In the Avengers story, a murderous psychopath is convinced half the living creatures in the universe need to die for peace and balance to exist. The sense of inevitability permeates the character’s every dialogue and action.
I wonder how many people, consciously or not, have transcribed their anger, hatred, etc of this character on to Bill Gates. I hear narratives about how he wants to kill a bunch of people with vaccines for a population control agenda. I’ve seen the interviews and understand the connections to planned parenthood, birth control, etc. As far as I understand, population growth works itself out as prosperity increases and there is a connection to having control over your own reproduction and being more self-directed in terms of your economic outcome. From this framework, talking about “population control” isn’t some Thanos move, but a recognition that empowering people to have only the children they want to have and to ensure those children live to be adults via good sanitation, access to healthcare, food, clean water, etc makes sense.
Are these not the things Bill Gates is funding?
Can Bill Gates be a ruthless business man (and potentially a similar hard-nosed philanthropist stretching his money as far as it will go) while also working on improving the world? Do we have space in our minds for these complexities or can we only fall into the “good guy” vs “bad guy” characterizations of the cartoons we watched as kids?
On this and many other topics (vaccines, government, military, 5G, universal ID, blockchain, Covid-19, 9-11, religion, politics, social justice, UBI, capitalism, socialism, etc) I have passionate friends who are completely convinced they have the story figured out. They know who the bad guys are and who to blame. They have their “data” sources which cater to their biases, and they are sure anyone else who disagrees is ignorant.
I think the world is far more complex than that. I think now, more than ever, we can practice mindfulness to recognize our own biases, set them aside, and learn from others. This doesn’t mean turning off our brains, and it certainly doesn’t mean blocking or censoring others we don’t agree with our don’t understand. The movies and media we consume literally programs and trains our emotional responses. We assign negative (and positive, when it comes to hero worship) emotions to real people who are far more complex than fictional characters.
Let’s try to rise above the trap. What if each day, we spent a little time listening and understanding people we disagree with. We don’t have to turn off our brains in doing so. On the contrary, memorizing logical fallacies, non-violent communication, and similar techniques will require our best wits, not to prove ourselves right all along, but to bypass our own filters and biases to seek understanding. Both sides of a debate describing each other as ignorant is not helpful. Listening and learning is.
I hope you learn something that surprises you today. Something that changes how you see the world to better understand it and those around you.
Love, peace, blessing, and lots of light shining all over.
Related Posts:
- We Disagree. Are You Ignorant, Immoral, or Stupid?
- Beyond Cartoon Morality: The World Isn't Bad Guys vs. Good Guys
Glancing over some evidence and throwing your hands up because you don't want to make "black and white" judgments is not the appropriate level of vetting for a man the world is trusting its health to IMO.
You should look up who funded the Eugenics programs in both the US and Nazi Germany, then take a look at when "population control" became an issue. Who started the "Population Council" and headed it with the ex-president of the American Eugenics society? Then check out their documents endorsing involuntary sterilization. From there you should check out the 1988 Rockefeller foundation annual report announcing successful testing of an HCG/Tetanus anti-fertility vaccine. Then check out the 1995 congressional investigation into a 3rd world WHO tetanus vaccine distribution and compare it to the 2014 Gates-funded Kenyan Tetanus vaccine scandal.
I understand that you want to be the nice guy and not offend anyone, but we are at a turning point in our global civilization and it is not the time to be cutting the most powerful men on the planet some slack. It is funny that you draw the comparison between Thanos and Gates, as the whole purpose of the Disney/Marval media monopoly running that decade long propaganda campaign was to get people to empathize with the depopulation agenda.
P.S. Gates only spent 650k out of 5Billion of his 2018 foundation budget on clean water, hygiene, nutrition, & economic development etc.
Thanks for chiming in! I love the detailed research you've been doing on this stuff and I've read both of your recent posts. When we bring in Nazi's and what parents have done, it does start to get a little into some grey area, unless people are already convinced with the blood-lines narrative that these families operate generationally and have no problem with long, drawn out agendas that take centuries.
As for me, it's less about "being the nice guy who doesn't want to offend anyone" as it is about not alienating two completely opposed groups of people who have strongly different opinions and are both made up of rational, educated individuals. If I truly believed "Gates is obviously EVIL itself!" then I would have to believe things about my educated friends (either they are ignorant or evil). I write things the way I do in order to bring both sides of an opposing discussion to the table for respectful dialogue. If that can't happen, no progress can be made. If, for example, Bill is evil itself, those who think otherwise have to be convinced so they have to come to the conversation, right? At the same time, if, but chance, he's not the boogie man he's made out to be and he has actually creating good in the world, that would also have to be addresses for those who feel that's impossible. That's why I take the tone I do. I haven't made up my mind and people I respect on both sides of issues like this one have important perspectives to share.
