do it to make friends. I don’t do it to make money. I do it because it’s a moral obligation and for no other reason. I don’t serve people. I serve truth. Truth is the force which I serve. And I bend the knee to no other. That’s it. That’s it!

So great quote on ignorance there, great few quotes on ignorance.

Let’s look at the next expression. The internal expression is what happens inside of us, very simply.

So now we’ve started creating with a polarity. Something has happened in the world, either acceptance of truth or refusal of truth. Now something’s gonna take place inside of us, right?

So look. This level is that knowledge level. This is the base consciousness level. You could look at, that’s the foundation, remember that four block diagram? You could look at this, here’s the foundation. This is the foundation that lies underneath the trivium. That’s as deep as it gets, consciousness or unconsciousness, love or fear.

That’s what everything is a choice about between. Now here’s that first block, knowledge or lack thereof, knowledge or ignorance, right? You can see these polarities are like that concept of, you know, in the polarity aspect of the natural law principles.

There’s one thing that’s real and then this is the illusion.

These are two aspects of the same thing. This is consciousness and this is its lack. This is acceptance of truth and this is the lack of that. So it’s the same thing but opposite in degree, which is why they’re the same expression.

Now, what happened after knowledge or lack thereof? We went up to understanding, right? So that’s what this level is. Understanding happens internally, right? It’s an internal process, all right? So the positive aspect of the internal expression is when we come to understand through developing the knowledge and the acceptance of truth that we are sovereign.

Sovereignty is the expression, the internal positive expression of natural law. Now, again, underneath these, in parentheses, I always put what I call these things, another name that I’ve given to these things, these concepts. I call sovereignty “Internal monarchy”. Internal monarchy!

Now, monarchy means one ruler. Mon means one, is a prefix for one, and archon in Greek means ruler or master. Internally, we each need to master and rule ourselves. This is our kingdom that we get to rule and nowhere else. We don’t get to rule over anybody else. Many people think they’re the rulers of other people, but they’re wrong. Each of us is a sovereign being.

Sovereignty, as we’re gonna see, means that you’re not owned by anyone else. No one else owns you if you’re sovereign. So here’s my expression, my visualization for sovereignty. Somebody who truly has the light. They have the light at their disposal, they’re bathed in it. It’s flowing within them. And light has always been associated in different mystery traditions as knowledge. It’s been a symbol that has represented knowledge.

This is the person who has the knowledge and has gone through the decision making and filtering processes with that knowledge to come to an internal understanding that they are a sovereign being. And I have news for everybody. Whether you know it or not, whether you are familiar with the term or not, every person here is a sovereign. And you can never not be. It is an impossibility for you ever to be non-sovereign. It cannot be done. It cannot be done in nature.

Every single human being on this planet is a sovereign being. And we’re going to look at what sovereignty actually means. The positive aspect of the internal expression is sovereignty, or what I call internal monarchy, meaning one ruler within, internal monarchy, one ruler within.

As a state of consciousness, sovereignty means that one has unified the three aspects of their consciousness such that there is no internal contradiction between one’s thoughts, emotions, and actions. We become a being that as we think, so we feel, so we speak and act. And there’s no contradiction between those. We’re not torn apart from within, in this state of internal opposition amongst our own consciousness.

Moreover, let’s break the word sovereign down. That’s where we’re gonna come to the real meaning of the term. Sovereign is derived from the Latin adverb super. Super means above. See, in classical Latin, there’s no “V” in classical Latin. There’s no “V” character. Actually, if you wrote a “V” like that, it was a “U”, and why a double “U” looks the way that it is. It’s two “Vs”, actually, but that sound was “U” in Latin, if you see a “V”. There’s no “V” sound in classical Latin, it doesn’t exist, phonetically, all right?

This phonetic variation that we express as “V” or “V” in English in Latin was “P” or “B”. It was represented by a “P” or a “B”. So what we’re really seeing here is suver. Suver, okay? But it was pronounced in Latin super, like super. Well, what does super mean? Super, you’re beyond. You’re above and beyond. It means above or beyond. That’s what it means. A superman is one who’s beyond an ordinary man, right?

The Latin noun, regnum, comprises the second part of the etymological root of this word. Regnum, it comes from rex, rex regis in Latin, or regis. It means king. So regnum was the king’s rulership. Regnum means his reign. It’s where the word reign comes from in English, regnum, in Latin. It means rulership or externally imposed control, not control in the context: “I’m gonna control my emotions; I’m gonna control my behavior”.

No. It means I’m gonna control YOU externally by imposing my will over your will through coercion. That’s the context of rulership or control that I’m talking about here. So put them together, super regnum. Sovereign means above or beyond externally imposed rulership or control by another. That’s what it means.

Sovereign means not a subject to another being, like a king, like one who considers himself a king. And it means not a slave to someone who considers themself your master. That’s all sovereign means, folks, not a slave. And why I say every single person here is a sovereign is because there is no such thing, never has been any such thing, and never will be any such thing as legitimacy to slavery. That has never existed, does not exist now, and never will exist.

Slavery is an illegitimate concept. None of us are slaves. The condition of slavery has been imposed upon people, but it has never in history been legitimate, and it never will in history be legitimate. So there is no legitimacy to the concept of slavery, of the rightful rulership of another being through directly imposing your control through coercion. Doesn’t exist.

That’s a big part of what natural law is about.

We have to understand when we’re saying this word, this is what is meant by sovereign……not a slave. We did a study where we asked people, are you a sovereign? Like 11% said yes. Maybe, I think it was 10 or 11%. Which I thought was almost encouraging that one in 10 people knew that they were sovereign beings. It was amazing. But 90% of the human population doesn’t feel that they’re sovereign, doesn’t know that they’re sovereign.

I’m telling you, it doesn’t matter an iota whether you believe you are or not. I’m telling you it’s an eternal truth that you are sovereign and can never be non-sovereign. There is no such thing as someone else’s legitimate rulership or ownership of you, because there’s no such thing to the legitimacy of slavery and there never has been and there never will be. So everyone is a sovereign.

A sovereign is a monarch. Again, mon means one and archon means ruler. So when people ask me, what kind of government do you want? I tell them I want anarchy and I want monarchy. And they’re like, how could you have those things simultaneously? Because if you have internal monarchy, you can have external anarchy.

See, we need to have the rulership within and we need to get rid of the rulership without. This is the kingdom we need to master and we need to set aside the concept of mastery and slavery in the external domain, in the physical world.

Sovereign is a monarch, which means a single ruler who rules only the kingdom of self. Sovereignty is a state in which one controls one’s own thoughts, emotions, and actions, and by bringing them into unity or non-contradiction or non-duality, attains mastery over one’s own consciousness.

Sovereignty could be considered the equivalent of true self-control, true self-mastery, true self-love, or true self-ownership. It’s all of these things. And ultimately it means not a slave. That’s what has to be remembered above all else.

Let’s look at the negative internal expression for natural law, which is confusion. Now, confusion results when we are in ignorance. That’s the emotional dynamic, the feeling that takes place within the individual. This is the lack of understanding.

Confusion only happens in a lack of understanding. When we have not taken in knowledge, because we are afraid, we are in fear, ignorance results and then confusion happens internally. So look, this is the, remember, here’s the essence, that’s the foundation. This is that first stage, that first building block that we called knowledge or lack thereof. This is the second building block that we called understanding or lack thereof. This is true understanding when truth has been taken in and accepted. And this is the lack of understanding.

Now in that state of lack of understanding, we’re confused. So there’s no rulership within. Inside of us, there’s anarchy, which means the absence of ruler, of a ruler, not the absence of rules, which I’m going to get into later. Anarchy means there’s no ruler, no master. So if there’s no master inwardly, we have a big problem, because that means there’s no self-mastery. There’s no self-control. There’s no self-discipline, and ultimately, there’s no self-love, inwardly. And that results in an understanding that we don’t truly own ourselves. It would result in the absence of self-ownership, which is what we’re experiencing as a species: that other people believe they own other people.

This is what I found as a picture representing confusion. Someone who doesn’t know themself, doesn’t know themself, completely attached to a ego identity. Their whole mind is all wrapped up. I believe I’m this businessman. I believe I’m this banker. I believe I’m this lawyer. I believe I’m this doctor. And that’s my identity. And if something goes wrong with that, there goes my identity. There’s who I am down the drain, you know?

So this negative aspect of the internal expression of natural law is confusion, or what I call internal anarchy, meaning no ruler within. Confusion is the state of mind in which the being is ruled by fear and ignorance. Confusion could be seen as internal opposition, opposition within one’s own consciousness.

In other words, being torn apart from within in such a way that one’s own thoughts, emotions, and actions are in perpetual contradiction with each other. A thought, emotion, and action are not in alignment. As we think is not how we truly feel and is not how we act. There’s total contradiction and separation. No unity amongst those three aspects of consciousness. That’s confusion.

The fourth expression of natural law is what happens externally in the macrocosm in society.

When you have a bunch of people who are in either this dynamic within their own consciousness or a bunch of people who are in this dynamic in their own consciousness, a state results in the society at large, because the society at large is comprised of the aggregate quality of the individuals that comprise that society, all right?

If there’s love present and knowledge has been taken in and it’s been understood and we understand that we’re sovereign and we’re expressing self-ownership and self-mastery, what state manifests in society?

Freedom, there it is.

Freedom can only manifest when those preceding conditions are in place. It cannot magically manifest by any other means. If we say we want to be free, this is the path we have to take. Consciousness, acceptance of truth, and an understanding of our own sovereignty through self-mastery. It can’t happen any other way. It’s not possible.

So this is the picture I chose for freedom. This is actually from the cover of probably one of the greatest books I think that’s ever been penned by human hands, and I’ve read a whole lot of books in my life, and for me to say that, it’s a high compliment.

I think I’m a pretty good judge of books that can impart some wisdom to people. And I’m telling you, you need to read the book, “The End of All Evil” by Jeremy Locke, if you haven’t already read it.

This is one of the cover image from that book. Very rare book. To find it physically online, if you find it at a decent price, snatch it up and give it to other people or sell it to other people. I had a physical copy of this book. I lent it out, took off. Forgot who I lent it to. It happens, right? But this was a rare book. I think it was only pressed so many, a couple thousand, and it was never repressed.

So it’s a single printing or something like that. Never repressed it. Now, you’ll find that book for $150, $200 in some places, right? I finally found it at some foreign source online for like 20, 25 bucks and jumped all over it and I finally have a new physical copy of it.

One of the books, along with Larkin Rose’s book, “The Most Dangerous Superstition”, that if I had to tell you, destroy every other book on Earth, it would be down to these two. You know what I mean? It’s that much. They’re that important.

This is the cover image from that book with chains being broken that were formerly holding the Earth in captivity. I think it’s a great image that represents what freedom is about. It’s not about my freedom. It’s about our freedom. It’s about freedom for all beings. And guess what? OUR, when I say that in relationship to the earth, doesn’t just mean human beings. It means all beings, including the animal kingdom.

So the positive aspect of the external expression is freedom, or what I call external anarchy, meaning externally there are no rulers. There is no condition of masters and slaves.

So that’s what anarchy actually means, the absence of slavery. That’s what it really means. True freedom for all should be seen as the goal of spiritual development. Such a state can only manifest as a result of human society’s adherence to natural law. Can only manifest. Not just will manifest. The only way it is possible for it to manifest is if we understand and adhere to natural law.

So that’s the positive external expression, what happens in society. Now, there’s a negative external expression, and you can call it multiple things. You can call it totalitarianism. You could call it slavery. I term it simply control, externally imposed control.

It doesn’t mean self-control. It means literally someone outside of your own being is trying to control you and own you. So yeah, a good way of looking at it would be slavery as well, because control leads to slavery.

Control is what I call external monarchy, meaning there’s a ruler from without that believes they do own you and wants to continue to own you as their subject or slave. And this manifests in things like the oncoming police state, which I wouldn’t even say is oncoming. I would say it’s here……say we’re already living in it. It’s not something that’s going to happen in the future. It’s something that’s happening in the present. People talk about it as something they’re trying to avoid from happening. What makes people think it’s not already happening?

The negative aspect of the external expression of natural law is control, what I call external monarchy, one external ruler, the concentration of illusory power in the hands of institutions like government. Control is the pathway to all forms of evil and destruction. It results when a society lives in direct opposition to natural law.

The fifth and final expression for natural law, how it operates in our lives, is what I call the manifestation, or the result that we create.

So, again, here’s the foundation for that little four-part building, right? Here’s the first block, knowledge or lack thereof. Here’s the second block, understanding or lack thereof. Here’s the third block, wisdom or lack thereof, which is why we’re in a society that’s completely based in control because we’re drowning in knowledge and having a lick of wisdom, right? Or very, very little, I should say. Certainly not enough to go around. That’s the action stage or the wisdom stage, what happens externally. This is that top block. Remember the top white block that sat on top? We had the blue block at the bottom, then the red, then the green, and then the white block. This was the manifestation, the result that we create. Remember what little question I put on the top of that white block? Who can tell me what it was? The manifestation was either order or chaos. What do we ultimately create?

So the positive manifestation is order, or what we would call all the things we say we want, manifested goodness, everything being okay, not creating self-inflicted chaos or suffering. This would be we get what we say we want to get. And there’s requirements for that and here they are. There’s the requirements.

You gotta be in this vibratory energy of consciousness. You have to accept the truth and develop knowledge. You have to have an understanding that you’re a sovereign being and you have to work toward the manifestation of true freedom. Then you’ll have all the things you say you want, manifested goodness and order in your life.

And that’s the only path to it. I’m telling you that’s the only path to it. Blanket statement. The human mind has a hard time with blanket statements……has a hard time with always, every, without exception. The ego doesn’t want to hear that.

Again, humanity’s greatest fear may be that the truth is absolute. I would say an even greater fear it has is that the truth is singular, that there’s no such thing as my truth, your truth, his truth, her truth, their truth. There’s just the truth and whether we align our perceptions to it or not. That’s humanity’s biggest fear.

So this is what I viewed order as being like. We have beings that are actually full of the light and they’re working toward a world that is based in freedom, cooperation, knowledge, sovereignty, no control. It’s what I call in some of my former presentations, cooperative spiritual anarchy, which is the natural condition of humanity. The natural, meaning spiritual, natural condition of the human species that has been blocked from manifesting through mind control, indoctrination, fear-based, trauma-based methods.

So that’s what I call order, the positive manifestation, manifested goodness. It represents everything we say we want and it only results when there is balance or justice; justice comes about through adherence to natural law. Justice can only be present when truth has been accepted in our lives and our behavior has been brought into harmony with natural law. Cannot manifest any other way. That’s the positive manifestation.

The negative manifestation is the opposite of order, chaos. Chaos is manifested evil. I just put this as, you know, complete disregard for other people, break down, me, me, me, first. Knock everybody else down, get what I want. Don’t worry about anybody else being hurt. Don’t worry about anybody else’s freedom. Don’t worry about whether anybody else’s rights are being tread all over. Doesn’t matter. Let me get mine. Self-preservation is the highest law. Survival is all that matters.

Even if I have to step on somebody else to get it, to make that happen. Yeah, it’s an animal. That’s exactly right, sir. That’s exactly correct. That’s not a human being. That’s an animal. That’s how animals in the animal kingdom behave. And again, natural law doesn’t work the same way for animals as it does for human beings, because they do not have the same capacity for consciousness that a human being has.

So let’s not start saying that’s the natural order. No it is not. It’s the exact antithesis of the natural order. The natural order is just that, order. It’s in the word. It’s in the phrase, natural order. What people are describing as the natural order through this utter nonsense concept called social Darwinism is as I’ve called it before, psychopathic chaos. And break down that word.

Psychopathology means an illness of the mind. Psychopathy is mental illness. Psyche in Greek means the mind, and pathology is an illness, sickness. Psychopaths are mentally ill, and they don’t create anything resembling order. All they can create is chaos, which is why they want us to mimic their mindset, because they’re just bent on hell and destruction to manifest, and they have to have our complicity and cooperation to make that dynamic happen.

Our energy has to be given over to them, by our mindset being made like theirs. Otherwise, their worldview can’t come into manifestation, which is one of chaos and disorder. The negative manifestation, chaos, or manifested evil is the exact opposite of what we say we want. Chaos results when there is imbalance and injustice, which results whenever there is ignorance of truth and behavior which is in direct opposition to natural law.

So that’s our chart, and one last thing I want to say about it is that the manifestations or the expressions of natural law are what I would call……they’re unilateral. They don’t cross into each other.

There’s no such thing as, well, I’ve accepted the truth and I’ve developed knowledge, so now I’m in a state of confusion. It doesn’t work like that. You can’t go from ignorance to sovereignty, to the understanding that you’re sovereign. You cannot cross the area of these charts. Once you’re here, you can only go here.

In order to get here, you gotta come from here. In order to get here, you gotta come from here, here, here, and here. You don’t get here from anything in this column. You don’t get here from anything in this column! Please keep this in mind. These expressions are unilateral, okay?

No, they cannot be skipped either. Good question.

They must proceed in order and in the same column of expression. So you can only get to order through freedom, which comes about through the understanding that we are sovereign, which comes about through taking in knowledge of truth, and which comes about through staying in a vibratory energy of love or higher consciousness. The openness to truth, that’s it.

Same thing here, we can only create chaos when our society is bent on control, because we are confused beings that don’t understand our sovereignty and think other people can legitimately own us or rule us and that comes from a place of ignorance or refusal of the truth which is based in fear. Can only manifest that way. Blanket statement too.

And I will not retract on that blanket statement because this has nothing to do with what I think or feel or my beliefs. This is how laws operate in creation, not a belief system, not a religion, has absolutely nothing to do……I did not develop this. I came to an understanding of it by seeking truth. I’m telling you, this is not my information. Never has been my information. Never will be my information. There’s no copyright on it. I don’t claim it.

It’s eternal truths that have existed forever and will exist forever, whether human beings are here or not. Take it and share it freely and widely to anybody that’s capable of comprehending it. Because it’s the only way we’re going to get out of this mess.

Those are the expressions of natural law.

(02:47:36) Now, when I say living in harmony with natural law or living in opposition to natural law, what do I really mean?

Well, what this has to do with is knowledge. We’re going to keep going back to this trend. This thread is not going away. And guess what? Every time I teach any of this stuff, whenever there’s the new age community around or present (……and you’ll encounter them from time to time……), they’ll insist……they’ll even see the……you can tell knowledge is becoming a bad word to these people.

KNOW!

When you say K-N-O-W, know, it’s almost like they immediately have an avulsion, extreme negative reaction, and it is fear, but it’s mind control moreover, because they are being fed this poisonous untruth that there’s not really any such thing as knowledge and that knowledge is not the way out of this prison.

And I’m telling you, it goes hand in hand with religious traditions, because they want you to externalize your power, externalize everything. And I’m not telling you, I’m not saying don’t have a model for behavior, and this person, Buddha patterned it, you want to pattern your behavior on the Buddha’s life?

Great.

Live the great life. You want to pattern your behavior on the life of Christ? Whatever. And again, I’m not getting into this discussion here today about the actual historicity of the man Jesus, regardless of what you believe regarding that. I understand. I could write books on astrotheology.

I understand that being may never have existed in the way a lot of people believe he did. So what? Whether Siddhartha Gautama existed in the form of a man or not, or whether that’s an allegory, who cares?

Understand the spiritual teachings they were trying to convey to humanity and then apply them in your life. Live by that ethic, that code. And great. Okay? And believe, have whatever religious notion you want. What I’m saying is what this religion called the New Age Movement and what many official organized regional religions do, is they try to take the emphasis off knowledge.

Because again, if you’re not seeking truth and trying to develop knowledge, that’s how this information remains occult. And that’s how the control system stays in place. They want you to externalize your power to a deity or a guru. Once you do that, you’re accepting your chains. You’re saying, I have no power. Let me tell you something, folks.

I’m not powerless. I am full of power. Why? Because I have knowledge of how things actually work. Nobody can tell me I’m owned by somebody else and can get me to believe it because I have understanding of my sovereignty. If they can take that away from you by getting you to de-emphasize the importance of knowledge, of self-knowledge, they own you. That’s when you’re owned at that point.

Knowledge is the way out of this. Knowledge, understanding, and then converting that to true wisdom through actions. Not believing in something, not accepting everything, not waiting on somebody to come down and save you, whether it be Zoroaster or the aliens from Zeta Reticuli or Ashtar Command or Jesus Christ.

You keep waiting on an external Savior, you’re going to be waiting in your chains forever. The knowledge of truth is what the Christ figure himself proclaimed would be the pathway to true freedom.

Now whether you put any emphasis on even exoteric Christianity, I’m telling you that’s the core of all the mystery traditions……is that until you take in the light, you’ll never dispel the darkness. And the light is knowledge of truth. That’s what it has always been symbolized as and represented as.

Knowledge is the answer.

And here’s what the biggest piece of knowledge that comprises natural law needs to be understood. There is a difference. It is a 100% completely polarized antithesis. These are diametric opposites that exist in nature. These concepts, right and wrong, do not exist as constructs within the human mind. Anybody who believes that is thrown completely off the path.

They are engaged in Satanism. Let me just say it just openly right out in a way that is completely unambiguous. If you believe there’s no real difference between these things and that they do not exist in nature, you are accepting Satanism. It’s a Satanic belief system that comes directly from dark occultism.

And once again, you could say whatever you want about believing that or not, I was a priest within this religion. So if you go up to a Jewish rabbi and you would expect he would have some knowledge of the Judaic tradition, would you not? If you went up to a Catholic priest, you would say, well, he has some knowledge of Catholicism and how it expresses the Christian tradition, would you not? If you go up to an Islamic, what do they call them? Right. You know, would you expect that this practitioner of his religion who’s in the priest class of his religion would have some knowledge of Islam?

Well, I’m telling you, I was a priest in Satanism. And I’m telling you, the concept of moral relativism is satanic belief. It is satanic ideology. It’s their second tenet. They have four pillars.

(02:53:54) The four pillars of satanism are:

self-preservation is the highest aspiration, and nothing comes above it.
the second tenet is there is no such thing as the objective of difference between right and wrong. Right is what’s good for me, wrong is what’s bad for me, personally, and that’s it. And I get to make that up, based on my likes, preferences, and whims.
the third tenet is social Darwinism, which is an extension of macro-biological Darwinian theory. Social Darwinism, an oligarchy or a ruling class gets to direct the herd, because we know better. And it’s just our right to do so, because our intellect makes us superior.
and the fourth pillar is eugenics. Since we are ultimately God, since we decide what’s real and what’s not real, and we give that perception to the rest of the herd, and we get to decide what’s right and wrong, well, we’re God here. And therefore, we get to decide who lives and who dies.

That’s the four pillars of Satanism. And you know how many people believe that nonsense? A whole lot. Way more than people in the priest class of this religion, because they are propagating these tenets everywhere in human society. So many people are Satanists and do not even know that they are Satanists. It is a secret, infectious ideology.

And I’ll tell you a personal anecdote real quick. And I’ll tell you who it is now, because I don’t care anymore. My own grandmother, all right? Let’s make it personal, all right? And I hope she sees it. My own grandmother, who I believe was in her late 70s or maybe early 80s at the time. I think she’s in her mid-80s now. And I don’t speak to her anymore.

I took a printed sheet of paper that I printed out of my printer, printed it out of a laser printer, and I put a little piece of white tape, I taped a piece of white paper over the heading, the title of the document. And I asked her to read this, it had four paragraphs, right? And the paragraphs described each of the tenets of Satanism very briefly.

Self-preservation is the highest law, et cetera, et cetera. Moral relativism is what we believe in. Social Darwinism is what we believe in. And we believe in eugenics.

She said to me, well, I pretty much agree with everything that’s written there. And I said, you do? And she said, yeah, that’s how I think. I don’t see anything really wrong with it or bad with it. I said, okay. I said, peel that little strip of paper off that I’ve taped to the top. I want you to see what the document’s called.

And on top, it said, “The Tenets of Modern Satanism”. And you know what her response was? Well, then I guess that makes me a Satanist, doesn’t it? Not horrified, not, oh my God, what is my belief system? What do I believe in? No. Well, guess that makes me a Satanist, doesn’t it? As if it was just no big thing.

And you know what?

You know how many people are in that mindset? Hundreds of millions, if not billions, and don’t even understand what it is. Because they think Satanism is something that it is not. They don’t understand what the ideology of Satanism is. They think you have to be associated with the trappings of Satanism, that you have to dress like, as if there’s such a thing as dressing like a Satanist. Or you have to have certain things on your walls in your house or in your garage if you’re a Satanist.

Well, let me tell you something. Satanists are the owners of banks. They own hospitals. They own schools. Yeah. Certainly that university right across the road. And many people ascribe to this religion in their thoughts, emotions, and actions, and do not even understand it because they don’t even understand what that belief system is about. They don’t understand what that ideology is. They don’t know its tenets.

So again, going back to this, if you don’t know that there is an objective, meaning in nature difference, between right and wrong, that is a satanic belief system.

Morality.

It’s not right versus left. It’s about right versus wrong. This whole left-right paradigm that people, oh, you fall in with the left, with the Democrats, or the right, the Republicans, has nothing to do with any of that.

It’s a false paradigm.

The thing that……all of that’s a distraction for not getting you to pay attention to and understand is the difference, the real, true, and objective difference between right and wrong.

And we’re going to explore what that is, because it can be known. It can be known and most people will be shocked and horrified to understand the real differences between right and wrong, because they’ll have to look into themselves and recognize in many ways that they are cooperating with wrong, and that they don’t really truly know the difference between right and wrong.

When you tell people this……I’m telling you. I told this to somebody in a bar once, which was a big mistake of even trying to bring up this discussion in that environment. But occasionally I even make asinine mistakes like that and think I’m going to be talking to even a semi-conscious being when you’re talking to a block.

So, I said, you understand what actual morality is, is true common sense. We’re gonna look at that term, common sense, and explore what it really means. And she said, so what you’re saying is if I think that there’s no really objective right and wrong, that I don’t have common sense? And I said, yes, that’s what it, no. I said, that’s not what I think. I’m trying to explain to you that’s what it means by definition, not by what I think. The definition of common sense is to truly know the difference between right and wrong.

And I said, because I say that you are not fully in that state of awareness, don’t even take it personally because billions of people on the earth are in that same state of awareness. You’re not special and it’s not a personal attack against you. And I thought this person was going to throw a glass at me, literally got so enraged because she’s associating the concept of common sense with that you are functional and can adequately perform the daily activities of living.

And that’s not what I’m talking about as common sense. Having common sense about, oh, I can prepare my meals and eat for myself and wash my own clothes and go to work, that’s not what I’m talking about as common sense. That’s your every man’s definition or connotation of common sense. We’re gonna talk about what common sense really is.

A deep understanding of morality, which are the principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong behavior, lies at the very heart of natural law. This is the essence of it, folks, right here. And here’s the difference between right and wrong in a nutshell, about as simply as I am capable of describing it, all right?

Now, we use the words correct or right to mean correct and moral. When you say, okay, what’s five plus five? It’s 10, you’re right, meaning you are correct. That is true. That is the correct answer. That is right. And then we say, was stealing that money from Jim, was that right, to mean, was it a moral behavior?

So now, why would we use the same word……again, like the ancient Romans used the same word, book and free, those two different concepts were represented by the same word, liber. And there’s a reason, because reading will put you on the path to true freedom, if you read the right books.

Why would in English, in the English language……we have other words to mean the same concepts, but the word right means two things simultaneously? It means both correct and it means moral. There’s a reason, because they mean the same thing.

Correct is moral. Correct meaning that it is in alignment with that which is true, means literally by definition, if it is true, then it is moral. The more you are following something that is false, that is not based in truth, the more you are going down the path of immorality, of wrongdoing.

So we have to come to know what is true regarding right and wrong, if we are going to be able to correctly, with wisdom, choose between these two modalities of behavior. So right, again, it means both correct, which is based in truth, and moral, which means that the action, if taken, if acted upon, is in harmony with natural law.

Actions based in it (ie in truth) do not result in harm to other sentient beings. That’s the definition of right. Now look at how simple that definition is. And think about it for a moment. We’re talking about what is a right? Meaning what do you have a right to do? And what you have a right to do is no different than what I have a right to do.

What I’m telling you here is every single human being on this planet has the exact same rights. Not one person has one more right than another being. Not one person has one less right than another being. To think that anybody has more or less rights anywhere on the earth at any time in history is a fallacy. It is a lie. It is a deception. It is wrong. It is not correct. It is not based in truth.

Rights are universal and the exact same for every human being. Blanket statement, absolute truth. Let the ego chew on it and deal with it. And again, the ego will have a hard time with this in many cases, with many people. They’ll hear that and they’ll wanna throw a glass at me.

So look at the definition again. A right. So when you make a definition, this is a noun. Noun’s a person, place, or thing in the English language. We’re talking about a noun here. You look up the word right, it’s a noun, meaning a right. A right that we have to enact, to take, is an action.

You have to start a definition with the same type of word. You’re defining a noun, you gotta give it a noun to start the definition. A right is an action. Most people will never even be able to tell you that. They’ll say, can you define what a right is to me? They will not give you this noun.

A right is an action. So is a wrong an action. A right is an action, that if you take it, it does not cause harm to other sentient beings. That’s the simple and easiest definition that anybody can give for what a right is.

And I guarantee you, you go and engage as many people as you want on the street. I have not asked this question and had anybody ever raise their hand or even contact me later and say, you go up to somebody on the street and ask them if they can define what a right is, nobody can give you the correct definition for what a right is.

Now, if you don’t know what the definition of a right is, you certainly don’t know whether you’re choosing accurately between a right and a wrong, between right and wrong behavior. You can’t. It’s not possible.

So, so many people believe that they’re allowed and they can do actions with no consequence that actually aren’t in alignment with natural law, because the taking of those actions do result in harm. And they don’t really even understand that.

So let’s look at what a wrong is. We’re gonna deeply look into what a wrong is. We’re gonna focus on what wrongs are. Because in reality, to even start this, what have we based this definition on? Actions based in it do not result in harm. That’s the negative of another definition. Well, it’s the negative of this definition.

So you can only actually define a right by knowing what a wrong is. A right technically cannot be defined outside of the negative. A right can only be defined apophatically, meaning understanding what a wrong is and then stating that it (ie stating a right) is anything that falls outside of the parameters of wrongdoing. And we’re gonna get to what those parameters are. All right?

So, I’m sorry, I want to focus on wrong for a moment. Wrong, again, we say this, what’s five plus five? Nine. Wrong. It’s not true. Incorrect. Incorrect answer. It’s not based in truth. We use the term wrong to mean both incorrect and immoral. Well, that was wrong what you did to that person by hitting him for no reason. You didn’t have the right to do that.

Immoral means in opposition to natural law because actions that are based in it result in harm to other sentient beings. That’s the simple definition of a wrong.

Now, we can go deeper into the definition of what a wrong is and look at different types of wrongs, which is what I’m gonna do in a moment. So this is the concept that is referred to as apophatic inquiry. Very, very critical to understand concept. And you have to apply this concept. What this essentially is, is it’s a filtration process.

This is the process of the middle process in the trivium. It’s weeding through the inconsistencies and saying, well, is this inconsistent? Is this inconsistent? Is that not true? And you’re setting those behaviors aside and you’re saying, here’s the behaviors that are wrong. Don’t engage in those behaviors.

It’s negative. It’s a negative process. It’s a destructive process. You’re taking away from the body of everything that can be done and you’re saying, I’m pulling all of these out through a weeding down process and saying, these are all inconsistent with truth.

It’s called apophysis, apophatic inquiry, and that is to be delineated from what’s known as cataphatic inquiry. Cataphatic inquiry means you’re reasoning in the affirmative, and you’re not trying to weed down through a process of elimination to get to the truth.

So cataphysis or cataphatic inquiry would be equivalent to inductive reasoning, whereas apophatic inquiry or apophysis would be akin to deductive reasoning.

Rights are most easily understood when they are considered through apophatic inquiry, or what is known as the process of apophysis. This process helps us to understand what a right actually is by understanding which actions are not rights because they cause harm to others. They’re the cause of harm.

Here’s what apophysis is. It’s been called apophatic inquiry. Really, look this up. Understand what apophysis is because it’s part of the trivium process.

It comes from the Greek noun apophysis, written there in Greek script, which comes from the Greek verb apophanai. So apo in Greek means away from or the negation of, and phanai in Greek means to say or to speak. So when we put them together, it means to say no or not to say, or to say what something is not, in other words. That’s what apophysis is. You’re saying this is not this. It’s the opposite of that.

So it is a method of logical reasoning or deductive reasoning that is employed when you are given a limited set of possibilities in order to arrive at knowledge……arrive at knowledge……by way of the exclusion of known negatives. You’re setting the logical inconsistencies to the side and saying this is not what this thing is.

That’s called apophysis.

You are describing what something is by explaining what it is not. This is called affirmation through negation is another term that this truth discovery process is known as. So what we’re gonna do is apophysis. We’re going to do apophatic inquiry regarding right and wrong. So, what is not a right? What are ways that people can cause harm to other people or animals? Ways that we can cause harm to other sentient beings.

