Examining the Heart and Soul of Totalitarianism

I can’t begin to tell you how happy I was to find out that a brilliant systems analyst whose opinions I hold in the highest esteem, Ivor Cummins, has identified the root cause of what’s destroying love, trust and trustworthiness in the world today. The author of an important book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, Mattias Desmet, also gets it. He delivers a spell-binding interview in the video above.

These two men have come to grips with a hard truth that I’ve been yammering about, mainly to my wife, for decades: the primary cause of our cultural dysfunction today is “scientific” materialism, the pseudoscientific and dogmatic faith in the untestable assumption that our universe and all of the things and beings that might possibly lie beyond it, are all made of 1. mindless matter and 2. mindless electromagnetic energy. This interchangeable pair, born of reductionism, has designed and constructed the vast living ecosystems of unfathomably complex organisms without mindful help, because the faithful know there is no chance of a higher mind existing out there anywhere.

“Mass formation psychosis,” as the narrative goes, was first described in the 1950s as a state of mass hypnosis that must take control of 30 percent of a population before a tyrant can drag a country into one of the traditional forms of totalitarianism. Nazi Germany is the poster-child, it seems.

When I listen to this highly educated guy in the video, Mattias Desmet, discuss “mass formation,” it seems intuitively obvious that the US is experiencing this odd hypnotic phenomenon now, heading rapidly and enthusiastically toward a technologically enforced totalitarian society with Central Bank Digital Currency in the hands of the Central Banking Cartel as the ultimate tool for micromanagement of speech, shopping, and the savings/ investment patterns of each individual within their digital surveillance.

Here are the dynamics of group psychosis through hypnosis…

Lonely, frightened people become emotionally married to a constantly repeated (but irrational) narrative that feels good because it focuses everyone’s free-floating anxieties and fears on a concrete object, the “evil people,” who can be dealt with directly (in contrast to their free-floating anxiety which has nothing concrete to target for elimination). These “evil people” are always a group of flawed souls (because we’re all flawed souls, OK? Own it.) This flawed group’s historic and ongoing imperfections are surreptitiously emphasized with righteous indignation which subconsciously tags the group as the cause of everyone’s fear and anxiety, especially where money and poverty are concerned.

Today’s iteration of mass formation psychosis is far from “an equivalence” to Nazi Germany’s events, except perhaps in vague broad terms such as the catastrophically bad judgement of our leadership (on both sides of US politics). The “ultimate evil” group today has become the un-woke white males, as best I can tell. This could change, of course. State-sanctioned racism could shift from white males to all whites including white women and children. Or the currently woke version of racism could suddenly point its finger at another group, such as the Asians, the Mormons, the folk who pilot the world’s UFOs/UAPs, or even the un-woke of all races and worldviews who simply oppose ALL forms of racism on principle, including the woke anti-white form we’re currently struggling with.

It’s strange how a frightened, lonely population can be group-hypnotized into embracing a narrative, no matter how absurd it is, as long as the narrative can be constantly repeated to the public while rational voices are suppressed.

If you wanted to take over the world today, you’d need to have Big Tech and ALL the TV “news” outlets behind your narrative.

Check.

You’d need a crisis or a series of crises, hopefully signaling an unavoidable global macroeconomic disaster like hyperinflation and/or depression.

Check.

You’d need the big money behind your cause, like the world’s true central bankers and their puppets who appear to run the FED.

Check.

Then you, as a wannabe tyrant, could succeed miraculously through public repetition of any delusion, because the discomfort of free-floating fear, anxiety and loneliness can be symptomatically suppressed by focusing these unstable emotions on their supposed root-cause, namely the insufferably rotten white people with male gender identification.

“These sub-humans need to be at least punished for what they’ve done. Then we’ll find justice.”

The huge relief that comes from focusing free-floating anxiety and fear on something concrete brings fanatical dedication to the cause. Currently the cause appears to be silencing, hating, and eventually hunting down and exterminating all the “subhuman animals” who stubbornly oppose the woke delusion and its cultural and governmental takeover. Some of us happen to be white males, so we’re an easy starting point, but probably it won’t stop there.

