My world of public discourse - or, at least large-ish sections of it - used to be mostly-honest; such that the lies could potentially be detected and worked-around.
But from around the millennium, the lies took-over all public discourse - including those special areas that were especially supposed to be about truth: such as science, academia, education, medicine, law.
And soon the lies took-over. What this means is that people were "not even trying" to be honest - but only, aimed not to be caught being-dishonest, and when they were caught - covering-up their lies.
From then onward we were living in a discourse-of-lies - and yet the discourse continued...
I experienced this myself in science (especially medical science) as a scientist, editor, and teacher.
The discourse of science continued - indeed it continued to grow very rapidly; yet the 'new' claims within the fields had zero validity since they were woven-from from material that included many lies, and woven-by people who were not primarily concerned with honesty.
It became ever less possible to teach, research or write honestly; except using only (selected) historical or personally-validated information, and dedicated to historically important matters - utterly avoiding new work and current issues.
And, in fact, such practice is not allowed; therefore honesty is excluded.
In such a situation, truth is not discernable; because truth does not 'stand-out' when evaluations and evidence are dishonest - quite the opposite.
Yet the discourse continues... Examples: We know that the mass media discourse is a tissue of lies; and yet people continue to take it seriously, discuss and analyze it as if the truth could be sifted-out. State and Corporate controlled research - wholly orientated towards the expediencies of the state and corporations - continues to claim special validity, and indeed increasingly demands and enforces unquestioning/ enthusiastic obedience. The law is become a weapon of leftist totalitarianism; and yet is taken to define 'justice'.
In all the areas of public discourse - and increasingly in private, among friends and in the family - the lies have taken-over; yet the discourse continues as if the lies were rare and exceptional!
The identification exposure of specific 'frauds' in 'science', or lies in journalism, or corruption in politics; all reinforce the assumption that these are exceptional; when in fact these whole-systems (science, media, politics - add law, military, universities etc.) are built-on lies and function dishonestly.
The truth is that we cannot participate in dishonest discourse, without ourselves being corrupted by dishonesty - and this means that we then need to acknowledge and repent our own dishonesty, as often as it happens.
...Which repentance rarely happens - and therefore the corruption remains and accumulates.
This, I believe, is a major reason for the corruption of the Christian churches. By increasingly participating in the dishonest discourse of politics, economics, finance, law, the media, 'science', education etc - by therefore being dishonest but not acknowledging or repenting this dishonesty - churches have themselves become a part of the discourse of lies; the leadership lying to- and among-themselves, as well as to laity.
Thus all institutions are corrupt; and aid in the corruption of each other, and of individual persons.
The only possible escape from general and increasing corruption and untruthfulness, is to detach oneself to a situation which is sufficiently honest that dishonesty stands-out and can be repented; and this means either small (family-like) groupings (if we are fortunate); or else (if less fortunate) to escape to the discourse of one's own self (which is, after all, for a Christian not alone, never alone).
As far as the UK is concerned the point at which lies and lying completely took over was when Tony Blair become Prime Minister. Of course, the tendency had been growing and spreading well before then but this was the tipping point. The mass delusion at the time of Diana's death around the same time, a kind of forerunner for the birdemic mass delusion, confirmed that the country had become completely untethered from truth, indeed from reality.
@William - "the point at which lies and lying completely took over was when Tony Blair become Prime Minister"
I agree. Although I regard 'Blairism' as a consequence of factors that had been accumulating for some decades before 1997, more than "the" cause - nonetheless, the sudden step-up in calculated misleading of the public (then termed 'hype' and 'spin') under Blair's regime was immediately obvious.
This is probably related to TB being a WEF (World Economic Forum) placeman, having been trained there as a young man and active ever since. It seems that WEF (and whatever lies behind it, and preceded it) have been a major tool of systematic Ahrimanic evil for a long time.
I agree wholeheartedly. An analogy I have used in the past when dealing with situation in which the opposing party was arguing that "Yes, there were some incorrect assumptions or representations made, but on the whole, the process results in a correct conclusion" was as follows:
"If you are making a 3000 gallon batch of strawberry ice cream and inadvertently mix in only 3 gallons of human excrement, are you still willing to eat that ice cream?"
I of course agree completely with Dr. Charlton's assertions here with respect to the fundamental shift to dishonesty that happened in recent decades.
I'm curious though what you make of fields such as my own -- computer science -- where progress on a purely technical level has been fairly consistent so far. I expect this could soon change as the woke ideology pushes out the old merit-based / results-based system, but so far I've seen little evidence of this. Apple, for example, continues to make bona fide advancements in consumer computer products. Google and Microsoft steadily improve the fabric of the "cloud", and machine-learning capacity grows more powerful and cheaper each year.
Again, I expect that this is a matter of when, not if, the "tissue of lies" will bring such progress to a halt.
@SM - When I was writing about the decline of science I used to exempt computation as the only area of genuine progress. On the other hand, progress has certainly slowed a great deal over the past 25 years; and gone into reverse in several crucial areas (e.g search engines are much worse now than 15 years ago).
My interpretation is that the genius-level intellectual work in computing was mostly done two generations ago; then there was slow, incremental, engineering-type improvement for as long as there was serious motivation to improve. But now markets and regulators are captured, and leftist-evil has become the primary goal of the large corporations for which everything else (effectiveness, efficiency, progress) have been sacrificed.
Indeed, the primary goal of the computing industry seems to be more about surveillance; and to an extent control (by propaganda, censorship, advertising, and transhumanist stuff) than usefulness.
The Ahrimanic demonic agenda (WEF etc) depends heavily on 'progress' in computation; and that has been probably an increasingly major driver with each decade.
Before the 1997 general election, the [not very] Conservative Party put up election posters around the country - I remember several in our London neighbourhood. The poster was an image of a grinning Tony Blair, with glowing red devil eyes. I liked them - they comported with my visceral distrust of Blair and ‘New’ Labour - and thought they were effective. Silly me, as Blair’s not-so-new Labour Party pummelled the Tories in that election. As usual, alas, the tired Tories offered no conservative alternative to Blair - as Cameron made obvious 13 years later.
That mundane election poster now seems prophetic. Between the advent of Blair and the Diana hysteria - which we also saw first-hand as we were only about a mile from Kensington Palace - 1997 was a watershed year for the United Kingdom. As in over the cliff. I hope the survivors huddled at the bottom will have enough of Christendom and Albion left in them to rebuild.
@HRS (anonymous) - The trouble is that the British public's idea of a demon c1997 was a mainstream middling conservative. Blair, by contrast, made all the nice noises - and put vast sums of money into the pockets of public sector-employed middle class managers (e.g NHS funding was *doubled* in real terms - almost all of it spent on managers - a fair bit on overpriced/ inadequate new buildings).
Post a Comment