One of the first thing, so what we’re doing here is we’re going to list the boundary conditions for natural law here, for breaking natural law. If we take these actions, we are breaking natural law because the action is a cause which results in the effect of harm to another being. All right?

(03:12:55) So these are what are simply, I call them the natural law transgressions, which means sins or wrongdoings.

They’re simply harmful actions that a person is capable of taking to another being, against another being. That’s all. So of course many people will get the first one.

What’s one of the main horrible wrong things that somebody can do to another person? Kill them. Murder them. Take their life. Murder. And I would distinguish murder from killing as well, because occasionally, to defend oneself, killing may be necessary, but murder is always immoral and wrong.

See, the fifth commandment in Hebrew, do you know what it says in Hebrew? It does not say thou shall not kill. The term for murder in Hebrew is tirzach, The fifth commandment in Hebrew is lo tirzach, which means do not murder. Murder as a verb in Hebrew is a completely different word and a totally different connotation than the verb to kill.

Because what they’re saying is, don’t take life without any right to take it. Meaning that you initiated the violence and that’s what murder is. It’s the initiation of the taking of somebody else’s life when you have absolutely no right to take that life.

Now, if someone is coming after you, your rights, there may be times when you do have to take defensive action and forceful action up to and including deadly force. We’re gonna talk about that later.

But murder is the first natural law transgression.

And if you want to go down to a subsection of this transgression……you could list it as a totally separate wrongdoing……I’m keeping it in the same basic category.

Assault.

Meaning you’re directly, physically accosting, without right, the well-being, the bodily well-being of another being, is also, it’s like it would be, you could consider it attempted murder. Because assault is something that you do without right. If someone assaults somebody, they have no right to commit assault. Never exists.

The right to commit assault does not exist. The right to commit murder does not exist in any circumstance, ever. Blanket statement. The right to defend oneself through physical force exists, and possibly in certain circumstances, the right to kill exists. But murder and assault can never be rights, because they always are done by being initiated without the right to do so. It is the initiation of violence.

Rape is the second natural law of transgression.

You’re coercing the free will of another person and making them sexually associate with whom they wish not to. That’s rape. And it’s always wrong, blanket statement.

The third natural law transgression is theft.

It is the taking of property that does not belong to you. Someone else got that property through lawful means without hurting somebody else. That’s their property for as long as they are using it and being responsible for it, and you don’t have a right to just take what doesn’t belong to you.

Nobody has a right to take my projector or my remote control or my computer any more than I would have the right to take Richard’s cameras. It would be theft of somebody else’s property. It’s not mine. And this is the problem. We don’t understand property. As we’re going to get to, all rights are property rights. We’ll get to that in a moment. That’s the third natural law of transgression.

The fourth is trespass.

And that means going into somebody else’s lair that they are using that they own lawfully and that they’re responsible for without their permission or consent, and you’re just invading their privacy and their space, and you’re taking their security away from them in that process.

We do have a right to set aside a place for ourselves for our own lair, and to violate that is to trespass against somebody else in their own property.

The fifth and last natural law transgression is coercion.

This is forcing somebody through the threat of violence to have their will comply with your will, whether they don’t wish that to be the case or not. Making somebody do something that is against their will, coercing them. And that’s also not a right.

Now, that’s a small list. Very small list, right? We could add one more.

We could add lying. Lying is also a wrongdoing.

And I would consider that a theft of truth or a withholding of truth that somebody needs to understand to make accurate and informed decisions, lying to them. But essentially, these five are the overarching natural law transgressions.

I challenge anybody to come up with a wrongdoing that doesn’t fit into one of these categories. So far, I’ve never had one person able to do it. Any wrongdoing, any action that you could think of that doesn’t fall into one of these wrongdoings?

Website author’s note: faint audience member said, laziness or inaction (I think but not sure, hard to hear)

I would probably categorize it as pure ignorance, but you know, I would say, hey, maybe you could look at it like that because that’s propagating the slavery system indirectly. So you’re not doing anything to help anybody else’s freedom, certainly. I don’t know if I would categorize that as a natural law transgression because it’s giving consent and propping up that system, not technically what I would call an action, but it’s more of like giving consent. You could say that is a wrongdoing, I guess, because giving your consent is tacitly saying yes to control, and that’s ultimately affecting everybody else’s freedom negatively. So, you know, possibly.

But in general, what I would say is, if you could think of an actual physical action that doesn’t fall into one of those categories, let me know, because that’s a pretty comprehensive list, and it’s only like six words.

Now, what if I told you I could narrow it down? What if I told you I can get rid of five of those words and take it down to one? These are the wrongdoings. Let’s try to narrow it down.

Every harmful action that a human being is capable of taking is a form of theft. Now many people will hear that for the first time (……I’ve never heard that said……). There is no action that you can take that causes harm to another person that is not a form of theft, in some form or fashion. I challenge anybody to come up with an action that isn’t a form of theft, an action that is a wrongdoing that isn’t a form of theft. You won’t be able to do it.

I put that challenge out on my podcast. Email me if you know. Not one person. The only, one person challenged it and tried to say lying. I say, okay, that’s really taking the truth from somebody, thieving truth, and whether you want to look at it as you’re simply dissuading them from looking at the truth, to deceiving them, or not offering correct information, still you’re taking away their ability to make correct judgments based on the availability of information. So it is a form of theft.

Some form of property. Now look at that word! Property……proper…… meaning right, is always being stolen when a wrongdoing is committed. All rights are property rights. All wrongs are theft of property. Once again, I challenge anybody. It’s an open challenge.

If you can find me a right that is not a property right, or a wrong that is not the theft of some form of property, please do it. Please let me know. Life is a form of property. So taking life you had no right to take, murder, is stealing property that wasn’t your own, because that was that person’s life, possessive. They own it. And I didn’t have a right to just go and take it for no reason.

Rights are a form of property, meaning actions that you may do because they are in harmony with natural law and do not cause harm to others, I don’t have a right to stop you from taking. If you’re not harming somebody else, nobody has a right to stop you from taking a right, taking an action. You may perform any action which does not directly result in harm to somebody else. Rights are a form of property.

Freedom is a form of property. Somebody doesn’t have a right to take somebody else’s freedom and hold them against their will, just because they don’t like what they’re doing. They have a distaste for what they’re doing, or they want them to comply with their behavior, with their commands. They want them to make their behavior comply with commands that they’re being given. So if you really break it down, let’s look at the wrongdoings once again.

Murder, is that not the taking of somebody else’s life?

Assault is the taking of their right to remain unharmed in their person. You’re taking their health if you assault them, right? Their homeostasis in their body is being put under assault and that’s robbery. That’s somebody taking something that isn’t theirs to take.

Rape, you’re taking somebody else’s free will to sexually associate with whom they choose to sexually associate. And therefore that’s a property theft, because that’s their property, their free will.

Theft itself, says it right there. You’re taking physical possessions that aren’t yours to take from somebody else, stealing.

Trespass, you are taking someone’s security in their own lair, as we talked about, which you don’t have a right to take. That’s also their property.

Coercion, what are you taking? Somebody else’s free will, which isn’t yours to take. That’s a gift from the creator, which belongs to each individual. And if somebody’s coercing somebody by telling them, you must do this because I said so, and if you don’t do this, I will come and do some form of harm to you. That’s not a right. That’s a wrongdoing……coercion. And it’s a form of theft.

Exactly. Sure. You must buy this. Imagine this. Great. We’re gonna take five more minutes and then we’re gonna take an hour and 15 minute break.

So all of these things are forms of wrongdoing and they’re all ultimately one wrongdoing in different forms. They are all theft. Every one of them. There is only one wrongdoing. There’s only one way anybody can wrong anybody else. Stealing. That’s it.

Every form of wrongdoing is a form of theft against another being and their property. A living being or their property must have been harmed in order for a violation of natural law or wrongdoing to have taken place.

Any action which does not cause such harm is a right. There’s the apophatic definition of a right, through understanding what a wrongdoing is.

Website author’s note: for example, speeding in your automobile IS a RIGHT! Such action could lead to assault and/or murder (due to an accident), but only if actual harm occurs, then and only then, natural law has been transgressed.

And I’m telling you, billions of people, not millions, not hundreds of millions, billions of people on this planet do not know this. Could not tell you this.

Because this is it. This is it, folks, right here. This is the crux of natural law. What is a right? What is a wrong? And I was laying……I couldn’t sleep last night. After we got home, and I never have problems sleeping, ever. Ever. I’m just gonna tell you this before we break.

I was laying in bed last night before I went to sleep for the night. Could not sleep, because all I was thinking of is how preposterous. I told this to some people at lunch. I’m just sitting there thinking about how preposterous and ridiculous it is for me to even ever have to utter any of this.

The fact that this is not 100% pure common sense knowledge on the earth is so abominably preposterous to me that all I was sitting there thinking is, how could I be going out and explaining this to people? This is what I must do? Me, though.

It was almost like schizophrenic in a way, because I was just thinking, I was waking up and then falling back to sleep and waking up thinking, where am I? Why am I here? And I’m the person who’s coming out and doing this. And it’s just so absurd and ridiculous to me.

Some punk from South Philadelphia taking in the knowledge of the mystery traditions and teaching them to people. Me. It’s the most ridiculous thing. I can’t even imagine it, you know? I still can’t. I can’t imagine that it’s necessary, that that’s the position that our society is in. It’s so profoundly sad that I can’t believe it.

And unless we deeply start to understand this and propagate this knowledge to other people, things are gonna get worse and worse and worse and worse, and there’s no reason for it. There’s no reason to go down that path. We wanna choose the way of maximum pain, because we don’t wanna give up thoughts that we’re addicted to, just because the pattern has been there for as long as we can remember.

We would rather go down the path to the grave and the abyss, rather than admit we were wrong and just say, I need to give up this negative way of thinking.

(03:27:16) I’m gonna leave it right there and just say:

The bottom line to what this section comes down to is, if someone hasn’t been harmed, no wrongdoing has been committed. No victim, no crime, in other words.

Many people insist, oh, there doesn’t have to be a victim for there to be a crime committed. You know how many people are rotting away in a jail cell right now as we speak, who have never harmed another living being? You know how many people? Tens of thousands. And no one has any right to hold them.

Unless you’ve harmed somebody else, nobody has a right to stop you from continuing to take the action that you are taking. We’re going to talk about some of those things in the last section.

So let’s take an hour and 15 minute break and we’ll be back here at about 5:20.

","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Next ->

<- Previous

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Anchor tag jump point

Natural Law seminar part 1

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Tue, 10 Feb 2026 16:07:34 GMT

GOTO Introduction","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Skip preamble-> GOTO Introduction

There sometimes seems to be a bug that suppresses the picture-in-picture (PIP) feature when accessing this website indirectly through a link. The PIP feature is normally available in the bottom right corner of the above video.

Also, the substack app seems to suppress the PIP feature much of the time, so I don’t suggest using the substack app, but rather directly access this site through a web browser, WITHOUT clicking a link. Simply type whatonearthishappening.wtf into the browser URL and PIP should work.

Using the PIP feature is the best way to assimilate this site’s information, IMHO, because you can scroll the video with you, as you read along. NOTE: you must also have PIP feature turned on in the settings for your browser.

Entry video on WOEIH.COM

Natural Law Seminar Part 1

650KB ∙ PDF file

Entire Natural Law Seminar In One Document - Parts 1, 2, and 3

1.66MB ∙ PDF file

2nd short video on youtube

NOTE: clicking the below underlined text links jumps up and down the Table of Contents (TOC). Please be patient, as there can be several seconds delay each way. 

Also note that clicking the underlined timestamp links will forward the video to that spot BUT you will have to manually re-position to the text spot you desire.

1) (00:11:10) Mark explains the name of this seminar and what it means to be teachable

2) (00:18:32) The requirements for change and the role of knowledge

3) (00:23:16) The knowledge required for change is deliberately being occulted, which simply means being hidden.

4) (00:26:58) Major and minor arcana

5) (00:33:16) Mark tells a parable about how the non-human entities (who work with human elite controlling the planet) manipulating mankind are like master psychologists

2 Mystic messenger perspective that perhaps hidden knowledge aids us

6) (00:37:28) The two forms of lacking knowledge: nescience versus ignorance, which is really IGNORE-ance

7) (00:42:38) People are allowing themselves to be hypnotized into IGNORE-ance

8) (00:45:20) Why is freedom being taken away and how to prevent the worldwide prison that is being erected?

9) (00:51:53) Firstly, to solve the problem of tyranny rising, fear-based IGNORE-ance and denial must be directly confronted and overcome

3 Secondly, look beyond symptoms and diagnose the true causal factors

4 Thirdly, taking appropriate action is necessary

10) (00:59:21) A proper understanding of truth versus human perception

11) (01:03:52) The practical definition of truth

12) (01:09:00) Perception is NOT reality, but rather the filter through which we perceive truth

13) (01:17:00) Solipsism as a false perceptual filter that can be likened to mental illness

14) (01:26:56) Defining definitions

15) (01:29:04) Breaking down the definition of natural law

5 What the word natural means

6 What the word law means (3 parts)

(ONE)→ Existing 7

(TWO)→ Binding 8

(THREE)→ Immutable 9

16) (01:39:24) Putting it all together for a working definition of natural law

17) (01:53:35) The definition of consciousness

18) (01:57:25) The Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can save humanity, but NOT like religion teaches

INTRODUCTION

Okay. I want to say thanks to each and every one of you for being here today. It’s going to be a great day. I’m going to go through what I consider to be the very heart of my material.

And people ask me a lot, they say, you put out a lot of material on your website. What is the main thing? If you had to tell me the main thing that I should check out if I check out nothing else that’s up there, what would it be? And I always tell them the same thing. It’s the material on natural law. If nothing else, that’s the material that you need to understand deeply. So that’s what we’re going to be covering here today in an extended presentation format.

I want to go through a few things before we actually get started. So I call this section “Before We Begin”. And the word begin is actually important here because that’s really what this presentation is actually about. It’s initiation. This is an initiation into really, really, deep esoteric material that has been hidden from humanity for millennia.

So, I just want to ask people before we get started, how many of you are new or relatively new to my work by a show of hands, please? That’s excellent. This is great. That is great news. I am so glad to hear that. OK?

I what I actually didn’t want is to come here and talk to a bunch of people who are already totally familiar with my work and have already heard it. So this is great, OK? How many of you here today feel that the human condition and life on earth for humanity right now is tolerable just the way that it is by a show of hands. That’s also pretty good, because if that was the case, I was going to say there’s nothing for you here today. There’s the door. OK?

So, that’s good that we’re all hungry for change. One of the big complaints I hear about my work, when I check in on forums or something or read some YouTube comments, many people will say, there’s nothing new here. I’ve heard this before somewhere else. This person covers this. I’ve read this in this book.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, I have news for you. There is nothing new here. I am not going to present anything new. I am not going to present anything that has not actually been in existence and will continue to be in existence. I’m not making up new material. I call myself, I would refer to myself, Art said it the other day, actually yesterday when we were having dinner, he said, I consider you an aggregator of material. And I love that term. I love that description of what I do. I am an aggregator. I bring things together into a tapestry and then help to explain it in simple and easy to understand terms so the people can readily absorb it, take it in and then do something with that information.

So you will not be seeing or hearing anything new here today Okay? As the old saying goes in in all the old mystery traditions, there is nothing new under the Sun and what that phrase actually means, many people don’t know what that phrase means, it means that the truth, it is singular and eternal. Truth has always been here among us and it will always be here. It is our perception that must be aligned with it. So there’s nothing new you’re going to hear today. These are eternal truths that have always been here among us.

Another aspect I want to cover before we get started is about my presentation style. This is another thing that I get a lot of complaints about, and it’s something that I have no intention of changing. My presentation style has been described by some as extremely intense, and at times even combative. This is a word many people will use to describe my presentation style. Some of you here today are very likely to be angered by some of the things you may hear me say during the duration of this seminar. And I say, so be it. That’s okay. If you get angry, that’s okay.

The fact of the matter is that truth itself, by its very nature, is belligerent. And I’ll actually be putting putting up a quote to that nature later on in the presentation. The reason truth is belligerent is because it actually is at war. It’s at war with the lie. It’s at war with deception. It’s at war with mind control. So truth can be belligerent. Many people don’t want to hear it when they first encounter it.

So, I tell people all the time, I don’t do this……I don’t present this information, okay, to be liked. I don’t do this to make friends, okay? I’m not interested in making a whole bunch of new friends. If it happens, that’s great, okay? But that’s not the reason I do what I do. I don’t do this to be popular. I don’t do this to make money. It’s not a popularity contest. Telling people many things that they don’t want to hear is not going to make you popular, or it’s not going to make you a whole lot of new friends. Okay. So those aren’t the reasons I do what I do.

To be honest, and I tell people this and sometimes they get upset by just hearing this. I don’t even really want to do this. Okay? I don’t want to do this with my life. I don’t want to do this with my time. Okay? As I already know, understand and live the information I’m going to present. So I get this. I know this. I don’t need to keep going over this over and over and over again for my own entertainment.

The reason that I actually do this is because I recognize that in a time of such overwhelming ignorance of this critical information, this information which is capable of saving humanity from its current condition, alright? The fact that I do already understand this information, places me in a position of moral obligation and responsibility. That’s why I do what I do. I’m in a position of moral obligation to speak this information to other people in an effort to help to get them to understand it and live it as well. And that is the reason I do this.

Every person here today who wishes to take real world value, practical value from this seminar here today, I’m going to ask them to make a deliberate and conscious effort to do two things. The first is try to set aside, to the extent that you are capable of doing so, your perceptions of me as the presenter. Okay? And this includes things like how you think I look, how you think I dress, the sound of my voice, you know, my mannerisms, etc. Try to set those things aside to the extent that you’re able to do it. And I know that’s difficult for some. And I say this because paying attention to such trivialities will detract your own mental focus away from the information that is being presented today. And that’s the worst thing that could happen. Because it’s the information that is important, not me. Try to ignore me and focus on the content. Alright?

The second thing I ask people to try to do is to be consciously aware of any of your own impulses that you may have here today to immediately reject the information that is being presented in this seminar based solely upon your own initial emotional reaction, your initial emotional response to this information. This is a logical fallacy. You cannot think with the emotions.

So, if you hear something you don’t like, or that angers you, that’s okay. Feel the emotion. But don’t just immediately say, that can’t be true. And don’t believe me either. It’s about checking it. It’s about a process of truth discovery. It’s about doing your own due diligence and actually researching this material, okay?

But if you try to gauge the veracity, meaning the truthfulness of this information solely based upon how it makes you feel when hearing it, you are committing a logical fallacy. Okay? So I ask people to try as much as possible to suspend immediate reactions of disbelief, okay, and say, no, I don’t want to accept that, no, it can’t be true, based on how something may make you feel that you hear today. That’s very important to keep in mind.

And lastly, this information, the entire seminar, is a tapestry. It’s like pieces of a huge jigsaw puzzle. It is meant to be seen and taken as a whole in its entirety. Now, I know I’m asking a lot here, too, because it’s going to be a long day. And my goal here, my work here, is to keep your interest and your attention and your focus throughout the entire course of this seminar. That’s a challenging thing to do.

What I’m asking people is you have to try to see it as a whole, because if you if you took the time to be here and you gave a monetary donation to be here, I’m highly recommending that you stay for the whole duration of the seminar. There’s a reason for that. You’re only going to get the full tapestry, especially if you’re new to my work, by hearing this information in its entirety.

So, if you don’t do that, you’ll probably not recognize the patterns, which is what this is all about, that’s what this day is all about, pattern recognition, that are inherent to this tapestry of information. And more likely than not, you’ll have wasted the time that you took to be here today and wasted the money that you spent to be here today. So I don’t want anybody to waste their time and their money and their attention, and I don’t think you do either. So that’s why I’m asking people, stay for the whole thing. You’ll get the maximum value out of this seminar if you stay for its duration. So with that having been said, let’s jump into the material.

(00:11:10) This presentation is called, “Natural law, the real law of attraction”, and how to apply it in your life.

And I emphasize that term real law of attraction. Many people will be familiar with the New Age variants of the so-called law or laws of attraction. And this is going to differ quite widely from what people have heard in the New Age community and in the New Age movement regarding what the law or laws of attraction are. These are the real laws of attraction you’re going to be hearing today and hopefully understanding today.

So let’s start in. The first section is about teachability, the teachability of the student. How does a student place themselves in the best position to learn? An individual’s teachability or their ability to learn by way of being taught by someone else is extremely dependent upon the open-mindedness or closed-mindedness of the individual being taught.

Low teachability derives from arrogance and rigid skepticism. But it also derives, low teachability, also derives from naivete and gullibility. High teachability, on the other hand, derives from a balance between healthy skepticism and an open-minded willingness to learn and change.

So we don’t want rigidly skeptical people, okay, that don’t have an open mind at all. And we don’t want naive and gullible people that will accept everything they’re told. We want to strike a balance between these two modes.

This is called a teachability bell curve. And down here is the mental state of the student, whether they are, and it goes from arrogance, cynicism, skeptical nature, a teacher, a student, and then up to being trusting, then being gullible, and then being outright naive. Okay, so that’s the whole spectrum of teachability.

The best position to learn is up here at the top of the bell curve. This means you will learn the most if you are here, and that means you’re in the balance between teacher and student. It means that you’re somewhat skeptical and you’re also somewhat trusting. It means that you’re able to hold a proposition in your mind without accepting it or rejecting it immediately. It means you will consider the information with an open mind, somewhat trustingly, but also somewhat skeptically.

That’s going to be the mental state we want to attempt to keep during the duration of this seminar. And therefore, you will be in the best position to learn. Of course, as we already said, the poorest positions to learn, the things that... If you’re in these mind states and arrogance and rigid skepticism and naivete and gullibility, you’re not going to take very much away from this seminar. Okay? So, we want to remain at the top of that bell curve, if at all possible.

Human beings should consider with great care where their information comes from, the source for the information. And this is because by refusing to present certain information, and by influencing people to dismiss, to dissuade them from looking into certain information, because they’re telling you that it’s unimportant or unnecessary to consider, many modern institutions, like media, like so-called education institutions, are seeking to actually control human perceptions, or let’s call it outright what it really is, to control the mind. And therefore, to limit what human beings may even come to understand, and therefore by limiting what they are coming to understand, they’re actually limiting what they’re able to do, what they’re able to change, what they’re able to create in the world.

You have to be skeptical of where your information comes from, and that’s why I tell people at the very beginning in my lectures, do not believe me. The worst thing you could do is believe what I’m telling you. You need to look into it for yourself, and most of all, you need to do personal introspection to really feel inside of yourself whether this information resonates with truth. Everybody has that intuitive capacity. That also has to be turned on and engaged and used. All right?

If anybody is coming to this seminar from the perspective of modern, organized, institutional bodies, meaning political thought, political agendas, political organizations, religion, religious thought, religious organizations, I’m talking about organized religion here. What I call scientism, not real science, but scientism. Science as set up by institutional bodies to be rigidly skeptical belief systems that blot out anything that could possibly say anything to the contrary of their pre-existing beliefs. I call that scientism. And of course the New Age Movement, which you can group that in with religion. It’s for those who don’t fall into the religious mindset, this is an alternative religion proposed for them and they call it the New Age Movement. And I tell people, please don’t think this is going to concur with any of these belief systems, with any of these boxes for consciousness.

This presentation is going to shatter these boxes. It stands outside of all of these, because these are limiters for perception and thought. They want to place everything in a box, say nothing outside of this box is fit for human consumption, so do not go there. And as a result, they act as a mind control influence.

The other and biggest limiter of the human perceptions and the mind, and ultimately of our behavior, is money itself. If you want to talk about the biggest religion, if these other religions aren’t big enough and powerful enough for you, there’s the one that is the ultimate power in the world, the ultimate religion, the god of this world, if you will, ok?

So, what I’m basically saying here is if you’re already in a mindset approaching the let’s call it the discovery of reality or the exploration of reality from any of these perspectives, you will be sorely disappointed here today by what you’re going to hear, because the information here falls well outside of any of these institutional limiters for consciousness.

(00:18:32) The requirements for creating change and the role of knowledge. Let’s talk about these concepts for a moment.

Human beings everywhere say that they want certain things in their life and they say that they want certain things to be present for all humanity. We say we want certain conditions to be present for ourselves and our species as a whole. And we say we want things such as happiness, health, peace, prosperity, freedom, etc. And all these things are great things to aspire to. And we say we want them. Most people will say and tell you we want these things. Alright?

However, you know, I don’t really feel that they’re truly being honest with themselves, ok? They’ll say they want them. But then when you tell them, well, those aren’t automatic conditions. They don’t just magically manifest. There are requirements for obtaining these conditions. And people wouldn’t say they want these conditions if these conditions were already omnipresent, right? They’re saying that they want something because they don’t have it at all, or at least in fullness, right?

So when you tell them there’s requirements for obtaining them, many people will say, well, I may not be willing to go there. I may not want to exert that much effort. And they believe that somehow they’re going to magically get these things.

Well, this is what the real laws of attraction are about: it’s explaining conditions that you want don’t just automatically manifest by thinking of them or just having a feeling about them. This is a new age deception. There are requirements for obtaining the conditions that we say we want. Requirements exist in nature. It does exist. If you want something to be different than the way that it already is, than the default conditions, then requirement exists.

If you’re okay with things being the way that they are now, requirement doesn’t exist. There are no requirements to creating change. You just accept the default conditions the way they are now and go on with your existence and accept it’s going to be this way and possibly get worse.

But if you want real change to happen, requirements exist. And this is what many New Age teachers will not tell you or they’ll outright deny that requirements exist for creating real change. Specific requirements exist in order for human beings to obtain the conditions that they say they want. If the requirements for obtaining those conditions are not met, those conditions do not just magically manifest by magical means automatically. That’s not how it works, folks. You know, and that burst a lot of people’s bubble right off the bat. This is a key concept to understand.

So what are these requirements? We need to know certain things. Knowledge is required. Knowledge. Knowledge that will spur us to action. That’s what’s required. Since human beings as a species do not already have the things that they say they want, and again, at least not in fullness. If we want to split hairs, we could say we have a modicum of what we may say that we want, but we don’t have it in the fullness that we will say that we want it, especially societally, globally.

So, since we don’t already have these things, it follows logically that the knowledge of the requirements to obtaining these things, ok, either must be absent, the knowledge is not present anywhere, or if it is present, if that knowledge for obtaining those things, the requirements for obtaining those things, if that knowledge is present, then it must be willfully being ignored. It is here, and yet people aren’t paying attention to it. They aren’t taking it in and accepting it and doing anything with that knowledge. So they’re ignoring it because it’s uncomfortable.

As long as this knowledge continues to remain either unknown or ignored, the manifestation of the desired conditions that we say that we want is impossible, cannot happen. It is an impossibility for it to magically, automatically manifest without the requirements being met. That’s what we’re going to talk about here today. What are these requirements? What is this knowledge?

(00:23:16) This knowledge is occulted, meaning hidden.

Okay, now how many people came here today thinking that they were going to hear information about the occult by a show of hands? Okay, about half the room. Good. Okay, for the rest of the people that may come as a shock. But what you have to understand right off the bat is that the word occult is simply derived from Latin, the Latin adjective occultus.

Occultus in Latin means hidden, hidden from sight. And it’s derived from the Latin noun oculus, which means eye. The word ocular in English means related to the eye or related to sight or vision. So what the occult is, is something, it is a body of knowledge that has been hidden away for a specific reason. And we’re going to get into what that reason is.

Okay, so from the the term oculus or eye in Latin comes the verb occultare. Occultare means to hide, to conceal or to keep secret, to keep hidden from the eye so that it cannot be seen. The information regarding natural law is occulted knowledge. It is knowledge that has been hidden from humanity. It is held by the few, which is represented here at the top of this pyramid. You can look at this as a pyramid representing knowledge or ignorance. At the top of the pyramid you have knowledge. The higher you go in the pyramid, the more knowledge. But the pyramid tapers because at the top, very few people understand that information. Very few people have that knowledge and have actually integrated it into themselves to the point where it becomes understanding. Alright?

Down here you have no knowledge. The ignorant masses. And up here you have the people who are in the know, right, who have this knowledge about how natural law works and are actually using it for a certain reason. We’re going to get to that next, what that is. So please, as you go through this seminar, please keep in mind if I ever use the term occult, all I’m talking about here is hidden knowledge. That’s what it means. Occulted knowledge is hidden.

Now, why would anybody want to hide knowledge that is extremely important? Well, there’s a very specific reason. Alright? But, before we even get to that, we have to talk about what is this occulted knowledge? What is the body of knowledge? What does it comprise? When I’m saying the occult, the knowledge of the occult, what do I mean by that?

Occult knowledge constitutes two things. There’s two general bodies of occult knowledge. In the actual mystery traditions and in occult schools, they talk about these as arcana. The word arcana is also Latin, it means knowledge. That’s all it means. So there’s two bodies of knowledge. There’s one body of knowledge in the occult called lesser arcana, the lesser arcana, or the minor arcana. This means the knowledge of the microcosm, the knowledge of the small things. It doesn’t mean it’s less important. It means it’s dealing with the individual units of consciousness, the human psyche, the psyche of the individual.

(00:26:58) So, the first part, the first major body of occult knowledge constitutes knowledge of human consciousness, how it works, how it operates, what our motivations are, things like that. The second body of occult knowledge is called the greater arcana, or the major arcana.

And again, this doesn’t refer to that it’s more important. It refers to, it is the macrocosmic understanding, the understanding of the very large laws of nature that govern the macrocosm. So universal laws are part of the greater arcana of occult knowledge. And what I call here today, under the umbrella, the term natural law, falls into that second category of greater knowledge, the greater arcana of occult knowledge.

And what these natural laws are, are unseen and universal spiritual laws. We can talk about the word natural here too. Natural is derived from Egyptian and other Middle Eastern tradition languages. The word neptare in Egyptian, which would have been spelled without vowels if we transliterated it would be n-t-r in English. Neptare means spirits in Egyptian, in ancient Egyptian. The suffix al, even in English today, but if you go back into Arabic languages and ancient Middle Eastern languages, al as a suffix actually means of or related to or having come from.

So natural, if you put these root words together, neptare and al, it means of or related to the realm of spirit, of or related to God, actually. The word Nectar also meant God, spirit or God. So this is the spiritual domain, the laws that actually are operating in the unseen realm.

Now, they manifest in the physical realm. We’re going to talk about that, because that’s the operation that it trickles down from. It starts in the spiritual domain and then it manifests in the physical domain. So it’s important to understand these two bodies of knowledge, the lesser arcana, is about the monad or the individuated unit of consciousness of the human being. And then the greater knowledge is about the laws that govern the macrocosmic universe. Alright?

So, what these laws do, this body of the workings of nature that I am calling under the umbrella natural law, they’re universal spiritual laws which govern the consequences of behavior. They govern the consequences of behavior. And I would add a caveat to that, they govern the consequences of behavior for intelligent species, for beings that are capable of coming to their understanding.

I would delineate that from the animal kingdom. The animal kingdom is not held to the same standard as human beings when it comes to this body of information. Because I don’t think you’re going to sit down with your cat and explain natural law to it. Okay?

So when people say, well, why doesn’t the animal kingdom held to account in the same way the human beings are? It’s because, surprise, surprise, we don’t share the same level of consciousness. Okay? There is differences in levels of consciousness and abilities to comprehend information and to actually know how something works. Just like you will not be explaining physics to your dog anytime soon, you’re not going to explain natural law to the animal kingdom and have them grasp it, because they’re not at the same level of consciousness as we are.

So we are held to a different account when it comes to natural law. It governs human behavior, would be an easy way of saying it. This body of knowledge has actually been called consequentialism by past researchers and teachers, and I have no problem with that term. I’ve actually looked into consequentialism and it’s quite similar in its scope and what it teaches. It’s been called karma, karmic law, in many Middle Eastern and Eastern traditions, okay? And I have no problem with that term for it either. It has been called in some of the Western traditions and Christian traditions moral law, and I have no problem with that term either. Religionists have called it God’s law, and I have no problem with that term either. I have no problem with any of these terms being applied to the umbrella of natural law, because that is essentially what it is. But we’re going to get deeply into how it works and operates in our lives here today.

Why is this knowledge hidden away from people? To what ends? The knowledge of the occult, the hidden knowledge about how natural law works and how consciousness works, is not commonly known. That’s why it’s not the exoteric. It’s not given to the masses. It’s the esoteric. It is reserved for the few. And there’s a reason for that. It’s been deliberately hidden away and kept from the general public in order to create and maintain a power differential.

Because if someone else is an extreme level of knowledge, they know how something works, like something as trivial as how human consciousness works, how human motivations work, how human perceptions work, how human beings can be manipulated. If somebody has deep knowledge of that information, and there’s a whole bunch of people over here who have not one iota of how that works, what kind of a number do you think somebody can do on people like that?

(00:33:16) The way I ask people to look at this is real simple.

