Archive for January 18th, 2007

Just How Dumb ARE People Who Think They’re Intellectuals?

I am a documentary freak. I was watching one on the Stone Age culture in the islands north of Scotland. It reminded me of the times I went to visit Great Zimbabwe. Like absolutely every other ancient structure, Zimbabwe was regarded as a “religious structure.” This is because it is assumed that anything useful that was not a product of a Great Civilization was taught to the barbarians by the Orient, Ex Oriente Lux.

There is another assumption here, and I am STILL the only one who goes on with the critique of assumptions at a deeper and deeper level. The assumption is that nothing DUMB ever came out of the East. So the Ex Oriente Lux crowd has always assumed that the lowly barbarians spent all their time, money, and building skill on useless religious exercises the way Egypt did. Actually, even the ROMANS laughed openly at the Egyptians about this. They MADE FUN of the fact that the Egyptians build worthless crap out in the desert while the Romans were building roads.

No, not all of the people in Europe had the same quivering worship of the Middle East that “Christians’ and Political Correctness demand today. Please note, once again, the alliance here between the so-called conservative “Christians” and the established faith of Political Correctness. They stand shoulder to shoulder in the battle against REAL history as they do in the case of other realities.

So let us return to this assumption, WHICH NOBODY ELSE HAS EVER THOUGHT OF, of the simple fact that historians assume that nothing SILLY came from the Great Civilizations.

Once again, as with the words of Jesus, my experience with totalitarian society gives me an insight others do not have. As I walked around Zimbabwe, the hair on my neck raised. I had been here before. Every avenue was WATCHED. The main entrance led straight to a guard post and straight away from it. On the outskirts is circular winding walkway that has a classic purpose: a guard could stand at the top in those days before electronics and watch every step a person made to the center point.

Then there was the water. Like all other nice things, I have been taught to think in terms of THIRST. They showed us that, under the porous rock in that semi-desert area, there was an area under Zimbabwe that was very wet. It was wetter when Zimbabwe was new. It was a previously rocked-in area underneath Zimbabwe under the porous rock. When it rained there three or four times a year, the water went though the porous rock and accumulated in that gap, which today is mostly open. What the guide thought was particularly funny was that the only TREE in the area has grown right there, with its roots in the only water for miles around.

So while other people saw only a giant religious structure trying to copy Great Civilizations, what I saw was a familiar sight: a structure built to keep watch on a huge number of slaves, with the only source of water there.

But I was, for once, not the only person to make this observation. A number of sane Rhodesian scholars had declared the Great Zimbabwe was a slave-labor gold mine. They were denounced at Oxford, of course. Now this idea is accepted.

Hell, a lot of Germans were advocating the germ theory of disease in the seventeenth century. We only know that because the Intellectuals denounced them and the “Christians” wanted to know where THAT was in the Bible and Noah’s Ark. But this is going on today: Real history is always denounced as uneducated at first.

Which tells you a lot about the “educated.”

Back when the Great Sculptors were working in Renaissance Italy, I am sure the peasants wondered why their statues had to be so UGLY. They were bare gray stone, and to the peasants of that day, who liked vivid colors to brighten their dull existence, they must have looked depressing. But the Great Sculptors said that the peasants were ignoramuses, so they did Understand the SUBTLE beauty of the Ancients.

Actually the ancients would have gagged at the monstrosities, like the Capitol Building in Washington, DC, that these TRUE barbarians, these “educated” barbarians, produced. We know now that no such depressing gray stone structures EXISTED in the classical world. The “educated” people found statues which had been denuded of their vivid color by a thousand years of wear and did not have the imagination “– imagination is DEFINITELY encouraged by “education” or “Christianity” — to consider that a statue buried in the earth for a millennium may look different from the one that was originally buried down there.

Now back the islands north of Scotland. One ancient, pre-pyramid, village has been uncovered. That is, the stones have. It is significant to me what they said about it, but they didn’t listen to THEMSELVES. The documentary said this was an important discovery because all the other structures from the megalithic period were built of wood, but these islands have no wood but lots of stone to build with. So the stone gave historians a clear look.

Now if they THOUGHT about what they said, as I KEEP encouraging YOU to do — they would have a whole new view of history. They worship the Middle East. The Middle East built in stone because they had to send to LEBANON for wood. So did everything come from the Middle East or did everything THEY CAN FIND still stand there while all the others, the real originators, had their wood structures rot away?

This seems pretty obvious if you can THINK. But Dewey education was declared to be about “teaching us to think,” which means it was a wholesale onslaught AGAINST education. I have given you example after example about how, in practical politics, the first thing you do if you want to defend a monopoly is to declare a campaign against monopoly, if you want to spread hate you do it in the name of fighting hatred, and so forth.

