Francis Berger has highlighted a crucial negative fact, easily missed: that the peck has not been imposed on everybody in the world.
Since early 2020 (and under the blanket excuse of the birdemic) there is a global System of totalitarian governance that has shown itself capable of rapidly (by mere diktat) imposing and enforcing international economic closures, house arrest of vast majorities, all manner of blocks to travel and basic human contact...
Furthermore, it is able to impose ludicrously incoherent and labile 'narratives' that disguise and justify its own activities - by a monolithic control of all mainstream news and social media sources.
In other words; we can observe here-and-now an orders-of-magnitude greater accumulation and concentration of both physical and psychological power than ever before in the history of the world.
Therefore, and given that opposition to this centralized and totalitarian power has been rare and feeble, it is quite reliably possible to infer the intentions behind those who wield this power. It is possible, in other words, to infer what the powers are trying to do from what they have done - and in particular from what they have Not done.
The peck has Not been forcibly imposed.
The world population has been compelled to do, and not to do, a zillion things since 2020.
Yet, people have not been forced to take the peck, despite that it certainly seems to be the number one agenda item for the global powers.
I assume that the peck is physically harmful and the ultimate (top level) motivation behind its introduction and promotion includes the intent to harm billions of people in various possible ways, including death.
Includes this intent - but the intent to harm physically is not the ultimate intent.
The ultimate intent is spiritual, not physical, harm - in other words the intent of the peck is damnation, not disease or death.
As Francis Berger has explained lucidly; the peck could have been imposed on everybody in the world, everywhere in the world, but it was not.
Many, many things have been imposed - but not the peck.
The powers clearly desperately want all the masses to agree to take the peck.
Propaganda to this effect is extreme, pervasive, unscrupulous, grossly dishonest, and relentless.
Vast and elaborate systems of incentives have been put into place - so that people are rewarded for asking to be pecked; while those who refuse the peck have been punished with multiple and severe sanctions.
Yet, the peck has not been imposed.
From this can be inferred that it is of vital importance to the powers that each person (as many as possible) makes a personal choice to take the peck.
Even the propaganda has been tailored in a personal way. It has been made a cause for celebration, an act of personal and moral development, of altruism and social solidarity. It is an officially-validated advertisement of virtue to take the peck.
Conversely, the peck-refusers are depicted as selfish, dumb, cowardly, psychopathic - evil.
All this makes clear (to spiritual discernment) that the peck is ultimately, but decisively, a spiritual choice - which in official materialist discourse translates as a choice of values.
The peck is presented officially as a spiritual choice, and it is seen as a spiritual choice by many serious Christian - indeed, by serious Christians of all denominations.
Therefor the choice about the peck is a choice of value-systems - which, for Christians, means a proxy for the choice between the two sides of God and Satan the spiritual war.
The dispute is about the nature of the two sides pro- and anti-peck. Which side is Good and which is evil?
The peck is a product of The System, and is being advocated and implemented by essentially-all major institutions, corporations, governments and media - everywhere in the world with unprecedented sustained aggression.
Therefore, one side in this spiritual war of values is clearly the side of The System.
Therefore, our choice about the peck is necessarily a decision either for, or against, The System; because compliance with the peck is a choice in favour of System values and goals.
Agreeing to the peck is a spiritual act of affiliation to The System, its values and spiritual intent.
Therefore, every Christian in the world needs to decide for himself whether The System is Good or evil; in service to God or Satan.
Every Christian needs to decide whether The System is motivated towards our salvation or damnation; our help or our harm.
Such choices always are personal, never can be compelled.
The System could have removed the peck from the arena of choice and forced it upon the world. But then it would not have been a spiritual choice.
Instead The System decided to leave the peck unenforced, exactly so that our choice of yes becomes a spiritual choice, a decision of affiliation to The System.
Because when The System is ultimately demonic; then to choose system values is also to choose our own damnation.
Note: It is, of course, possible for a Christian to repent any sin - any choice of affiliation to the side of evil - and thus attain salvation. But repentance has to be chosen -and that requires acknowledgement of having-sinned.
Evil must, like a vampire, be invited-in. The greater the degree of choice, the less the degree of compulsion - the less likely is repentance.
The peck strategy tries to present itself as-if mandatory, to provide an untrue excuse for peck-choosers; while ensuring that in reality consent has been chosen.
The peck-complier may say that he 'had to' take the peck, that he had 'no choice'; which rationalization conceals his own decisive act of consent, his own sin.
This insidious combination makes repentance less likely.
12 comments:
Another problem with forcing people to take the peck is that this would create martyrs.
They don't wand to have any martyrs because the martyr has chosen the side of god irrevocably and might encourage other to stand firm on the side of god
@Karl - A valid point; although they may well be capable of suppressing this kind of information.
