This is my reaction to the following article by one of my well-meaning fellow authors on Substack:
https://kwnorton.substack.com/p/fascism-and-codependency-part-i
The article cross-published Tessa Lena’s, who is another well-meaning author here:
https://tessa.substack.com/p/zombies-of-algorithm
My comments are on both, but primarily on Lena’s (but she doesn’t mention codependency).
Codependency?
Although the idea of “codependency” is not fully acknowledged in the pseudo-science of Psychiatry, I can condone the following definition:
A co-dependent person relies on other people’s opinion for his or her self-esteem.
That certainly supports KWNORTON’s notes, because it certainly applies to those, who expect an “authority” to be responsible for their decisions, perhaps because they lack the self-esteem or the adventurous spirit to make up their own minds. Dangerous lot, indeed: they definitely exhibit characteristics of the proverbial “zombie” that Tessa uses for reference to such people.
Fascism?
Tessa, for some reason, is using the cuss word, “fascism,” which is meaningless and is only good for arousing emotions, while discouraging any further investigation of the subject. If you can offer an acceptable definition beyond the popular myths, I would highly appreciate it.
Tessa is setting up a straw-man opposition: fascism, which, frankly, I don’t believe can be identified in any of the major players* or even ever existed as it has been planted into popular culture after the international bankers’ only significant adversary was eliminated in WW2.
Who is your enemy?
Today, the people’s enemies are the globalist eugenicist technocrats, and they have literally nothing to do with “fascism,” unless the fact that they control and own governments and corporations is meant by “fascism.” In the traditional definition, the term only referred to the combination of corporate and governmental power, but didn’t include the globalist banking cartel and, it looks like in the way it is used today by most sources, it still doesn’t.
Mystifying the subject for the sake of rhetorical or artistic power doesn’t help
Tessa’s reference to “Thinking with your soul” only adds further mystification to the subject, which only does disservice to the otherwise (possibly) well-meaning article. Only problem-centered thinking can be “clear,” and only when it contains the cause, the owner, an acceptable solution, and the parties who have the power to solve the problem. Otherwise, the problem becomes an “issue” or, preferred by the MSM, a “controversial issue,” which is an insult to anyone’s intelligence.
Tessa also mentions the demonization of the uninjected, which is nothing new and the article adds literally nothing to what has been commonly known for about two years.
Tessa also suggests that “We all have the power, our power is in respecting our own souls and in standing up for our right to be dignified and loving toward others.”
Complete nonsense:
1. there is no “we”; the warm and fuzzy feeling the word generates also leaves responsibility to others, while maintaining that the person must shut up, because it is “we” who are talking (it’s called The Rhetoric of Power);
2. people have no power. The time for saying “no” successfully expired, when they obediently wore their muzzles, and by now, the damage is done; they might as well start considering why and how they will inevitably lose:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/what-will-ensure-you-will-lose
3. “respecting ‘our’ own souls” is also in dire need for a definition in order to prevent mystification of the subject.
All in all, I am not impressed with Tessa’s article. (KWNORTON tried to contextualize it, but your building materials determine the quality of the building you can erect.)
More often than not, Tessa does a whole lot better.
Say “no”?
Somehow, “say no” and the like have become popular slogans, which will accomplish literally nothing at this point.
Why?
Because
only affirmation of a greater good can defeat Evil. Fighting Evil on its own turf only dooms you to failure: sooner or later, everyone breaks.
* It’s a bit like throwing around the feel-good term “psychopath” that, as all labeling, only prevents thinking specifically and confines the mind to the realm of popular tropes, while encompassing a self-defeating mechanism:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/looking-for-psychopaths
Have to disagree with you on Fascism. Fascism was funded by the Globalist Banking Cartel through the BIS which was established in 1930 and what became known as Hitlers Bank.
BIS was supposed to be shut down after WWII but stayed on and is now the National Central Banks Central Bank currently working on a Global Programmable CBDC which will be the key to the Digital Gulag that is being built
Western Industrialists and Eugenicists were Fascisms biggest supporters, including the Bush Family whose bank was seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act.
Nazi Germany was the Pilot Project for Eugenicists and Technocrats , and contrary to popular opinion Fascism was never defeated in World War II, it just took cover under the cloak of Anti-Communism and is the basis of the Fascist European Union, NAFTA and the WEF.
Many of the Nazis and those who supported the Nazis in Ukraine were reintegrated into Germany and Europe business, politics, intelligence and banking, or were brought over to US, Canada and UK to teach us their tricks under programs like Operation Paper Clip
Truth be told China and the US (both Left and Right) are both Fascist despite one calling itself Communist and the other calling itself Democratic Capitalism.
Today Fascism and their policies are disguised with words like Public-Private Partnerships (Mussolini call Fascism Corporatism) and Sustainable Development and is more Global or Regional in vision than National, and Eugenics is now called Genetics using mRNA to depopulate and sterilize the useless class
Global Fascism is right on our door step but is invisible to many people who have been brainwashed into believing it does not exist
What Klaus Schwab calls the Fourth Industrial Revolution is best called the Fourth Reich.
“Enjoy” the coming Storm. I agree with you, saying “No “ is not enough to stop it. I am not sure anything can. Its almost 60 years since they took out JFK. That was the time to stop it, but we failed to act.
Hi Ray, yes there is some truth that psychiatry is a pesudo-science. Better be said that it is clearly a "fuzzy" empirical practice and can be and often is corrupted. It's like virology, you can be still be a good virologist if you know the troubles in your field. You still can study small particles (exosomes), subcellular structure and function, toxins, and call out your colleagues that they need to admit they aren't really finding things that fit the definition of a virus.
So you can still be a good psychiatrist if you call out the BS like psychoanalysis and the overselling of CBT, and the limitations of meds. But, some people are very mentally ill and need support and medications and some just need advice through tough times. You can see this if you are so inclined to understand the corruption of psychotherapy clinical trial madness, https://f1000research.com/articles/4-638/v2 but that doesn't mean all of it is pseudo, it all depends on what the psychiatrist is espousing in their practice.