Stop Telling Me To Vote!

Every election cycle I have to deal with so many people asking me if I voted and then being shocked, angry or disappointed with me when I say that I don't vote. Maybe I should just say I voted for the Tea Party, is that better? At least I voted right? I have no problem with you voting if that is what you really want to do but I have my reasons for not endorsing this political circus with my vote. I have a right to decline participation in a political system that I believe is corrupted by money, that forces cultural programming and propaganda on us everyday, that is assisting corporate interests in the looting of our wealth and resources, that supports constant wars and military occupation all over the world, that is gradually dumbing down America and has a strong hand in shaping the New World Order.

Voting in America is about giving in to one of two manufactured options. Both options have continually failed us, over and over again, yet we continue to support a political system that cleverly feeds on one of our last bits of freedom; the right to resist the mechanisms of powers that be. Voting is not the last right we have left, so stop telling me it is. We have the right to cognitive liberty, to think for ourselves and act according to those ideas and principles. Every election cycle the machine chews us up, gets us all riled and agitated and then spits us out, excited for a fight and the promise of change that will never come. We are led to believe that our vote gives us a seat behind the steering wheel, but it doesn't. We aren't fighting the machine by voting, we are becoming it.

Our politicians are illusionists, highly skilled at distorting the field of reality. They playfully distract Americans from whats going on behind the scenes, funded by their corporate sponsors. You are constantly being asked to vote against the other party and not for what you believe would be better for our country. You may ask yourself, "what happened to the man I voted for?" or excuse his failures by blaming the opposition of his political rivals but don't give in to the illusion. Do you really think that not voting is what the other political party wants you to do? Are you that afraid that you would vote against your best interests just because you think the other party is more dangerous? Make no mistake, Democrat or Republican, the machine is tethered to corporate interests, big business and the banking elite. There is no great champion of the people, there is no catalyst for change in the two-party system, there is only the illusion that your vote makes a difference and that your candidate will make things better. The masters of political manipulation, the alchemists of internet and television propaganda; they know how to transform opinion and bypass reason, so that they can grab hold of our emotional cords and pull us into their illusion.

Do you ever ask yourself why you really vote? If its because you actually researched your preferred candidate, agree with their policies and know they aren't receiving large amount of campaign contributions from big business, then you are a rarity. I think most people vote like I used to, because they are afraid or angry. Everyday, fear is propagated through a narration of carefully selected emotional issues. We get angry when we feel that others want to take our power away and afraid when we think we are actually loosing that power. We are being played against each other, while they pull off the greatest heist in history and shape the future of our world. We are toys in their game and intuitively we know it, but instead we deny that other people can control our fate. They are playing for the end game but we are playing battle to battle. Refusing to vote and working to expose the false narrative is a form of culture jamming. We will tear down the layers of illusion and display the political beast, naked and transparent, for all to see.

When you vote, you endorse this system and feed the very monster you want to transform. You have a right to do so, but if you choose not to, you may be guilted into relinquishing your right of refusal or convinced to vote for the "lesser of two evils," but is that what you really want? There is no longer such a thing as a strategic vote, the machine will move forward in the same direction, regardless of which party holds office. The only thing that really makes sense when you see through the lies? Don't vote. Or at least don't vote for the politicians who support the two-party system that you know you oppose. There is a slow rise of alternative candidates who we all know won't win, but that vote is a vote is a form of resistance as well. Whether you vote your conscious or choose not to vote at all, the most important thing is that we continually write, produce art and music, spread the word, work to better our communities and if you have the stomach for it run for local office. Do what you can to disrupt and subvert the mainstream cultural institutions which make this machine work. This is a War we live in and its not Republican vs. Democrat, as you may have been led to believe. The sides are drawn and even though we don't have the same resources that they do, we can still tear down the illusion piece by piece.

Brief Thoughts On Morality and Enlightenment

I've made this morality argument many times before, but it keeps coming up in my life, so here is the condensed version: Morals based on the Bible and only the Bible are a blind obedience to a social order that are within the confines of one's religious community.  Those within that community often pressure others who are outside their religion to obey their rules, without regard to other cultures or societal structures.  This kind of morality is about controlling people who can't control themselves and subduing the individual in favor of the conformity of the group.  This type of morality can be important to the development of society and culture but is also inauthentic because it does not come from the self.

A higher morality is most certainly one in which realizing the importance of the individual within the community, as well as the communities needs, is equally important.  In a higher morality, the strict rules of conformity based morality become more like social contracts, which also take into account other cultures and their social contracts.  The focus moves from the within the community to the interaction of different communities.  This higher morality is based on the idea that all humans have basic rights and we should aim for the greatest good for the most people.  It is a morality of wider communication and the search for understanding outside of a persons immediate surroundings.