It's not what the "parents" have done, the Population Council was founded by John D. Rockefeller III, the Tetanus/HCG anti-fertility vaccine distribution was funded by Gates directly. The idea that these families were obsessed with Eugenics in the 40's, and were sterilizing 400k Germans against their will, then in the 50's suddenly discovered that "overpopulation" is humanity's greatest threat and start sinking money into solving it is a bit too much of a stretch for me.
As far as the "evil not evil" thing, who cares? There is a pile of evidence showing that eugenics has been used to decrease populations (many times involuntary) by the same groups and families over the last century. We had FORCED STERILIZATION in the US less than 100 years ago.
The facts speak for themselves, you do not need to make value judgments on the person your sharing information with, nor Gates. Just share the information, but it will take work to absorb the necessary amount of historical context for it to become clear for you.
It's not easy to research either, these oligarchs have covered their tracks as much as possible, but isn't the future of our civilization worth it?
We didn't have the widespread internet to spread information and expose the people who orchestrated 9/11 then took our civil rights with the Patriot Act, we have a chance to stop them in their tracks this time around, but only if we put in the work and aren't afraid to offend people that have bought the mainstream narrative.
The problem here is that there exists EVIL.
Many of the neo-religious have decided to state that since they cannot define EVIL (without the great book) then EVIL doesn't exist. So, there are only people doing harmful things because they are misinformed.
In their minds, evil doesn't exist, and they have a good idea of what is happening.
Unfortunately, neither is the case.
Their exists a group that wants to see the utter destruction of the world.
However, since we are all misinformed, we have no idea what that looks like.
Imagine a world where shooting someone just knocked them down for a little while.
If in that world, you wanted to destroy it, does killing people do anything to further that goal?
No, you need to get those people to believe in self-destructive ways, and keep them in a state of ignorance and despair.
Since every high spiritual person knows their is reincarnation, then that little imagining is far closer to reality than any can imagine.
Billy Gates has gone around the world leaving a horrifying destructive trail of bodies and shattered dreams behind him. He has been banned from entire countries. If we had an honest legal system he would be locked up for genocide, just to keep him away from society (whether he has knowingly done this or not)
We must recognize that there is EVIL.
And we must call it out and stop helping these people.
Fortunately, the solutions do not require this. They require people to understand GOOD, and work towards it.
Everything the govern-cements have done during this "pandemic" has been not GOOD.
So, we must change our ways.
How would you prove evil exists? How would you prove reincarnation?
You tend to make a lot of definitive statements as truth claims without supporting evidence with some logical fallacies thrown in (like appeal to authority with "every spiritual person knows").
Claiming Bill Gates has participated in genocide and should be locked up for it is quite a claim. I do know some vaccine trials were terribly immoral. Was that directly on Bill Gate? Did he knowingly do that and is there evidence to prove it? Please explain what you mean by "(whether he has knowingly done this or not)" because if you're advocating for a justice system which locks people up for things they don't even know they did, that, I might agree, could be evidence of the existence of evil.
I agree up to a point. You cannot make progress with someone without acknowledging their humanity and perspective as valid.
But... that presume their perspective is valid. Which is true more often than many think, but not always. A perspective of "the lizard people living in the Earth's core created coronavirus in order to usher in the return of Elvis" is... not, not valid, not rational, and not worth engaging with.
You can constructively disagree with someone over opinion, or interpretation of facts. But if you cannot even agree on the nature of facts, and rationality, and the scientific process itself, then no, there's really nothing more you can do with that person.
If someone actively undermines the very concept of rational, constructive discourse, and actively spreads malicious, malevolent lies, then no, you are under no obligation to sympathize, empathize, or respect their viewpoint or them.
That someone disagrees with you does not mean they fall into that category. But there are people who fall into that category, and engage in those behaviors, and they are as close as we have to "evil" and should be treated as such.
To do otherwise is to engage in self-harm. And that is also a trap you need to avoid.
Question for you: have you had many transcendent experiences in your life? Maybe psychedelic ones, but not exclusively so? Have you ever had your understanding of reality so completely questioned that you have to step back and rethink everything? Have you studied (to avoid the woo woo stuff for a second) the holographic universe ideas, multi-worlds hypothesis, simulation theory, or quantum weirdness such as the quantum entangled delayed double split experiment which essentially proves what we do in the now can actually change the past?
To use the example you outlined:
If our understanding of reality is completely off, this may not be as crazy as it initially seems. Let's say "the earth's core" isn't really a thing because the "earth" as we understand it is actually 2D, and we are seeing a 3D projected holographic reality. So there could be, from the view of higher dimensional beings, a way to come out of the "core" on the 2D and project into higher planes such as 3D and beyond. The "lizard people" narrative is another interesting one. Why do people groups all throughout history have similar stories and histories regarding these types of beings? Why are demons and the like so common in our folklore? Why do many different spiritual traditions all have similar ways of describing the same thing from their own brand? As to Elvis... many do include reincarnation as their reality and even beyond that, the concept of an absolute unbounded oneness where our individuated units of consciousness are just projected illusions of the ONE.