Thanks for refining spiritual implications of the issue in this post. I think the repetition of the voluntary consent is a key tell -- the whole thing has been set up to ensure people repeatedly reaffirm their active decisions "for" the System. Once or twice is not enough. It has to be repeated indefinitely.
The peck has been forced in a handful of non-Western countries, but it has not been fully implemented in the West . . . yet. Partial impositions in certain age groups and professional fields do currently exist in many Western countries, but even in those cases it fundamentally came down to a matter of choice. Non-consenting individuals were threatened with job loss and/or fines, but they were not, technically, forced into it.
I know that sounds flippant and callous from a purely material perspective -- I mean how could the threat of depriving a person of their livelihood not be considered force? -- but it is more of a matter of coercion rather than outright force. Anyway, I am very curious to see how the current batch of proposed "general" forced peck impositions in the West will pan out, especially against the backdrop of other Western countries supposedly (but probably not really) loosening and/or abandoning such measures.
@Frank - Yes, the fact that it has not been 'mandated' in the US focus of attention (as well as many other highly controlled nations) for about a year is significant - whatever happens from here.
I try not to take any notice of what is supposed to happen in the future, because promises and pledges means exactly Nothing to the Establishment; nor do I believe reports from other countries (unless I get it from a trusted eyewitness) because all such stories in the media are dishonest manipulations.
So I base my interpretations on what I personally know has-happened - and am trying to eschew prognostication about this specific issue.
After all; the birdemic-peck is just one of potentially very-many means towards the end of damnation - and in principle the whole idea could be abandoned and replaced with another, or several different, damnation strategies.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would also add that, as one living I the US, if the pores. That be were to force a shot in everyone, those marked for invol untariy receoption would returning the favor on xammassive scale. By this, I mean the Second Amendment option. Win, lose, or draw, (I know, there is no draw in the current fight), such a response would signal to the entire worlds in a scale so large as to be impossible to ignore, that one does have a choice and that the System is well and truly evil. While my crystal ball is a bit foggy, I cannnot see any future scenario where this is not the ultimate next stage.
Maybe it's a mass-suicide ritual? Perhaps the masses are being enticed to commit suicide on an installment plan, one easy booster-payment at a time.
For what it is worth, the cover story here in the US us that the approach you and Mr Berger discuss arises from the book: Nudge by Thaler and Sunnstein.
Thaler is an economist and founded a Financial Company and was heavily involved in the creation of the UK's Behavioral Insights Team (BIT)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioural_Insights_Team
Sunnstein is an Ivy League Lawyer mover and shaker aligned with the neo-Liberals. Instrumental in forming the Lawfare movement.
Lawfare and BIT were both formed in 2010.
@Sk - No. This is not applied managerial pseudo-science. It is quite simple; just how ultimate evil works - how it has-to work.
Yes. Sorry I wasn't clear. And didn't even make the point I was trying to make. I used the phrase "cover story" to try and indicate that it was an obvious lie. And to show how the real process you two were discussing manifests itself mechanically. I do see how it isn't really useful and wasn't appropriate even if I had made my point clearly. Sorry.
My prediction is that forced pecking will play the same very limited role that rape has played in the sexual revolution.
https://narrowdesert.blogspot.com/2021/10/how-far-will-peck-mandates-go.html
@Wm - That is a valid comparison.
Nobody wants to get raped or forcibly pecked, and therefore it makes sense for at least some instances of these to happen and be known-of. The idea is that in order to avoid this outcome for themselves, more will comply 'willingly' without (much) coercion. And thus become complicit.
In ordinary social terms, it is painful, humiliating and degrading to be coerced violently (up to and including being killed as a consequence).
I suppose that is why martyrs have always been revered - there are so many reasons of social pressure and spontaneous psychology to seek to avoid it by pre-emptive compliance. And pre-emptive compliance is (we observe) fatally easy to rationalize as absolute coercion, and not repent.
I don’t know what happened between final proofing of this comment and its posting, but it is all messed up. Perhaps the evil demons that inhabit the internet decided to play some games. ;-) Anyway, here is what was supposed to be posted.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would also add that, as one living I the US, if the powers that be try to forcibly administer the “shot,” those marked for such treatment would returning the favor on a massive scale. By this, I mean the Second Amendment option. Win, lose, or draw, (I know, there is no draw in the current fight), such a response would signal to the entire world in a scale so large as to be impossible to ignore, that one does have a choice and that the System is well and truly evil. While my crystal ball is a bit foggy, I cannot see any future scenario where this is not the ultimate next stage.
Sorry for the confusion.
Post a Comment