Beyond the higher morality of community interaction is a morality driven by universal ethical principles.  Simply put, this kind of morality is about 'putting oneself in the others shoes' to determine what action is right.  A person acts morally because it is the right thing to do, not because it is the law, a rule or an expectation. Only at this level does a person truly take personal responsibility for their actions.  This is extremely difficult within our current culture because universal ethical principles are often in direct conflict with cultural and societal ethics.  In a way, universal ethics arise out of a relaxation of expectations and relinquishing the desire to control the life of others.  It's about helping people in need when you can but also about taking care of yourself.  More importantly, it's about working within another person's framework and allowing them to make mistakes without putting undo pressure on them to see things the way that you do.  There is a realization that no two people see the world in the same way, we all live with our own reality tunnels.  This type of morality embraces individuality and there is a realization that, even though we have many similarities, no to people are a like in the way their perceive and function in the world.

What is the morality of Enlightenment?  Because Enlightenment is the natural state of oneness with Being, an Enlightenment driven morality is the morality of Being itself.  The action taken is in accord with all that is and is the most perfect action for that time and place.  An action is done, not because it is right but because it is in accord with everything.  It is a way of clearly seeing with the details, while retaining a view of the big picture.  It is easy to run into the question of fate and pre-determination but that question does not have an easy answer.  It is impossible to express how an idea like fate or pre-determination can be part of an experience of imediate experience.  Ideas are part of the reality of space/time, while Enlightenment is simultaneously within and outside of that reality.  The terms associated with a specific place and time are only a fraction of the enlightened experience.

Real Fringe Science - Nazi's, MKULTRA and Technological Augmentation

Real Fringe science is the study of things that are outside of mainstream science; like ESP, telepathy, shared dream states, astral projection, lucid dreaming, neuro-linguistic programming, precognition, remote sensing, collective consciousness, entheogens, brainwave entrainment, anti-gravity, free energy, etc.  Mainstream scientists are often very skeptical of fringe science and sometimes associate it with pseudoscience or junk science.  While pseudoscience lacks the serious application of the scientific method and junk science ignores data to favor an agenda-driven outcome, fringe science uses the scientific method but looks at phenomenon that mainstream science finds to not be worth the time or effort.

Image From Brainwave Entrainment Website - Isochronic Tones

During World War II, Nazi Germany was actively engaged in fringe science research.  They worked heavily on developing paranormal abilities such as ESP, telepathy and telekinesis.  They were also rumored to be working on reverse engineered UFO's and anti-gravity systems.  In the aftermath of WWII, Project Paperclip was the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) program used to recruit scientists from Nazi Germany for employment by the United States government.  Some of those scientists may have been recruited to work for the super-secret Project MKULTRA.  MKULTRA was brought to public attention in 1975 but began operations in the 1950's.  It's best known for its CIA mind control experiments using psychoactive chemicals like LSD.  The CIA's objective was to manipulate individuals mind states and to alter brain function.  Most of the documents about MKULTRA are still classified but some people theorize that their ultimate goal was the creation of a "Manchurian Candidate" through brainwashing techniques.  Later the U.S. Military funded the First Earth Battalion, made famous by the film adaptation of the book "The Men Who Stare At Goats," by Jon Ronson.  The First Earth Battalion tried to train soldiers to see auras, walk through walls, bend metal with their minds, utilize retro-cognition and precognition to gather military intelligence, have out-of-body experiences and remotely view military targets, use telepathy to communicate with each other and... learn how to kill a goat using only their minds.  Before the Hollywood movie, there was an excellent documentary called "Crazy Rulers of the World" made by Jon Ronson.

Crazy Rulers of the World

Eye Telescope - Engadget.com

These days, the United States has been using fringe technology and augmentation for things like seeing using the tongue, seeing through clothes, brain implants, an invisibility cloak or telescope eye implants.  It won't be long before we can reproduce ESP type effects with advanced technology.  On the other hand, it does seem like our consciousness may have the capability of telepathy, access to the collective consciousness, astral projection and better vision but it is hard to study subjective experiences.  Entheogenic substances supposedly have a history of producing these types of experiences, but its almost impossible to verify that they are really happening and incredibly difficult to repeat the results.  Chemical augmentation of the brain may be just as important as technological augmentation, so maybe in the future we will use them together.  Until then, it looks like the real fringe science will be more about accelerated technology than taking LSD or staring at goats.