Before you write me off completely as having lost my mind ("Luke, I could barely handle the bitcoin/anarchy stuff, but this???!?! Geez man, come back to PHP."), please truthfully and sincerely consider this thought experiment:
You've never known anything but visible light. Someone tries to convince you of mythical sounding frequencies outside of what you can perceive with your eyes which allow for all kinds of magical things like X-Rays, WiFi, Radio, etc, etc. You've never experienced those things, so you doubt it all. Let's say you then experience one of those things. You don't have a framework or scientific tool to understand, so it seems like magic. Later, you gain experiential knowledge, understanding, and tools. Now it all makes sense scientifically according to your epistemology.
Are you open to the possibility that your perception of reality is somewhat similar to this? That you don't yet have experiential knowledge about the fabric of existence than many others do and scientific tools are just starting to catch up with?
Luke, I can barely handle the bitcoin/anarchy stuff. :-P
The solution to your question is what I already stated: The scientific method. Science regularly said "well, that was wrong, gotta rethink this." That's what makes it so reliable, and made it able to usher in the greatest advancements in human knowledge since ever. Making a change is not always easy; it requires evidence, data, and a good logical argument. But in time, those win out.
But if someone still thinks the moon landing was faked? Or that the global climate isn't getting warmer? Or that vaccines cause autism? That's just deliberate ignorance of the facts, and no, you don't get "alternative facts."
When considering alternate opinions or perspectives, which you can and should do, you should always evaluate them rationally. If they fail a rationality test, then... no, I am not going to stay open to them.
I have never seen X-rays myself, but I have seen ample evidence that they exist, and have trust that the institutions and people that study them are, overall, honest about their findings. (The best way to evaluate someone's honesty: What happens when they're actually wrong. Do they own up to it or try to cover it up? If they own up to it, I am more willing to accept their word for it the rest of the time.) If the current understanding of electromagnetism was way off, we would physically not be able to have this conversation. Are there gaps and details that we don't understand or may have wrong? Absolutely, and science freely acknowledges that. But "there is no such thing as ultra-violet light" is... no, not actually a thing.
An alternate epistemology has to justify itself rationally. If it can't, then no, I am not going to accept it.
So I'm pretty much with you on the whole thing...it's really impossible to know what to believe and I also don't really have the time to do any sort of in-depth research. But I have heard a number of things (from Bill Gates and others) about a forced vaccination for the entire world's population and some type of marker to indicate who has and has not been vaccinated which then leads to non-vaccinated people not being allowed to do certain things, and that kind of talk is extremely worrying, especially from people who have the money and power to actually make it happen.
I agree with you. I just have to look at my friends posts (on networks that shall not be named - that ought to get a few triggered) and see them re-posting things that they know very little about and they are just amplifying biased posts with so many logical fallacies. In many cases it disheartening, as I consider some of these people extremely intelligent and they are highly educated.
I like the epistemological concept. Everyone need's to step back realize what is a biased belief built on amplified arguments and bereft of fact versus arguments and information based on actual fact. Belief vs fact.
And you've started that approach with @builderofcastles. It's about understanding someones perspective buy asking questions that are not meant to be inflammatory but just probing.
@builderofcastles let's try to understand what we would define as evil, how do we know it exists, start there to get us on an equal footing? Go from there.
How do you explain color to a blind person?
Unless they have seen, you can't even explain what sight is.
Explaining sight ends up with people who can't tell the difference between a picture and seeing it yourself. (as a metaphor)
Describing colors... there just isn't any concepts that you share to get it across.
Thus describing evil, first you have to describe the world.
And since most people have been lied to about the world their whole lives, its really hard to explain, requiring many layers.
Like above, i mentioned the shooting of someone.
Most consider that evil.
But, from a viewpoint of the wheel of life, it is but a step in a larger journey.
So, it is not really evil.
Many bring up the trolly problem to talk about what is evil or more evil.
But again, this is a mental game that has no bearing on real life, and thus no bearing on evil
(the trolly problem can't happen in real life because the world doesn't work that way. It can only exist from evil people trying to break your brain. Here, choose bad ending #1 or bad ending #2, and since you chose, you are bad, bwaahahahahaaa)
So, all i can really do right now is state that EVIL exists, and point out signs to look for.
Holographic universe type stuff, yeah?
... he just thinks he's a god like the other lucky ass silicon valley punks that want to rule us
Trump and the Q group will handle it like WHO and CNN. Will be next as others in the Fauci queue.Gates is a pharmaceutical fanatic who has killed many people in poor countries by testing.