Imagine a very, very, very advanced psychologist at the top of his field, wrote all the textbooks, okay? And he’s got a house out in the suburbs, he comes into the university, he’s got tenure, ok? He’s got the trophy wife, the house out in the suburbs, the three-car garage, driving the Lexus into work at his tenured job, and he finds out that his trophy wife is having an affair because she’s bored. She’s not satisfied with him at home. And it’s maybe the 19-year-old, you know, captain of the local high school football team or something. He’s a senior, he’s a star football player, right? The jock, yeah. And she has a fling with him.

Well, what if he decides I’m going to become buddy-buddy with my boy here after finding out about his wife’s affair? And this kid, this punk, who’s cheating on, you know, my wife’s cheating on me with, he knows nothing. He doesn’t study the mind. He doesn’t know anything even about himself. He watches TV six hours a day, plays violent video games, is obsessed with football. What kind of a number do you think that psychologist can do on that kid?

Total number. That’s the answer, exactly. That’s right.

He can do a total number on him. He can gain his confidence. He can get into his head, and I guarantee you give him a little bit of time, he could screw up his life, based on what he knows and how he would be able to manipulate based on his hatred of that person. Well, guess what? That’s the position humanity’s in. We’re that punk jock.

And I’m not saying we necessarily did something to deserve it, but we’re in that same position where the people with this knowledge at the highest levels, they hate us. And they’re doing a total number on us because we don’t have this knowledge. And until that changes, don’t expect the playing field to be leveled. Expect it to get worse. Okay?

The knowledge is hidden to create and maintain a power differential between those who hold it and those who are ignorant of it. It’s that simple. The knowledge of natural law and its operations constitutes what I call the most deeply occulted or hidden information that exists on this planet. You will not find any more hidden information.

An aside: Mystic messenger video below hints that perhaps hidden information might be for our good, to “save/mature” us, and perhaps the “elite” only appear to hate true humans but are actually doing necessary & difficult work for God

Above video on youtube

This is the thing that all the distractions are there for, to keep you from learning, the endless trivialities, the nonsense you hear on the news, all the video games, all the nonsense television, the sports, you know. It’s all there to keep people from understanding this. And I can’t get you to accept that or believe it, and I don’t ask you to believe it. I’m telling you that’s what they’re trying……from my years of being inside occult traditions that are very, very dark……I’m telling you this is what they don’t want you to know. From first-hand experience.

How many people here today know that I was involved in the dark occult in my past? Good. Great. Okay. The powers that be want to seek to keep this information hidden from the people of the earth at all costs because understanding this information about natural law will level the playing field and put an end to the currently entrenched systems of control that are operating on the earth. We should very clearly make a distinguishment between nescience and ignorance, so that people fully understand the difference between these two concepts.

How many people even have heard the term nescience? Very few. This is a word that has practically been sanitized from colloquial English. Practically been sanitized from the English language. And there’s a reason for that too.

(00:37:28) There’s two contexts to not knowing something.

The first context is nescience. Nescience comes from the Latin. The prefix ne- in Latin means not or not present or absent. And then scio- sciere- in Latin means to know. It’s where we get the word science from. So you put them together and nescience, actually those two roots form another word, nesciere. Nesciere in Latin means not to know, to not know, to not understand. But there’s a connotation to it.

It means to not understand because the specific information that you may be having a desire to understand is completely absent. It is not present. And you cannot actually aggregate that information. You can’t bring those pieces of grammar together to form the sentence, ok? It’s not present.

So you don’t have it at all. It’s unattainable.

This should be clearly delineated from ignorance. Now, nescience is not someone’s fault. The information just isn’t there. You can’t be blamed for nescience. There is no blame in nescience. The person who is nescient is not to be blamed for being nescient. The information simply wasn’t present so they could take it in and then come to understand it.

Ignorance carries blame. This is another thing people want to think in the New Age movement there’s no such thing as. Nobody’s to blame. And that goes to that there’s no cause for anything that’s happening, as you’ll hear a lot in the New Age circles. I very strongly put down these notions or attempt to. There are causes and effects. There are people who are responsible for what is happening. There is blame. Blame exists. There are people who are culpable. We’re going to talk about moral culpability later.

So, ignorance has blame attached to it and responsibility attached to it. It comes from the Latin verb ignorare, in Latin, and this means not to know, just like nescience means not to know, but in a completely different connotation. The connotation of ignorance means you don’t know even though necessary information is present and right there before you, because you have willfully refused or disregarded that information. Whether you’ve refused it because it made you feel uncomfortable, or whether you disregarded it because you felt, that’s not important for me to know. I don’t need to know that. Or you feel you already understand something that contradicts with the new thing that you’re hearing or seeing.

So when you willfully disregard something……if I wanted to willfully disregard the gentleman sitting in the front row……he’s present. I could just pretend he’s not here and ignore him. That’s what ignoring is. This is why I try to say to people that the impact of the word is almost lost to us, of the word ignorance, because of the way it’s pronounced.

I tell people start pronouncing it, IGNORE-ance, ignorance. Then people will hear the word ignore in it, and the connotation becomes clear. It means you’re ignoring it, ignorance. That’s how I like to say it now, because the connotation is clear that way. The information is there, the truth is there, and somebody wants to ignore it completely.

Now that is inexcusable, and there is blame that is attached with that. So what I ask people all the time is, do we have a nescient society, or do we have an ignorant one? Do we have an ignorant one? Is our society ensconced in nescience or is it ensconced in ignorance? I would argue absolutely that we are ensconced in ignorance in society, not nescience. I think we are drowning in information. I think we are drowning in the truth that is all around us, but people are ignoring it, largely. Not everyone, because many people are very hungry for it and taking it in as fast as they can, you know?

But I think the majority of human beings are in the state of ignorance, even though the truth is present all around us. And that constitutes what Art talked about earlier, this consensus trance, which people in the so-called truth community or truth movement have likened to sleep. They say that they are asleep. I liken it to hypnosis.

(00:42:38) If you look at the origins of the word hypnosis, it means suppressed knowledge.

It comes from Greek. Hypo means under, as in hypodermic, under the skin. And gnosis means knowledge, the suppression of knowledge. Hypo means suppression also, under and suppression.

So, hypnosis is the suppression of knowledge and that’s the state that these people are in. And it’s done by themselves. We have to stop looking at this as victim, as a victim relationship. This is a willful choice. In a time of overwhelming information available at people’s fingertips, the truth being ignored is not an option. It’s a willful decision that people are making, and it’s a decision that they should be held accountable to because of what is going on that they are ignoring, what they are allowing to go on in their name and not saying a thing about it. Content to let evil run amok. Alright?

And then people will wonder, why are we losing freedom? Why is freedom on the wane? Why is totalitarianism and tyranny rising up? Why do we see so much control and obsession with control in our society. You know, they’ll see that. Many of them will see the rising police state. They’ll see the injustices in our society. They’ll see the restrictions on our inherent natural liberty. Okay?

But here’s the thing. Many of them will not make the transition to grasping. You know? They’ll say, yeah, this is what’s happening to the earth. It’s being turned into a huge prison, everywhere. And at the most rapid pace right here in America. Okay? And they’ll see this lock going on to the cage, but the question that they never get to, they don’t even get to the question, let alone the answer, is why?

They’ll talk about the symptoms. They’ll describe the prison. They’ll describe every corner of the cage, accurately in many cases. They can tell you exactly how it’s working. They can tell you all the different aspects of the control system. But they can’t tell you why it’s actually going into place. Why is that happening? Well that’s what this presentation answers. Why are we losing freedom? And it gets to the actual heart of that answer.

(00:45:20) So what this presentation constitutes is a master key that unlocks all the locks to all the doors on all the cages in the prison, if it is accepted.

And once again, I don’t tell you that belief is required for that, because truth is always present. It’s always here. It’s a matter of will we perceive it as being present, acknowledge it’s present by stop ignoring it, and then accept it into ourselves, and then do something with it.

Understanding is not the end.

Taking in the knowledge and understanding it is the beginning. Action is required. See, knowledge is required, understanding is required, but then action is finally required, above all, if change is to be created. And that’s how the laws of attraction really work.

So, will people as a whole, as a society, accept that master key? I can’t answer that question. All I can do is try to place it into their hands. After I have taken that key and unlocked my personal prison, my personal cages, and freed my mind, all I can do is try to help people to see, here’s how this key works. Here it is. Here’s the information that constitutes that key and here’s how you put it to work in your life. That’s all I can do. Can’t make anybody take it.

Let’s look at what problem-solving entails, because that’s really critical to understand if we’re going to get past this stage and where we’re at in our stifled evolutionary development as a species. There’s a few main steps to solving problems, any problem. Doesn’t matter what the nature of the problem is. The first is you have to recognize that the problem exists. Recognize that there is a problem to begin with.

And I think by asking the question, is everybody content with the way things are (nobody raised their hand)? I think that’s great because it at least acknowledges to me the people here today recognize we have a problem. And that’s healthy. That’s good.

Many people out there don’t believe we have a problem. You know, they like this place. They like the world the way that it is, you know, which is unfathomable to me, because to me it’s a living hell. And that’s not because of how my own personal life is going. I’m very content with my own personal life. I have no self-inflicted suffering in my personal life. I don’t create problems for myself. My life goes on very well according to how I live it without hurting anybody else. The problem is other people. And that’s another thing the New Agers won’t acknowledge. And they’ll flip out if you say that there’s a problem with someone else.

There are problems with other people. OK? And people will say people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. My glass house has been taken down long since, long time ago, because I went through all that personal introspective work. And I dug deep into my subconscious and faced those problems and confronted them head on and healed them and came out of the mindset that I was once in. Okay?

So, you know, people will say, if there’s something you don’t like in other people, that’s something in yourself that you’re seeing in them. This New Age mumbo-jumbo nonsense, ok? If you’re not part of the problem, I’m not part of this problem. I can say that honestly. I’m not part of this problem. I can look at every single person, anybody who’s watching this, and say, I’m not part of the problem that’s happening on the earth. With all honesty and knowing that I’m telling the truth with that. Okay?

But see, at one point, I was part of the problem, and a big part of the problem. What I had to do at some point is stop doing this and pointing out and saying the problem lies elsewhere, while I was still part of it. And then I had to do this, and point squarely at myself, and say, what do I need to change here, here, and finally here, in the guts, in the courage.

You know, people say, yeah, change happens in the mind, it happens in the heart, but lastly it happens in the guts. We need to generate what I call the heart-mind-guts. Okay? You got to care enough to know and then put it into action. The heart, mind, guts.

Okay?

That taking action is the most important step when it comes to creating change. We’re going to get to that in a moment. But the whole point here is, I had to look at what I needed to change about myself in my thoughts, my emotions, and my actions, and then change those things in myself. This is what most people want to run away from. They want to say, yeah, I want those things that I say I want to magically, to be present in my life, but I don’t want to do those things that require self-change in how I think, in how I feel, and in how I act. I want it magically to happen without changing those things in me.

So, I can honestly look at the rest of the world and say, the problem does not lie within me. I am not seeing a manifestation of myself in other people. Other people have not done the same process that I have, the introspective work that I have, and gone through that painful, painstaking work that involves effort, hard effort. I’m not up here telling people, “I’m offering you the tonic”. You’re going to take a sip and magically you will be enlightened. Okay?

Knowing what’s going on in the world is hard work. It involves destruction. It’s a destructive process. It involves destruction of belief systems. It involves completely breaking down barriers that are in your head. Okay?

Hardly anybody wants to do that work. People want to run a million miles an hour in the opposite direction from that work. Anything but that. I’ll take the grave instead of that. Okay? That’s where most people’s heads are at. Alright? So let’s get back to the steps here for problem solving.

The first is, you’ve got to recognize that there’s a problem. If you are in denial, good luck. Let me know how that works out for you. Because you’re not solving any problem in the state of denial. At all.

(00:51:53) Fear-based denial of the problem must first be dealt with and conquered and stamped out. And you have to acknowledge how bad it is. You know?

People feel symptoms coming on of a disease or something and they want to ignore it, because they don’t want to believe I’m sick. I don’t want to believe I’m sick. I don’t want to believe I have a problem. Then you’re waiting, waiting, waiting. You don’t get it diagnosed. And then it turns into a much bigger problem, which is where we’re at as a society for ignoring this information.

This is what denial looks like symbolically. A person with their head in the sand like an ostrich. And please take note, ladies and gentlemen, when you’re in this position, when you’re in the position of denial with your head in the sand, you’re on your knees with your ass in the air.

I almost say it’s amazingly synchronistic that the human body was designed like that. That in order to put your head in the sand, symbolically so to speak, you have to be on your knees. And that’s where most of our society is at. They’re on their knees and in that state of denial.

The second step to problem solving is to recognize that the symptoms that are being displayed, the symptoms you are seeing, are merely effects of underlying causal factors.

You can’t treat symptoms and solve a problem. It’s not possible. That’s not how problem solving works. You have to get to what caused the problem. Instead of simply treating symptoms, make an accurate diagnosis of the causes of the problem.

So, what does the word diagnosis mean? Diagnosis comes from Greek. The preposition dia, transliterated there, in the parentheses, you see it in Greek script, it means through or by way of. So, by a method, by a particular method. All right?

And the second part of diagnosis is the Greek noun, gnosis. Gnosis means knowledge in Greek. So, what a diagnosis means is through knowledge or by way of knowledge. You’re going to solve the problem by way of knowledge. There is knowledge that acts as the requirement to solving the problem and getting what you want and here’s another thing……I’m going to keep going back to this. It’s going to be like an undercurrent in this……

Because the new age community…and I’m going to be, and I have been……but I’m going to become a more outspoken opponent of new age ideologies, because they are lying to people, whether it be through direct willful deception or whether it be through useful dupes and useful idiots. They are telling people things that are completely inaccurate to how things really work. Because they want to keep people suppressed and non-active. They want people in acceptance mode of everything. Accept, accept, accept. Never rebel. Don’t take action, just observe, just watch. You’ll hear all these things in the New Age movement.

The reason I bring it up is because when you even say the word knowledge to some New Agers, they almost take offense. Because what the New Age is becoming is the new modern day variant. It’s a new form of what’s known as solipsism. We’re going to get to what solipsism is in a little while. But essentially, people don’t want to hear that knowledge is what is required. Because the attainment of real knowledge, not pseudo-knowledge, real knowledge, requires work. It requires effort. It requires reading. It requires listening. It requires watching. And you know what most of all it requires, that people don’t want to give up? Who can tell me?

Time. Thank you, sir. It requires time.

There’s one of the currencies people don’t spend, you know, on many things that they don’t feel they can get immediate gratification from, which is why immediate gratification is so stressed in our society by the control system. That’s what keeps people in their ignorance.

So a diagnosis means if you’re going to get well, you’ve got to have the knowledge of the underlying causal factors that led to the creation of the symptoms. You’re not going to treat the symptoms and get well. You’ve got to have the knowledge to get to the causal factors to find out what cause put this into effect. We’re going to talk a lot about cause and effect.

The third step to problem solving is: through the knowledge that you’ve acquired now (…via making an accurate diagnosis of the problem of the causal factors, right?…), you’re going to then put that knowledge into action.

Understanding what created the problem is like step two, right? Stop being in denial, understand what caused the problem, act on the knowledge you now have to solve the problem, to make it right.

So action is required. We make the diagnosis, then we have to take the required action necessary to rectify or to set right, which is what the word rectify means, the causal factors that led to the manifestation of the problem.

Let’s talk a little bit about the concept of what truth is, how I refer to truth in all of my work, because people have a real deeply mystified concept of what truth is or what it means. They’ll get into all these really deep, abstract discussions of the mind of God, and trying to get into quantum theory and everything. This is mystification of the concept of the truth. And we have to demystify it. We have to bring it down to real, simple, easy to understand language that anybody can comprehend. And then really completely delineate that from perception of any given thing. Because the two are not the same. When people say perception is reality, nothing could be farther from reality than that statement. Perception is not reality. Okay?

It is just what it says, perception, seeing through, perceive, to see through something, like a lens or a filter. I perceive things differently without these glasses. That’s one perception. When I put them on, I perceive things quite differently and more clearly. That’s how human perception works, like a lens, it’s a filter. But what’s there is the same thing. What’s there is the same thing. All that changes is how I perceived it. So, let’s look at this concept.

(00:59:21) Truth is objective.

That means that it’s not dependent upon the perceptions of human beings. No one wants to hear that. That is a direct assault, a direct frontal assault on the human ego. Because everybody wants to hear my perceptions are important. And we want to also believe my perceptions are accurate. Okay?

Now people will say, well, what makes you say your perception of this topic is going to be accurate? That’s because I went through the process of having to admit over and over and over and over and over again, endlessly, how wrong I was about my former perceptions. I went through that destructive process of breaking down my former belief systems, of breaking down my former emotional patterns, of most of all changing my behavior. That’s the thing that’s the most destructive because we get attached to our behaviors and patterns.

So asking people to change, I recognize it’s not easy. It took me like probably about eight years of my life to do it. Most people don’t want to spend a minute on creating personal change, let alone eight years. And you know, when I look at myself, in all honesty, again, none of this is to sound egoic or to toot my own horn, but I look at it like I was a mild case of ego entrapment, a mild case compared to where I see other people at. I feel like I was the, you know, very brittle stone that just needed to be hit with a chisel a few times and it broke into powder. You know, other people are hardened granite or diamond. You know, to break them down is going to take enormous effort and work. And most of them don’t even want to do it. They’re so calcified, you know, they’ve been so compressed into that hardened state that they don’t even want to start.

So, I realize telling people your perceptions are not what really matters, you know, that the truth isn’t based upon how you perceive things, that it’s independent from your perceptions. Most people don’t want to hear that. They don’t want to hear that. Human beings’ perceptions are capable of wavering. They can waver slightly from the truth, and they can waver wildly from the truth. All right?

What truth is, is that which does not waver. It doesn’t move. It’s that which is. It doesn’t matter what anybody thinks about it. It doesn’t matter whether anybody believes it. It doesn’t matter whether anybody knows it. It doesn’t matter whether anybody sees it. It doesn’t matter whether anybody wants to see it. It’s there. It’s always been there. It’s always going to be there. Nothing anybody does can change what has happened.

Can anybody change what has already occurred in what we call in the thinking of linear time, the past? Not one person here is capable of doing that. Let me tell you something, not one being in the entire manifested universe is capable of doing that, because that which has already occurred is set in the record of the universe. Nothing can change the past, ever.10

Great movie on this. Watch the new movie, “The Time Machine”. Not the original 50s version or 60s version, the new one. Think it came out in late 90s or early 2000s, okay? This movie got crushed in reviews, crushed. Whenever reviewers crush a movie and give it the worst ratings, go see that film. Because I guarantee you there’s very important allegorical concepts that you need to understand embedded in that film and that’s why the reviewers crush it because they don’t want you getting any ideas. You know.

This movie got crushed in the theaters and I’m telling you it’s one of the best films to understand the concept of the absolute impossibility of changing the past. The past cannot be altered. You know what can be altered? The future. That’s what that movie is about. And you know where the alteration of the future begins? In the present moment. That’s exactly right. That’s the only place it begins. Okay?

(01:03:52) So what truth is, the demystified concept of truth, is it simply that which already exists.

1st video on youtube

It’s that which has happened in the past and is happening in the present moment. The truth does not exist in the future. When we get to those future moments and it’s the present, truth will be existent then, but not until. Okay?

So, there is no such thing as truth in the future. Truth is that which has occurred in the past and that which is occurring in the present. It is simply that which is and that which has been.

Please recognize when I use the word truth, that is all I’m talking about. I’m not talking about the mind of God. I’m not talking about the entire reason for the existence of the universe. I’m talking about the events that have taken place in the past and are taking place in the present. That’s all. And guess what? That’s all the truth is. It doesn’t need to be any more complicated than that. You want to make it more complicated than that, call it something other than truth so as not to confuse people to what truth really is.

Truth versus human perception. I want to ask people to imagine, see these white lines? Imagine these white lines that do not waver as truth. Imagine that the perception that is set against the truth, we’re going to take three different individuals. This is individual A, this is individual B, this is individual C.

Their ability to perceive what has occurred and what is occurring is what I would refer to as consciousness. Consciousness is a being’s ability to recognize patterns and meaning with respect to those patterns. Meaning you have an accurate understanding of what’s taking place within and around you, or you have an inaccurate understanding of what’s taking place in and around you.

If your consciousness is high, meaning it’s at a high frequency, that means you’re going to have more of an ability to understand and recognize the patterns. If your consciousness is low, you’re at a low frequency, you’re going to see the pattern less. You’re not going to accurately perceive. So I liken this to a wave form. In simple physics, a wave, this is a simple sine wave, it has its crest here and its trough here, and then the pattern repeats, goes up to the crest, down to the trough, and it repeats over again.

The distance between the either crests or troughs of the wave is called the wavelength. The longer the wavelength, the shorter the frequency. What that means is how frequently is it going to be intercepting the line that represents truth. How frequently is it going to be aligned with this line, which we are calling truth?

Now, can everybody just, with that explanation, understand this simple model and what I’m talking about here? Is that clear? Because it’s important. Because this is a low frequency vibration. It’s a low frequency wave. A wave like this, if it was an audio wave, would produce a low frequency, would produce a low bass tone.

As we go up to a higher frequency, you can see the wavelength is shorter, meaning that it intercepts the line which represents truth much more frequently. We can count them, one, two, three, four, five here; one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine there. So this is a higher frequency vibration. We go up to an even higher frequency, let’s say person C has this consciousness, they have a higher frequency. And they’re intercepting the line that represents truth, much more frequency, I won’t count those out because there’s a lot of them.

The higher the frequency, the more in tune with truth we are. What would happen if this frequency became infinitely high? What would it become? It would be indistinguishable from a line. And therefore, someone would be aligned to that which is. The higher the level of consciousness or frequency, which is their perception of reality being accurate, okay, not wavering as much from the truth, because it’s hitting it in more places. We would basically, this wave would turn into a line at some point, the higher the frequency went.

Think about this in sound, right? You hear a low bass tone? It’s like, then it goes up, and it would go eventually outside the range of human hearing, because the frequency went so high. Same concept here. The higher the frequency, the higher the perception of reality, the quality of the perception is going to be.

(01:09:00) The concept to keep in mind here is perception is not reality.

It’s the filter we see reality through. What the human being’s work is to do is to align their perception to the reality which exists, which is truth. We need to set aside what we want the truth to be and look at what it is. What it is is altogether different than what we want it to be. But until we recognize what it is, we’re not even in a position to make an accurate diagnosis of what’s going on and therefore create what we want it to be.

So, I’m going to give the first quote here. It comes from a gentleman I personally greatly respect. How many people are familiar with Travis Walton, by a show of hands? Hardly anybody in the room. Wow, two people. Amazing. And I know Barb is in the back because we’ve met him personally.

I spoke with this gentleman at a conference last year in 2012. And I just want to say, I just think he’s a totally genuine individual. I don’t care what anybody thinks of me saying that. I believe him. Do I know factually that what he claims happened to him did? No, I do not. But I believe what he is saying for a reason.

When I am around somebody, especially for any length of time, I think I can, my intuition is good that I can get a feel for their heart. And when he’s telling you stuff, it’s very consistent. And in his book, he asks people, you need to listen to my whole story, suspend your disbelief for a minute, and then do your research and then make a judgment call. Do you want to believe me? Do you think I’m telling you the truth? Do you think I’m lying to you? And then make up your own mind.

And who Travis Walton is, he claims that he was an abductee, that he was taken on board an extraterrestrial craft at a point in his life. He disappeared for days. They were out looking for him and his best friends were accused of murdering him. And he shows up five days later in like deplorable conditions, out on a country road someplace. But anyway, again, I spoke with him back in 2012. I just bumped into him again. We were just at a conference. I’m bringing this up for a reason. We were just at a conference in Philadelphia where he spoke.

And this quote, I feel I would start, if I was going to quote somebody, I was going to make this like the first quote in the presentation today. Travis Walton says in his book, which is called “Fire in the Sky”, he said, “I have come to realize that the biggest problem anywhere in the world, the biggest problem anywhere in the world, is that people’s perceptions of reality are compulsively filtered through the screening mesh of what they want and do not want to be true”.

Above video on youtube

Now when I read that in his book, I got chills up and down my spine, because I said this meshes exactly with what I’m talking about in my section, in my presentation called Truth vs. Perception. And he’s encapsulating it in a sentence perfectly. Alright? We want things to be true. That doesn’t make it so. That’s not what makes truth the way that it is.

What makes truth is the way that it is, is what behaviors were taken and what is the actual effect in the manifested world. That’s how things are. It doesn’t matter how we want them to be; they may be a completely different way right now than we want them to be. And I would say for the people in this room, they are a completely different way than we want them to be.

But most people in the world think……they kind of believe……they’re the arbiter of truth. And that’s a bad place to be. And that’s a very, very, low level of consciousness. To think that, if I don’t believe that it’s this way, it’s not this way. Many people are trapped in that state of mind.

Now, the reason I even bring this up, and included Travis’s quote here, is at this conference that we were just at a couple of weeks ago. I didn’t speak at it. I tabled at it. A woman came up to my table and she picked up my New Age bullshit DVD, which is available here today in the back. And she said, “What’s this about?” With a real skeptical look.

And I said, I explained, I said, “Well, it’s a seven hour extended video podcast that has many, many, slides. I gave a shortened version of it at the ‘Free Your Mind’ conference in Philadelphia. And this is the extended version that goes deeply into the deception of the New Age movement and how it is a religion that is designed to suppress the masculine side of the personality, which is the side which actually takes action and creates change”.

And that’s of course pushed (ie sacred feminine pushes us) by the sacred feminine which is care and creativity and compassion. Both need to be present. We’re going to talk about that here today. But I said this is about the suppression of that masculine energy. And that’s what the New Age movement is about: the suppression of the masculine.

So, I said what the New Age religion wants to teach people is just accept everything the way it is, no matter how unjust it is, no matter how deplorable the conditions are, no matter how much evil, evil, is taking place in our midst. Accept it. That’s the New Age religion. And here’s what she said, here’s what she said, “That’s exactly how I am. I just accept everything. I don’t make any judgments on anything that occurs, no matter what it is, no matter how it’s perceived. You want to perceive it as evil? That’s your judgment”.

I said, yes, it is my judgment. You know why? Because it’s evil. It really is. There is such a thing. I said, you’re content to let evil run amok and take this whole world, because you don’t want to act. Because what’s really there is cowardice. That’s what it really is. Okay? She didn’t want to hear that. She said, “I prefer not to see it that way”.

Now, align this with the quote. I prefer not to see it that way. I hope by some miracle she happens to see this presentation at some point. In hindsight, I didn’t say this to her on the spot, but I thought about it for a little bit the next day, and what I should have really said is, no, you prefer not to see, period. That’s the truth.

So, I prefer not to see it that way means, “No, I want to ignore reality. I want to believe what I want to be true is the way that it already is”. And this is what the New Age hopes is peddling to people.

So, great quote that I thought accurately sums it all up. See, this woman also told me that she is a follower, of the “New Age ideology that is referred to as the ‘Course in Miracles’”.

How many people have even heard of this? A lot of people. Okay? You know what that is? It’s called solipsism, wrapped in a nice, neat, new package. Solipsism. How many people are familiar with the ideology called solipsism? Good. More than I would have thought. Most people have never heard of this. Okay?

(01:17:00) Solipsism is a completely egoic and destructive ideology that has absolutely no bearing or resemblance to truth in any way.

And the people who are solipsists are mentally ill. I’m not even going to provide any evidence of that. I’m telling you, you need to research this religion and sickness for yourself. It’s a mental illness. A solipsist is a mentally ill person who should probably be somehow removed, segregated from society and institutionalized until they are made well, because they are a destructive influence on society.

This is what I focused on on podcast number one of my podcast series and radio shows. I went into the ideology of what solipsism is, and how destructive it is, and how it’s a religion. What this is, well, first of all, let’s look at the word. And you’ll notice I’ll be breaking down words all day long, because if you don’t understand where words came from, you don’t really understand what they really were intended to mean.

Regardless of whatever connotation they may have taken on in the modern world, the intended meaning of the word, the original meaning, is derived from its etymological derivation. You need to go into the ancient languages, Latin and Greek roots and other languages, Germanic, Arabic, etc., and you need to break down the words from their etymological origins. Then you will understand their real meaning. And I’m telling you, you do this and the top of your head will blow off by what you will find. By what words we speak on a daily basis actually mean. And we have no idea what they mean.

So, the word solipsism comes from the Latin adjective solus, which means alone or one. And then the Latin pronoun ipse which means self, myself, etc. The ideology of solipsism is that nothing exists outside of me. I’m the only being that exists in creation. Or, essentially, it’s another way of saying, I’m God. That my perception is the only real perception and no one else is here. Now imagine that.

What I’m essentially telling the audience here today is your perceptions are not the truth. You have to work to align your perceptions with the truth. That’s damaging enough to the human ego. If I just said, none of you exist, I’m only perceiving your existence, I’m the only one who exists, imagine how egoic that statement is and actually how demoralizing it is to other people, you’re even telling them, I don’t even consider that you exist.

That’s what a solipsist is. They believe the universe is a big illusion created somehow for their amusement. And that there’s no objective reality, that you don’t exist, you don’t exist, you don’t exist, you don’t exist. I’m the only one who exists. And that’s not mental illness. We don’t diagnose that as mental illness.

I don’t care if you want to accept the notion everything is one. I personally accept that notion. I do accept that we are all one. That doesn’t mean you’re not existent in the physical domain right now as I’m talking to you. Of course we all exist here. We are in the physical domain. Okay?

The whole point is, these people want to believe the entire physical domain is such an illusion that nothing that takes place in it matters or has any significance and should just be watched and nothing should be done to change it. Let me explain what this is, folks:

When I was a Satanist (……and I was working inside the Church of Satan and other dark occult organizations……), they have a set of sins, believe it or not. They don’t look at them as sins in the same way that, you know, religionists look at sin. They are the things that, these are behaviors and thought patterns that should not be engaged in by the dark occultist themselves, by the magician, if you will. You are not to engage in these behaviors, but we are to peddle them to other people. We are to get them to engage in these behaviors. Okay?

You know what the first one is? No, it’s not. That’s the second or third. I think it’s the third, if I’m not mistaken. I don’t have the list handy. But the first one is stupidity. That’s the first satanic sin, for the dark occultist. But they want other people in deep stupidity. They want other people in deep ignorance. The idea here is we will know it all. We will know the truth, so that we can control others and keep them a dumb down herd. Okay?

There’s a bunch of other ones but I think the second or third is solipsism. Solipsism is one of the biggest sins for Satanists and dark Luciferians and dark occultists. They don’t want any of their membership believing in this mental illness nonsense. Okay? But they want to propagate it and peddle it. They want to do that. And they told me personally, higher-ups in this network, told me personally when I was working with them, wait until you see the New Age books that we, our membership, will be writing, or either writing ourselves or putting into the hands of useful dupes to write and put out there. We’ll be giving them the idea, they’ll write it for us, put it out there as their own idea.

And they say, we are going to propagate and peddle solipsism like you have never seen. And you know what? When they say something, they do it. I’m serious. They’re aligned. Their act is together. They act on the same page, and for that I have respect for them as an enemy. And I don’t take anything they do lightly. I recognize they have the will. They’re not like the rest of humanity. They align their thoughts, their knowledge, with their version of care, you know. It’s not like our emotionally based care, but they care about what they’re doing and then they act.

And when they act, they act in concert and they get it done. I’m not saying, you know, I agree with any of their agenda, because I don’t, and I’m trying to stop it. But I have respect for their unity. They are unified and on the same page, and humanity is not. That’s why, in all honesty, we’re having our rear ends handed to us in this spiritual battle right now. At least right now.

Solipsism is the ideology that only one’s mind is sure to exist. Solipsists contend that knowledge of anything that is outside of one’s own mind is unsure and hence there is no such thing as objective truth. No such thing as objective truth. And therefore, nothing about the external world and its workings can actually ever be known. Just think about that statement. It’s saying no one can ever know anything. You cannot come to know anything at all. There is no such thing as knowledge.

So, what I would say to somebody who’s following the “Course in miracles”, or course in solipsism, or course in acceptance of all forms of evil in this world is, you can’t know anything by reading “The Course in Miracles”, because nothing can be known. How could a solipsist, why would a solipsist ever pick up a book? Why would a solipsist ever watch anything, any video? Why would a solipsist ever engage in a conversation with another human being? Tell a solipsist you can’t know that you’re going to fall off that cliff, so why don’t you go try to walk over and see what happens? Because you can’t be sure of anything. They won’t do that though, you know.

The whole point here is, this is a religion. This is a New Age religion. And I’m telling you who it’s peddled by. It’s peddled by the occultists, who have the knowledge of how natural law works and are trying to put out whatever ideologies they can, destructive ideologies they can, to get people not to understand it. Or to even go so far as to believe that nothing can be understood. Why would you bother to look into natural law? Nothing can be known. It’s unbelievable that anybody would be so gullible and naive to fall into this mindset.