Occult Marketing and Branding - The URL Is Dead

Every time I work on design for a new marketing product the question almost always arises, "shouldn't we put our URL on this?"  The answer is usually no and I'll tell you why, the URL is dead or at least its dying.  From an occult prospective, your logo (sigil) and product name are exponentially stronger than your web site address.  Adding the .com to your product can easily weaken your all important sigil.  It draws power away from the logo, brand name and image that you have worked so hard to cultivate.

Putting a website URL on Merchandise was an advertising strategy of the Dot Com boom/bust in the 90’s.  Its outdated and no longer necessary, if it ever even was in the first place.  If your product name is on your product and your website and social network is optimized for search engines, 99.9% of people can easily find your website by searching for your name.  That is exactly how the vast majority of people will find you online.  Statistical research also shows that the majority of website visits are either from referral sites like a blog, facebook or a news story or from one of the Big Three search engines.  People will usually Google your name before they try and type in a URL.  If they want to revisit your site later, they will either bookmark it or it will be saved in their browser history.  I'm sure you've noticed that when you type something into the URL bar at the top of your web browser, that handy list of visited pages will pop up underneath.  Putting your website on your product is usually a waste of space, time and sometimes money.

If you can hide your website address somewhere on your merchandise it doesn't really matter that much if it is there, but if it's visible to the casual viewer then it is considered tacky and dated.  Marketing research has shown that the 16-30 year old demographic not only does not want to be a walking billboard, it turns them off to your product, weakening the sigil you worked so hard to create and release out into the world.  This demographic is more willing and more likely to wear your sigil if they consider your product a badge of loyalty than if they consider it blatant advertising.  It is an added plus if your product and logo are modern and fashionable.

SWAG Merchandise:

There is an exception to the rule if you are dealing with SWAG or "Stuff We All Get."  Most companies already have a strong and loyal costumer base that needs to be rewarded, maintained and utilized for spreading their sigil.  Merchandise for your costumer base can act as a badge of support, straight up advertising or a combination of the two.  There is also a large potential costumer base which needs to be looked at much differently.  With a new company, it is essential to build that loyal costumer base quickly.  Merchandise is a great way to differentiate these two costumer bases.  Loyal costumers want more than SWAG merchandise but new costumers need ways to remember why they liked you in the first place and then take the extra step of entering your online social network and coming back for more.  SWAG products like buttons, re-usable shopping bags and coffee mugs can have your web address on them, if you are giving them away for free.  This type of marketing is okay if your only purpose is attracting new costumers to your website.  The major problem arises when a company chooses to treat products that they are selling as SWAG.

We've moved way beyond the Dot Com era of the 90's.  Marketing and advertising your product has to be modernized.  Putting your web address on all your products will certainly devalue your brand.  Be careful not to cross the line and you'll be okay.

Knowledge Versus Belief

There are plenty of theoretical models that people use to make sense of the world that we live in. Whether they be spiritual, religious, scientific, political or sociological; we constantly create order out of the chaos in an attempt to feel secure in our knowing. We are information hunters and gatherers, piecing together the puzzle and predicting the way that things will work, based on the images we ourselves create. Then we claim that the image we have made is an authentic reality and treat our concepts and beliefs as concrete knowledge. People feel personally offended when the simulated reality they have so carefully woven is challenged by another person's belief system. It is the rare individual who can repeatedly tear a hole in the fabric of the simulated reality and catch a glimpse of what lies behind the veil. We have always been challenged with the question of what is real but in our search for truth, we consistently identify with the simulation instead of our immediate experience. The simulation is only an approximation of the real, a fabricated myth we use to quell our sense of insecurity in the face of the great unknown.

"Religion says: --- 'Believe and you will understand.'

Science comes to say to you: --- 'Understand and you will believe.' - J De. Maistre

We in the Conspiracy research community are constantly playing with models of reality, but how can we tell if they are fact or fiction? We often believe in theories that we ourselves can not verify to be true except through textual referencing. When it comes down to experiential reality, we can not know if there is a Planet X, if there are extra-terrestrials and what they are like, what will happen in 2012, what is being discussed behind closed doors by secret societies or who is at the top of the Illuminati pyramid. We can not claim to know these things the same way we can know how the flower in our yard looks and smells (and only to us) by going outside to look at and smell it. There is, and should be, an important distinction between these two very different kinds of knowledge. Yet when it comes to these models, many of us are not playing with them, we are all too seriously fixated and static in our beliefs.

