“Guidance”, by Eric Peters

Corrupt power corrupts language, like calling suggestions carrying implicit threats “guidance.” From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

 
 

Tyranny begins with abuse of language. With evasive language.

Talk of “contributions” that you are forced to make; of being forced to “help.” The forced  element never mentioned – but defining. You are not asked to “contribute” or to “help.” You are told you will – or else. But without actually saying so.

It is the language of the thug without the forthrightness of the thug. It renders a vile act – theft, coercion – something even more so, by veneering it with a chintzy patina of voluntaryism.

And now there is “guidance” – which of course you’re also forced to obey. As for example in the state of California, where the tyrannizers decreed they will force every child who is forced to attend a state school to wear a demoralizing Rag of Obedience or submit to being experimented upon by the pharmaceutical cartel that might as well be the state, since it essentially controls the state.

There will be no asking. Just telling. Without the forthrightness.

 

It is of a piece with prior “guidance” mandating – that is to say, forcing – the ongoing mass wearing of Obedience Rags and the performance of degrading Kabuki rituals meant to not merely to humiliate the individual (by making him behave as if he were literally suppurating disease, a hugely insulting implication when he is perfectly healthy) but also to drive a wedge, both psychological and physical, between individuals. To make them alarmed about the presence of others and constantly obsessing over it, something only sick (in the head) people did a little over a year ago.

This is being done as well with regard to the forcible violation of other people’s bodies – a thing formerly considered rape – but now considered a legitimate act by some, most notably (and cognitively dissonantly) those who fervently insist they have a right to control their bodies – when it comes to the extinguishing of the life of another body, within their bodies. But they see no incongruity in the holding of this view and the assertion by others of the right to control what is done with their actual bodies.

Continue reading→

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.