Let me just tell you what it really is. It’s a person who has given up on life. They feel that it’s so difficult to know anything and they don’t want to do the work to come to that level of knowledge that they’ve just said, “I don’t believe it can be known”. That makes me feel more comfortable in my ignorance and laziness. That’s the truth about what solipsism is. And that’s the truth about my friend I bumped into at the MUFON conference. And I’d say that to her face.

So, we have to realize we’re battling this force. And this religion is on the rise. Solipsism is on the rise. More people are becoming solipsists or solipsistic in their beliefs, in their thought processes. Let’s look at some basic definitions and working definitions.

(01:26:56) Now, first thing we’re going to define is definition.

Let’s define what a definition is. A definition is an exact statement, a statement of the exact meaning of a word. We’re looking for an exact meaning, not a connotation, not a maybe or a like or a somewhat. We’re looking to narrow the focus. That’s why D “finites” it. It makes it finite. We’re taking it, not infinite, we’re finiting it. We’re making it finite. We’re actually limiting, through words, what something means so we can be clearer about what we’re saying.

It’s an exact statement or description of the nature, scope, or meaning of something. Another way we can look at a definition when we’re talking about visual or audio definition is it’s the degree of distinctness or clarity of an object, image, or sound.

So why do people buy HD TV sets? They want higher definition. They want a higher clarity of the picture. If you have high definition audio, for audio files, they won’t accept anything but high definition audio, because in comparison to low def audio, the clarity of the sound is very good. It’s much better. Okay?

So, that’s what definition is. It is all related to clarity. When we use it in conjunction with words, it means the clarity of the meaning is amplified. When it’s with a picture, the clarity of our vision, of the ability to see what the picture is, the information in the picture, is amplified. And same thing with sound.

The more accurate the definitions that we have for words or concepts, the better our clarity of meaning and therefore our understanding of those concepts, words or concepts will be. So definition simply means clarity of meaning when we’re applying it to words and concepts.

(01:29:04) So therefore, let’s define natural law.

This is what we’re going to be talking about for the rest of the day. We have to define it.

The simple definition of natural is inherent, having a basis in nature, reality and truth, not made or caused by humankind.

So, if it’s natural, it wasn’t made by man. Mankind didn’t make it. And again, the origin of the word, neptare in Egyptian means spirits and all means of or related to spirit. It is all of nature, the spiritual domain. See, this is the other part.

People believe that the spiritual domain is separate from the physical domain. This is a huge thread and a huge central focus in all of my work. If you think the spiritual domain is not where you are at now, because you are in the physical domain, you are mistaken.

If you think that the spiritual domain is someplace other than the physical domain, you’re also mistaken. If you place emphasis on one above the other and say, well, this one takes precedence and this one’s not important……either way you do it, whether you say the spiritual is more important and the world of matter should not be given any significance, it’s imbalanced and it’s not true.

Or, if you say hey like scientism does in many, you know, left-brain scientism, the material world is all that there is. This is just a dead mechanized clockwork called the universe and it happened by accident for no reason, you know, there’s no such as the spirit, you know, spiritual domain. Both of these worldviews, and we’re going to get to a breakdown of these worldviews. They’re completely inaccurate. They’re not based in truth and most of all they’re based on brain imbalance. And we’re going to see how one of these worldviews or another develops when either the left brain hemisphere or the right brain hemisphere has taken precedence and dominance within the individual consciousness.

So, natural means spiritual. These words can be used interchangeably. So, when I’m talking about natural law, I mean spiritual law, unseen spiritual laws. But overall, the dictionary definition of natural is it’s inherent to nature and it’s not made by man.

The word law is, the definition is an existing condition which is both binding and immutable.

So let’s look at each one of these words.

Existing.

It means that it is present. It is present. It cannot be just ignored and expected that, well, that doesn’t make it true and it’s not going to have an effect. It’s there. It’s present. That’s why it’s a law, that it’s in operation, that is in operation.

It is binding.

Binding means it has an effect. It means it doesn’t matter whether you believe that it has an effect. It doesn’t matter whether you understand that it has an effect. It doesn’t care. This is another big hammer to the ego. The human ego wants to hear what it wants to hear. One of the things it wants to hear is, the universe cares about you personally. It cares about John. It cares about Bob. It cares about Mary. It cares about Elizabeth, whatever, okay? Cares about you individually as a being.

Now, you could go so far as to say you believe that the Creator of the universe cares about you. I’m not denying anybody or saying don’t think that. What I’m saying is that the laws of the universe don’t care about you. Laws have been created in this realm that work flawlessly, 100% of the time, flawlessly.

Let me ask people to envision this scenario to try to clarify this. A couple are on a picnic. They’re out in a state forest or something like that. They’re on a picnic. About 50 yards away from where they’re at, okay, there’s a pretty tall cliff, maybe about 200 feet, okay, and it ends in some jagged rocks. They brought their two-year-old child on the picnic with them. They unfold the blanket, take out the picnic basket, they’re having their picnic. Maybe passions got heated and the husband and wife were making out a little bit. Their kid, two-year-old daughter, in her nice Sunday sundress or whatever, wanders off, gets to the edge of that cliff.

Will gravity care if that girl goes over the edge? Will gravity allow her to go over the edge? Yes, it will. Gravity is not going to say, this girl doesn’t understand this law and she’ll die if she goes over that edge. She’s innocent. She’s nescient even, not even ignorant, innocent and nescient. Will that law still have an effect? You damn better well believe it will. And so does natural law in the same way. It doesn’t care whether you don’t know, doesn’t care whether you’re nescient or ignorant. It’s in effect. It’s binding and it is immutable.

Immutable means that nothing you can ever do can ever change it.

It is in effect eternally. Because man didn’t put it into effect. You know who put it into effect? The Creator of the universe put it into effect. And I don’t really care what you think of that force as. You can think of it as an impersonal force. You can think of it as the man with the beard. You can think of it as this remote control. I don’t really care what you think of it as. Personally, that’s none of my business. But you know what?

If you think of it that it’s man that makes the laws, then I have a problem. Because man doesn’t make these laws I’m talking about. The Creator of the universe set these laws into motion, put them into effect, and they bind you. You and I are bound by these laws, whether we like it or not, whether we accept it or not, whether we understand it or not. They’re in effect and you are already creating the reality that we are experiencing, based upon interaction with these unseen laws. Already. You’re already doing it. You can never not be doing it. That’s an impossibility. You’re always co-creating in harmony, I’m sorry, in cooperation, I should say. Whether it’s in harmony or opposition is a different story.

In cooperation with these spiritual laws that I’m going to talk about, you are already creating in cooperation with them and can never not do so, as long as you exist in the physical domain. So that’s what the simple definitions that we’re working forward with.

Natural law doesn’t mean anything other than this. That’s it.

It means, so let’s put them together? Inherent, existing conditions. Conditions that exist in nature, which are both binding and immutable. They have an effect whether they’re understood or not, and they cannot be changed.

So what would be our requirement of knowledge here? What do you think should be done? If we are always working with these, do you think we’re going to create something that is wise to create, that is good, that is in alignment with what we say we want, if we don’t know how these laws operate? You know what’s going to be created? A mess. Total chaos. Something you don’t want. Something that leads to enormous suffering, which is where we’re at.

If, on the other hand, you have that knowledge of how these things work, then you align your behavior to them, you’re going to create a whole new different ballgame. And then you’re going to not have self-inflicted suffering. That’s what this is all about.

So let’s give a working definition. This is what I call the soundbite. People say, well, tell me what natural law is, Mark. You have a few days? Maybe a large portion of the day like we’re going to cover today? Maybe some people will get it. But really, you need to devote a large amount of time to studying this, understanding it, reading about it, and even experimenting with it.

This is not an untestable hypothesis. And it’s not a hypothesis, it’s actually a law. But it’s not untestable. You can test it. You can apply all the scientific methodologies to natural law, same thing.

Gather your information, observe, hypothesize, observe, test the results, publish the results. That’s scientific methodology. The scientific methodology will be borne out for everything I’m talking about in this presentation, if it is applied, because this is not a religion. This is not some New Age mumbo-jumbo. This is a science. It is a science that constitutes knowledge of how laws that are existent, in operation, and immutable, in this universe work. And how we are creating what we experience in conjunction with these operating laws.

And man didn’t put them into effect. Whatever created this universe put them into effect. I’m not here today to tell you what that is. Your job in your own personal experience is to get in touch with what you feel that is. I’m not here to tell you what that is. I’m not here to tell anybody what that is.

But my whole point is, it created these laws and they’re in effect. And if you want to stop suffering and if you want the human condition to change, you have to understand how these laws work. There is no way around that. Knowledge of these laws is required. And this is what people in the so-called new age movement and in religious communities and in other communities don’t want to acknowledge. They don’t want to acknowledge that work is required.

(01:39:24) So, let’s give a working definition for natural law.

My soundbite variants, okay? I tell people who want the six o’clock news edition of what natural law is, okay.

Natural law is universal, non-man-made, binding and immutable conditions that govern the consequences of behavior. And specifically, at least on this planet, human behavior. I would say in the universe it governs the behavior of all intelligent beings. Intelligent beings. Okay?

Natural law is a body of universal spiritual laws which act as the governing dynamics of consciousness. The governing dynamics of consciousness. That’s the working definition.

Let’s look at the dynamics between discovery and belief. The difference between discovery and belief. Because, again, natural law is capable of being discovered, understood, and harmonized with. Now, does that sound like a religion?

Religion asks people to believe, accept, and do without question. What this is, is saying, this exists, you’re bound by it. The best you can do is to understand its operation, like you would understand gravity and therefore not just walk toward the edge of a 200-foot cliff that is bottomed by jagged rocks. If you’re intelligent and you understand how the law of gravity works, you won’t do that behavior. Just like if you’re intelligent and you understand how natural law works, you won’t do certain behaviors to create a prison for the entire species, for your entire species.

Unfortunately, humanity has not reached that level of consciousness yet. They are not at that level of co-creative intelligence to understand how these laws work and then align their behaviors to them.

So, natural law has nothing to do with religion. It’s not a belief system. It’s a science. It is a discoverable operation that is already in effect that we can either understand and align our behavior to, or remain ignorant of and suffer as a result of that ignorance, because it’s already in effect. And already has a binding effect upon you and your behaviors, and everyone’s.

So, when it comes to belief, anybody that was trying to propagate a religion wouldn’t put this slide up here. When it comes to natural law, it works just like gravity. So, the clown that’s going to jump over the cliff, saying, I don’t believe in gravity, what’s going to happen? Down he goes, because belief is irrelevant, because natural law does not care about you. It is in effect, no matter what you do……deal with it.

And people don’t want to hear that. And I recognize this. I recognize I’m not telling anybody anything they want to hear. If I wanted to sell a lot of stuff, if I wanted to be real popular, I’d come up here and I’d tell you exactly what you want to hear and then I’d be making $50,000 a presentation like Wayne Dyer does. Okay?

And that is his fee. I know because I’ve actually had some people speak to his management. That’s what, that’s what a new age presenter gets. You know what I asked for? Zero. I don’t even ask for a stipend, because I don’t want, I don’t even care about fake money. I care about making real money. Real one-eye. The word money is actually one-eye. People have said it a billion times in their life and never recognized what they’re saying is one-eye. And the symbol of the one-eye, which represents spiritual enlightenment, is plastered all over the one dollar bill.

Well, this is the one. See, I tell people, I’m a poor man when it comes to the fake money, but I’m very rich in the real stuff. The real thing, I have tons of. The fake stuff, I don’t do so well with, and I don’t care. It’s not what I’m concerned about. I know it’s fake. Okay?

So, I don’t ask for a stipend when I present. I tell whoever set up the presentation pay for my travel and lodging. Hook me up with a dinner or whatever. That’s it. I’ll come out and speak anywhere. The point is, if I was trying to appeal to somebody’s ego and what they wanted to hear, I would tell you your beliefs are very important. Your beliefs shape, and they do shape your reality, in a negative way, if you don’t align yourself with truth, and you want to stay attached to a belief system, because you prefer it over what’s real.

So, when it comes to natural law, I’m not telling people, don’t believe in yourself. See, people will say, there’s forms of belief that are good. Yeah, I acknowledge that. I understand that. Believe in yourself. Believe in your own ability to come to this understanding of information like this, but I’m explaining when it comes to a law that is existent in the universe, your belief doesn’t matter, it’s irrelevant. The universe doesn’t care what those parents at that picnic, whose child just went over the cliff, believed. It doesn’t care whether that girl doesn’t know how gravity works. It’s going to have an effect.

You act a certain way, like a computer. Boom! You put this in, here’s how you program this, that’s what has to come out. Invariably. Invariably. It is nothing personal. Natural law is not a personal force. It is an impersonal force. That every single mystery tradition and occult tradition, that has actually wanted to share this knowledge with people, has been telling people about and attempting to tell people about since time immemorial.

It is an impersonal force, it does not care about you, it does not worry or care in the slightest bit whether you understand it or accept it or not. It is in effect. You are bound by it. The end. And stop crying in your milk over it. That’s it.

No one wants to hear that.

And I’m not so naive that I recognize people don’t want to hear that. That I don’t recognize that. I do recognize that. Believe me, I realize the wall I am up against in saying this. I get it fully, fully.

If I wanted to blow smoke up people’s rear ends, I’d come up here and I’d say, the universe cares about you and what you believe. And it’s going to gauge that, it’s going to look at all that, and it’s going to tabulate it, and it’s going to say, well what did he believe when he took this action? It’s not going to say that. It’s going to say, is this what happened? Yes or no? Yes? Here’s the result. That’s it. Unwaveringly and invariably, the human ego has a hard time with that.

There was some popular TV show, I don’t even remember what it was, Barb had downloaded it and she was watching an episode and it said, humanity’s greatest fear is that truth is absolute. And I usually don’t bother watching any television, okay? I have downloaded, I downloaded a couple of shows to watch because they’re allegories and I want to pick apart the allegory. But I wasn’t even watching this one, but I heard it, my head snapped around. Whoa!

That came through a network television show? How’d that happen?

Humanity’s greatest fear is that the truth is absolute. The ego has a hard time with the concept of any absolutes. It loves relativism. That’s another part of the big trap of where we’re at. Relativistic ideas, and especially when it comes to morality. We’re going to talk about moral relativism.

But, the concept here is natural law does not require your beliefs to be in effect. No more than gravity requires your beliefs to be in effect. That needs to be understood. Human belief is completely irrelevant, when it comes to the existence and operation of natural law, just as it is irrelevant in relation to any of the other laws of nature such as gravity, inertia, momentum, thermodynamics or electromagnetism.

Similar, similar, to such other phenomena of nature: the workings of natural law require no belief in order for them to be discovered and known.

So, what I’m saying is, your belief will not change natural law, but your inquiry into it can lead to an understanding of it. You can develop the knowledge of it if you are willing to open your mind and look at how these laws function. And what we’re getting as a result of our disharmony with them. The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard said that there are two ways to be fooled: one is to believe what is not true, and the other is to refuse to accept what is true.

So, believing in untrue notions, which is what religion is, all forms of it, all the five religions I posted at the beginning of the presentation: organized cultural religion, money, scientism, politics, and the New Age movement. There’s the world religions, folks. People think of religion as only the cultural religions. No, there’s four other ones. One’s called government and authority, okay, or politics, whatever, however you want to name it. The other one is money, finance. There’s another religion. One of them is the New Age movement. And one of them is scientism, which I’m not going to refer to as real science because it is not. It is a belief system and a religion.

So what Kierkegaard is saying here is, you can believe things that aren’t true, and that will hold you back. And you can refuse to accept what is true, and that will also hold you back. I say these are the only two ways that humanity ever creates self-inflicted suffering for itself.

We want to know how suffering is created for the human species, that it doesn’t need to experience?

We believe what’s not true.
We refuse to accept what is true.

That’s why self-inflicted suffering exists in our species. And if we are to become wise, we need to stop doing both of those things and then we’ll stop creating suffering for ourselves

So let’s look at consciousness and the human brain. Because consciousness is an intangible force. It’s something that exists, but you can’t really see it. Many people even have a hard time explaining what it is. But there is physiological expressions for consciousness in the physical domain, and the brain is one of them. And of course, people will say, well, don’t leave out the heart. Of course, the heart is also very important. The heart has an even bigger electromagnetic field than the brain and is tied into the physiology in an even more complex way than the brain is.

But we need to understand the basic structure of the brain to understand the types of imbalances that go on within it that lead to these debilitating conditions within humanity that continue to create suffering for us. And also, what these belief systems do is they prevent the activation of the heart and the actions, of care and action. Not only do they prevent knowledge, real knowledge from manifesting within the being, they prevent care, and they create apathy, and they create inaction, laziness, inaction and cowardice, so that we don’t actually act and take action based upon what we’ve come to know.

So, let’s look at how the brain and consciousness actually work. People will also try to give ridiculously over-complicated and mystified definitions of what consciousness means, and many people are even scared of the term. We have to demystify these terms and bring them down to real simple English and real simple concepts that the average person can grasp. And stop trying to make it more complicated than it is.

Being conscious of something, meaning having consciousness of it, is an ability of the being to recognize patterns, remember this is all about pattern recognition, to recognize patterns and meaning with respect to events that are taking place or have taken place, both within oneself, in the inner realm, in the lesser realm, the realm of the individuated consciousness, and in the realm in which the self exists and operates, the macrocosm.

So let’s break it down, right? Ability of a being to recognize patterns and meaning with respect to events taking place within oneself, the microcosm, and in the macrocosmic world, the world at large. And the events taking place is the truth.

(01:53:35) So it’s our ability to accurately perceive truth of what has happened and what is happening. That’s consciousness. That’s consciousness.

And it’s made way overly complicated by people. It’s mostly made overly complicated in the New Age movement. Again, which I can’t stress enough how big of a deception it is. For people, really have to go and check out my work on the New Age Deception. It’s on my website, it’s in the video section, and it’s in the podcast section. It’s a seven-hour presentation. I’m telling you, it will be as worthwhile for you to check out as this seminar.

So, that’s what consciousness is. Now, how does consciousness express? There’s a difference between what it is and how it expresses in our life. Consciousness expresses, I ask people just tell me what are the ways you could ever make yourself known to any other being? How can any other being come to know, who you are in this incarnation in this physical manifestation? How could they possibly come to know you how could you manifest yourself or make yourself known to them?

And there’s only three ways: thoughts, emotions and actions. And I would say speech falls into the line of the combination of thoughts and emotions. And speech is also a form of action. I’m using force to, you know, make the air flow over my vocal cords to make sounds come out so that you can hear the concepts I’m trying to express. So it is a form of action. And it derives from what we have thought up to this point and the emotions that we have and we can express it through speech. So, thought, emotion and action.

Thought you have to look at as the creative force that is the expression for consciousness within the individual. So, it’s a neutral force. You don’t look at your thoughts as masculine or feminine, do you? But you do look at them as creative forces. In order for anything to manifest in the physical domain, it had to first exist as a thought. This computer, somebody had to envision all the parts, how it works, how it’s put together. This camera equipment, the clothes you’re wearing, the seats, everything that exists had to first exist in the realm of thought, had to, by law. Then it comes into physical manifestation through action.

Your emotions are a polarized component, you could look at it as. It is a feminine aspect of consciousness. Because other people don’t feel your emotions, they can perceive or sense them. You’re the one who’s feeling the emotions in your physiology. It’s an internal expression. You feel emotions inwardly, inside in the physiology. Hence, this is a feminine expression for consciousness. It is something that is not externalized and put out. It is something that is felt within.

So, the emotions in the mind-body-spirit connection are the spirit in which we do something. So, that’s the feminine force or the spirit. Of course, thoughts are within our mind, hence that’s the mind component of the consciousness. Then there’s a marriage between them.

So, you can look at thoughts as the creative essence, which then blends with or marries to the feminine. Now, see, we’re getting into a notion that is taught in all……many different religious traditions.

(01:57:25) It’s called the Trinity.

And I challenge anybody, go and look in any of the trinities that exist, in any of the religions. You can go back to Babylon. You can go to the Indus Valley traditions. You can go to the Egyptian and Camiscian traditions. The Christian traditions.

Every single religious tradition that is taught of a trinity, it is always a father creator, a sacred feminine figure of some kind that the father then impregnates or inseminates in some form. And then, from that offspring is born a male child. Always. Okay?

What we’re talking about here is the Father being the mind, the creative essence. Then the Spirit or the emotions being the sacred feminine essence, or the Holy Spirit, the emotions. And then, the child, the male child, is behavior. It is the active or masculine principle that actually interacts with the physical world to change it.

And hence, that is the only way to actually save ourselves.

And again, people in religious thinking will immediately attack this and say, you’re saying that saving ourselves will not come through faith. Yes, I am. Saving ourselves will only come through action. Action will save humanity. Faith will not do it.

So, sorry to again smash another egoic attachment that people have to religious notions. But these religions are created by the control system. People don’t understand that exoteric Christianity is created by the dark occult, of the ancient dark occult mystery schools. They don’t understand where this religion came from because they haven’t studied astro-theology. And I’m not telling you there’s no good concepts in any religion. I say take all the good concepts and leave the nonsense. One of the nonsense is that you need to believe in something to be saved from the current human condition. You don’t need to believe in a thing. You need to know the truth. And right in their own religion, there it is. Let me just stay on this for a moment because……

In their own scripture, the exoteric Christian scriptures, what is the one prescription that the Christ figure gives to the people when he is asked about freedom? He’s only asked about freedom like once in the Gospels, okay, in the words attributed to his teachings. And they want to know what will save us, what will make us free, and what is his prescription?

No, that is not. There’s something missing there, you’re close. What is the actual saying? Know the truth. Knowing the truth will make you free. That’s the prescription, even in exoteric Christianity. It’s right there in the Gospels. But Christians don’t want to hear that, because the controllers in the church who came from the dark priest class gave them this nonsense that all you have to do is believe and everything will magically change. Well, good luck with that.

When people’s behaviors have no alignment with morality, you think your belief is going to change something? Again, let me know how that works out for you. And again, I’m not mincing words up here. I’m telling it like it really is. I don’t care who it offends.

So, the expressions for consciousness are thoughts, emotions, and actions, which are likened to in the consciousness community of mind, spirit, and body. And it’s a trinity. A Father Creator, which is the thoughts, the mind, the feminine essence, which is the mother of the trinity, the emotions, the inward aspects, the spirit. And then they give birth, when the thoughts and the emotions come together, they give birth to action in the world, which is the male child. This is very important to understand. I hope everybody is clear. This is our internal Trinity which constitutes the expressions for consciousness.

So let’s move on. Yes. Okay, how much time? It is. Okay, we’re going to stop right there and take a break. We will resume at 1:15 precisely. So you want to come in a few minutes early to get settled? I will start again at 1:15 p.m. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Next ->

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Click for cross-post from WritePharma

Anchor tag jump point

Not entirely true, as Mandela Effect proves SOMETHING is changing the apparent past, in our fluid quantum reality.

The Great Unshackling: An AI blueprint for bringing "Mark Passio type" natural law freedom to the world

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Mon, 05 Jan 2026 01:58:05 GMT

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Click for original Doug Casey article

Doug Casey on Anarchy and Voluntaryism

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Wed, 31 Dec 2025 16:15:39 GMT

Note: Doug Casey says, starting in the 8th paragraph, “What does that imply? It implies a police force to protect you from coercion within its boundaries, an army to protect you from coercion from outsiders, and a court system to allow you to adjudicate disputes without resorting to coercion”.

This website author’s thoughts: Doug has some blinders, because he claims to be an anarchist, yet still hasn’t gone all the way, as he believes in centralized police and armies. He also thinks courts aren’t coercive?

He doesn’t understand that these services can ALSO be handled by private security and/or voluntary militia, as America’s founding fathers envisioned. Mark Passio would call Doug Casey a 1 fake-ass anarchist.

Eventually, in a truly moral world, even these services would NOT be needed.

In the modern age, it would take creative & free thinking to re-invigorate these ideals, but despite Doug’s deficiencies, I thought that the rest of the article was decent enough (in other ways) to reproduce it on my substack!

Now, let’s take a look at Doug’s article:

You’re likely aware that I’m a libertarian. But I’m actually more than a libertarian. I don’t believe in the right of the State to exist. The reason is that anything that has a monopoly of force is extremely dangerous. As Mao Tse-tung, lately one of the world’s leading experts on government, said: “The power of the state comes out of a barrel of a gun.”

There are two possible ways for people to relate to each other, either voluntarily or coercively. And the State is pure institutionalized coercion. It’s not just unnecessary, but antithetical, for a civilized society. And that’s increasingly true as technology advances. It was never moral, but at least it was possible, in oxcart days, for bureaucrats to order things around. Today it’s ridiculous.

Everything that needs doing can and will be done by the market, by entrepreneurs who fill the needs of other people for a profit. The State is a dead hand that imposes itself on society. That belief makes me, of course, an anarchist.

People have a misconception about anarchists. That they’re these violent people, running around in black capes with little round bombs. This is nonsense. Of course there are violent anarchists. There are violent dentists. There are violent Christians. Violence, however, has nothing to do with anarchism. Anarchism is simply a belief that a ruler isn’t necessary, that society organizes itself, that individuals own themselves, and the State is actually counterproductive.

It’s always been a battle between the individual and the collective. I’m on the side of the individual.

I simply don’t believe anyone has a right to initiate aggression against anyone else. Is that an unreasonable belief?

Let me put it this way. Since government is institutionalized coercion—a very dangerous thing—it should do nothing but protect people in its bailiwick from physical coercion.

What does that imply? It implies a police force to protect you from coercion within its boundaries, an army to protect you from coercion from outsiders, and a court system to allow you to adjudicate disputes without resorting to coercion.

I could live happily with a government that did just those things. Unfortunately the US Government is only marginally competent in providing services in those three areas. Instead, it tries to do everything else.

The argument can be made that the largest criminal entity today is not some Colombian cocaine gang, it’s the US Government. And they’re far more dangerous. They have a legal monopoly to do anything they want with you. Don’t conflate the government with America—it’s a separate entity, with its own interests, as distinct as General Motors or the Mafia. I’d rather deal with the Mafia than I would with any agency of the US Government.

Even under the worst circumstances, even if the Mafia controlled the United States, I can’t believe Tony Soprano or Al Capone would try to steal 40% of people’s income from them every year. They couldn’t get away with it. But—perhaps because we’re said to be a democracy—the US Government is able to masquerade as “We the People.” That’s an anachronism, at best. The US has mutated into a domestic multicultural empire.

The average person has been propagandized into believing that it’s patriotic to do as he’s told. “We have to obey libraries of regulations, and I’m happy to pay my taxes. It’s the price we pay for civilization.” No, that’s just the opposite of the fact. Those things are a sign that civilization is degrading, that the society is becoming less individually responsible, and has to be held together by force.

It’s all about control. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. The type of people that gravitate to government like to control other people. Contrary to what we’re told to think, that’s why you get the worst people—not the best—who want to get into government.

What about voting? Can that change and improve things? Unlikely. I can give you five reasons why you should not vote in an election (see this article). See if you agree.

Hark back to the ’60s when they said, “Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?” But let’s take it further: Suppose they gave a tax and nobody paid? Suppose they gave an election and nobody voted? What that would do is delegitimize government.

I applaud the fact that only half of Americans vote. If that number dropped to 25%, 10%, then 0%, perhaps everybody would look around and say, “Wait a minute, none of us believe in this evil charade. I don’t like Tweedledee from the left wing of the Demopublican Party any more than I like Tweedledum from its right wing…”

Remember you don’t get the best and the brightest going into government. There are two kinds of people. You’ve got people that like to control physical reality—things. And people that like to control other people. That second group, those who like to lord it over their fellows, are drawn to government and politics.

Some might ask: “Aren’t you loyal to America?” and “How can you say these terrible things?” My response is, “Of course I’m loyal to America, but America is an idea, it’s not a place. At least not any longer…”

America was once unique among the world’s countries. Unfortunately that’s no longer the case. The idea is still unique, but the country no longer is.

I’ll go further than that. It’s said that you’re supposed to be loyal to your fellow Americans. Well, here’s a revelation. I have less in common with my average fellow American than I do with friends of mine in the Congo, or Argentina, or China.

The reason is that I share values with my friends; we look at the world the same way, have the same worldview. But what do I have in common with my fellow Americans who live in the trailer parks, barrios, and ghettos? Or even Hollywood, Washington, and Manhattan? Everyone has to be judged as an individual, but probably very little besides residing in the same political jurisdiction. Most of them—about 50% of the US—are welfare recipients, and therefore an active threat. So I have more personal loyalty to the guys in the Congo than I do to most of my fellow Americans. The fact we carry US passports is simply an accident of birth.

Those who find that thought offensive likely suffer from a psychological aberration called “nationalism”; in serious cases it may become “jingoism.” The authorities and the general public prefer to call it “patriotism.” It’s understandable, though. Everyone, including the North Koreans, tends to identify with the place they were born. But these things should be fairly low on any list of virtues.

Nationalism is the belief that my country is the best country in the world just because I happen to have been born there. It’s most virulent during wars and elections. And it’s very scary. It’s like watching a bunch of chimpanzees hooting and panting at another tribe of chimpanzees across the watering hole. I have no interest in being a part of the charade—although that’s dangerous.

And getting more dangerous as the State grows more powerful. The growth of the State is actually destroying society. Over the last 100 years the State has grown at an exponential rate, and it’s the enemy of the individual. I see no reason why this trend, which has been in motion and accelerating for so long, is going to stop. And certainly no reason why it’s going to reverse.

It’s like a giant snowball that’s been rolling downhill from the top of the mountain. It could have been stopped early in its descent, but now the thing is a behemoth. If you stand in its way you’ll get crushed. It will stop only when it smashes the village at the bottom of the valley.

This makes me quite pessimistic about the future of freedom in the US. As I said, it’s been in a downtrend for many decades. But the events of September 11, 2001, turbocharged the acceleration of the loss of liberty in the US. At some point either foreign or domestic enemies will cause another 9/11, either real or imagined. It’s predictable; that’s what sociopaths do.

When there is another 9/11—and we will have another one—they’re going to lock down this country like one of their numerous new prisons.

It’s going to become very unpleasant in the US at some point soon. It seems to me the inevitable is becoming imminent.

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Anchor tag jump point

The 522 page philosophy book about natural law, that I wrote in less than one minute

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 06:26:44 GMT

Click to read cross-post

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Original video on brighteon

Mark Passio interview with Mike Adams

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Sun, 30 Jun 2024 04:12:40 GMT

Mark’s first ever interview with fellow freedom fighter, Mike Adams of www.brighteon.com. No commentary needed by me.

transcriptions 4 study","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) -> transcriptions 4 study

The Real 7 Deadly sins

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Thu, 23 May 2024 00:58:01 GMT

GOTO Introduction","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Skip preamble-> GOTO Introduction

There sometimes seems to be a bug that suppresses the picture-in-picture (PIP) feature when accessing this website indirectly through a link. The PIP feature is normally available in the bottom right corner of the above video.

Also, the substack app seems to suppress the PIP feature much of the time, so I don’t suggest using the substack app, but rather directly access this site through a web browser, WITHOUT clicking a link. Simply type whatonearthishappening.wtf into the browser URL and PIP should work.

Using the PIP feature is the best way to assimilate this site’s information, IMHO, because you can scroll the video with you, as you read along. NOTE: you must also have PIP feature turned on in the settings for your browser.

Download from WOEIH.COM

7 Deadly Sins

122KB ∙ PDF file

ACTUAL PRESENTATION STARTS AFTER THE ORANGE IMAGE LABELED “START OF PRESENTATION”

NOTE: clicking the below underlined text links jumps up and down the Table of Contents (TOC). Please be patient, as there can be several seconds delay each way. 

Also note that clicking the underlined timestamp links will forward the video to that spot BUT you will have to manually re-position to the text spot you desire. 

Finally, there is a bug in the underlined timestamp links, because they only work properly on desktop and/or laptops.

1) (00:00:35) Name of presentation and caveats

2) (00:05:33) Implications of the Real 7 Deadly sins

There is such a thing as sin and some are more deadly than others.

3) (00:09:40) Definition of sin

Sin as transgression against divine law.

4) (00:11:23) Natural law

Brief review of natural law

5) (00:14:18) Law of Freedom

As morality increases, freedom increases; as morality decreases, freedom decreases.

6) (00:17:45) Apophatic definition of rights

Define the small amount of wrongs, and automatically everything else is rights.

7) (00:23:48) Religion as deception

The so-called 7 deadly sins: pride, gluttony, sloth, lust, anger, jealousy, and greed. Religion gives us false definitions of immoral behavior to confuse about objective morality and natural law, to hold back consciousness. These are 7 vices because you do it to yourself. Sin is transgression against another sentient being.

8) (00:33:48) The real 7 deadly sins

Vices cannot compare to the societal damage caused by the true 7 deadly sins that initiate harm to other sentient beings: murder, assault, rape, theft, trespass, coercion and deception.