Unfortunately, eliminating entire segments of the human population (and thereby reducing genetic diversity and our species’ odds of long-term survival) appears to be historically central to a successful “mass formation psychosis” perpetrated by tyrants who are overthrowing a government.

The folk in a takeover-targeted society who speak against the hypnotic racist narrative are, we’re told, unable to reverse the course of the revolution, but at least their anti-racist, anti-murder efforts to preserve rational thought do sometimes seem to succeed in preventing outright genocide and mass murder.

Today the WEF is openly telling us their plans to conquer the world, rejoicing in the ongoing global crises (economic and virus-related) that they freely admit they’re taking full advantage of while publicly bragging about their success in “infiltrating” by getting WEF graduates elected to public office. Fortunately the World Economic Forum seems to want to avoid nuclear war during their takeover. Got to be thankful for the little things.

“Mass formation” theory explains why and how the low points of human history tend to repeat themselves.

But I find it more fascinating that “scientific” materialism itself, the dominant toxic fundamentalist worldview today, is nothing short of a mass formation psychosis. It has taken a lonely group of highly intelligent people who have dedicated their careers to objective truth and curiosity, a group of wonderful men and woman who live in constant anxiety and fear of stepping out of line or in any way inadvertently screwing something up and losing their research funding, and through endless repetition of the Neo-Darwinian narrative for over a century, it (the toxic soup of materialism) has transformed about 66% of scientists and much of the general public into “scientific” materialist fundamentalists who reject all scientific curiosity outside of traditional materialist boundaries.

And as a group, the materialists (a.k.a. physicalists) continue to destroy the careers of anyone who opposes their scientific faith-based assumption with any other scientific faith-based assumption, such as Intelligent Design or the objective, scientific study of UFO’s/UAPs. They also censor and derail the careers of those within their own materialist faith whenever one of them accidentally discovers and tries to publish the evidence supporting a non-materialist worldview.

It’s no wonder I’m hearing rumors that materialist scientists are individually but quietly backing away from their long-held religion. Reality is impossible to hide from smart people forever, it seems to me.

I can deal with the notion that Desmet suggests, that the silent majority (on all sides of politics, science and human demographics who quietly dislike racist government takeovers) cannot prevent it from ultimately happening. It’s not the end of the world if we can’t change the course of history or even change the mind of a single woke racist. We can at least keep talking sense to the brick wall of hypnosis. We can at least keep trying to limit the loss of life that has traditionally been part of government takeover revolutions throughout history.

Come to think of it, I like what someone reported hearing during their life-changing near-death experience…

“God doesn’t ask us to succeed, only to persist.”

Ask Viktor Frankl, God rest his soul. Speaking up against ALL forms racism is the only loving, kind, and thoughtful thing to do, because nobody who’s not a sociopath feels good about themselves after a genocide, whether they’ve participated as a bloodthirsty proponent, a passive observer, or a survivor like Mr. Frankl.

Democracy Love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Wokeism’s misplaced blames

The woke movement preaches an unquestionable dogma of white privilege and white guilt. The dogma ignores the cultural and historic diversity of the so-called “white race” and overlooks the truly privileged class because these people are racially diverse.

And it’s easier to take the lazy route of thoughtlessly lumping white people together into their fictitious monolithic camp of genetically evil abusers who must be shamed, silenced and conquered through political force and eventually all other available means including violence and possibly white genocide if their emotions run high enough.

To question the broad-brush treatment of “white privilege” constitutes an unpardonable sin called racism. With this knee-jerk programming of thought, they are able to forbid all meaningful discussion of race issues throughout the Western education system.

Even so, their ironic racism deserves everyone’s examination because it can potentially open our eyes to a truly privileged class, a group that dominates human society and probably always will unless some future generation learns to identify them and educates themselves to recognize and avoid their mass manipulations of society.

I suspect that identifying the truly privileged class within each country might be quite helpful over the long haul, though silencing them and discriminating against them would be a foolish mistake if the goal were to diminish their grip on global power.

“But why do they even exist?” we might ask ourselves.

At least from the infinitely limited perspective of human materialistic science, the world is fundamentally unfair. Gazelles provide “necessary” food for lions. Sparrow hawks must eat smaller birds to survive, we are told.

It’s hard to disagree.