I wonder sometimes... is the Trump and Q Group narrative connecting into the "Avengers" idea that some good super heroes are out there to save us like in the cartoons so it's all going to be okay, and we should just sit back and watch?
Every story has a hero. It happens and before the election there will be effects. So the watch will strike the hour ...
How about we simply focus our energy to things we can control and worry less about things out of our scope?
Worrying about whether or not there is a hidden agenda played out by some powerful small group of billionaires might not always be the best time investment.
Yes, but the division created relationally between families, friends, and communities who don't know how to discuss issues like this is more what I care about. People can passionately disagree about something, but if they can't talk about it reasonably together, then that division does hinder their ability to be successful at the things they can control.
It's maybe not for everyone to be able to reason and discuss things with an open mindset.
Sometimes the only real option without falling into chaos is a belief system that, although not always based on reason and facts, provides enough certainty to cope with the challenges of life.
Changing someone's mind doesn't always fall in the category 'do-able' or 'in the zone of things I can control'.
I often find myself avoiding certain topics, especially with family, since that won't bring anyone closer in any way.
Bitcoin would be one of those topics :)
I'm naive enough to believe change is possible everywhere.
I've seen change in myself, so I think, fractually, it exists everywhere else as well.
I've always said the opposite of naïveté is cynism. If a choice between those must be made, the open-minded optimistic naive approach is far better.
You will certainly run into some disappointments from time to time, but don't let those take away your positive perspective 💪
I know people who are direct beneficiaries of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, it's a charity that gives funding to the poorest and ill-stricken. It has made a profound positive effect on their lives. I also understand how Bill got rich and some of the things MicroSoft did to become the richest corporation in the United States. I believe some folks hold some of that resentment and try to vilify the man. It's like okay if it wasn't MicroSoft it was probably going to be some other Silicon Valley company, so Gates made a name for himself and got rich but at least he has chosen to do a lot good with it.
hahahaha
It looks quite similar!
We need the iron man in this case. lol
Well compared Thanos with Bill Gates... I first thought it is bit funny but very logically explained everything.
I really don't understand all the hate to Bill Gates. Jeff Bezos seems to be more evil to me when compared. But, we are all human and I think some of us might be more evil if we got as wealthy as them.
How is a guy that cant protect me against a virus on my computer going to protect me with a vaccine? All I know is hopefully I see him in prison soon but probably not. Money like that keeps you alive.
Your article is nice but I don't think the comparison will please Bill Gates lol
Thank you :)
Greetings @lukestrokes and all the commentators who have passed by here,
The controversy is very interesting and invites you to think. Gates is Thanos or Thanos is Gates, is there evil? Perspectives on the expression of the universe, western versus eastern worldviews, heaven and hell against the reincarnation process, wow, definitely very interesting gathering, a post to philosophize.
Obviously modern fictions like the old ones have their support in reality. I was a fan of the Avengers saga. Now I have a calmer and more reflective vision in this regard and I have no doubt about Hollywood's media handling of the masses through neurolinguistic programming.
One aspect that caught my attention in the comment thread was the controversy about the existence of evil. We could argue for hours from the epistemological and logical perspective for the definition of the term and its nature. In such a way to attribute the malevolent action of Mr. Gates disguised as a Thanos type philanthropist.
Bill Gates conducts actions with noble intentions with malevolent effects. This depends on the glass with which you look at it. The pair, good and evil, share the same nature or on the contrary, behave like light, that is, evil is the absence of light and vice versa. I don't know why this brings to mind a Nazi character who excused himself during the trial on the grounds of just doing his duty, this led Hannah Arendt to write about the banality of evil, an ordinary man responsible for hundreds of thousands or millions of deaths in the concentration camps of the Second World War.
We could argue for long hours under absolutist positions of morality or relative ethics to justify the actions of man like Adolf Eischmann or a fictional titan like Thanos to pigeonhole the current actions of Bill Gates and its potential repercussions. Time will give its verdict, however, in my case every human action that attempts against life is a reflection of evil based on a diminished vision of reality. Only he who has an absolute understanding of reality can normal his course and of course no man or Titan has that ability.
No. No, he is not.
There's always a Thanos.
This is a very good story, sir. I really enjoy the beauty of the story you gave, greetings, I am happy to choose you as a witness
Very well said.
I especially like it when people take one statement that Bill Gates makes during a 20 minute interview, ignore the question that he was asked and all of the context of the speech, and then play that sentence over and over again at various speeds (for effect) while claiming that this one sentence proves the authors wild theory as if its evidence of some kind of Freudian slip or something lol.
The best line that sums it up for me was provided by David Icke. To paraphrase:
"if you already know the answer then there are no coincidences."
Basically he admitted that his philosophy in life and methodology for critical thinking is using confirmation bias to prove his own ideas.
Of course, here I'm using one quote stated during an hour long interview, to sum up entirely, one mans character. What does that say about me?