9) (00:42:40) All “sins” are a form of theft

Theft includes coercion, because that is stealing a person’s free will decision, and deception is stealing a person’s access to true information to make informed decisions, etc… and all 7 deadly sins steal something from others.

INTRODUCTION

Welcome one and all. I'm Mark Passio of whatonearthishappening.com. It's a pleasure to be speaking here at the Freedom Under Natural Law III Conference. I want to say thank you to Will Keller and all of the other organizers of this great event, and thank you to the other speakers for making this a really incredible event focused on natural law, objective morality, the occult, and many other absolutely vital topics for us to understand at this point in human history.

(00:00:35) Today my presentation is entitled, “The Real Seven Deadly Sins”.

And I am emphasizing the word real, because there are, of course, false, deadly, so-called sins that we are told are the true seven deadly sins, the true transgressions that we could perform upon our fellow men and women, when in fact this is highly misleading and creates a lot of moral confusion in the population.

This is a topic that I have been wanting to discuss and formalize for actually quite some time. So the Freedom Under Natural Law III Conference presented this opportunity, and I think it's a perfect opportunity to expound on this very important topic.

So let's jump into the presentation. As always, I begin my presentations with simple caveats for new viewers to my work to attempt to understand. The first thing is, many people will say, “Well, there’s nothing really truly new here. This is all things that have existed.” And I fully agree.

Nobody should be expecting anything new at this point. Tyranny is ancient. Slavery is ancient. The real new thing is the idea of freedom, and unfortunately it has not manifested in our world yet.

So, I always begin by telling people, you will not be seeing or hearing anything new presented here today. This is simply the truth that has always existed. As the ancient saying goes in many different mystery traditions, there is nothing new under the sun. And what that statement means is that truth is objective and eternal. It has always been here, and it will always be here. It is for us to recognize, and unfortunately, since we haven't yet recognized it as a species, nothing truly new is happening here on our planet, under the sun, here on Earth.

You know, all I can do as a public presenter is apply my own personalized framework and personalized aesthetics to concepts and ideas that can help get them across better and help get them across to people in an interesting way and in a way that looks attractive so people will be more liable to pay attention to it.

So that's my job here and that's what I attempt to do, but if you're expecting anything brand new you're going to be disappointed because this is truth that has always been here among us as human beings for us to recognize.

The second caveat that I always give before delivering the body of a presentation is that if you're an easily offended human being, this information is probably not for you. If you hear more of the tone that something is delivered with and the style rather than the meat of the ideas, rather than the moral of the story, so to speak, then you’re thinking from an emotional standpoint. You’re trying to think and reason with your emotions, and thinking and reasoning doesn’t actually work that way. You’re prone to what I call emotional mind control or heart control, and that's the problem with a lot of people.

So I always give this caveat before I begin, that my presentation style is often very abrasive. It's often intense and at times even combative framework toward the viewer. That's because I recognize a lot of people are under influence of their own thoughts through their emotions. So I deliberately choose not to sugarcoat my words and not to sugarcoat my delivery. And that means some people who will watch this might become angered and offended by it. Oh well, that's your problem, so be it.

That will never make what I'm about to say untrue. I'm going to speak the truth in this presentation, and the truth remains the truth regardless of what anyone thinks about it. Truth, by its very nature, is actually a belligerent energy, because it wages war against all the forms of false indoctrination and mind control that we've been through in our lives. And, therefore, truth can be a very difficult thing for people to hear and digest and come to a true understanding of.

Nonetheless, that's what you're going to hear today, and I'm not going to sugarcoat the delivery of that truth. I'm going to say it plainly and out in the open, as if you're an intelligent adult human being that's psychologically mature and able to receive the truth, whether that's the actual target audience or not. So let's jump in to the material.

(00:05:33) The first thing, if we're talking about the real seven deadly sins, that implies a few things.

That implies, number one, that there is such a thing as quote-unquote sin. And the second thing is that it implies that there is a false definition of the deadly sins, or sin in general.

So the first thing I like to do when I'm fleshing out a presentation, and since the subtitle of this year's Funnel Conference is the Trivium, is we have to establish grammar. Grammar is the first step of the trivium, followed by logic. I'm going to present the true seven deadly sins and the false ones from a perspective of pure logic, the second stage of the trivium. But the first stage is going to be how we have to establish the grammar in the trivium process, and that means we have to set definitions for the words that we're about to use.

So let's define sin. I went to the Oxford English Dictionary for a decent definition of the word sin, and I was surprised that it actually gave a very good definition. So I used it here to start the slides. Their definition of sin is an immoral act that is considered to be a transgression against divine law.

Obviously this is from a somewhat religious definition of the word sin. I generally don't use the term sin when talking about the violations of natural law, which we will get into, that do comprise transgressions against other sentient beings. I tend to just call them harmful behaviors. But since we're talking about the real seven deadly sins in this presentation, as opposed to the false ones, I wanted to give a textbook definition of what is generally considered to be sin or sinful behavior. And I thought that this definition was actually very well constructed, hence I'm using it to define sin moving forward in this presentation.

Sin is defined as an immoral act that is a transgression against divine law. So let's define some of the parts of that definition. The word immoral, an immoral act.

Immoral simply means in conflict with moral principles, or wrong, meaning a wrongdoing. Again, something that is not a right, something that initiates harm against other sentient beings. That's what an immoral behavior is, and in the usage as an adjective it simply means that it is in conflict with what is right, it is in conflict with the general principles of true objective morality.

Then the word transgression, which was used in that definition of sin given by the Oxford English Dictionary. The word transgression simply means an act that goes against a law, an offense of some type. Again, very simple, very accurate definition to be used going forward in the subject material when we use the word sin. This is what we're really talking about.

So I think those establish the definition pretty succinctly of what sin is considered to be. So I have no problem with any aspects of those definitions. What I have a problem with is what religiosity, what major world religions, what most religious people consider sin to be in the world, because I think it's a very false definition of the behaviors that they categorize as sin. And what that does is that paints in people's mind a very inaccurate picture of what true wrongdoing is.

Then they don't understand what wrongdoing is, and they're more susceptible not only to perform wrongdoing, but to condone others doing wrongdoing. Okay?

So that's why it's so important to truly establish definitions of what we're talking about, then move forward with an understanding of, let's understand how certain categories of behaviors fall in line with this definition, or do not fall in line with it. So let's move on to the next slide.

(00:09:40) What we're talking about here overall, moving forward, is sin is transgression against divine law.

And again, if you don't like the term divine law, use the term the laws of God, the laws of the Creator. I call it natural law in all of my work. It's moral law, it's the laws that define true and objective morality. These are the laws of cause and effect, because they actually bring a result into the human experience when we behave either in alignment with them or out of alignment with them.

Some people have called this consequentialism. Some people have called this karma. Probably the oldest name for it is karma, coming from the ancient Indus Valley traditions of what it means to conduct action in the world. Karma actually means action, and then the result that you get from the taking of that action.

So, I find this to be purely in alignment with the correct definition of what would be considered sin, and very much in alignment with natural law principles. So let’s move on and talk about natural law.

Now, of course, we can't define every aspect of natural law here in this presentation. I took about eight and a half hours to do that in my natural law seminar. So, let's just do a brief review of what natural law is, because this is what karma is. This is what the laws of cause and effect are. This is what God's law, or the Creator's law, is. This is universal law, what we're talking about here, that sin is a transgression against.

(00:11:23) So, as a general definition, as a working definition, natural law is a set of universal, inherent, objective, non-man-made, eternal and immutable conditions which govern the consequences of behaviors of beings with the capacity for understanding the difference between harmful and non-harmful behavior.

So it's universal, everywhere present, no matter where you go in the universe. Inherent. That means it's part of nature. It's actually embedded in the fabric of reality. It is not a constructural idea in the mind. It's objective. That means it's not based on human opinion or perception. It's not subjective. It's non-man-made. This is not made by any human beings. It is not made by society. It is not made by any groups of people. It is made by the universe itself. It is eternal. It exists for as long as the universe exists. It is immutable. It can never be changed by any action of anyone or anything.

And they are conditions which govern the consequences of behaviors. These are moral consequences that we receive when we act either in alignment with the laws of morality, or out of alignment with the laws of morality. The understanding of natural law is centered upon bringing our own conscience, our knowledge of the difference between right and wrong, into alignment with objective morality. It's choosing moral behavior over immoral behavior. That is what it means to bring our behavior into alignment with morality.

So, to do that means definitively knowing which behaviors are rights, because they do not initiate harm to other sentient beings, and knowing which behaviors are wrongdoings, because they do initiate harm to other sentient beings. And as we will see, that's the very definition of right and wrong.

The problem is, most people don't understand that. They have completely falsified notions and ideas and conceptual constructs in the mind of what right and wrong actually are. And I'm going to prove that objectively with data from social experiments that we did. I'll present those results in a moment.

So how does natural law actually function in the world? Well, when human beings in the aggregate, in the collective, actually live in harmony with natural law, and are therefore considered to be acting morally in the aggregate, they become and remain free. This is how the laws of consequence of behavior work.

When human beings in the aggregate, in the collective overall, live in opposition to natural law, and are therefore, overall, immoral as a species, they will become and remain enslaved. This is what I personally refer to as the law of freedom, this dynamic of natural law I call the law of freedom.

(00:14:18) And here it is stated very simply, as morality increases, freedom increases, and as morality declines, freedom declines.

This is how entire civilizations either create a situation in which they live in freedom and harmony and peace together, or a civilization creates the situation that we are in right now. Tyranny, covert enslavement, moving toward overt enslavement, and ultimately extinction, if the cycle continues and we do not better ourselves and therefore better our condition as a species. That's what natural law is, that's how natural law works in our world.

So this brings us to the crux of the matter in understanding sin, what are rights, what is an actual human right? A sin is something that we do not have the right to perform. We don’t have the right to conduct sin without negative karmic consequence. So if we know what our rights are by knowing what comprises sin, what are the wrongdoings, which we're going to get to, then we will create freedom when we behave in alignment with those laws of morality in the aggregate.

Defining a right is one of the most important things we can do, and unfortunately it's one of the things our society fails miserably at, and I'm proving that with social experiment results that we conducted back four years ago in 2019. But nothing has really changed since then. You could do it today and get the same results. I guarantee you will get the same results unless you're doing it in a highly, in a concentration of highly enlightened beings, which is a rarity to even have that assembled anywhere in human society. But if you're in an environment such as that, yes, you'll probably get skewed results.

If you go out on any given street corner in any major city in America, you'll get these results. I guarantee you'll get these results. So we define a right in the correct way. A right is an action that does not initiate harm to another sentient being. You are not beginning harming someone else. If you don't do that, there will be no problem, there will be no trouble, there will be no sin.

Therefore there will be no negative karmic consequence in the form of tyranny and enslavement, when all of humanity conducts their affairs that way and then condones other people doing that type of violence, which is where we're at now.

So we did a social experiment in the year 2019, and the results that we got is that no one we asked out of the hundreds of people that we asked could correctly define what a human right is. Zero, out of all the people that we've ever asked. And this is anywhere we did it, any city in the United States, or actually anywhere else. I haven't done it outside of the United States, but I guarantee you if you did it outside the United States, you're going to get the same results.

No one could correctly give the definition of what a right is. Now, my question in response to that is always the same. If you cannot correctly define a right, how could you possibly ever expect to be able to keep your rights from being stripped away from you? If you don't even know what they are, how are you going to know that they've been stolen from you? See, this is the problem in ignorance that we have in human society today.

(00:17:45) So in the defining of a right, we actually immediately define the wrongdoings, because we're defining the right in the negative, or the apophatic definition.

In theology, when you study things from the perspective of what they are not, this is called apophysis, or apophatic inquiry. A very interesting topic to look into from theological schools of thought.

So we're defining a right in the negative, or an apophatic definition. A right is an action that does not initiate harm to another's sentient beings. By definition, from that grammar, using the trivium, we could easily see that what are wrongs, then.

True wrongdoings are actions which do initiate harm to other sentient beings. Very simple. We're just inverting the definition of a right. If a right is an action that does not initiate harm, wrongdoings are actions that do initiate harm to other sentient beings. This is almost kindergarten level logic here. Right? It's very simple, it's very non-complex, it's very easy to understand. Most people should understand it.

Unfortunately, the mind control, the social engineering, the brainwashing, the conditioning that they've been through since they've basically come out of their mother's womb is so colossal that they cannot even grasp simple definitions such as this. And they want to overly complexify things.

It's very simple. I didn't say aligning our behavior to it is necessarily easy, but the definitions are quite simple, if we're being honest with ourselves.

So, moving forward, if this is the simple, natural law definition of what wrongdoings are, then we have to look at what we've been told about what the seven deadly sins actually are. Because so many people have this in their religious programming, that they believe morality is something other than what it is, and that's the problem.

Then it paints a bad idea when someone's trying to talk about morality, because people who have been so inculcated with false definitions from religion carry that into their understanding of what's going on in the world, and of natural law and of true objective morality, and then they confuse the two, they conflate the two, and it brings a bad name to people who are trying to really explain how natural law and morality and freedom are inseparably interconnected. That's why this is such an important topic, to get right.

So I felt it was so important. I have to go back to things like what I presented in my Fake Ass Christians presentation. I actually brought out the quote mascot, this religionist, this dark evil priest who's really giving people false religion and it's really coming from the dark occultists of our world.

Again, he's basically giving people a false version of morality, telling people he's the intercessor between God and man, God and humanity, and kiss his hand, why don't you? This is the attitude that really any clergy and priest class take. I'm better than you, I'm more moral than you, I'm closer to God than you. You have to use me as an intercessor between you and God, an intermediary, a middleman.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It's all toxic and poisonous from a true spiritual perspective and real spirituality. And I feel it's so important I brought him back into this presentation and I want to redefine the word religion as a form of mind control that holds us back from evolving in consciousness, that holds us back from the recognition of truth and objective morality and natural law.

The word religion itself is etymologically derived from the Latin verb religare meaning to tie back, to hold back from forward progress, to bind. It is occult binding, it is a spell. And again, this is all religion, not just cultural religions, not just Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. You can name all of the cultural religions of the world, but there are still other religions.

There's the belief in authority, that's one of the biggest religions on earth. There's the belief in government. There's worshipping money, there's worshipping “science”, even though it's all basically government grant money funded science. It's not true investigation into truth of how the laws of reality really work. And there's many, many, many others.

People can make all sorts of false idols, they can make all sorts of things to turn into religion and pure identity of self that they then cling to mercilessly with religious fervor. We're talking about religion from the point of view of it holds people back from an accurate understanding of truth, regardless of what the topic that we're talking about is. It doesn't have to be cultural religious ideas.

So, in most cultural religions, however, they give us a false definition of morality. This is why so many people are confused. This is why people don't understand objective morality. It's largely due to religious beliefs, religiosity.

By providing these false definitions of immoral action, religion ultimately holds humanity back from a correct understanding of natural law and true objective moral principles.

This is why we're heading into tyranny and bondage and slavery. We don't have accurate definitions of morality, we don't have the truth when it comes to what is an immoral behavior versus what are moral behaviors.

Religion is not helping with this task of unraveling this and coming to a correct understanding of it. It's actually acting as a block to humanity's forward progress in the understanding of objective morality, and that's why I think it does so much harm in society.

(00:23:48) So the seven deadly sins of “religion” in the Roman Catholic ideology are as follows: pride, gluttony, sloth, lust, anger, jealousy, and greed.

And if we look at these, it is not behaviors that we would say we necessarily want to dwell in, live in continually, constantly engage, make the driving impetus of our lives. I would be the last person to say, just go and recklessly engage in these types of behaviors ceaselessly. You'd have to be a fool to condone that, right?

So I'm not saying that these are good things to perpetually behave in this modality of consciousness. However, I am taking exception to calling these things sin.

See, this is where religionists who have been indoctrinated and inculcated into their mind-control belief system would take exception to what I'm saying. I'm trying to tell people that these are not sins in and of themselves.

If we constantly lived in these modes of consciousness, they could be an impetus for us to begin conducting real sin. In and of themselves they are not sin per se, and this is where the logic of the trivium has to come into play, you see, because if we can't apply the logical transforms to understand that these are behaviors that are conducted upon the self, not others, the definition of a sin, again, a transgression against natural law, is an action that does initiate harm against another sentient being, meaning they can't be actions that we perform to ourselves.

If we do it to ourselves, it can't be defined as a sin. It is a vice. That is the difference between a vice and a sin.

Roman Catholic ideology in particular, and in general, most of the Christian religious tradition, what I call churchianity. It is not true esoteric Christianity, but churchianity. They give us these false definitions of sin, and in telling us that these are immoral behaviors in and of themselves, it leads to all kinds of confusion in the general population about morality.

Then when someone like myself comes along and says, hey folks, morality is intimately and inextricably interconnected with human freedom. You get a bunch of people that go, “Here’s another religious nutter”. No, this isn’t religion. This is a science defined by the Trivium Method to help people understand objective morality so that they create freedom instead of tyranny. That’s what the understanding of natural law is, a science.

In that sense, I’m a moral scientist. I'm not a religionist. I think religion is the root of our problems, and religious thinking needs to go away if we're going to evolve as a species. So please don't confuse what I'm saying with religion, just because I'm talking about objective morality.

Objective morality is a scientific understanding, not a religious belief. And we're going to prove this here. So let's look at these behaviors in turn, from a logical point of view. Here we're applying the transforms of step two of the Trivium process, logic. Okay?

So let's look at each behavior in turn. Is pride a behavior we do to someone else? Once again, you wouldn't want to constantly dwell in the modality of counterproductive pride, like thinking that you're way better than you're actually are you're actually doing in the world right. That's not going to motivate you to do any better. But if you have done really well from an objective point of view and you you have gotten what you want accomplished and you've done it to the best of your ability and it's very well done, even from other people's perspective uh... at you know assessing it all together just about having agreement universally that you've done a brilliant job. You could take pride in that work. It's something that is not necessarily the initiation of any harmful thing against another.

Counterproductive pride, you're going to basically diminish what you could be doing better. That's why there's a good form of pride, there's a bad form of pride. But I don't think anybody disputes that this is an internal emotion that one feels toward oneself. We're just applying this simple logic. Is this done toward the self internally? Is it an emotion that exists purely internally within the self? Or is it an action, a behavior that you do outside of yourself toward someone else?

I don't think anybody's going to say that pride itself is something that you do to someone else. It is an emotion. Pride is a noun, it's not a behavior, it's not a verb.

So let's look at gluttony. Gluttony is overindulgence in food. That's self-indulgence. That's something you do to yourself that could be a vice. You could get sick, you could get heavy and overweight and out of shape and in bad health. All kinds of bad things can come out of gluttony.

If I am gluttonous one day of the year, or maybe two or three, it's not going to undermine my health necessarily, right? So, it's like just engaging in that behavior is not doing something harmful to someone else. You could potentially, if it's overboard, do harm to the self, but your body is your property, as long as you're not forcing food down someone else's throat in too large of an amount when they're telling you they don't want that done to themselves, then it's not a harmful action against others.

We can continue down the line. Sloth, by definition, is inaction. It's the state of inaction. It's laziness. Now you could say, well, maybe not taking any action when someone's actually being, having violence conducted upon them, you're sort of complicit with the violence. That's a rare exception to the rule. Sloth just generally means you're lazy, you're in a state of inaction, you're not actively harming someone else.

Lust, again, it's an internal emotion. The desire for sex, the desire to perceive others in a sexual way too much. Right? Lust, is an internal emotion. It's not a behavior that you're doing to someone else. Rape, if you went overboard with lust and then said, I'm just going to rape somebody because, you know, I feel like I have the right to engage in sexual activity with them without their consent, no, that's a crime. That's a transgression against natural law. Lust in and of itself, an internal emotion, not an outward behavior toward others, so it cannot be a transgression against others.

Anger, again an internal emotion, different kinds of anger, anger over trivialities and nonsensical things, just because you want to placate your emotions or rage against something that isn't even really truly important in the world, just from your own whims, that's counterproductive anger.

Righteous indignation about a matter of true justice in our world, that's a righteous form of anger that could compel someone to then take true, right action against injustices and iniquities in our world. So, anger could be a positive thing, but again, I don't think anyone would argue it's not an act against others. It's an internal emotion.

Jealousy, the same thing. Another internal emotion. I could be jealous of someone else's skill sets as a presenter and say, boy, I wish I had that ability. Boy, I wish I had that that knowledge and know how. Boy, I wish I could present like that and make slides like that. That's just an internal emotion. They might never even know that I'm jealous of them. And it could compel me to go and do good things. Right.

So bad jealousy is like you're worried about trivial things, you're just wanting what other people have just because they have it and you don't, and just physical possessions. And it's like, then, okay, if it leads to you going and saying, I'm going to take something from someone else, well then that's theft, then that's a transgression. But the internal emotion of jealousy itself is not a sin, it cannot be, because it's not even an action. Jealousy is an emotion, it's not an action.

This is where the confusion of emotion and action comes into play, and that plays such a big role in how our society doesn't understand true morality.

And then greed, another form of self-indulgence, like gluttony, right? But just with things and possessions. And again, that is a form of a behavior, but it's not an action that's taken against others.

We have to understand, if we are doing these behaviors to ourselves, they are vices. These are definitions of vices, of specific instances of vices, and there's many others. But vices themselves are not immoral acts against others. This is something, again, you wouldn't want to dwell in all the time, that might debauch and debase the self, but it's still not violence against others, it's not violating anyone else's natural rights.

So let's look at the real seven deadly sins, the heart of the entire presentation here. What does constitute violations of natural law and others' rights? Look at the qualitative difference in the words. The words, pride, gluttony, sloth, lust, anger, jealousy, and greed, compared to the real seven deadly sins.

(00:33:48) The false seven deadly sins don't even rate when it comes to the level of harm and evil that results from these types of behaviors, the real seven deadly sins, the real violations of natural law: murder, assault, rape, theft, trespass, coercion and deception.

I think anyone logically even looking at the qualitative difference between the vices versus the real sins, if they're being honest with themselves, is going to realize there's zero comparison. These are the real deal when it comes to harm. And they all share one basic thing in common.

So let's look at some of these from a logical perspective. We're going to look at what is the act of murder, just like we look at what is pride, what is taking pride in oneself. What is gluttony? What is sloth? What is lust? And on.

So, let's look at these in turn. A very logical procedure. The part of the trivium process we're engaging here is we're asking the question, who, what, and then eventually we come to how and why. We're looking at why these now are actual transgressions against others, because something has to be done in order for a transgression against someone else to have taken place. Not thought, not felt, but acted upon. That's why sins are actions. Sins aren't thoughts, sins aren't emotions, sins are actions.

And, you know, quite frankly, I really shouldn't have to even explain this to people who say that they're people who are spiritual, slash, even religious, people who want to take the laws of the Creator into the universe. This should be common sense, you know, and that's the definition of conscience. Conscience literally means common sense, when we etymologically break it down into con, meaning together, or with, and science, meaning to know, or to understand.

And this is the problem, we've lost the common sense of what the true sins are, what violations against natural law are. And that's why we do them and we continue to condone when other people do them, namely when government performs these behaviors. We say, that's perfectly justifiable and acceptable because they have some kind of magical rights that everyone else doesn't have, or we, not having those rights, have delegated them to this group of people who now magically have turned wrongs into rights.

It's utter ridiculous religious nonsense, of course, and this is how people have to come to perceive it. So let's look at these in turn from the logic perspective of the trivium.

Murder is the theft of life without having the right to take someone else's life. There is such a thing as the rightful ability to kill in self-defense, but that is not murder. That is a killing done in self-defense. When we talk about murder, it is the theft of life without right.

So you have stolen something that doesn't belong to you, namely the life of another being, when you did not have the right to do that. That's what murder is. Assault is the theft of well-being without right. Now, if I defend myself against assault, that's not assault. That's the right of self-defense, being engaged with.

So again, you can't do murder, but you can kill in self-defense. You can't do assault, but you can defend yourself with physical force in self-defense.

The next wrongdoing under natural law, the next sinful behavior is rape. Again, like we said, lust is an inward emotion, but rape is an external action done to another. That's the theft of sexual association that one has the right to engage with.

So you're taking another form of property from someone else, like their life, their well-being, and now their sexual association.

Simple theft, the act of taking something that doesn't belong to you, is the unrightful taking of someone else's property. Again, you're taking something that doesn't belong to you.

Trespass, you're taking security of another being within their living domain, their living space, their rightful property. That's the theft of someone else's security. You're taking something that doesn't belong to you.

Coercion. That's the theft of someone else's free will to make their own decisions in life, so long as their actions are not harming other people. This is what government always advocates for. This is what the supporters of government always advocate for, the taking of someone else's free will when they have not harmed someone else.

Coercion and duress are threats of violence if you don't comply to the commands of another claiming to be the authority over you. That's theft of free will. That's one of the most important ones in the seven deadly sins that unfortunately goes largely unrecognized in our world, and not seen as a sin, and unfortunately condoned by people who consider themselves, people who are saying that they want to follow the laws of the Creator.

And then finally we have deception, the theft of someone else's informed decision-making, because you're giving them false information, misinformation, lies, and willingly doing that, knowing that they're false and misleading, so that someone else makes incorrect decisions.

And that is the commonality between all of the wrongdoings listed. From a logical perspective, they all share one common characteristic. You're taking something, by engaging in those behaviors, you are taking something that does not belong to you rightfully. You are stealing, you are engaging in theft.

Theft is the root of all sin. If theft is not taking place, there is no transgression taking place. And this is a very difficult one for most people to see. It's because they haven't logically thought it through with the trivium process to a great enough extent.

And this is the crux of the entire presentation, folks. Religious people want to say that things are immoral, when, if that behavior has been engaged in and conducted, nothing has been stolen.

One of the examples I always give, even though I don't engage in it, and it's not my preference, homosexuality is a right. To say that someone cannot engage in a consensual behavior with another adult is trying to coerce them against their free will. Whether you like the behavior or not, whether it suits you, whether you find it comfortable or something that is within your preferences, it doesn't matter how you want to word it. It's not somebody doing something harmful to someone else. So it can't be considered immoral.

Immoral means someone's rights are being violated. So, in a consensual sexual act between homogenous beings in gender, how could it be an immoral act?

It's immoral only when it's forced upon another, when it's initiated without consent. If it's consensual between adults, it's a moral behavior, because that's the definition of morality, an action that does not initiate harm against another.

Rape is not simple homosexual behavior. If one man rapes another man, that's rape. If one man rapes a woman, that's rape. If a woman rapes a woman, that's rape. The act is non-consensual. The act is initiating harm against another. That's rape. Any form of consensual sexuality between two people, that's a right.

Religionists can get as upset as they want about that. You're still wrong. The problem is people don't understand the actual breakdown of what moral behavior means versus what it's not. That's the problem.

So since theft is the root of anything that is an immoral behavior, what by definition, from a logical standpoint, must be the root of virtue? The understanding of property.

(00:42:40) Property and its understanding is the root of all virtuous behavior. If we truly understand what we really own versus what we really don't own, most of the violence of the world will go away in the snap of a finger, overnight practically.

This is the problem. People don't understand property and property rights. All rights are property rights. All virtue stems from understanding what our property is versus what it is not.

So ultimately, in the very end analysis, in our rhetoric, we did the grammar stage of the trivium in the first part of the presentation, the logic stage in the middle, and this has to be our rhetoric. This has to define our behavior moving forward if we truly understand what the real seven deadly sins are and what the real transgressions against natural law truly are.

Ultimately learning and applying objective morality and natural law is 100% entirely about understanding what one's rightful property truly is, versus what one's rightful property absolutely and definitively is not.

The understanding of rights all stems from the understanding of property, and that's why the word proper or rightful is in the word property. And the suffix "-ty", etymologically, if you research it, actually means power, true power.

True power stemming from what is right, literally is what the word property means, if you break it down etymologically. Which is why the understanding of words is beautiful, because it helps us to really understand what they mean in spirit.

If we fully understand and value our rightful property, then we will naturally extend that accurate understanding to the property of all other sentient beings. We will not violate their life, we will not violate their rights, we will not violate their freedom, we will not violate their property rights. We will not coerce them, we will not deceive them, we will not steal from them, we will not diminish them.

That is what our rhetoric is to do. Once we understand, we have the grammar in hand, and we understand logically what rights are and what they are not. Our behaviors have to be brought into alignment with them through a full understanding of property. And in doing so, we will then as a species, hopefully, cease to violate the one true law of morality. Don't steal.

Don't take that which does not belong to you to take. Don't condone it when others are doing it. Then we might move into a free and prosperous world based on real justice, based on natural law.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for your kind attention in this presentation, and I'm very proud to have been part of Funnel 3 this year. Have a good one.

transcriptions 4 study","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) -> transcriptions 4 study

More analysis from stopworldcontrol.com

Anchor tag jump point

Tucker Carlson and Putin discuss natural law, albeit in disguised ways

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Fri, 09 Feb 2024 03:11:49 GMT

Website Author’s opinion: All nation’s break natural law. But I thought Putin’s comment that nobody can compete with America when it comes to propaganda (ie breaking natural law point about willful lying) was funny. Russia lies too and does propaganda. For those who need a review about natural law:

transcriptions 4 study","publication_logo_url":"https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F55373c4d-59c1-431e-91d5-d826714de522_500x500.png","belowTheFold":false,"youtube_url":null,"show_links":null,"feed_url":null}">

Putin also said he can't figure out America, difficult to understand as each state has own laws. This is called moral relativism, and all nations do it. So does Russia. It’s all bullshit. Putin says America bombs and kills as foreign policy (ie breaks natural law about coercion first, and then lack of compliance results in breaking natural law principles about assault/murder). Russia does this too.

While there is lots of breaking of natural law all around, plenty of blame for both sides, I do agree that it is mainly the USSA (i.e. Union of Socialist States of America) that is the most at fault.

I think all countries are fucked and can't be anything but fucked, because none understand natural law and refuse to follow it. 1Mark's philosophy is mostly correct but unrealistic, and I’m starting to realize that it is for the next life. It is most likely NOT the Creator's purpose to bring natural law to earth (ie hell realm) in its fullness.

It doesn't seem realistic that natural law can ever flourish here, but I'd be happy if I am proven wrong.

I'm coming to the conclusion that unless some massive supernatural event happens to dramatically & quickly blast human consciousness upward, Mark's Utopian ideas about 100% natural law being the mission of truthers to bring to earth will never happen. There are things to learn in the process of trying, but I somehow doubt that is/was ever the purpose of this realm. Seems God has easier time creating the entire universe in just 6 days. :-)

As for Putin’s spirituality, I highlight this:

Tucker: So do you see the supernatural at work as you look out across what's happening in the world now? Do you see God at work? (Mark just calls this Being the Creator, but I like Originator-Creator-Oversoul, aka OCO) Do you ever think to yourself, these are forces that are not human?

Vladimir Putin: No, to be honest. I don't think so. My opinion is that the development of the world community is in accordance with inherent laws (ie he means human legal bullshit, NOT OCO’s natural laws), and those laws are what they are (which he has NO clue about). It's always been this way in the history of mankind (yeah and time to fix it). Some nations and countries rose, became stronger and more numerous and then left the international stage, losing the status they had accustomed to (yes perhaps the USSA will fall soon like USSR did in 1991). There's probably no need for me to give examples, but we could start with Genghis Khan and horde conquers, the Golden Horde and then end with the Roman Empire. It seems that there has never been anything like the Roman Empire in the history of mankind (the Roman system was preserved and pushed by Britain). Nevertheless, the potential of the barbarians gradually grew, as did their population. In general, the barbarians were getting stronger and begun to develop economically, as we would say today. This eventually led to the collapse of the Roman Empire (it still exists but with different names) and the regime imposed by the Romans. However, it took five centuries for the Roman Empire to fall apart. The difference with what is happening now is that all the processes of change are happening had been much faster paced than in Roman times (ie he implies NATO and the west may fall much faster than 5 centuries, and he may be right, but it is still all by design).

Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin. You can also watch the on Tucker’s website.

Tucker: The following is an interview with the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Shot February 6th, 2024, at about 7 p.m in the building behind us, which is, of course, the Kremlin. The interview, as you will see if you watch it, is primarily about the war in progress, the war in Ukraine, how it started, what's happening, and most pressingly how it might end. One note before you watch. At the beginning of the interview, we asked the most obvious question, which is why did you do this? Did you feel a threat, an imminent physical threat, and that's your justification. And the answer we got shocked us. Putin went on for a very long time, probably half an hour, about the history of Russia going back to the eighth century. And honestly, we thought this was a filibustering technique and found it annoying and interrupted him several times, and he responded. He was annoyed by the interruption. But we concluded in the end, for what it's worth, that it was not a filibustering technique. There was no time limit on the interview. We ended it after more than two hours. Instead, what you're about to see seemed to us sincere whether you agree with it or not. Vladimir Putin believes that Russia has a historic claim to parts of western Ukraine. So our opinion would be to view it in that light as a sincere expression of what he thinks. And with that, here it is.

