Morning coffee and Mr. Gabriel Marcel
Once upon a time the Cafe Society saw readers and not laptops
First my morning musings before engaging in conversation with Mr. Marcel came from reading my notes, such as this one.
Injecting more than half of all humankind with inadequately tested, dangerous pharmaceuticals based on a never-before-tried technology while claiming that they are “completely safe” is an unprecedented mass experiment with the gravest potential consequences. Never before has any government, an international actor, or a transnational cabal undertaken an act that would expose such a big swath of humanity to such serious danger.
This operation was carried out under false pretenses and those who initiated it knew that their claims were unsubstantiated and false. The question that must be answered is this: How could something like this have been allowed to happen?
Untold millions across the world have already suffered severe side effects from these injections in the short term. And we do not yet know what the medium- or long-term consequences may be because these vaccines have not been trialed for such time frames.
Please keep in mind that the clinical trials for the Covid vaccines began only less than 22 months ago. In such a short period of time, it is simply impossible to adequately assess the safety of any vaccine.
The Covid-19 vaccination crusade is a global crime the like of which the world has not yet seen.
Those complicit in this vast crime against humanity are the vaccine manufacturers, the leaders of the regulatory agencies, public health officials, and politicians. Also complicit is the media which endlessly amplified the “completely safe” claim which became the mantra under which this enterprise has been carried out.
Those responsible for this must be called to answer for their deeds in legal settings so that their actions can be evaluated and judged in accordance with national and international laws and statutes.
Vasko Kohlmayer was born and grew up in former communist Czechoslovakia. You can follow his writings by subscribing to his Substack newsletter ’Notes from the Twilight Zone’. He is the author of The West in Crisis: Civilizations and Their Death Drives.
And reading Mr. Marcel, Man Against Humanity, I also take notes—oh as an aside I have been able to source epublications of quite a few books I mention and am happy to point readers in that direction if asked-and this book is but one I can point to. Philosophy is a useful attitude in times totalitarian.
Mr. Marcel-
Fanaticism is essentially opinion; opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature. Let us notice also that, whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out. And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible—they are ‘lubricious vipers’ or ‘hyenas and jackals with typewriters’—and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back. here again at the techniques of degradation. It cannot be asserted too strongly or repeated too often that those the Nazis made use of in their camps—techniques for degrading their victims in their own eyes, for making mud and filth of them—and those which Soviet propagandists use to discredit their adversaries, are not essentially different though we should, in fairness, add that sadism, properly so called, is not to be found in the Russian camps. And it is not enough to say even this. We must add that the Soviet propagandists seek to foster in the adversary, through physical and psychological processes not yet known to us in complete detail, a spirit of complicity which will make him prepare and assure his own ruin.
=======
What are equal, what must be postulated as equal, are not human beings but rights and duties which men must reciprocally recognize; for if that recognition is lacking, we have chaos, we have tyranny with all its frightful consequences—the primacy of the most vile over the most noble.
But we become guilty of a tragic error when, from what has to do with rights, we claim to pass to what has to do with men themselves, and it would be easy to show by what sort of dialectic process egalitarianism, properly so called, leads to the monstrous aberrations of which we are the witnesses to-day. This dialectic process is linked precisely to the fact that equality, being a category of the abstract, cannot be transferred to the realm of beings without becoming a lie and, in consequence, without giving rise to contemporary inequalities which surpass any that have been ever seen under non- democratic systems. Here, too, it is war which supervenes, but in forms under which it is not even recognized as such any more, since it is in fact the systematic crushing of millions of beings reduced to a total impotence.
We should never cease to recall to ourselves that a world in which millions, in which tens of millions, of beings have been reduced to slavery cannot be considered as a world at peace; but, on the other hand, whatever may be said to the contrary, a condition of iniquity of this sort is radically different from anything that may have existed at a time when the fundamental principles of law and human rights had neither been proclaimed nor even thought of. The most scandalous aspect of the present state of affairs, for anybody who reflects at all, is precisely the intolerable contradiction between these principles of human right which nobody has quite the courage to make a formal argument against and the systematic violation of the most elementary actual rights. Our most serious problem is that of discovering how such a contradiction is possible—possible as a matter of actual experience, not as a mere mental notion.
====
https://ko-fi.com/thejournaloflingeringsanity
Think of Covid. Mass death and mass sadism. "not as the monstrous and unnatural expression of a demoniac will. These methods were, rather, the premature but at bottom rigorously logical expression of a state of mind which all around us we can see becoming more and more general,"
It seems to me very important to notice that the methods which our enemies used during the war in dealing with inhabitants of occupied countries, labour conscripts, or deportees, should be looked at from this point of view, and not as the monstrous and unnatural expression of a demoniac will. These methods were, rather, the premature but at bottom rigorously logical expression of a state of mind which all around us we can see becoming more and more general, and that, moreover, in countries where the majority must be thought free of that madness which is itself, nevertheless—as Chesterton for instance saw so clearly—only a rationality that has broken out of its proper bounds. The only thing that appears as in some sense superfluous, as implying an excess of horror, inexplicable in itself, and not fitting neatly into a logical system, is. the sadism of certain kinds of torturers. But this, again, may be only a superficial view; we have certainly no clear notion of the conditions in which the sadistic mentality is developed; it may after all represent a kind of explosion of the irrational in a world of false rationality. But the fact, for instance, that certain poor wretches whose output had fallen below a given minimum were hurried away to the crematorium does not appear at all an irrational fact, if westart with certain premisses. If man is thought of on the model of a machine, it is quite according to the rules and it conforms to the principles state health economy that when his output falls in nae cost of his maintenance and when he is not worth repairing’ (that is, not worth sending to hospital because the cost of patching him up would be too much of a b n_in proportion to any result to be expected from it, it is quite logical that he should be sent to the scrap heap like a worn-out car, thus allowing any still useful parts of him to be salvaged (as, if I am not mistaken, the Third Reich in wartime salvaged the fatty elements of corpses). If such attitudes and methods still appear monstrous and absurd to us, it is because we refuse to acknowledge that man really can be thought of on the model of a machine; that is a premise which we reject spontaneously and with horror; and it is well that we should do _ so,but a pale emotional reaction is not— we have to ask ourselves if we can translate our emotional reaction into terms of thought, for otherwise it will be all too easy for the doctrinaires of the new rationality to see in this emotional re- action only the residual life, the last kick, of an out-of-date and exhausted attitude of mind.
Everything tends to show that, in what is very pretentiously called present-day civilization, it is the man whose output can be objectively calculated—as I showed just now, when dealing with the special case of the taxable earnings of the artist or man of letters—who is taken as the archetype: that is to say (and let us note this carefully) the man who by his type of activity seems to be most directly comparable to a kind of machine. One might say that it is starting with the machine, and in some sense on the model of the machine, that man at the present time is more and more commonly thought of, and one should remember that this is true also of, and is perhaps the essential truth about, a rebellious protest against the human condition in an industrialized world. Yet Marxism seems to have shown itself incapable of resisting the fascination exercised on it by the spectacle of this very world against which it first revolted. It is therefore quite as one would expect that, given such conditions, the genuinely creative man who sees things in terms of quality should find himself out of favor and even actively discredited.