Such seems to be the dark side of Nature’s balance between predation and cooperation (symbiosis). Science is beginning to believe that symbiosis actually dominates Nature while competition/predation plays a subordinate role. This reversal of emphasis is the start of great things for humanity, I think. Humanity has suffered enough from the error that Nature is dominated by the “survival of the fittest” or the survival of the best breeders. The era of “survival by symbiosis” will hopefully take root and shift us away from hatred and war.

But within the darkness of Nature’s lethal competitions, none of us seems to have been given a choice as to where we would be born or what species or subspecies we might inhabit when we find ourselves alive and conscious on Earth.

And so from birth we humans have not escaped the unfair competition inherent to Earth’s ecosystems. (Nor have we missed out on her networks of symbiosis.)

In this context, the woke movement seems to be a well-meaning attempt to fight Nature’s unfairness from a materialist’s anti-spiritual perspective. Wokeism is a resistance to the unfair birth circumstances on Earth. It uses woke racism to fight a heavily exaggerated version of white racism that would have been accurate 75 years ago, I think.

Unfortunately the woke movement has targeted the wrong group of people entirely.

A more appropriate target would be the truly privileged. But who are they?

Here are some of their lucky cultural and metabolic traits…

1. strong wills from early childhood

2. outlier courage (which is a low baseline of anxiety and fear, I suspect)

3. the gift of stable high mental energy for sustaining purpose over decades while imposing their wills upon others

4. the uncommon form of “intelligence” (for lack of a more accurate term) that enables them to mentally navigate complex cause-and-effect scenarios and make predictions that tend to come true with the help of their high mental energy and sustained physical activity over decades and generations…

People with this combination of rare metabolic and cultural advantages are the actual privileged class in today’s societies around the globe. But they are not primarily white people by any stretch of the imagination.

They are instead a racially diverse group that constitutes a tiny percentage of the top 1% of wealthy, politically powerful people in every country. They are outliers, born for dominance just as lions are born to dominate their niche.

Nature does this sort of thing routinely on Earth. No one is to blame.

The woke myth that the privileged people belong to their oversimplified version of a “white race” is a bad joke that sets humanity up for another round of racist genocide. It’s not as if two wrongs ever made anything right. 

Of course the woke folks mean well and have tried to deny their racism by redefining the word “racism” as something that the (by definition) “oppressed” people of color can’t possibly participate in. You have to be white to be a racist, in essence.

No one can reason with them on this because to the woke mind, reason, statistics, science and religion (or spirituality) represent inferior sources of truth. They believe that the individual’s “lived experience” is the ultimate source of truth, perhaps the only source.

This little Jedi mind trick is the bedrock foundation of a woke brainwashing technique that begins with school children and continues through the university level in parts of the US. 

I’m hoping that the woke movement will quickly become a dark history lesson about how easily childhood brainwashing took place back in the day within modern school systems.

As such, Wokeism could become a valuable cautionary tale.

If, however, it continues to grow exponentially, our children and grandchildren will live in a modern version of the dark ages where objective reality, logic, reason, fairness, science, spirituality, and honest statistics will take a backseat to “lived experiences” and the self-destructive emotions of victimhood expressed subjectively by woke individuals, many of whom have suffered unspeakable wrongs within Earth’s apparent unfairness.

Below is an informative interview of a professor, Peter Boghossian, who was driven to resign by woke colleagues and students of the university where he taught. The interviewer claims to be neither conservative nor liberal, which should be irrelevant but isn’t. The professor claims to be politically “liberal but not progressive,” if that matters to you. Personally, I think it shouldn’t matter because both sides of politics desperately need to hear the views of the other side and learn to respect them.

It’s a bit shocking to me to realize (and personally own) just how malleable the human worldview is, especially when the mind is seized and controlled from childhood as it is to some degree for all humans I guess, like it or not. Wokeism demonstrates that we don’t have to be part of a “primitive” culture in a stone age to undergo dramatic brainwashing to the point where we advocate anti-reason while believing we’re somehow not promoting evil.

Humans can be made to see North as South and subjectivity as objectivity.

For example, the woke community sometimes claims that science is racist. Talk about a radical retreat from reason.