Tucker: Mr. President, thank you. On February 22nd, 2022, you addressed your country in a nationwide address when the conflict in Ukraine started, and you said that you were acting because you had come to the conclusion that the United States, through NATO, might initiate a, quote, surprise attack on our country and too American ears, that sounds paranoid. Tell us why you believe the United States might strike Russia out of the blue. How did you conclude that?

Vladimir Putin: It's not that America, the United States was going to launch a surprise strike on Russia. I didn't say that. Are we having a talk show or a serious conversation?

Tucker: Here's the quote. Thank you. It's a formidable serious talk.

Vladimir Putin: Because your basic education is in history, as far as I understand.

Tucker: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: So if you don't mind, I will take only 30 seconds or one minute to give you a short reference to history for giving you a little historical background.

Tucker: Please.

Vladimir Putin: Let's look where our relationship with Ukraine started from. Where did Ukraine come from? The Russian state started gathering itself as a centralized statehood. And it is considered to be the year of the establishment of the Russian state in 862. But when the townspeople of Novgorod invited a Virangian Prince Rurik from Scandinavia to reign. In 1862, Russia celebrated the 1000th anniversary of its statehood. And in Novgorod there is a memorial dedicated to the 1000 anniversary of the country. In 882 Rurik's successor, Prince Oleg, who was actually playing the role of regent at Rurik's young son. Because Rurik had died by that time, came to Kiev. He ousted two brothers who apparently had once been members of Rurik's squad. So Russia began to develop with two centers of power Kiev and Novgorod. The next very significant date in the history of Russia was 988, this was the baptism of Russia when Prince Vladimir, the great grandson of Rurik, baptized Russia and adopted Orthodoxy, or Eastern Christianity. From this time, the centralized Russian state began to strengthen. Why? Because of the single territory. Integrated economic ties. One and the same language. And after the baptism of Russia, the same faith and rule of the Prince, the centralized Russian state began to take shape. Back in the Middle Ages, Prince Yaroslav the Wise introduced the order of succession to a throne. But after he passed away, it became complicated for various reasons. The throne was passed not directly from father to eldest son, but from the prince who had passed away to his brother. Then to his sons in different lines. All this led to the fragmentation and the end of Rus as a single state. There was nothing special about it. The same was happening then in Europe. But the fragmented Russian state became an easy prey to the empire created earlier by Genghis Khan. His successors, namely Batu Khan plundered and ruined nearly all the cities. The southern part, including Kiev, by the way, and some other cities, simply lost independence. While northern cities preserved some of their sovereignty. They had to pay tribute to the horde, but they managed to preserve some part of their sovereignty. And then a unified Russian state began to take shape with its center in Moscow. The southern part of Russian lands, including Kiev begun to gradually gravitate towards another magnet, the center that was emerging in Europe. This was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and it was even called the Lithuanian Russian Duchy because Russians were a significant part of this population. They spoke the old Russian language and were Orthodox. But then there was a unification, the union of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. A few years later. Another union was signed, but this time already in the religious sphere, some of the Orthodox priests became subordinate to the Pope. Thus these lands became part of the Polish-Lithuanian state. During decades the Poles were engaged in colonization of this part of the population. They introduced a language there, tried to entrench the idea that this population was not exactly Russians, that because they lived on the fringe, they were Ukrainians. Originally the word Ukrainian meant that the person was living on the outskirts of the state, along the fringes, or was engaged in a border patrol service. It didn't mean any particular ethnic group. So the poles were trying to, in every possible way, to colonize this part of the Russian lands and actually treated it rather harshly, not to say cruelly, all that led to the fact that this part of the Russian lands began to struggle for their rights. They wrote letters to Warsaw demanding that their rights be observed and people be commissioned here, including to Kiev.

Tucker: I beg your pardon. Could you tell us what period, I'm losing track of where in history, we are in the Polish oppression of Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: It was in the 13th century. Now, I will tell you what happened later. And give the dates so that there is no confusion. And in 1654, even a bit earlier this year. The people who were in control of the authority over that part of the Russian land, addressed war so, I repeat, demanding that they send them to rulers of Russian origin and Orthodox faith. But Warsaw did not answer them, and in fact rejected their demands, they turned to Moscow so that Moscow took them away. So that you don't think that I'm inventing things. I'll give you these documents.

Tucker: Well, I, it doesn't sound like you're inventing. And I'm not sure why it's relevant to what happened two years ago.

Vladimir Putin: But still, these are documents from the archives. Copies. Here's the letters from Bohdan Khmelnytsky, the man who then controlled the power in this part of the Russian lands, that is now called Ukraine. He wrote to Warsaw demanding that their rights be upheld. And after being refused, he began to write letters to Moscow. Asking to take them under the strong hand of the Moscow Tsar. There are copies of these documents. I will leave them for your good memory. There is a translation into Russian. You can translate it into English later. But Russia would not agree to admit them straight away, assuming that the war with Poland would start. Nevertheless, in 1654, the Russian assembly of top clergy and landowners, headed by the Tsar, which was the representative body of the power of the old Russian state, decided to include a part of the old Russian lands into Moscow Kingdom. As expected, the war with Poland began. It lasted 13 years, and then in 1654, a truce was concluded. And 32 years later, I think a peace treaty with Poland, which they called eternal peace, was signed. And these lands, the whole left bank of Dnieper, including Kiev, went to Russia. And the whole right bank of Dnieper remained in Poland. Under the rule of Catharina the Great Russia reclaimed all of its historical lands, including in the south and west, this all lasted until the Revolution. Before World War 1, Austrian General Staff relied on the ideas of Ukrainization, and started actively promoting the ideas of Ukraine and the Ukrainization. The motive was obvious. Just before World War 1, they wanted to weaken the potential enemy and secure themselves favorable conditions in the border area. So the idea which had emerged in Poland, that people residing in that territory were allegedly not really Russians, but rather belong to a special ethnic group, Ukrainians started being propagated by the Austrian General Staff. As far back as the 19th century, theorists calling for Ukrainian independence appeared. All those, however, claimed that Ukraine should have a very good relationship with Russia. They insisted on that. After the 1917 revolution, the Bolsheviks sought to restore the statehood, and the civil war began, including the hostilities with Poland. In 1921, peace with Poland was proclaimed. And under that treaty, the right bank of Dnieper River once again was given back to Poland. In 1939, after Poland cooperated with Hitler. It did collaborate with Hitler, no, Hitler offered Poland peace and a treaty of friendship. An alliance, demanding in return that Poland give back to Germany the so-called Danzig Corridor, which connected the bulk of Germany with East Prussia and Konigsberg. After World War One, this territory was transferred to Poland. And instead of Danzig, a city of Gdasnk emerged. Hitler asked them to give it amicably, but they refused. Of course, still they collaborated with Hitler and engaged together in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia.

Tucker: But may I ask, you're making the case that Ukraine, certainly parts of Ukraine, eastern Ukraine is in effect Russia has been for hundreds of years. Why wouldn't you just take it when you became president 24 years ago? You have nuclear weapons. They don't. It's actually your land. Why did you wait so long?

Vladimir Putin: I'll tell you, I'm coming for that. This briefing is coming to an end. It might be boring, but it explains many things.

Tucker: It's not boring. Just not sure how it's relevant.

Vladimir Putin: Good, good. I'm so gratified that you appreciate that. Thank you. So before World War 2, Poland collaborated with Hitler. And although it did not yield to Hitler's demands, it still participated in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia together with Hitler, as the Poles had not given the Danzig corridor to Germany, and went too far, pushing Hitler to start World War 2 by attacking them. Why was it Poland against whom the war started, on 1st September 1939? Poland turned out to be uncompromising, and Hitler had nothing to do but start implementing his plans with Poland. Sobieski. By the way, the USSR, I have read some archive documents, behaved very honestly, and it asked Poland's permission to transit its troops through the Polish territory to help Czechoslovakia. But the then Polish foreign minister said that if the Soviet planes flew over Poland, they would be downed over the territory of Poland. But that doesn't matter. What matters is that the war begun and Poland fell prey to the policies it had pursued against Czechoslovakia. This under the well known Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, a part of the territory including western Ukraine was to be given to Russia, thus Russia, which was then named the USSR regained its historical lands. After the victory in the Great Patriotic War, as we call World War 2, and all those territories were ultimately enshrined as belonging to Russia, to the USSR. As for Poland, it received, apparently in compensation, the lands which had originally been German. The eastern parts of Germany. These are now western lands of Poland. Of course, Poland regained access to the Baltic Sea and Danzig. Which was once again given its Polish name. So this was how this situation developed. In 1922 when the USSR was being established, the Bolsheviks started building the USSR and established the Soviet Ukraine, which had never existed before.

Tucker: Right.

Vladimir Putin: Stalin insisted that those republics be included in the USSR as autonomous entities. For some inexplicable reason, Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, insisted that they be entitled to withdraw from the USSR. And again, for some unknown reasons, he transferred to that newly established Soviet Republic of Ukraine some of the lands, together with people living there, even though those lands had never been called Ukraine, and yet they were made part of that Soviet Republic of Ukraine. Those lands included the Black Sea region, which was received under Catherine the Great and which had no historical connection with Ukraine whatsoever. Even if we go as far back as 1654, when these lands returned to the Russian Empire. That territory was the size of 3 to 4 regions of modern Ukraine, with no Black Sea region. That was completely out of the question.

Tucker: In 1654.

Vladimir Putin: Exactly.

Tucker: I'm just, you obviously have encyclopedic knowledge of this region. But why didn't you make this case for the first 22 years as president, that Ukraine wasn't a real country?

Vladimir Putin: The Soviet Union was given a great deal of territory that had never belonged to it, including the Black Sea region. At some point when Russia received them as an outcome of the Russo Turkish wars, they were called New Russia or another Russia. But that does not matter. What matters is that Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, established Ukraine that way. For decades, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic developed as part of the USSR. And for unknown reasons, again, the Bolsheviks were engaged in Ukrainization. It was not merely because the Soviet leadership was composed to a great extent of those originating from Ukraine. Rather, it was explained by the general policy of indigenization pursued by the Soviet Union. Same things were done in other Soviet republics. This involved promoting national languages and national cultures, which is not a bad, in principle. That is how the Soviet Ukraine was created. After the World War 2, Ukraine received, in addition to the lands that had belonged to Poland before the war, part of the lands that had previously belonged to Hungary and Romania. So Romania and Hungary had some of their lands taken away and given to the Soviet Ukraine, and they still remain part of Ukraine. So in this sense, we have every reason to affirm that Ukraine is an artificial state that was shaped at Stalin's will.

Tucker: Do you believe Hungary has a right to take its land back from Ukraine, and that other nations have a right to go back to their 1654 borders?

Vladimir Putin: I'm not sure whether they should go back to their 1654 borders. But given Stalin's time, so-called Stalin's regime, which, as many claim, saw numerous violations of human rights and violations of the rights of other states. One can say that they could claim back those lands of theirs while having no right to do that. It is at least understandable.

Tucker: Have you told Viktor Orban that he can have part of Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin: Never. I have never told him. Not a single time. We have not even had any conversation on that. But I actually know for sure that Hungarians who live there wanted to get back to their historical land. Moreover, I would like to share a very interesting story with you. I digress, it's a personal one. Somewhere in the early 80s, I went on a road trip in a car from then Leningrad, across the Soviet Union through Kiev. Made a stop in Kiev and then went to western Ukraine. I went to the town of Beregovoy and all the names of towns and villages there were in Russian and in the language I did not understand in Hungarian, in Russian and in Hungarian. Not in Ukrainian, in Russian and in Hungarian. I was driving through some kind of village, and there were men sitting next to their houses, and they were wearing black three piece suits and black cylinder hats. I asked, are they some kind of entertainers? I was told no, they were not entertainers, they were Hungarians. I said, what are they doing here? What do you mean? This is their land. They live here. This was during the Soviet time in the 1980s. They preserved the Hungarian language, Hungarian names and all their national costumes. They are Hungarians and they feel themselves to be Hungarians. And of course, when now there is an infringement.

Tucker: What that is, and there's a lot of that, though I think many nations are upset about Transylvania as well as you obviously know. But many nations feel frustrated by the redrawn borders of the wars of the 20th century and wars going back a thousand years, the ones that you mentioned. But the fact is that you didn't make this case in public until two years ago, February. And in the case that you made, which I read today, you explain at great length that you felt a physical threat from the West in NATO, including potentially nuclear threat. And that's what got you to move. Is that a fair characterization of what you said?

Vladimir Putin: I understand that my long speeches probably fall outside of the genre of the interview. That is why I asked you at the beginning, are we going to have a serious talk or a show? You said a serious talk. So bear with me, please. We're coming to the point where the Soviet Ukraine was established. Then in 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed and everything that Russia had generously bestowed on Ukraine was dragged away by the latter. I'm coming to a very important point of today's agenda.

Tucker: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: After all, the collapse of the Soviet Union was effectively initiated by the Russian leadership. I do not understand what the Russian leadership was guided by at the time, but I suspect there were several reasons to think everything would be fine. First, I think that then Russian leadership believed that the fundamentals of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine were in fact a common language. More than 90% of the population there spoke Russian. Family ties, every third person there had some kind of family or friendship ties. Common culture. Common history, finally, common faith, coexistence with a single state for centuries and deeply interconnected economies. All of these were so fundamental. All these elements together make our good relationships inevitable. The second point is a very important one. I want you as an American citizen and your viewers to hear about this as. The former Russian leadership assumed that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist and therefore there were no longer any ideological dividing lines. Russia even agreed voluntarily and proactively to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and believed that this would be understood by the so-called civilized West as an invitation for cooperation and association. That is what Russia was expecting, both from the United States and this so-called collective West as a whole. There were smart people, including in Germany, Egon Bahr, a major politician of the Social Democratic Party, who insisted in his personal conversations with the Soviet leadership on the brink of the collapse of the Soviet Union, that they knew security systems should be established in Europe. Help should be given to unified Germany, but a new system should be also established to include the United States, Canada, Russia and other Central European countries. But NATO needs not to expand. That's what he said. If NATO expands, everything would be just the same as during the Cold War, only closer to Russia's borders. That's all. He was a wise old man, but no one listened to him. In fact, he got angry once. If, he said, you don't listen to me, I'm never setting my foot in Moscow once again. Everything happened just as he had said.

Tucker: Of course, it did come true. And I and you've mentioned this many times. I think it's a fair point. And many in America thought that relations between Russia and the United States would be fine with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the opposite happened. But you've never explained why you think that happened, except to say that the West fears a strong Russia. But we have a strong China the West does not seem very afraid of. What about Russia do you think, convinced policymakers they had to take it down?

Vladimir Putin: The West is afraid of strong China more than it fears a strong Russia, because Russia has won 150 million people and China has 1.5 billion population. And its economy is growing by leaps and bounds, or 5% a year. It used to be even more, but that's enough for China. As Bismarck once put it, potentials are the most important. China's potential is enormous. It is the biggest economy in the world today in terms of purchasing power parity and the size of the economy. It is already overtaking the United States quite a long time ago, and it is growing at a rapid clip. Let's not talk about who is afraid of whom. Let's not reason in such terms. And let's get into the fact that after 1991, when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of civilized nations, nothing like this happened. You tricked us. I don't mean you personally when I say you. Of course I'm talking about the United States. The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward. But it happened five times. There were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don't. We are as bourgeois now as you are. We are a market economy and there is no Communist Party power. Let's negotiate. Moreover, I have also said this publicly before. There was a moment when a certain rift started growing between us. Before that, Yeltsin came to the United States. Remember, he spoke in Congress and said the good words: God bless America. Everything he said were signals, let us in. Remember the developments in Yugoslavia before that, Yeltsin was lavished with praise. As soon as the developments in Yugoslavia started, he raised his voice in support of Serbs. And we couldn't but raise our voices for Serbs in their defense. I understand that there were complex processes underway there. I do, but Russia could not help raising its voice in support of Serbs, because Serbs are also a special and close to us nation, with Orthodox culture and so on. It's a nation that has suffered so much for generations. Well, regardless. What is important is that Yeltsin expressed his support. What did the United States do? In violation of international law and the UN charter it started bombing Belgrade. It was the United States that led the genie out of the bottle. Moreover, when Russia protested and expressed its resentment, what was said? The UN charter and international law have become obsolete. Now everyone invokes international law, but at that time they started saying that everything was outdated. Everything had to be changed. Indeed, some things need to be changed as the balance of power has changed. It's true, but not in this manner. Yeltsin was immediately dragged through the mud, accused of alcoholism, of understanding nothing, of knowing nothing. He understood everything, I assure you. Well, I became president in 2000. I thought, okay, the Yugoslav issue is over, but we should try to restore relations. Let's re-open the door that Russia had tried to go through. And moreover, I said it publicly, I can reiterate. At a meeting here in the Kremlin with the outgoing President Bill Clinton, right here in the next room, I said to him, I asked him: Bill, do you think if Russia asked to join NATO, do you think it would happen?" Suddenly he said, "you know, it's interesting. I think so." But in the evening, when we met for dinner, he said: You know, I've talked to my team, no, it's not possible now. You can ask him. I think he will watch our interview, he'll confirm it. I wouldn't have said anything like that if it hadn't happened. Okay, well, it's impossible now.

Tucker: Were you sincere? Would you have joined NATO?

Vladimir Putin: Look, I asked the question, is it possible or not? And the answer I got was no. If I was insincere in my desire to find out what the leadership position was....

Tucker: But if he had said yes, would you have joined NATO?

Vladimir Putin: If he had said yes, the process of rapprochement would have commenced, and eventually it might have happened if we had seen some sincere wish on the side of our partners. But it didn't happen. Well, no means no, okay, fine.

Tucker: Why do you think that is? Just to get to motive. I know, you're clearly bitter about it. I understand. But why do you think the West rebuffed you then? Why the hostility? Why did the end of the Cold War not fix the relationship? What motivates this from your point of view?

Vladimir Putin: You said that I was bitter about the answer. No, it's not bitterness. It's just the statement of fact. We're not bride and groom, bitterness, resentment, it's not about those kind of matters in such circumstances. We just realized we weren't welcome there, that's all. Okay, fine. But let's build relations in another manner. Let's look for common ground elsewhere. Why we received such a negative response, you should ask your leaders. I can only guess why, too big a country, with its own opinion and so on. And the United States, i have seen how issues are being resolved in NATO. I will give you another example now concerning Ukraine. U.S. leadership exerts pressure and all NATO members obediently vote. Even if they do not like something. Now, I'll tell you what happened in this regard with Ukraine in 2008. Although it's being discussed, I'm not going to open a secret to you say anything new.Nevertheless, after that, we try to build the relations in different ways. For example, the events in the Middle East, in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner. I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus's? But they continue to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial support, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the United States. He says it's impossible. Do you have proof? I said yes, I was prepared for this conversation, and I gave him that proof of motive. He looked at it and you know what he said? I apologize, but that's what happened. I'll quote, he says, "well, I'm gonna kick their ass." We waited and waited for some response. There was no reply. I said to the FSB director: Write to the CIA". What is the result of the conversation with the president? He wrote once, twice. And then we got a reply. We have the answer in the archive. The CIA replied: We have been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the right thing to do and we will keep on doing it." It's just ridiculous. Well, okay. We realized that it was out of the question.

Tucker: Forces in opposition to you? So you're saying the CIA is trying to overthrow your government?

Vladimir Putin: Of course they meant in that particular case, the separatists, the terrorists who fought with us in the Caucasus. That's who they call the opposition. This is the second point. The third moment is a very important one, is the moment when the US missile defense system was created at the beginning. We persuaded for a long time not to do it in United States. Moreover, after was invited by Bush Juniors Father Bush senior to visit his place on the ocean.I had a very serious conversation with President Bush and his team. I propose that the United States, Russia and Europe jointly create the missile defense system that we believe, if created, unilaterally threatens our security. Despite the fact that the United States officially said that it was being created against missile threats from Iran. That was the justification for the deployment of the missile defense system. I suggested working together: Russia, the United States and Europe. They said it was very interesting. They asked me, "Are you serious?" I said, "Absolutely".

Tucker: May I ask what year was this?

Vladimir Putin: I don't remember. It is easy to find out on the internet. When I was in the USA at the invitation of a Bush Sr.. It is even easier to learn from someone I'm going to tell you about. I was told it was very interesting. I said, "Just imagine if we could settle such a global strategic security challenge together. The world will change. We'll probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones. But we could drastically change the situation in the world." He says "Yes, and asks, "Are you serious? I said, "Of course". "We need to think about it." I said, "Go ahead please". Then Secretary of Defense Gates, former Director of CIA and Secretary of State Rice came in here in this cabinet, right here at this table. They sat on this table. Me, the Foreign Minister, the Russian Defense Minister on that side. They said to me, yes, we have thought about it. We agree. I said, "Thank God, great". "But with some exceptions."

Tucker: So, twice you've described U.S. presidents making decisions and then being undercut by their agency heads. So it sounds like you're describing a system that's not run by the people who are elected, in your telling.

Vladimir Putin: That's right, that's right. And then they just told us to get lost. I'm not going to tell you the details because I think it's incorrect. After all, it was confidential conversation, but our proposal was declined. That's a fact. It was right then when I said, "Look, but then we will be forced to take counter measures. We will create such strike systems that will certainly overcome missile defense systems. The answer was, "We are not doing this against you, and you do what you want. Assuming that it is not against us, not against the United States. I said, "Okay". Very well. That's the way it went. And we created hypersonic systems with intercontinental range, and we continue to develop them. We are now ahead of everyone, the United States and the other countries in terms of the development of hypersonic strike systems. And we are improving them every day. But it wasn't us. We proposed to go the other way and we were pushed back. Now about NATO's expansion to the east. Well, we were promised no NATO to the east, not an inch to the east, as we were told. And then what? They said, well, it's not enshrined on paper, so we'll expand. So there were five waves of expansion. The Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe, and so on. And now I come to the main thing. They have come to the Ukraine. Ultimately, in 2008, at the summit in Bucharest, they declared that the doors for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO were open. Now, about how decisions are made there. Germany, France seemed to be against it, as well as some other European countries. But then, as it turned out later, President Bush and he's such a tough guy, a tough politician, as I was told later, he exerted pressure on us and we had to agree. It's ridiculous. It's like kindergarten. Where are the guarantees? What kindergarten is this? What kind of people are these? Who are they? You see, they were pressed. They agree. And then they say Ukraine won't be in the NATO. You know, I say I don't know. I know you agreed in 2008. Why won't you agree in the future? Well, they pressed us then I say, why won't they press you tomorrow and you'll agree again? Well. It's nonsensical. Who's there to talk to? I just don't understand. We're ready to talk. But with whom? Where are the guarantees? None. So they started to develop the territory of Ukraine. Whatever is there? I have told you the background, how this territory develops. What kind of relations? They were with Russia. Every second or third person there has always had some ties with Russia. And during the elections in already independent sovereign Ukraine, which gained its independence as a result of the declaration of independence. And by the way, it says that Ukraine is a neutral state. And in 2008, suddenly the doors or gates to NATO were opened to it. Oh come on. This is not how we agreed. Now, all the presidents that have come to power in Ukraine, they relied on the electorate with a good attitude to Russia in one way or the other. This is the southeast of Ukraine. This is a large number of people. And it was very difficult to persuade this electorate, which had a positive attitude towards Russia. Viktor Yanukovych came to power. And how, the first time he won, after President Kuchma, they organized the third round, which is not provided for in the Constitution of Ukraine. This is a coup d'etat. Just imagine someone in the United States wouldn't like the outcome....

Tucker: In 2014?

Vladimir Putin: No, this was before that. After President Kuchma, Viktor Yanukovych won the elections. However, his opponents did not recognize that victory. The US supported the opposition and the third round was scheduled. But what is this? This is a coup. The US supported it and the winner of the third round came to power. Imagine if in the US something was not to someone's liking and the third round of election, which the US Constitution does not provide for, was organized. Nonetheless, it was done in Ukraine. Okay. Viktor Yushchenko, who was considered the pro-Western politician, came to power, but fine we have built relations with him as well. He came to Moscow with visits. We visited Kiev. I visited it too, we met in an informal setting. If he's pro-Western, so be it. It's fine. Let people do their job.The situation should have developed inside independent Ukraine itself as a result of Kuchma leadership. Things got worse and Viktor Yanukovych came to power. Maybe he wasn't the best president and politician, I don't know. I don't want to give assessments. However, the issue of the association with the EU came up. We have always been leanent into this. Suit yourself. But when we read through the treaty of association, it turned out to be a problem for us since we had the free trade zone and open customs borders with Ukraine, which under this association had to open its borders for Europe, which would have led to flooding of our market. But we said, no, this is not going to work. We shall close our borders with Ukraine then the customs borders, that is. Yanukovych started to calculate how much Ukraine was going to gain, how much to lose and said to his European partners, I need more time to think before signing. The moment he said that, the opposition began to take destructive steps which were supported by the West. It all came down to Maidan and a coup in Ukraine.

Tucker: So he did more trade with Russia than with the EU? Ukraine did.

Vladimir Putin: Of course. It's not even the matter of trade volume, although for the most part it is. It is the matter of cooperation size which the entire Ukrainian economy was based on. A cooperation size between the enterprises were very close since the times of the Soviet Union. Yeah. One enterprise there used to produce components to be assembled both in Russia and Ukraine and vice versa. They used to be very close ties. A coup d'etat was committed. Although I shall not delve into details now as I find doing it inappropriate. The US told us, calm Yanukovych down and we will calm the opposition. Let the situation unfold. In the scenario of a political settlement. We said, all right, agreed, let's do it this way. As the Americans requested, Yanukovych did use neither the armed forces nor the police. Yet the armed opposition committed a coup in Kiev. What is that supposed to mean? Who do you think you are? I wanted to ask the then US leadership.

Tucker: With the backing of whom?

Vladimir Putin: With the backing of CIA, of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they didn't let you in. Although it is a serious organization, I understand. My former is a V in the sense that I served in the First Main Directorate, Soviet Union's intelligence service. They have always been our opponents. A job is a job. Technically, they did everything right. They achieved their goal of changing the government. However, from political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. Surely it was political leadership's miscalculation. They should have seen what it would evolve into. So in 2008, the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup. They started persecuting those who did not accept the coup. And it was indeed a coup. They created the threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started. There's a video of aircraft attacking Donetsk from above. They launched a large scale military operation. Then another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next one. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO's doors. How could we not express concern over what was happening? From our side this would have been a culpable negligence. That's what it would have been. It's just that the US political leadership pushed us to the line we could not cross because doing so could have ruined Russia itself. Besides, we could not leave our brothers in faith. In fact, just part of Russian people in the face of this "war machine".

Tucker: So that was eight years before the current conflict started. So what was the trigger for you? What was the moment where you decided you had to do this?

Vladimir Putin: Initially, it was the coup in Ukraine that provoked the conflict. By the way, back then, the representatives of three European countries Germany, Poland and France aligned, they were the guarantors of the signed agreement between the government of Yanukovych and the opposition. They signed it as guarantors. Despite that, the opposition committed a coup and all these countries pretended that they didn't remember that they were guarantors of the peaceful settlement. They just threw it in the snow right away. And nobody recalls that. I don't know if the US knew anything about the agreement between the opposition and the authorities and its three guarantors, who, instead of bringing this whole situation back in the political field supported the coup. Although it was meaningless, believe me, because President Yanukovych agreed to all conditions, he was ready to hold an early election, which he had no chance of winning frankly speaking. Everyone knew that. Then, why the coup? Why the victims? Why threatening Crimea? Why launching an operation in Donbas? This I do not understand. That is exactly what the miscalculation is. CIA did its job to complete the coup. I think one of the deputy secretaries of state said that they cost a large sum of money. Almost 5 billion. But the political mistake was colossal. Why would they have to do that? All this could have been done legally, without victims, without military action, without the losing Crimea. We would have never considered to even lift the finger if it hadn't been for the bloody developments on Maidan. Because we agreed with the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, our borders should be along the borders of former union republics. We agreed to that, but we never agreed to NATO's expansion, and moreover, we never agreed that Ukraine would be in NATO. We did not agree to NATO bases there without any discussion with us. For decades we kept asking, don't do this, don't do that. And what triggered the latest events? Firstly, the current Ukrainian leadership declared that it would not implement the Minsk agreements which had been signed, as you know, after the events of 2014 in Minsk where the plan of peaceful settlement in Donbas was set forth. But no, the current Ukrainian leadership, foreign minister, all other officials and then president himself said that they don't like anything about the Minsk agreements. In other words, they were not going to implement it. A year or a year and a half ago, former leaders of Germany and France said openly to the whole that they indeed signed the Minsk agreements, but they never intended to implement them, they simply led us by the nose.

Tucker: Was there anyone for you to talk to? Did you call us President and Secretary of State and say, if you keep militarizing Ukraine with NATO forces, this is going to get, we're going to act.

Vladimir Putin: We talked about this all the time. We addressed the United States and European countries leadership to stop these developments immediately. To implement the Minsk agreements. But frankly speaking, I didn't know how we were going to do this. But I was ready to implement them. These agreements were complicated for Ukraine. They included lots of elements of those Donbas territories independence. That's true. However, I was absolutely confident. And I'm saying this to you now. I honestly believe that if we managed to convince the residents of Donbas and we had to work hard to convince them to return to the Ukrainian statehood, then gradually the wounds would start to heal. But when this part of territory reintegrated itself into a common social environment, when the pensions and social benefits were paid again, all the pieces would gradually fall into place. No, nobody wanted that. Everybody wanted to resolve the issue by military force only. But we could not let that happen. And the situation got to the point when the Ukrainian side announced, no, we will not do anything. They also started preparing for military action. It was they who started the war in 2014. Our goal is to stop this war. And we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.

Tucker: Do you think you've stopped it now? I mean, have you achieved your aims?

Vladimir Putin: No. We haven't achieved our aims yet because one of them is de-nazification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements. This is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process, which ended in Istanbul early this year. And it was not our initiative because we were told by the Europeans in particular that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents. My counterparts in France, in Germany said, How can you imagine them signing a treaty with a gun to their heads? The troops should be pulled back from Kiev. I said, all right. We withdrew the troops from Kiev. As soon as we pulled back our troops from Kiev, our Ukrainian negotiators immediately threw all our agreements reached in Istanbul into the bin and got prepared for a long standing armed confrontation with the help of the United States and its satellites in Europe. That is how the situation has developed, and that is how it looks now.

Tucker: Pardon my ignorance. What is what is de-nazification? What would that mean?

Vladimir Putin: That is what I want to talk about right now. It is a very important issue. De-nazification. After gaining independence, Ukraine began to search, as some Western analysts say, its identity. Well, if the intuitionist, you know. And it came up with nothing better than to build this identity upon some false heroes who collaborated with Hitler. I have already said that in the early 19th century, when the theorists of independence and sovereignty of Ukraine appeared, they assumed that an independent Ukraine should have very good relations with Russia. But due to the historical development, those territories were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Poland, where Ukrainians were persecuted and treated quite brutally as well as were subject to cruel behavior. There were also attempts to destroy their identity. All this remained in the memory of the people. When World War 2 broke out, part of this extremely nationalist elite collaborated with Hitler, believing that he would bring them freedom. The German troops, even the SS troops made Hitler's collaborators do the dirtiest work of exterminating the Polish and Jewish population. Hence this brutal massacre of the Polish and Jewish population, as well as the Russian population too. This was led by the persons who are well known, Bandera, Shukhevych. It was those people who were made national heroes. That is the problem. And we are constantly told that nationalism and neo-Nazism exists in other countries as well. Yes, they are seedlings, but we uproot them. And other countries fight against them. But Ukraine is not the case. These people have been made into national heroes in Ukraine. Monuments to those people have been erected. They are displayed on flags. Their names are shouted by crowds that walk with torches, as it was in Nazi Germany. These were people who exterminated Poles, Jews and Russians. It is necessary to stop this practice and prevent the dissemination of this concept. I say that the Ukrainians are part of the one Russian people. They say, no, we are a separate people. Okay, fine. If they consider themselves a separate people, they have the right to do so. But not on the basis of Nazism, the Nazi ideology.

Tucker: Would you be satisfied with the territory that you have now?

Vladimir Putin: I will finish answering the question. You just asked the question about neo-Nazism and denazification. The president of Ukraine visited Canada. The story is well known, but being silenced in the Western countries. The Canadian Parliament introduced the man who, as the speaker of the Parliament said fought against the Russians during the World War II. Well, who fought against the Russians during the World War two. Hitler and his accomplices. And it turned out that this man served in the SS troops, he personally killed the Russians, Poles and Jews. The US troops consisted of Ukrainian nationalists who did this dirty work. The president of Ukraine stood up with the entire Parliament of Canada and applauded this man. How can this be imagined? The President of Ukraine himself, by the way, is a Jew by nationality.

Tucker: Really my question is, what do you do about it? I mean, Hitler has been dead for 80 years. Nazi Germany no longer exists. And so, true. And so I think what you're saying is you want to extinguish or at least control Ukrainian nationalism. But how? How do you do that?

Vladimir Putin: Listen to me. Your question is very subtle, and I can tell you what I think. Do not take offense.

Tucker: Of course.

Vladimir Putin: This question appears to be subtle. It is.