People used to understand this as a matter of course. Then came “education.”

OK, so the documentary made my OLD point, that “Christians” and historians both worship stone. But my NEW point is that that piece went on to insist that everything on those islands was just religious. And in their terminology, “religious” means worthless. Anything NOT worthless had to wait for the Middle East to get it there.

But tiny communities on those barren islands did not develop the massive priesthood that wasted Egypt’s resources. While the historians obsessed over religious significance, as they did in Great Zimbabwe, I saw the practical uses of those structures. In other words, the silly stuff, the wasteful superstitious side of lie that historians impose on every building remain outside of the Middle East is a product of their own crap. Other societies didn’t develop the SILLINESS of Egypt. They did things for REASONS, like the Great Zimbabwe gold mines.

But until we realize that “intellectuals” are so stupid they don’t wonder what a thousand years’ wear might do to a status, that only a dullard would worship ROCKS and assume that everything began where there was no wood, that it is a highly expensive bureaucratic priesthood that builds a whole society around religion, we can’t see ANYTHING clearly.

Political Correctness is NOT the first time that silliness and superstition has been imposed in the name of “intellectuality” and “education.” It happens in every society as a matter of course and is just as a matter of time.

The people who call themselves “intellectuals” simply cannot understand real history because they are incapable of looking in the mirror, which is where the answer lies.

9 Comments

No, Shari, I am NOT Saying Your Mother is Ugly!

Not Spam
Not Spam

This blog is fascinating and I think about it a lot. But, I wonder if you don’t also despise us who are white, but not brilliant, as “cute Amish.” Shari

ME:

This is another of the million examples of taking offense where none was intended. I say something about life in Pompeii before the volcano, and somebody looks offended and says, “So what you mean is that my mother is ugly.” He or she then goes into a detailed discussion about how, if you really wanted to, and I mean DESPERATELY, you could take what I said as, if I had motivations I hadn’t dreamed of, would show how SUBTLY, since I’m smart and probably being subtle, be taken as a reference to his mother’s lack of pulchritude.

As you can imagine, this sort of thing is AWFULLY hard to deal with. It’s like a slap in the face. No, I did not have this person, much less his MOTHER, in mind. I thought what I said was pretty clear in itself. I don’t think anyone here who has been subject to my criticism — ask Al Parker — thinks of me as SUBTLE.

Today the term used is “designer children,” and it is considered to be a horror by the “Christians” and by the Politically Correct Ethics Departments of all universities. Once again, you have this alliance of “Christians” and Political Correctness against the future.

I have seen tracts by “intellectuals” attacking the germ theory of disease in the old days the same way. I saw sermons denouncing vaccinating, based on the germ theory. I dare any of you to go to a doctor today who does not subscribe to the germ theory of disease. When it HAPPENS, it is simply a practical step based on reality.

So I said that a person in the year 2100 who CHOOSES to have children with random genes will be regarded as “cute Amish.” Thais, he will have ugly, dumb offspring, who will probably NOT regard that choice as “cute.” But then again, circumcision was treated as “cute” on the Seinfeld Show. You can do anything you want to a baby.

I don’t think Amish children resent their upbringing, even when they choose the modern world. As I SAID, their parents can be pacifists because they have us here to protect them. They can choose not to have vaccinations because everybody else does, so the diseases are not a threat. They can NOT choose to send their children to school through the eighth grade only, as they wish, because that is not allowed by the established religion of this country. Even “cute,” “pet” people, which is what the Amish are, are allowed to defy The One True American Faith.

These are god points. These are IMPORTANT points.

So I make them and Shari says I am insulting her.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????

I am talking about people half to a century from now who will make a particular. I would be very happy to learn that Shari is indeed contacting us fro the future, because I would have a lot of questions for her if she is. But for the moment I will go on the assumption that Shari is also living in the year 2007. Shari can no more decide not to have designer children (her age will not then be a factor) than the Amish could have decided not to own an automobile in the year 1850.

And, Shari, for the twentieth time, it is YOU who keep saying you’re not bright, and Ole Bob is the one who KEEPS saying he wishes you would STOP that. It implies that ***I*** tolerate dumbies. You are here and quoted because ***I*** clear your comments and ***I*** quote your approach and ***I*** would tell you if I thought they were not bright.

Shari, your mother is NOT ugly and you are NOT dumb. If you had nothing to say I wouldn’t quote you, and that puts you in a vanishing small percentage of the present population.

STOP IT! If you keep putting yourself down, you are going to give the impression that the women here are considered stupid. If you do that, I am going to send Elizabeth after you.

If you really tick HER off, you’re going to find that the female of the species is not only deadlier than the male but if she really gets going, she makes us look like wimps.

Beware!

5 Comments