Our society is plagued by conflicting belief systems, that harden the mind, in an attempt to avoid confrontation with the unknown. We choose a false sense of security over the “wisdom of insecurity.” One of the most prevalent conflicts arises out of our various religious traditions and modern day Atheism. The religious and atheistic are the most unwavering in their attachment to their particular simulation and the most volatile when their belief systems are challenged. Their certainty is unwavering and essentially limiting. Any intelligent researcher of physics knows that the Newtonian model gave way to Quantum physics, which will eventually give way to another model. Any intelligent biologist knows that natural selection is an incomplete theory and will eventually lead to a new and more accurate theory of biological evolution. Any intelligent theist knows that religious views change with time and will continue to change as we learn more about God’s creation. Blind faith in any belief system is a dangerous thing because it can restrict a person’s ability to verify knowledge through direct experience. If we read a book on how to ride a bike, we can not claim to know how to ride a bike until we get on one and start to pedal. Even then we may be able to ride from one point to another but what else can we do? Can we ride with no hands? Can we do tricks? Intellectual knowledge of a religious text does not predicate a person’s ability to have a spiritual experience. Without direct spiritual experience, one’s claimed knowledge is shallow. Religious texts are inherently deep and can be understood on increasingly complex levels. If, as many claim, these texts are in fact the word of God, then they should be infinite in depth. Strict literal or surface interpretations are offensively anti-God as they collapse the infinite mystery into the finite.

Our senses limit what we can know and technology can amplify our senses, so the amount of knowledge we can gain grows as technology advances and becomes more available. The same holds true for intellectual or spiritual pursuits because technology can increase the amount of knowledge we have access to. Religion and Science are not irreconcilable but instead are two simultaneous dimensions of human evolution. With the development of international travel and communications technology we now have the ability to spread cultural knowledge beyond a country’s borders. Our beliefs limit us but our understanding of the world grows as we gain more understanding of other belief systems. No longer can we claim cultural superiority since, whether we like it or not, we are part of a new international culture that transcends but still includes all the cultures of the past. Few people can maintain a meta-belief system because it requires the ability to identify one’s Self as being outside the realm of belief. Beliefs become like interchangeable lenses in a pair of glasses, varying ways of seeing the mystery of creation. It is a terrible intellectual mistake to be certain that one’s cultural belief system is the only valid belief system. When we release our identification of Self from our opinions and beliefs we will most likely feel a sense of extreme discomfort and anxiety, as if there were no ground to stand on. Without direct experiential knowledge of the ultimate Ground of reality, it feels like we are floating in Chaos. But when we limit ourselves to what we are comfortable with, we limit our ability to feel compassion and limit our intellectual understanding of the variety of existence. Without taking the leap into the unknown, giving up our false sense of grounding in the simulation, we can never come to know the ultimate Ground that is Spirit. In this sense, those who claim spiritual superiority through blind faith are resisting experiential contact with God. Some will say that experiential contact with God is not possible, but if there is evidence that it is possible and a person claims to love God, why not give into the possibility? Only by giving up one’s certainty in their idea and image of God can they experience God’s Truth. It is important for us to not stop growing as people. Do not merely feel comfortable being who you are, feel compelled to always be in the process of becoming who you are. Stasis is not real; life is in constant motion, everything is always changing. Stasis is an illusion. Our resistance to change will drain our batteries dry because we are fighting a losing battle.

God is just a name. There are many different names for the same thing. A person does not have to believe in the name God to believe in God. As soon as a thing is named it loses a part of its essence. If God is, as we are told, eternal and infinite then we can not even begin to describe what God is or is not. All characteristics attributed to God are restricting us from experiencing what it means to be eternal and infinite. It is a common misconception that eternal means “going on forever” instead of timeless or outside of time. Similarly, the infinite means outside of space or without space. Without having experienced the eternal and infinite, most religious follows hold tight to their image of God. What we imagine God to be like can not possibly be true. Consequently, without this particular spiritual experience, no holy scriptures or religious texts can be interpreted as they are meant to be. Every passage of every authentic religious text can be interpreted from the finite and temporal perspective or from the infinite and eternal. One interpretation has depth and the other examines only the surface. We must peel away the layers or we will continue to fight over appearance rather than embrace substance.

How can a person claim to be moral or ethical when they relinquish their responsibility to a religious moral code or social institution? Their morals and ethics then become restrictive and belong to the group, rather than the individual, losing any real authenticity. Resisting an action out of self restraint is not authentic because the desire to act in contradiction to one’s rules is the primary re-action. An authentic moral action is not a resistance to one’s initial desire; because of one’s moral system, that initial desire to do opposite of what they consider good, does not arise. There is a difference between not killing someone because you are told that it is wrong and not killing someone because you place great value on human life. The religious moral codes provided by religious institutions are for those who have yet to come to this realization. They are not an end-all or absolute. It’s easy to follow a rule or regulation but much more difficult to know why we have it, when it should be followed and when it should be broken. We always have the potential to be more than we are.