No surprise if it turns out that some of people who want to run the world might also be pedophiles. Evil is evil, after all. From Brandon Smith at alt-market.com:
I have spent the better part of the last 10 years working diligently to investigate and relate information on economics and geopolitical discourse for the liberty movement. However, long before I delved into these subjects my primary interests of study were the human mind and the human “soul” (yes, I’m using a spiritual term).
My fascination with economics and sociopolitical events has always been rooted in the human element. That is to say, while economics is often treated as a mathematical and statistical field, it is also driven by psychology. To know the behavior of man is to know the future of all his endeavors, good or evil.
Evil is what we are specifically here to discuss. I have touched on the issue in various articles in the past including Are Globalists Evil Or Just Misunderstood, but with extreme tensions taking shape this year in light of the U.S. election as well as the exploding online community investigation of “Pizzagate,” I am compelled to examine it once again.
I will not be grappling with this issue from a particularly religious perspective. Evil applies to everyone regardless of their belief system, or even their lack of belief. Evil is secular in its influence.
The first and most important thing to understand is this — evil is NOT simply a social or religious construct, it is an inherent element of the human psyche. Carl Gustav Jung was one of the few psychologists in history to dare write extensively on the issue of evil from a scientific perspective as well as a metaphysical perspective. I highly recommend a book of his collected works on this subject titled ‘Jung On Evil’, edited by Murray Stein, for those who are interested in a deeper view.
To continue reading: Understanding Evil: From Globalism To Pizzagate
Bob: While the quote of Brandon’s that you have selected is an outstanding one, the paragraph that follows indicates that he places Jung’s innate knowledge as of primary (as opposed to Freud’s environmental factors) moral significance. Quote: “To summarize, Jung found that much of the foundations of human behavior are rooted in inborn(!) psychological contents or “archetypes.” Contrary to the position of Sigmund Freud, Jung argued that while our environment may affect our behavior to a certain extent, it does not make us who we are. Rather, we are born with our own individual personality and grow into our inherent(!) characteristics over time.
His arguments seem to ignore rational consciousness, obliterating the concept of morality (conscious choice!) by choosing such concepts as “inborn” followed by further fuzzy concepts such as we “grow into our inherent(!) characteristics over time.”
I found the article, though it contained important truths, sloppy – and with respect to morality, contradictory.
Dave
Dave,
I agree. I posted the article because I agreed with Smith’s general point about the immorality of the globalists and the possibility that they are involved with pedophilia, not his philosophical/psychological assertions, which as you note are sloppy and contradictory. One beneficial aspect of at least parts of the alternative media is that they occasionally cast issues in terms of right and wrong, good and evil. Even if they don’t address or miss the boat entirely on morality grounded in reality and conscious choice, as least they frame issues in such terms. That is a contrast to the MSM’s ammoral and thus immoral endorsements of virtually anything statists do.