Tucker: Quite pesky.

Vladimir Putin: You say Hitler has been dead for so many years, 80 years. But, his example lives on. The people who exterminate the Jews, Russians or poles are alive. And the president, the current president of today's Ukraine, applauds him in the Canadian Parliament, gives a standing ovation. Can we say that we have completely uprooted this ideology? If what we see is happening today, that is what De-nazification is in our understanding. We have to get rid of those people who maintain this concept and support this practice and try to preserve it. That is what De-nazification is. That is what we mean.

Tucker: Right. My question was more specific. It was, of course, not a defense of Nazis, new or otherwise. It was a practical question. You don't control the entire country. You don't control Kiev. You don't seem like you want to. So how do you will eliminate a culture or an ideology or feelings or a view of history in a country that you don't control. What do you do about that?

Vladimir Putin: You know, as strange as it may seem to you during the negotiations at Istanbul, we did agree that we have it all in writing. Neo-Nazism would not be cultivated in Ukraine, including that it would be prohibited at the legislative level. Mr. Carlson, we agreed on that. This, it turns out, can be done during the negotiation process. And there's nothing humiliating for Ukraine as a modern, civilized state. Is there any state allowed to promote Nazism? It is not, is it? Oh, that is it.

Tucker: Will there be talks? And why haven't there been talks about resolving the conflict in Ukraine? Peace talks.

Vladimir Putin: There have been they reached a very high stage of coordination of positions in a complex process, but still they were almost finalized. But after we withdrew our troops from Kiev, as I have already said, the other side threw away all these agreements and obeyed the instructions of Western countries, European countries and the United States to fight Russia to the bitter end. Moreover, the President of Ukraine has legislated a ban on negotiating with Russia. He signed a decree forbidding everyone to negotiate with Russia. But how are we going to negotiate if he forbade himself and everyone to do this? We know that he is putting forward some ideas about this settlement, but in order to agree on something, we need to have a dialog. Is that not right?

Tucker: Well, but you wouldn't be speaking to the Ukrainian president. You'd be speaking to the American president. When was the last time you spoke to Joe Biden?

Vladimir Putin: Well, I cannot remember when I talked to him. I do not remember. We can look it up.

Tucker: You don't remember?

Vladimir Putin: No.

Tucker: Why? Do I have to remember everything? I have my own things to do. We have domestic political affairs.

Tucker: Well, he's funding the war that you're fighting, so I would think that would be memorable.

Vladimir Putin: Well, yes, he funds, but I talked to him before the special military operation, of course. And I said to him then, by the way, I will not go into details, I never do. But I said to him, then, I believe that you are making a huge mistake of historic proportions by supporting everything that is happening there, in Ukraine, by pushing Russia away. I told him, told him repeatedly, by the way, I think that would be correct if I stop here.

Tucker: What did he say?

Vladimir Putin: Ask him, please, it is easier for you. You are a citizen of the United States. Go and ask him. It is not appropriate for me to comment on our conversation.

Tucker: But you haven't spoken to him since before February of 2022.

Vladimir Putin: No, we haven't spoken. Certain contacts are being maintained, though. Speaking of which. Do you remember what I told you about my proposal to work together on a missile defense system?

Tucker: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: You can ask all of them. All of them are safe and sound. Thank God. The Former President. Condoleezza is safe and sound. And I think Mr. Gates and the current director of the intelligence agency, Mr. Burns, the then ambassador to Russia, in my opinion, are very successful, ambassador. They were all witnesses to these conversations. Ask them. Same here. If you are interested in what Mr. President Biden responded to me, ask him. At any rate, I talk to him about it.

Tucker: I'm definitely interested. But from the outside, it seems like this could devolve or evolve into something that brings the entire world into conflict and could, um, initiate some nuclear launch. And so why don't you just call Biden and say, let's work this out.

Vladimir Putin: What's there to work out? It's very simple. I repeat, we have contacts through various agencies. I will tell you what we are saying on this matter and what we are conveying to the US leadership. If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That's it. And then we can agree on some terms before you do that, stop. What's easier? Why would I call him? What should I talk to him about? Or beg him for what?

Tucker: And what messages do you get back?

Vladimir Putin: You were going to deliver such and such weapons to Ukraine. Oh, I'm afraid, I'm afraid. Please don't. What is there to talk about?

Tucker: Do you think NATO is worried about this becoming a global war or a nuclear conflict?

Vladimir Putin: At least that's what they're talking about. And they're trying to intimidate their own population with an imaginary Russian threat. This is an obvious fact. And thinking people, not philistines, but thinking people, analysts, those who are engaged in real politics, just smart people, understand perfectly well that this is a fake. They're trying to fuel the Russian threat.

Tucker: The threat I think you're referring to is a Russian invasion of Poland. Latvia. Expansionist behavior. Can you imagine a scenario where you send Russian troops to Poland?

Vladimir Putin: Only in one case, if Poland attacks Russia. Why? Because we have no interest in Poland, Latvia or anywhere else. Why would we do that? We simply don't have any interest. It's just threat mongering.

Tucker: Well, the argument, I know you know this is that, well, he invaded Ukraine. He has territorial aims across the continent. And you're saying unequivocally you don't.

Vladimir Putin: It is absolutely out of the question. You just don't have to be any kind of analyst. It goes against common sense to get involved in some kind of a global war and a global war will bring all humanity to the brink of destruction. It's obvious. There are certainly means of deterrence. They have been scaring everyone with us all along. Tomorrow, Russia will use tactical nuclear weapons. Tomorrow Russia will use that. No, the day after tomorrow. So what. In order to extort additional money from U.S. taxpayers and European taxpayers in the confrontation with Russia in the Ukrainian theater of war. But the goal is to weaken Russia as much as possible.

Tucker: One of, our Senior United States senators from the state of New York, Chuck Schumer, said yesterday, I believe, that we have to continue to fund the Ukrainian effort, or U.S. soldier citizens could wind up fighting there. How do you assess that?

Vladimir Putin: This is a provocation and a cheap provocation at that. I do not understand why American soldiers should fight in Ukraine. They are mercenaries from the United States. They're the bigger number of mercenaries comes from Poland, with mercenaries from the United States in second place and mercenaries from Georgia in third place. Well, if somebody has the desire to send regular troops, that would certainly bring humanity to the brink of a very serious global conflict. This is obvious. Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory. Don't you have anything better to do? You have issues on the border. Issues with migration, issues with the national debt. More than $33 trillion. You have nothing better to do. So you should fight in Ukraine. Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with Russia? Make an agreement. Already understanding the situation that is developing today, realizing that Russia will fight for its interests to the end. And realizing this actually a return to common sense, start respecting our country and its interests and look for certain solutions. It seems to me that this is much smarter and more rational.

Tucker: Who blew up Nord Stream?

Vladimir Putin: You for sure.

Tucker: I was busy that day. I did not blow up Nord Stream. Thank you though.

Vladimir Putin: You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi.

Tucker: Did you have evidence that NATO or the CIA did it?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I won't get into details, but people always say in such cases, look for someone who is interested. But in this case, we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for someone who has capabilities, because there may be many people interested, but not all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected. Who is interested and who is capable of doing it?

Tucker: But I'm confused. I mean, that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever, and it's the largest emission of CO2 in history. Okay, so if you had evidence and presumably given your security services or Intel services, you would that NATO, the US, CIA, the West did this, why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory?

Vladimir Putin: In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions. Don't you know that? So it is possible to get involved in this work, but it is cost prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight on our sources of information and we will not achieve results. It is clear to the whole world what happened then. Even American analysts talk about it directly. It's true.

Tucker: Yes I, but here's a question you may able to answer. You worked in Germany famously. The Germans clearly know that their NATO partner did this, but they. And it damaged their economy greatly. It may never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That's very confusing to me. Why wouldn't the Germans say something about it?

Vladimir Putin: This also confuses me, but today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective West rather than its national interests. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the logic of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about Nord Stream one, which was blowing up and the Nord Stream two was damaged, but one pipe is safe and sound and gas can be supplied to Europe through it. But Germany does not open it. We are ready. Please. There is another route through Poland called Yamal Europe, which also allows for large flow. Poland has closed it, but Poland pecks from the German hand. It receives money from the pan European funds, and Germany is the main donor to these pan-European funds. Germany feeds Poland to a certain extent and they close their route to Germany. Why? I don't understand Ukraine, to which the Germans supply weapons and give money. Germany is the second sponsor of the United States in terms of financial aid to Ukraine. There are two gas routes through Ukraine. They simply closed one route. The Ukrainians. Open the second route. And please get gas from Russia. They do not open it. Why don't the Germans say, look, guys, we give you money and weapons. Open up the valve. Please let the gas from Russia pass through for us. We are buying liquefied gas at exorbitant prices in Europe, which brings the level of our competitiveness and economy in general down to zero. So do you want us to give you money? Let us have the decent existence to make money for our economy, because this is where the money we give you comes from.They refuse to do so. Why? Ask them. That is what is like in their heads. Those are highly incompetent people.

Tucker: Well, maybe the world is breaking into two hemispheres. One with cheap energy, the other without. And I want to ask you that if we're now a multipolar world, obviously we are. Can you describe the blocks of alliances? Who is in each side. Do you think?

Vladimir Putin: Listen, you have said that the world is breaking into two hemispheres. A human brain is divided into two hemispheres. At least one is responsible for one type of activities. The other one is more about creativity and so on. But it is still one and the same head. I the world should be a single whole. Security should be shared rather than a meant for the golden billion. That is the only scenario where the world could be stable, sustainable and predictable. Until then, while the head is split in two parts, it is an illness, a serious adverse condition. It is a period of severe disease that the world is going through now. But I think that thanks to honest journalism, this work is akin to the work of the doctors. This could somehow be remedied.

Tucker: Well, let's just give one example. The U.S. dollar, which has kind of united the world, in a lot of ways, maybe not to your advantage, but certainly to ours. Is that going away as the reserve currency, the com the universally accepted currency? How have sanctions do you think changed the dollar's place in the world?

Vladimir Putin: You know, to use the dollar as a tool of foreign policy struggle is one of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the US political leadership. The dollar is the cornerstone of the United States power. I think everyone understands very well that no matter how many dollars are printed, they're quickly dispersed all over the world. Inflation in the United States is minimal. It's about 3 or 3.4%, which is, I think, totally acceptable for the US. But they won't stop printing. What does the debt of $33 trillion tell us about? It is about the emission. Nevertheless, it is the main weapon used by the United States to preserve its power across the world. As soon as the political leadership decided to use the US dollar as a tool of political struggle, a blow was dealt to this American power. I would not like to use any strong language, but it is a stupid thing to do and a grave mistake. Look at what is going on in the world. Even the United States allies are now downsizing their dollar reserves. Seeing this, everyone starts looking for ways to protect themselves. But the fact that the United States applies restrictive measures to certain countries, such as placing restrictions on transactions, freezing assets, etc., causes grave concern and sends a signal to the whole world. What did we have here? Until 2022, about 80% of Russian foreign trade transactions were made in US dollars and euros. U.S. dollars accounted for approximately 50% of our transactions with third countries. Well, currently it is down to 13%. It wasn't us who banned the use of the US dollar. We had no such intention. It was the decision of the United States to restrict our transactions in U.S. dollars. I think it is complete foolishness from the point of view of the interests of the United States itself and its taxpayers, as it damages the U.S. economy, undermines the power of the United States across the world. By the way, our transactions in yuan accounted for about 3%. Today, 34% of our transactions are made in rubles and about as much. A little over 34% in yuan. Why did the United States do this? My only guess is self conceit. They probably thought it would lead to full collapse, but nothing collapsed. Moreover, other countries, including oil producers, are thinking of and already accepting payments for oil in yuan. Do you even realize what is going on or not? Does anyone in the United States realize this. What are you doing? You are cutting yourself off. All experts say this. Ask any intelligent and thinking person in the United States what the dollar means for the US. But you are killing it with your own hands.

Tucker: I think that's. I think that's a fair assessment. The question is what comes next? And maybe you trade one colonial power for another, much less sentimental and forgiving colonial power. I mean, or is the the BRICs, for example, in danger of being completely dominated by the Chinese, the Chinese economy? In a way that's not good for their sovereignty. Do you worry about that?

Vladimir Putin: Well, we have heard those boogeyman stories before. It is a boogeyman story. We're neighbors with China. You cannot choose neighbors, just as you cannot choose close relatives. We share a border of 1000km with them. This is number one. Second, we have a centuries long history of coexistence. We're used to it. Third, China's foreign policy philosophy is not aggressive. Its idea is to always look for compromise. And we can see that. And that's the next point is as follows. We are always told the same boogeyman story. And here it goes again through in euphemistic form. But it is still the same boogeyman story. The cooperation with China keeps increasing the pace at which China's cooperation with Europe is growing is higher and greater than that of the growth of Chinese Russian cooperation. If you ask Europeans, aren't they afraid they might be? I don't know. But they are still trying to access China's market at all costs, especially now that they are facing economic problems. Chinese businesses are also exploring the European market. Do Chinese businesses have small presence in the United States? Yes. The political decisions are such that they are trying to limit the cooperation with China. It is to your own detriment, Mr. Tucker, that you are limiting cooperation with China. You are hurting yourself. It is a delicate matter and there are no silver bullet solutions, just as it is with the dollar. So before introducing any illegitimate sanctions, illegitimate in terms of the charter of the United Nations, one should think very carefully for decision makers. This appears to be a problem.

Tucker: So you said a moment ago that the world would be a lot better if it weren't broken into competing alliances, if there was cooperation globally. One of the reasons you don't have that is because the current American administration is dead set against you. Do you think if there were a new administration after Joe Biden, that you would be able to reestablish communication with the U.S. government? Or does it not matter who the president is?

Vladimir Putin: I will tell you. But let me finish the previous thought. We, together with my colleague and friend President XI Jinping, set their goal to reach $200 billion of mutual trade with China this year. We have exceeded this level. According to our figures, our bilateral trade with China totals already 230 billion. And the Chinese statistics says it is $240 billion. One more important thing. Our trade is well balanced, mutually complementary in high tech, energy, scientific research and development. It is very balanced. As for BRICs, where Russia took over the presidency this year, the BRICs countries are by and large developing very rapidly. Look, if memory serves me right, back in 1992, the share of the G7 countries in the world economy amounted to 47%, whereas in 2022 it was down to, I think, a little over 30%. The BRICs countries accounted for only 16% in 1992, but now their share is greater than that of the G7. It has nothing to do with the events in Ukraine. This is due to the trends of global development and world economy, as I mentioned just now. And this is inevitable. This will keep happening. It is like the rays of the sun. You cannot prevent the sun from rising. You have to adapt to it. How do the United States adapt with the help of force sanctions, pressure, bombings and use of armed forces? This is about self conceit. Your political establishment does not understand that the world is changing under objective circumstances. And in order to preserve your level, even if someone aspires, pardon me to the level of dominance. You have to make the right decisions in a competent and timely manner. Such brutal actions, including with regard to Russia and say other countries, are counterproductive. This is an obvious fact. It has already become evident. You just asked me if another leader comes and changes something? It is not about the leader. It is not about the personality of a particular person. I had a very good relationship with say Bush. I know that in the United States, he was portrayed as some kind of a country boy who does not understand much. I assure you that this is not the case. I think he made a lot of mistakes with regard to Russia, too. I told you about 2008 and the decision in Bucharest to open the NATO's doors to for Ukraine and so on. That happened during his presidency. He actually exercised pressure on the Europeans. But in general, on a personal human level, I had a very good relationship with him. He was no worse than any other American or Russian or European politician. I assure you he understood what he was doing as well as others. I had such personal relationship with Trump as well. It is not about the personality of the leader. It is about the elites mindset, leader deal. If the idea of domination at any cost, based also on forceful actions dominates the American society, nothing will change. It will only get worse. But if in the end, one comes to the awareness that the world has been changing due to the objective circumstances, and that one should be able to adapt to them in time using the advantages that the US still has today, then perhaps something may change. Look, China's economy has become the first economy in the world than purchasing power parity in terms of volume. It's over to the US a long time ago. The USA comes second, then in the 1.5 billion people, and then Japan with Russia in the fifth place. Russia was the first economy in Europe last year, despite all the sanctions and restrictions. Is it normal from your point of view, sanctions, restrictions and possibility of payments in dollars being cut off from Swift services sanctions against their ships carrying oil? Sanctions against airplanes. Sanctions in everything, everywhere. The largest number of sanctions in the world which are applied, are applied against Russia. And we have become Europe's first economy during this time. The tools that U.S. uses don't work. Well, one has to think about what to do. If this realization comes to the ruling elites, then yes, then the first person of the state will act in anticipation of what the voters and the people who make decisions at various levels expect from this person. Then maybe something will change.

Tucker: But you're describing two different systems. You say the leader acts in the interest of the voters, but you also say these decisions are not made by the leader, they're made by the ruling classes. You've run this country for so long, you've known all these American presidents. What are those power centers in the United States? do you think? Like who actually makes the decisions?

Vladimir Putin: I don't know. America is a complex country. Conservative on one hand, rapidly changing on the other. It's not easy for us to sort it all out. Who makes decisions in the elections? Is it possible to understand this when each state has its own legislation? Each state regulates itself. Someone can be excluded from elections at the state level. It is a two stage electoral system. It is very difficult for us to understand it. Secondly, there are two parties that are dominant: the Republicans and the Democrats. And within this party system, the centers that make decisions that prepare decisions. Then look, why, in my opinion, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, such an erroneous, crude, completely unjustified policy of pressure was pursued against Russia. After all, this is a policy of pressure. NATO expansion, support for the separatists in Caucasus. Creation of a missile defense system. These are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure. Then dragging Ukraine into NATO is all about pressure, pressure, pressure. Why? I think, among other things, because excessive production capacities were created. During the confrontation with the Soviet Union. There were many centers created and specialists on the Soviet Union who could not do anything else. They convinced the political leadership that it is necessary to continue chiseling Russia, to try to break it up, to create on this territory several quasi state entities, and to subdue them in a divided form, to use their combined potential for the future struggle with China. This is a mistake, including the excessive potential of those who worked for the confrontation with the Soviet Union. It is necessary to get rid of this. There should be new, fresh forces, people who look into the future and understand what is happening in the world. Look at how Indonesia is developing. 600 million people. Where can we get away from that? Nowhere. We just have to assume that Indonesia will enter. It is already in the club of the world's leading economies. No matter who likes it or dislikes. Yes, we understand and are aware that in the United States, despite all the economic problems, the situation is still normal with the economy growing decently. The GDP is growing by 2.5%, if I'm not mistaken. But if we want to ensure the future, then we need to change our approach to what is changing. As I already said, the world would nevertheless change regardless of how the developments in Ukraine end. The world is changing and the United States themselves. Experts are writing that the United States are nonetheless gradually changing their position in the world. It is your experts who write that. I just read them. The only question is how this would happen. Painfully and quickly or gently and gradually. And this is written by people who are not anti-American. They simply follow global development trends. That's it. And in order to assess them and change policies, we need people who think, look forward, can analyze and recommend certain decisions at the level of political leaders.

Tucker: I just have to ask you, you've said clearly that NATO expansion eastward is a violation of the promise you all were made in 1990. It's a threat to your country. Right before you send troops into Ukraine, the Vice President of the United States, went to the Munich Security Conference and encouraged the president of Ukraine to join NATO. Do you think that was an effort to provoke you into military action?

Vladimir Putin: I repeat, once again, we have repeatedly, repeatedly proposed to seek a solution to the problems that arose in Ukraine after 2014 coup d'etat through peaceful means. But no one listens to us. And moreover, the Ukrainian leaders who were under the complete US control suddenly declared that they would not comply with the Minsk agreements. They disliked everything there and continued military activity in that territory. And in parallel, that territory was being exploited by NATO military structures under the guise of various personnel training and retraining centers. They essentially began to create bases there. That's all. Ukraine announced that the Russians were a non titular nationality, while passing the laws that limit the rights of non titular nationalities in Ukraine. Ukraine having received all the southeastern territories as a gift from the Russian people, suddenly announced that the Russians were a non titular nationality in that territory. Is that normal? All this put together led to the decision to end the war. That neo-Nazi started in Ukraine in 2014.

Tucker: Do you think Zelensky has the freedom to negotiate a settlement to this conflict?

Vladimir Putin: I don't know the details. Of course, it's difficult for me to judge, but I believe he has. In any case, he used to have. His father fought against the fascists Nazis during World War Two. I once talked to him about this. I said, Volodymyr, what are you doing? Why are you supporting neo-Nazis in Ukraine today while your father fought against fascism? He was a frontline soldier. I will not tell you what he answered. This is a separate topic, and I think it's incorrect for me to do so. But as to the freedom of choice. Why not? He came to power on the expectations of Ukrainian people that he would lead Ukraine to peace. He talked about this. It was thanks to this that he won the elections overwhelmingly. But then when he came to power, in my opinion, he realized two things. Firstly, it is better not to clash with neo-Nazis and nationalists because they are aggressive and very active. You can expect anything from them. And secondly, the U.S. Led West supports them and will always support those who antagonize with Russia. It is beneficial and safe. So he took the relevant position despite promising his people to end the war in Ukraine. He deceived his voters.

Tucker: But do you think at this point, as of February 2024, he has the latitude, the freedom, to speak with you or your government directly about putting an end to this, which clearly isn't helping his country or the world. Can he do that, do you think?

Vladimir Putin: Why not? He considers himself a head of state. He won the elections. Although we believe in Russia that the coup d'etat is the primary source of power for everything that happened after 2014. And in this sense, even today, government is flawed. But he considers himself the president and he is recognized by the United States, all of Europe, and practically the rest of the world in such a capacity. Why not? He can. We negotiated with Ukraine in Istanbul. We agreed. He was aware of this. Moreover, the negotiation group leader, Mr. Arakhamia, his last name I believe, still heads the faction of the ruling party, the party of the president in the Rada. He still heads the presidential faction in the Rada, the country's parliament. He still sits there. He even put his preliminary signature on the document. I am telling you. But then he publicly stated to the whole world, we were ready to sign this document but Mr. Johnson, then the Prime Minister, came and dissuaded us from doing this, saying it was better to fight Russia. They would give everything needed for us to return what was lost during the clashes with Russia. And we agreed with this proposal. Look, his statement has been published. He said it publicly. Can they return to this or not? The question is, do they want it or not? Further on, president of Ukraine issued a decree prohibiting negotiations with us. Let him cancel that decree. And that's it. We have never refused negotiations indeed. We hear all the time, is Russia ready? Yes. We have not refused. It was them who publicly refused. Well, let him cancel his decree and enter into negotiations. We have never refused. And the fact that they obey the demand or persuasion of Mr. Johnson, the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, seems ridiculous. And it's very sad to me because, as Mr. Arakhamia put it, we could have stopped those hostilities with war a year and a half ago already. But the British persuaded us and we refused this. Where is Mr. Johnson now? And the war continues.

Tucker: That's a good question. Where do you think he is, and why did he do that?

Vladimir Putin: Who knows. I don't understand it myself. There was a general starting point. For some reason, everyone had the illusion that Russia could be defeated on the battlefield. Because of arrogance, because of a pure heart, but not because of a great mind.

Tucker: You've described the connection between Russia and Ukraine. You've described Russia itself a couple of times as orthodox. That's central to your understanding of Russia. You've said you're Orthodox. What does that mean for you? You are a Christian leader by your own description. So what effect does that have on you?

Vladimir Putin: You know, as I already mentioned, in 988 Prince Vladimir himself was baptized following the example of his grandmother, Princess Olga. Then he baptized his squad. And then gradually, over the course of several years, he baptized all the Rus. It was a lengthy process from pagans to Christians. It took many years but in the end, this orthodoxy, Eastern Christianity, deeply rooted itself in the consciousness of the Russian people. When Russia expanded, then absorbed other nations who profess Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism, Russia has always been very loyal to those people who profess other religions. This is our strength. This is absolutely clear. And the fact is that the main postulates main values are very similar. Not to say the same in all the world religions I have just mentioned, and which are the traditional religions of the Russian Federation. By the way, Russian authorities were always very careful about the culture and religion of those people who came into the Russian Empire. This, in my opinion, forms the basis of both security and stability of the Russian statehood. All the peoples inhabiting Russia basically consider it their motherhood. If, say, people move over to you or to Europe from Latin America and even clearer and more understandable example, people come, but yet they have come to you or to European countries from their historical homeland. And people who profess different religions in Russia consider Russia their motherland. They have no other motherland. We are together. This is one big family and our traditional values are very similar. 've just mentioned one big family, but everyone has his or her own family. And this is the basis of our society. And if we say that the motherland and the family are specifically connected with each other, it is indeed the case, since it is impossible to ensure a normal future for our children and our families unless we ensure a normal, sustainable future for the entire country, for the motherland. That is why patriotic sentiment is so strong in Russia.

Tucker: The one way in which the religions are different is that Christianity is specifically a nonviolent religion. Jesus says, turn the other cheek. Don't kill. How can a leader who has to kill - of any country - how can a leader be a Christian? How do you reconcile that to yourself?

Vladimir Putin: It is very easy when it comes to protecting oneself and one's family, one's homeland. We won't attack anyone. When did the developments in Ukraine start? Since the coup d'etat and the hostilities in Donbas began. That's when they started. And we were protecting our people, ourselves, our homeland and our future. As for religion in general, you know, it's not about external manifestations. It's not about going to church every day or banging your head on the floor. It is in the heart, and our culture is so human oriented. Dostoyevsky, who was very well known in the West and the genius of Russian culture, Russian literature, spoke a lot about this, about the Russian soul. After all, Western society is more pragmatic. Russian people think more about the eternal, about moral values. I don't know, maybe you won't agree with me, but Western culture is more pragmatic after all. I'm not saying this is bad. It makes it possible for today's golden billion to achieve good success in production, even in science and so on. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that we kind of look the same.

Tucker: So do you see the supernatural at work as you look out across what's happening in the world now? Do you see God at work? Do you ever think to yourself, these are forces that are not human?

Vladimir Putin: No, to be honest. I don't think so. My opinion is that the development of the world community is in accordance with inherent laws, and those laws are what they are. It's always been this way in the history of mankind. Some nations and countries rose, became stronger and more numerous and then left the international stage, losing the status they had accustomed to. There's probably no need for me to give examples, but we could start with Genghis Khan and horde conquers, the Golden Horde and then end with the Roman Empire. It seems that there has never been anything like the Roman Empire in the history of mankind. Nevertheless, the potential of the barbarians gradually grew, as did their population. In general, the barbarians were getting stronger and begun to develop economically, as we would say today. This eventually led to the collapse of the Roman Empire and the regime imposed by the Romans. However, it took five centuries for the Roman Empire to fall apart. The difference with what is happening now is that all the processes of change are happening had been much faster paced than in Roman times.

Tucker: So when does the AI empire start do you think?

Vladimir Putin: You're asking increasingly more complicated questions. To answer them you need to be an expert in big numbers, big data and AI. Mankind is currently facing many threats due to the genetic researchers, it is now possible to create this superhuman. A specialized human being. A genetically engineered athlete, scientist, military man. There are reports that Elon Musk has already had the chip implanted in the human brain in the USA.

Tucker: What do you think of that?

Vladimir Putin: I think there's no stopping Elon Musk. He will do as he sees fit. Nevertheless, you'll need to find some common ground with him. Search for ways to persuade him. I think he's a smart person. I truly believe he is. So you'll need to reach an agreement with him because this process needs to be formalized and subjected to certain rules. Humanity has to consider what is going to happen due to the newest development in genetics or in AI? One can make an approximate prediction of what will happen. Once mankind felt an existential threat coming from nuclear weapons. All nuclear nations begun to come to terms with one another, since they realized the negligent use of nuclear weaponry could drive humanity to extinction. It is impossible to stop research in genetics or AI today, just as it was impossible to stop the use of gunpowder back in the day. But as soon as we realize that the threat comes from unbridled and uncontrolled development of AI or genetics or any other field, the time will come to reach an international agreement on how to regulate these things.

Tucker: I appreciate all the time you've given us. I just gotta ask you one last question. And that's about someone who is very famous in the United States. Probably not here. Evan Gershkovich who's the Wall Street Journal reporter. He's 32. And he's been in prison for almost a year. This is a huge story in the United States. And I just want to ask you directly, without getting into the details of it or your version of what happened, if, as a sign of your decency, you would be willing to release him to us and we'll bring him back to the United States.

Vladimir Putin: We have done so many gestures of goodwill out of decency that I think we have run out of them. We have never seen anyone reciprocate to us in a similar manner. However, in theory, we can say that we do not rule out that we can do that if our partners take reciprocal steps. When I talk about the partners, I first of all refer to special services. Special services are in contact with one another. They are talking about the matter in question. There is no taboo to settle this issue. We are willing to solve it but there are certain terms being discussed via special services channels. I believe an agreement can be reached.

Tucker: So typically, I mean this stuff has happened for obviously centuries. One country catches another spy within its borders. It trades it for one of its own intel guys in another country. I think what makes and it's not my business, but what makes this different is the guy's obviously not a spy. He's a kid, and maybe he was breaking your law in some way, but he's not a super spy and everybody knows that. And he's being held hostage in exchange, which is true with respect. It's true. And everyone knows it's true. So maybe he's in a different category. Maybe it's not fair to ask for, you know, somebody else in exchange for letting him out. Maybe it degrades Russia to do that.

Vladimir Putin: You know, you can give a different interpretations to what constitutes a spy. But there are certain things provided by law. If a person gets secret information and does that in conspiratorial manner, then this is qualified as espionage. And that is exactly what he was doing. He was receiving classified, confidential information, and he did it covertly. Maybe he did that out of carelessness or his own initiative. Considering the sheer fact that this is qualify this espionage. The fact has been proven as he was caught red handed when he was receiving this information. If it had been some farfetched excuse, some fabrication, something not proven, it would have been a different story then. But he was caught red handed when he was secretly getting confidential information. What is it then?

Tucker: But are you suggesting he was working for the U.S. government or NATO, or he was just a reporter who was given material he wasn't supposed to have? Those seem like very different, very different things.

Vladimir Putin: I don't know who he was working for. But I would like to reiterate that getting classified information in secret is called espionage. And he was working for the US special services, some other agencies. I don't think he was working for Monaco as Monaco is hardly interested in getting that information. It is up to the special services to come to an agreement. Some groundwork has been laid. There are people who, in our view, are not connected with special services. Let me tell you a story about a person serving a sentence in an allied country of the U.S. That person, due to patriotic sentiments, eliminated a bandit in one of the European capitals. During the events in the Caucasus, do you know what he was doing? I don't want to say that, but I will do it anyway. He was laying our soldiers taken prisoner on the road and then drove his car over their heads. What kind of person is that? Can he even be called human? But there was a patriot who eliminated him in one of the European capitals. Whether he did it of his own volition or not. That is a different question.

Tucker: I mean, that's a completely different. He's a 32 year old newspaper reporter.

Vladimir Putin: He committed something different. He's not just a journalist. I reiterate. He's a journalist who is secretly getting confidential information. Yes, it is different, but still, I'm talking about other people who are essentially controlled by the US authorities, wherever they are serving a sentence.

Tucker: There is an ongoing dialog between the special services. This has to be resolved in a calm, responsible and professional manner. They're keeping in touch, so let them do their work.

Vladimir Putin: I do not rule out that the person you refer to, Mr. Gershkovich, may return to his motherland. But at the end of the day, it does not make any sense to keep him in prison in Russia. We want the U.S. Special Services to think about how they can contribute to achieving the goals our special services are pursuing. We are ready to talk. Moreover, the talks are underway and there have been many successful examples of these talks crowned with success. Probably this is going to be crowned with success as well. But we have to come to an agreement.

Tucker: I hope you let him out. Mr. President, thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I also want him to return to his homeland at last. I'm absolutely sincere. But let me say once again, the dialog continues. The more public we render things of this nature, the more difficult it becomes to resolve them. Everything has to be done in calm manner.

Tucker: I wonder if that's true with the war though. I guess I want to ask one more question, which is and maybe you don't want to say so for strategic reasons, but are you worried that what's happening in Ukraine could lead to something much larger and much more horrible? And how motivated are you just to call the U.S. government and say, let's come to terms?

Vladimir Putin: I already said that we did not refuse to talk. We're willing to negotiate. It is the western side, and Ukraine is obviously a satellite state of the US. It is evident. I do not want you to take it as if I am looking for a strong word or an insult. But we both understand what is happening. The financial support. 72 billion U.S. dollars was provided. Germany ranks second, then other European countries come. Dozens of billions of U.S. dollars are going to Ukraine. There's a huge influx of weapons. In this case, you should tell the current Ukrainian leadership to stop and come to a negotiating table, rescind this absurd decree. We did not refuse.