But, wow! As flawed, biased, and illogically dogmatic as science remains today, and as much as the aging “scientific” dogma of genetic evolution via random mutation and natural selection has been used as justification for some of the insane racist genocides of the 20th century, the fact still remains as clear as mountain water that science and spirituality together are the only paths that humans have found toward wisdom, truth, love, understanding, fairness and peace.

Fair love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


Richard Dolan answers Zappa’s eerie question: “WHO ARE THE BRAIN POLICE?”

Remember the Mothers of Invention? Probably not, unless you’re my age and happened to have loved Frank Zappa’s music when you were 11 years old.

Frank Zappa called out the Hippie culture, the (then) conservative establishment, and sometimes himself. He was a great man who died of prostate cancer, a cancer variety which, incidentally, may have a causal relationship to cow’s milk according to a heavily “debunked,” but fascinating and unique correlation study called “The China Study.”

Mr. Zappa’s song, “Who are the Brain Police?” asks us…

What will you do if the people you knew
Were the plastic that melted,
And the chromium too?
WHO ARE THE BRAIN POLICE?

Last night I listened to Richard Dolan’s modern answer. You should probably listen to Richard while you can. He will be cancelled from YouTube when he gains too many subs for Google’s comfort.

Bottom line: Conspiracy Theory (otherwise known as common-sense analysis) has always been essential to informed, critical, independent thinking.

Imagine a criminal on trial for “conspiracy to commit fraud.” The evidence is clear against him, but the judge throws the case out because “conspiracy theories” are false by definition. This is what Google’s “JIGSAW” group and the RAND Corporation are conspiring to make us all believe.

It’s brainwashing for a “higher” purpose…

Our new brain police, following in the footsteps of every revolutionary totalitarian regime, must eradicate independent thinking in the name of protecting us from harm before they can take full control and ownership of a nation.

But this time the Brain Police want global control, one world government, perhaps with the continued existence of “nations” as window dressing, like in the European Union.

Independent love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

 


PayPal joins the Free Speech Ban

I’m often wrong about important things.

As a scientist, I take pride in admitting this, especially to myself, despite the fact that, like you, I’m infallible.

The insight to admit that you’re often wrong about important things is central to science and vital to any spirituality that values truth over smugness.

Since many, if not most, major scientific breakthroughs come from brave scientists who overcome the peer-review ban on real science…

And since highly intelligent scientists exist on both sides of ALL major issues today, including COVID, Global Warming, mainstream medicine, and the morally bankrupt whitophobes of the racist “Woke” movement’s completely uncritical “critical race theory”…

I can tell you with certainty that free speech, while not risk-free, is far less dangerous than driving a car sober or drunk, riding a horse, operating a motorcycle, texting while driving, or smoking cigarettes sober or drunk.

While free speech is still allowed in the US, some people will refuse to submit to COVID vaccination despite being over 65 years old. This might turn out to be a fatal mistake that endangers others who have made the same free choice.

While free speech is still allowed, some people will refuse to agree with the anti-logic of using racism to combat racism.

While free speech is allowed, some people may learn that political hatred is no cure for poverty because both sides, the conservatives and the liberals have essential viewpoints that need input from the other side if we’re ever going to solve global hunger and pollution.

While free speech survives, some people may learn that there’s an alternative to binary thinking. It’s called love.

People like me who have submitted to the mainstream narrative on COVID vaccination may someday suffer chronic side effects worse than the disease, worse than death even. It’s possible, though I think unlikely.

But let’s face it, scientists don’t have the time machines necessary to identify side effects that may appear years and years after the treatment. Some scientists act as if they do, though, hence they ban free speech. Rookie mistake.

The irony is, free speech gives medical scientists the one and only path for identifying side effects after the clinical trials. Those trials are always relatively brief, especially for psychiatric drugs.

Everyone knows that Silicone Valley hates free speech when it contradicts their political views or, worse yet, their ignorant belief that “settled science” exists in the real world. It doesn’t.

Science is unsettled by definition, that’s why science is invaluable to beings who already know the important stuff, like which worldview is right (always mine), which political party is morally superior (always mine), and which person among the billions is “right this time” (always me, always now).

Computer geeks in the Valley can be forgiven for binary thinking. Facebook, Twitter, Google, et. al might be expected to act like Nazi’s, but PayPal?