Tucker: Sure, but you already said it. I didn't think you meant it is an insult because you already said correctly, it's been reported that Ukraine was prevented from negotiating a peace settlement by the former British Prime Minister acting on behalf of the Biden administration. So, of course they're a satellite. Big countries control small countries. That's not new. And that's why I asked about dealing directly with the Biden administration, which is making these decisions, not President Zelensky of Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: Well if the Zelensky administration in Ukraine refused to negotiate, I assume they did it under the instruction from Washington. If Washington believes it to be the wrong decision, let it abandon it. Let it find the delicate excuse so that no one is insulted. Let it come up with a way out. It was not us who made this decision. It was them. So let them go back on it. That is it. However, they made the wrong decision. And now we have to look for a way out of this situation to correct their mistakes. They did it, so let them correct it themselves. We support this.

Tucker: So I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying. I don't think that I am. I think you're saying you want a negotiated settlement to what's happening in Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: Right. And we made it. We prepared the huge document in Istanbul that was initialed by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. He had fixed his signature to some of the provisions, not to all of it. He put his signature and then he himself said, we were ready to sign it, and the war would have been over long ago. 18 months ago. However, Prime Minister Johnson came, talk to us out of it and we missed that chance. Well, you missed it. You made a mistake. Let them get back to that. That is all. Why do we have to bother ourselves and correct somebody else's mistakes? I know one can say it is our mistake. It was us who intensified the situation and decided to put an end to the war that started in 2014, in Donbas. As I have already said by means of weapons. Lt me get back to furthering history. I already told you this. We were just discussing it. Let us go back to 1991, when we were promised that NATO would not expand to 2008, when the doors to NATO opened to the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine, declaring Ukraine a neutral state. Let us go back to the fact that NATO and U.S. military bases started to appear on the territory, Ukraine creating threats to us. Let us go back to coup d'etat in Ukraine in 2014. It is pointless, though, isn't it? We may go back and forth endlessly, but they stopped negotiations. Is it a mistake? Yes. Correct it. We are ready. What else is needed?

Tucker: Do you think it's too humiliating at this point for NATO to accept Russian control of what was two years ago Ukrainian territory?

Vladimir Putin: I said let them think how to do it with dignity. There are options if there is a will. Up until now, there has been the uproar and screaming about inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia on the battlefield. But now they are apparently coming to realize that it is difficult to achieve, if possible, at all. In my opinion, it is impossible by definition. It is never going to happen. It seems to me that now those who are in power in the West have come to realize this as well. If so, if the realization has set in, they have to think what to do next. We are ready for this dialogue.

Tucker: Would you be willing to say congratulations, NATO, you won and just keep the situation where it is now?

Vladimir Putin: You know, it is a subject matter for the negotiations. No one is willing to conduct or, to put it more accurately... they're willing, but do not know how to do it. I know they want to. It is not just I see it, but I know they do want it, but they are struggling to understand how to do it. They have driven the situation to the point where we are at. It is not us who have done that. It is our partners, opponents who have done that. Well now let them think how to reverse the situation. We're not against it. It would be funny if it were not so sad that. This endless mobilization in Ukraine, the hysteria, the domestic problems, sooner or later it will result in an agreement. You know, this probably sounds strange given the current situation. But the relations between the two peoples will be rebuilt anyway. It will take a lot of time, but they will heal. I'll give you very unusual examples. There is a combat encounter on the battlefield. Here is a specific example. Ukrainian soldiers get encircled. This is an example from real life. Our soldiers were shouting to them. There is no chance. Surrender yourselves. Come out and you will be alive. Suddenly the Ukrainian soldiers were screaming from there in Russian. Perfect Russian. Saying Russians do not surrender. And all of them perished. They still identify themselves as Russian. What is happening is, to a certain extent, an element of a civil war. Everyone in the West thinks that the Russian people have been split by hostilities forever, and now they will be reunited. The unity is still there. Why are the Ukrainian authorities dismantling the Ukrainian Orthodox Church? Because it brings together not only the territory. It brings together our souls. No one will be able to separate the soul. Shall we end here, or is there anything else?

Tucker: Thank you, Mr. President.

transcriptions 4 study","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) -> transcriptions 4 study

Anchor tag marking spot, for jump point

The Revolution of Natural Law, a 1776 rebellion in the 21 century

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Wed, 24 Jan 2024 09:40:17 GMT

Click to read cross-post

transcriptions 4 study","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) -> transcriptions 4 study

Click here to go to new presentation

Natural Law part 3

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:03:55 GMT

This presentation has been upgraded & redesigned.

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Click here to go to new presentation

Natural Law part 2

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Sun, 05 Nov 2023 20:13:13 GMT

This presentation has been upgraded & redesigned.

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Click here to go to new presentation

Natural law seminar Part 1

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:27:54 GMT

This presentation has been upgraded & redesigned.

Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH) - transcriptions 4 study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own

Mark Passio & The Science Of Natural Law Documentary

Dennis promoting Mark Passio — Wed, 01 Nov 2023 06:10:05 GMT

There sometimes seems to be a bug that suppresses the picture-in-picture (PIP) feature when accessing this website through a link. The PIP feature is normally available in the bottom right corner of the above video. Also, the substack app seems to suppress the PIP feature much of the time, so I don’t suggest using the substack app, but rather directly access this site through a web browser, WITHOUT clicking a link.

Using the PIP feature is the best way to assimilate this site’s information, IMHO, because you can scroll the video with you, as you read along. NOTE: you must also have PIP feature turned on in the settings for your browse

Science Of Natural Law

134KB ∙ PDF file

Is humanity truly free?

Are there universal laws in effect that apply to human behavior?

Does our knowledge or ignorance of these laws impact our collective freedom as a species?

This documentary will explore these questions and our current understanding of universal forces that affect the daily lives of each and every one of us.

I'm an independent researcher and public speaker from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I lecture on the topics of human consciousness, morality, freedom, occultism, symbology, and spirituality.

Many years of unique life experiences have afforded me an extraordinary perspective on the current human condition. Through my website, whatonearthishappening.com, I continue to explore these topics with a worldwide audience. I grew up with a traditional Roman Catholic family background in South Philadelphia.

During my grade school years, I began questioning the beliefs and motives of organized religion, recognizing it as a system designed to control human thought and understanding. My unanswered philosophical and sociological questions eventually turned to discontent and anger. This drove me to seek out what I considered at the time to be the polar opposite of religion. My subsequent life path led me into membership and influence of what I now refer to as the Dark Occult, what most people might call nefarious secret societies.

But what actually is the Occult?

The occult

What does the word occult mean?

Occult? It means maybe supernatural or yeah.

Occult? Mystic, unknown, kind of stigmatized.

It's funny, I think by society it generally has a negative connotation. I'm not sure I could actually define it.

I think it's like palmistry, voodoo, like spirits, things like that. Ouija boards maybe.

I guess anything that is a Christian would be considered a cult.

Um... spiritual.

Like something with a strong following, right?

Um, I don't know, honestly.

I don't know.

Um. I have no idea.

The word occult simply means hidden. The occult refers to hidden knowledge, knowledge that is not commonly known by the vast majority of human beings. Occultism is a body of knowledge which encompasses the study of hidden laws of nature. Laws which cannot readily be seen with our eyes or measured by traditional scientific instrumentation.

I became aware that the groups of occultists with whom I became involved were comprised of an eclectic array of people from every walk of life and every social institution, including politics, banking, media, law, military, law enforcement, entertainment, technology, medicine, and education. Among their ranks were many people of great influence and power, all working together toward one common goal, to increase their own collective power at the expense of everyone else's rights and freedom.

These dark occultists are able to do this because they have access to hidden knowledge to which the overwhelming majority of humanity still remains ignorant. These occult manipulators are actually master psychologists who utilize their deep and ancient knowledge of the human psyche and the hidden laws of nature to deceive and manipulate the masses of humanity into total subservience to their will. This allows the occult manipulators to easily convert their knowledge differential into a power differential in our world.

After a profound crisis in conscience, I eventually made the free will decision to cease my involvement in the world of dark occultism. I now teach people the very information which these dark occult orders have been keeping to themselves in order to stay in power behind the scenes. The ultimate hidden knowledge which they have been holding back from humanity's awareness is called natural law, and it is the secret of all so-called secret societies throughout human history.

Natural Law

What is natural law?

Natural law? I guess you could say just what, almost like first instinct kind of, you know what I mean? Like what would come simply just by the way that we are.

I'm not really sure. I'm actually a lawyer by training and education, so I'm probably the worst person to ask.

Law applies to the whole country.

I think it means like how law is interpreted by people on like a day to day basis.

Natural law, everyone is nice. Everyone was born nice and kind but they’re corrupted by society.

The term natural law. I mean if you break it down, and I guess in regular terms it’d mean. Damn actually now I'm thinking about it. I don't know what natural law means.

To understand what natural law is we must first know what it most certainly is not. Natural law is definitely not and has absolutely nothing to do with Darwin's theories on evolution, the Darwinian survival of the fittest, the so-called law of the jungle, or the so-called natural order of nature as a dog-eat-dog world.

So, what actually is natural law? The definition of the word natural is, inherent to, and having a basis in, reality and nature. In other words, not man-made. The definition of the word law is, an existing condition that is both binding and immutable. Binding means having an effect that cannot be escaped. Immutable means unable to be changed by anything or anyone. Natural law, therefore, is a set of universal, non-man-made, binding and unchangeable conditions, which govern the behavorial consequence of beings with the capacity for holistic intelligence.

Natural law governs the aggregate or collective, free-will behavioral choices of entire populations by manifesting the consequences of the behaviors that we choose. The consequences which we receive are always dependent upon whether our chosen behaviors are either moral or immoral, or in other words, right or wrong. While we all have free will to choose which behaviors we will conduct, we are not insulated from the moral consequences of our behavioral choices.

Natural law is a body of laws that operate within the unseen or non-physical realm, so they may be considered to be occulted or hidden laws of nature. These laws are built into the fabric of reality, just like gravity and electromagnetism. However, since these governing dynamics operate in the non-physical realm, human beings must incorporate a much wider worldview in order to recognize and accept the existence and operation of these laws.

The understanding of natural law is absolutely not a belief system or a religion. The workings of natural law can be discovered and understood through its observable, measurable, and repeatable effects in our world. In other words, the understanding of natural law actually constitutes a science of morality, which requires no belief or faith. Belief or disbelief in these laws is completely irrelevant, as they exist as surely as any physical law, such as gravity, which we take for granted in daily life.

Natural law is also known as moral law, cosmic law, universal law, spiritual law, the law of cause and effect, consequentialism, the golden rule, karma, and many other names. Why is understanding natural law so important? The understanding of natural law is critically important to human beings who seek to live in freedom and peace together. Since natural law delivers the consequences of an entire society's behavioral choices, based on whether their behavior is moral or not, it is of fundamental importance for human beings to know with certainty what the difference between right behavior and wrong behavior actually is.

Human rights

Do human beings have inherent rights?

Yes.

Of course.

Yeah, they do.

Yes.

Uh, yes.

Oh, absolutely. Absolutely.

Yeah, I think every human has a right.

Human beings always have rights. No matter where you're from, no matter your religion, sex, no matter what happens, they should always have rights.

What is the definition of a human right?

A human right is something that by the fact that we exist as individuals, we are entitled to just by the nature of being.

Something that a human being would need in order to thrive.

Something provided to a human just for existing.

Something that everyone deserves, like just being born and being alive.

The right to have shelter and food and water and basic necessities.

You know I want to go with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness essentially, but food, shelter and basic needs I think are human rights.

Human right, I think it's, I don't know, I guess something allowed to a human, I guess.

Every human being deserves something, and that would be a right, and an example of human right would be safety.

A right is an action that does not initiate harm to another sentient being. Most human beings cannot correctly provide that simple definition when asked. This is the primary reason that human beings are losing their rights and freedom. How can we possibly keep what we cannot even properly define?

A right must be defined in the negative. This means that we can arrive at an understanding of the infinite amount of rights we have by knowing the very small amount of actions that are not rights. Actions which are wrongdoings. Behaviors which do initiate harm to other sentient beings.

This list of harmful behaviors includes: murder, assault, rape, theft, trespass, coercion, and willfully lying. If we analyze each of the wrongdoings in turn, we can find that they are all variations of theft in one form or another.

Murder is the theft of life which is not rightfully ours to take.

Assault is the theft of another's well-being without right.

Rape is the theft of free will sexual association.

Theft is the stealing of property

Trespass is the theft of the security of one's living domain

Coercion is the theft of free will choice via violence or duress

And willfully lying is the theft of necessary information, which negatively impacts someone else's ability to engage in informed decision-making.

These immoral behaviors constitute the very definition of violence. Violence is the initiation of harmful behavior against other sentient beings. The list of harmful behaviors just explained are transgressions against natural law, because they are violations of the inherent rights of others. To violate the inherent rights of other beings through theft is actually what is meant to conduct violence. Since all wrongdoings are forms of theft, the natural law of moral conduct be summed up in two words: don't steal.

The non-aggression principle and the self-defense principle. The non-aggression principle is one of the main principles of natural law. This principle means that it is morally wrong to initiate aggression or violence upon other sentient beings. This brings us to another important principle of natural law, the self-defense principle. Individuals always reserve the natural right to use physical force to defend themselves against acts of violence conducted upon them. Self-defense is not, and should never be considered to be, violence. Self-defense against violence is an inherent right of all sentient beings.

Do human beings have the right to defend themselves against aggression?

Yes

Yes.

Yeah.

Yes

Yes, yeah, if the aggression is physical I would say yes.

If physical force is acted on them first.

Equality under natural law

Does everyone have the same rights? Or do some people have more rights than others?

I think people should have rights that are equal to everybody else.

I think in a perfect world everyone would have the same rights but as the world is right now, people don't all have the same rights.

Not everyone has the same rights.

Some people have different rights, money, privilege, class, things like that.

In reality, some people have way more rights than other people.

There's definitely some rights that some people possess and others don't.

Most people would agree with the fact that the behaviors which initiate harm to others are immoral actions. The problem arrives when we fail to hold everyone to the same account regarding the morality of their actions. We must understand that everyone has the same rights as everyone else, and there are no exceptions to this law. If no individual possesses the right to perform a certain action because it initiates harm to another, then no one can delegate such a non-existent right to any other individual or any other group, and thereby magically turn a wrongdoing into a right. In other words, everyone possesses exactly the same natural, inherent rights as everyone else, and there are no exceptions to this rule for individuals in government, police, military or any other societal institution. This is what is meant by equality under natural law.

Legality does not equate to morality

Is government authority morally legitimate?

I mean I think we need laws and regulations, but I'm not sure our laws and regulations are always moral.

Not always.

Yeah, I believe it is.

To some extent.

It depends on whether the authority was, at least in our democratic tradition, whether the authority was based on the consent of the governed.

No. No, I feel like we'd be fine without it.

If the laws of man happen to align with the natural laws of morality, then they are by definition redundant and therefore unnecessary. If man's law is in opposition with natural law, and therefore false and immoral, it can never be legitimately morally binding upon anyone. Because something is either legal or illegal does not make it moral or immoral. Recognizing this, we can then arrive at the correct understanding that all so-called human authority is morally illegitimate because it is not voluntary and it is based upon coercion and violence, which is itself immoral behavior.

Natural law versus man's law

Does government authority exist in nature?

Yes, I believe it does.

Yes. Yes. In some cases more than other cases.

Absolutely.

Yes.

In today's society, yes.

I feel like you are, whatever your mind convinces itself that it is, or that you are, that's just what it is.

Well yes, there's always a hierarchy. I mean, even in every animal species, there's a hierarchy.

Yes.

Yes, because we follow orders from our parents from time to time. You know, they're the authority figures.

Yes, because of the punishments that can happen if you go against authority.

Yeah, it does.

They do, but it's up to you whether you want to care about it or not.

It does exist in nature. I mean, if you look at animals and birds, there's a hierarchy and there's some form of government, and I'm okay with that.

Governmental authority is an illegitimate, man-made construct that does not exist in nature. The belief system that certain people can somehow possess legitimate authority over others, or that some people have more or less inherent rights than others, is one of the most fundamental causes of unparalleled suffering and death in our world. Authority is, and always has been, an untrue, illusory, illegitimate, and immoral claim, which is unfortunately accepted and believed in by most human beings with absolute religious fervor. The so-called delegation of authority to politicians, police and military is inherently morally illegitimate and cannot actually be done in nature, since it is impossible to bestow or delegate a quote right to someone else which no one possesses as an individual.

The human condition is slavery

Is taxation by government morally legitimate?

Yes. It's morally legitimate because there are people who are not... Yes. I'm just going to say yes.

Yes, because we need to fund things.

Uh, to some extent, but I think it has to be fair taxation.

I think it would depend on what the taxes are going to.

I don't think it's morally legitimate. Again, I do think it is needed to fund resources and things like that, but I don't think it's a moral issue.

I think so because if we didn't have taxes we wouldn't be taking care of the greater good, roads, education, etc.

Well the way we've set up our culture that's the only thing that makes it work.

Paying taxes? No. Like, I mean where does it go? I mean, we all experience this. You work, get a check, and then you see a chunk of it missing, and no one's telling you why it's missing. Hell no. Yeah, no.

Money and taxes, I think there's a lot of bullshit involved, because a lot of money is thrown around, like huge amounts of it, at things like politics and war and a lot of taxes go into things that aren't really helping most people. They're helping a few people do not so good things.

Taxation is theft enforced by the threat of coercion and violence.

Are drug laws morally legitimate and necessary? Or do people have the right to put into their body what they choose?

If society is charged with the responsibility of funding the health and welfare of everyone in society, then I think there should be laws that prevent people from incurring health risks they would not otherwise occur had they not taken the drugs.

If they promise never to leave the house, but that doesn't happen, so yeah, we have to babysit people, unfortunately.

In my experience, it's kind of like, it is their own choice for what they put in their bodies, but at some point, you do want the government to step in, because you don't want it to become like an entire crisis where you're losing an entire portion of your country's population due to that drug.

Yeah, so people have the right to put whatever they want into their body, but they also must not let that affect other people around them.

Well, I do not agree with all of the laws, and I think that to a limit that everyone has a choice on that, but I don't think that it should be readily available if it's toxic.

It depends on the drug and how bad it is for you.

I believe they should have the right.

I think people have the right to I mean it is our body we're born into it.

I think they help they help but some of them I would say are a little over the top some of them are a little under.

People own their body and have a right to choose what they put into it.

Are driver's licenses morally legitimate and necessary? Or is travel an inherent right?

Driver's license is definitely necessary, otherwise there would be way too many accidents.

I think unlicensed travel is a right.

I think you do need a license, because that proves that you're able to drive safely.

I think driver's licenses are morally necessary and legitimate.

I would want someone who's going to be driving a car to know how to drive a car. So, yes, I would say that driver's licenses are pretty necessary.

Do you need a license? Do you see people driving in Philly?

Have you seen people driving? They're texting, they're not paying attention. We've got to babysit people, unfortunately.

Driving licenses are necessary because I feel like you shouldn't be able to drive after a certain age.

I think there could be even more rules with driver's licenses actually. I think they're too lax.

That's another interesting question. I know a few people without licenses who drive, but I don't think it's 100% ethical. I think there are some drawbacks to that, mainly the application process.

License drivers is morally legitimate.

Driver's licenses are a coercive restriction on the natural human right to travel.

If a government law prohibits an action that doesn't cause harm to anyone else, are people morally obligated to obey that law?

Yes, it brings peace to the society.

I think they should still obey it because it's a law.

It depends on what the purpose of the law was. It might have a purpose other than harm. It might be for a greater good or it might be... So that's a definite maybe.

No, I don't believe so.

No, I don't think so.

That would be the law, but I don't think that everyone... I think there are occasions or exceptions to that idea, so no.

I think legally they're obligated, but on a personal level, I don't think they are.

No, I don't feel like you should, because it's like they make it so that you have to or else you'll be punished for it. But I don't feel like you should have to. I feel like if it's not hurting anyone, why is it a big issue? Why are we focused on it?

Man-made laws that are in moral opposition to natural law are morally illegitimate and therefore not morally binding. The only legitimate human interactions are those which are voluntary, meaning they are mutually agreed upon by all of the involved participants. Man-made laws, including those which decree and enact behaviors such as prohibition, taxation, and licensure are not voluntary in any way. They are commands of compliance, which are always backed by the threat of violence or actual violent behavior. Man-made laws are arbitrary decrees of a ruling class, calling themselves government, who are believed to possess a magical right to rule. Their subjects, the people living under their so-called jurisdiction, are believed to have a moral obligation to obey this ruling class's arbitrary commands called laws.

Understanding that such a system is entirely based in behavior that is coercive, violent, and immoral, and conducted to bring human behavior into compliance with the will of a dominating ruling class, we can arrive at the unwavering truth that the term government is simply a euphemism for slavery.

And that is what the human condition truly is: slavery.

Slavery exists when certain individuals make a claim upon the body or the fruits of the labor of others, making them subject to them through violent and coercive means. Slavery can exist in an overt form in which those being enslaved are physically imprisoned and subject to the confiscation of all their labor. Or, slavery can exist in covert form where mental manipulation is used to legitimize or justify the duress, coercion, and violence that is used to perpetuate the immoral conditions in which people are unjustly kept.

There is a reason the condition of human slavery continues on and on. This immoral human condition is maintained by the occult ruling class by manipulating people into a state of ignorance and confusion regarding the actual difference between right and wrong.

Objective morality

Is morality objective or subjective?

Um, I think morality, to some extent, is human interpretation, but there is a clear right and wrong on other topics.

I think it depends on you know definitely depends on who you are because a different person can see it a completely different way you get what I'm saying.

I think it depends on the situation.

I believe morality is based on opinion. I mean I don't really believe that you're necessarily born with a good or bad morality. It's basically based on your life circumstances.

I think it's definitely subjective.

I think it depends on opinion and the situation.

I think it depends on human opinion.

No, I don't believe that there is such thing as objective morality.

I mean, I'm inclined to say that it exists, objective morality, but I don't think that we have the capacity to understand something that all-encompassing.

I think morality is objective.

Objective. I mean mostly on human perception, but I'd say there's like a societal viewpoint, yeah.

It's a tough question. I'm...The way I feel about it is if you're not hurting anyone and if it makes you happy, why not?

Sadly I think it's a subjective and that it's a open for agreement or discussion kind of.

I think it's written in stone. I think it should be pretty clear. I think it's written in stone uh...to some point with some opinion. I guess.

I don’t think it’s written in stone. I think it is subjective actually. I think it's subjective, yeah ok.

I'm believe I personally think it's more objective than than relative.

The difference between right behavior and wrong behavior is objective, meaning it is not based upon the perceptions or opinions of human beings, but rather, such a difference in behavior exists in nature, purely independently of subjective human perception or opinion. Morality does not change based upon feelings, religion, belief, location, time, or the preferences and whims of man's law. These things have no bearing upon true morality. What is moral in one place and time is moral at all places and times. And what is immoral in one place or time is immoral everywhere and at any time.

Conscience

The knowledge of this objective difference between right and wrong behavior is called conscience.

Conscience is the knowledge of whether any particular behavior in question does or does not initiate harm to another, and therefore whether it is right or wrong. The problem is that most people do not possess this knowledge, or they are extremely confused regarding it. To behave with right action is moral, and to behave with wrong action is immoral, yet this fundamental understanding is often grossly misunderstood. People do not get to decide what morality is. Morality is based upon whether an action initiates harm or not. This dynamic exists inherently in the natural world.

Where do human rights come from

Religion, government, society.

I guess it depends on the country allowing human rights. I’m not sure.

Some from the law, some from, yeah, I think from the law.

They apparently are decided by many people.

Well since you're not bored with it, I think it's like a collective... I think they come from your fellow woman or man. More woman, quite frankly.

Constitution.

Realistically, human rights come from law, but I think they should come from the basic moral agreements that I described earlier.

Human rights, I think human rights are inherent. The moment we're born, we are entitled to certain rights, but then those rights are also, like I said, qualified by society.

Well, human rights come from what you believe that all humans should have in general. So like, if you believe that they should always have freedom, or if you believe that they are always entitled to something.

They should come from morality.

They come from, I guess, morality. Yeah, so.

Well, in the Christian tradition we say they come from God.

Human rights should come from within and should come from a natural place, but I think in our society they come from governments.

The inherent rights of human beings are their inalienable universal birthright and can never be granted or removed by any action or process of mankind. Our rights come from nature, meaning they are pre-existing and inherent to creation itself.

Unfortunately, after thousands of years of human civilization, most people still do not understand this eternal truth. It seems so simple that we as human beings should willfully choose to take right action, to honor and respect the rights of others not to be harmed, to treat others with the same respect with which we expect to be treated, not to steal the life, well-being, property, rights or free will of others. Yet it is not as simple as it may seem. True right action is elusive at best and deliberately ignored at worst. And this brings us to the crux of the matter, which is what I refer to as the Law of Freedom.

The Law of Freedom

The law of freedom governs the states of freedom or slavery of entire populations of beings who possess the capacity to comprehend the objective difference between moral behavior and immoral behavior. The natural law of freedom dictates that, as a society collectively becomes more moral, they collectively become more free. And as a society collectively becomes more immoral, they collectively lose their freedom and become more enslaved.

The freedom or slavery of an entire society is hinged upon whether that society behaves in the aggregate morally or immorally. Since most people still do not truly know the objective difference between right and wrong behavior, they are constantly making judgments that do not align with natural law. As more and more people act in such an ignorant capacity with respect to natural law, this conduct becomes a fundamental source of disorder and chaos in our society as a whole. In other words, the law of freedom could be summarized like this: as the aggregate moral behavior in any given society increases, the aggregate freedom of the members of that society also increases, and as the aggregate moral behavior of any given society declines, the aggregate freedom of the members of that society also declines. Even more simply put, as morality increases, freedom increases, and as morality declines, freedom declines. Therefore, human freedom is entirely dependent upon educated judgments that align with natural law-based morality, the objective knowledge of the difference between right behavior and wrong behavior. Believe it or not, you have just been given the secret of secrets of all secret societies throughout human history.

Moral Relativism

Moral Relativism is the belief that there is no objective difference between right behavior and wrong behavior. Moral relativists believe that morality is relative or subjective, meaning that right and wrong can change with respect to time and location, depending upon human perception and opinion, likes and dislikes, whims and preferences. Moral relativism is the belief that human beings may arbitrarily decide for themselves what right and wrong are, and that they may become the arbiters of moral and immoral behavior based upon their likes and dislikes at any given time or place.

It is absolutely essential for humanity to recognize that morality is objective, and that it is most certainly not based upon human perception or opinion. There is definitely an objective difference in nature between moral behavior and immoral behavior, because moral behavior does not initiate harm to others, whereas immoral behavior does initiate harm. These dynamics exist within, and are inherent to, the natural world.

The prevalence of moral relativism in human society today is one of the main factors which solidifies slavery as the current human condition. Since aligning human behavior with natural law hinges upon knowing the objective difference between right behavior and wrong behavior, if most members of a society accept that there is no truth regarding those objective differences, that society can never consistently behave morally and therefore they can never truly be free.

True freedom can never exist in a society that embraces moral relativism, a society where people believe there is no objective difference between right and wrong behavior. Knowing the objective difference between right and wrong, and then willfully choosing right action over wrong action, is the foundational basis for the manifestation of the condition of freedom. If human beings remove that foundation by declaring that there is no objective morality, they will never be able to manifest a condition of genuine freedom in their lives.

Understanding true objective morality will help humanity to recognize the fundamentally flawed belief in the legitimacy of human authority and government. By doing so, human interaction can become voluntary and free from the immorality of violence and coercion. If we want a world based in real freedom, we must understand that truth is independent of our perception and that objective morality exists and we can come to know it. If people learn the true difference between right and wrong behavior, humanity can become and remain free. If human beings continue to refuse this knowledge and continue to accept erroneous beliefs such as authority and moral relativism, humanity is going to remain enslaved.

Free will

Do human beings have free will?

We think we do, but I don't believe so.

Human beings for the most part have free will.

To some extent. We're not always free to do everything, which I think it should be left like that.

I don't believe so, no.

Yes, in my opinion, I believe that humans have free will. I don't believe that you're living your life under somebody's control.

Free will. I think we do, we do have free will. We do have free will. But that free will is also suppressed by social norms.

No actually no. I don't think human beings have free will.

Um, yes.

Well we think we do, but in truth I don't think we do.

Yes.

Yes and no.

Yes. Or they should.

Uh, in some cases.

Yes.

All human beings have the free will to choose between moral behavior and immoral behavior. We have a choice as a people. We can use our free will to change our behavior and bring it into alignment with natural law by choosing morally right action. Or we can choose to behave immorally by condoning and perpetuating a system based in violence, coercion, and moral relativism.

Will we continue down the path of slavery, watching our inherent rights stripped from us little by little? Or will we embrace the moral principles of natural law, and create a society where each individual's life, rights and freedom are respected and protected, because we recognize our inherent sovereignty and the sovereignty of all other sentient beings. The law of freedom will manifest our reality in either direction, based upon our collective moral choices.

The Science of Natural Law

Our shared human experience on earth is collectively created and determined by the quality of aggregate human behavior. This demonstrates the effects of the natural laws of behavioral consequence operating within the physical realm. Our free will based behaviors operate in what is known as the plane of causality, because our behavior is the underlying cause of the physical manifestations which result in the world.

The consequences and repercussions of aggregate human behavior then materialize upon the plane of effects, which constitutes the shared human condition in which all of us must live. Our aggregate thoughts regarding morality are transformed into the aggregate behavior of our species, and that behavior is then transformed into resultant conditions and consequences. Truly, we collectively reap that which we collectively sow.

Wrongful action can never create goodness and harmony, and right action can never constitute a violation of rights. Two plus two will never equal five, and the apple falling from a tree will never fall upwards in elementary terms. Our behavior creates our circumstances. These dynamics can be repeatedly observed, and their workings can be known as a result of such observation. The study of these dynamics in human society constitutes a science of behavioral consequence. All living beings are endowed with self-ownership as an inherent birthright, and therefore possess the natural right to exercise their own free will to live in sovereignty, free from the initiation of harm or coercion by other human beings. These principles of human freedom and rights are the very basis of morality and are governed by the spiritual laws of behavioral consequence. Any and all violations of these principles are wrongdoings, chaotic actions working in direct opposition to the generative, self-ordering dynamics of natural law as designed by creation itself.

Though some may attempt to do so, these laws ultimately cannot be worked around, changed, skirted, or bent to suit human whims or desires. To choose to observe the natural rights and sovereignty of other beings is in alignment with spiritual law, and such choice will create the conditions for freedom to manifest upon earth. To choose to conduct wrongdoings in direct violation of these laws will manifest only chaos and suffering. Human behavior is collectively manifested into our physical reality based upon humanity's free will choice whether to act in harmony with natural law, thus creating the conditions of freedom, or to act in opposition to natural law, thus creating the condition of human slavery.

These are the universal, moral, spiritual laws of the universe that govern all of humankind. This is the science of natural law.

The One Great Work

My unwavering dedication to delivering the message of natural law in every conceivable form for the past thirteen years has gone virtually unnoticed by humanity as a whole, and society continues its rapid descent into immorality, chaos, and slavery. Far too few understand or take heed of my warnings, and even fewer speak out to teach others. I am seeking peers and allies in the war for our very freedom that is before us. Our one great work is to end the human condition of slavery. This arduous task begins with the self and extends to our friends and family, our communities and our world.

Speaking out is an extreme act of defiance because those who are currently in power seek to keep their power by exploiting the ignorance of mankind. There is so much human ignorance in the world today regarding the issue of morality that the situation can seem hopeless. Becoming aware of the level of ignorance that exists, we must also come to see that the only solution to the human condition of slavery is to spread the understanding of natural law and make it common sense knowledge for everyone.

The dark occultists who are currently controlling humanity seek to continue to hide this understanding and to prevent it from becoming everyday common sense knowledge on a worldwide scale. Ultimately, this documentary is a call to action for all those who have gained an understanding of natural law and its principles. A lot more teachers are needed to carry this message of freedom to the masses of humanity. There are not yet enough voices doing this. You yourself need to get involved in the effort of spreading the knowledge of natural law. The solution lies in not just knowing it, but in what you do to spread this knowledge once you have come to understand it.

Start a podcast, publish a blog, make a video, publish a newsletter, make music and art, contribute resources, do anything and everything you can to make natural law common sense knowledge to people all over the world. Only with a united effort will we have a fighting chance. We need more boots on the ground in this spiritual war for human freedom. Once you have expanded your world view to encompass an understanding of the science of natural law, it becomes your personal responsibility to help others to learn these inherent governing dynamics of creation.

Our very freedom itself depends on it. This has been an introduction to the philosophy and science of natural law. For further study, please watch my full video seminar entitled, “Natural Law-The Real Law of attraction and how to apply it in your life”. For more information on my work, please visit my website www.whatonearthishappening.com. I recommend studying my podcasts in order starting from number one at yoru own pace and watching my video presentations and seminars.

Thank you so much for your time and attention.

For more on natural law:

transcriptions for study","action":null,"class":null}" data-component-name="ButtonCreateButton">Share What on earth is happening (WOEIH)->transcriptions for study

Start writing today. Use the button below to create a Substack of your own