PayPal is stealing money from people who’s ideas they hate. This is new and far more dangerous than golfing in a thunderstorm. I had no idea overt petty theft had become a tool for banning free speech on the Net. We must resist it somehow, I think.

Please watch this video and imagine the implications if such things continue. Imagine a time when Whiteophobes feel justified in confiscating you paycheck because you’re skin isn’t genetically Woke.

I don’t know what Ryan Cristian’s censored content is all about, but unless it’s terrorism or child porn, it doesn’t matter. (OK, it’s not terrorism or porn because Alison Morrow wouldn’t interview someone like that. She’s awesome.)

I just hope Ryan Cristian knows that he’s “often wrong about important things,” like any other truth seeker.

If you know the name of an objective independent reporter besides Alison Morrow, please tell me. Or if you know of a free-speech affirming alternative to PayPal, please mention it in a comment below. I’ll do my part to support them.

Love, trust and trustworthiness,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD


THE IDIOTIC CENSORSHIP OF IVERMECTIN – “As if Silicon Valley knows better than doctors”

One law of simulation that has brought our world’s flawed democracies a better outcome for the poor than the popular forms of totalitarianism is this: Truth must be challenged to survive from generation to generation.

Truth is antifragile. It grows stronger when exposed to rational opposition. Truth is like the memory B cells of the immune system, those nanofactories that produce specific antibodies against antigenic foci on the microscopic predators we encounter. Without repeated exposure, B cells can forget what they’ve learned.

Likewise, without rational challenge and debate, truth fades from humanity’s collective memory.

Falsehood is fragile like some of the dangerous bacteria lurking in hospitals. Clostridium difficile, for example, is a bug that thrives when antibiotics have silenced the balanced competition of the normal gut microbiome. I’ll never forget the horror on my infectious disease doctor’s face when I had C. diff colitis and his first round of IV antibiotics had failed (targeting Clostridium difficile with antibiotics, fighting fire with fire). People sometimes die from the pseudomembranous colitis caused by this opportunistic infection.

My doc’s second round of IV antibiotics worked. Now I’m swallowing probiotics and prebiotics regularly for prevention.

Meanwhile, most MD’s aren’t even sure the microbiome is worth their attention. The drug companies have less than zero motivation to do large blinded, controlled clinical trials on probiotics. And without reports of such trials in the “infallible scriptures” of big-pharma medicine, the faithful congregation of mainstream MD’s must continue to ignore the human gut microbiome. Everyone loses.

Just as broad-spectrum antibiotics kill the gut’s healthy bacteria, censorship kills the truth. Especially censorship of genuinely dangerous, hurtful, triggering, bigoted lies and misinformation. This is counterintuitive, but all human judgement is a matter of perspective. Always and forever.

An easy example of truth vanishing due to censorship is the megalithic evidence of humanity’s prehistoric high-tolerance stonework technology seen in massive ancient stone structures around the world, some weighing hundreds to over a thousand tons. The academics refuse to allow discussion of this evidence in their sacred literature (science journals). As a result, the truth of advanced human technology in ancient history has become invisible to archeology and academia.

Perhaps it’s not invisible to you?

Another example of vanishing data is the entire history of unidentified flying objects. This topic has been denied, shamed and shunned for so many generations that now, even after the US Department of Defense has admitted that UFOs/UAPs are real, many people continue to deny their existence, clinging to “explanations” that betray a lack of reading.

It turns out that we have a simple rule of thumb to help us differentiate falsehood from truth: Just ask, “Do the experts allow published debate on the data or do they dismiss the topic and attack the credibility of those who try to discuss it?” If debate is encouraged, the experts are probably defending a truth. If not, they’re usually defending lies or honest mistakes.

Truth tends to inspire a calm, logical discussion based on evidence rather than personal attack. Truth seems to be antifragile and never ever sides with censorship, name calling, or angry shouts of “shame on you.”

Our culture is forgetting the value of two-sided arguments. More and more we’re forced to accept censorship, cancellation and the personal destruction of all who challenge the amoral, anti-spiritual agendas of Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, mainstream TV Inc., the entrenched academics and all the other mind-police.

For example, as you probably recall, any video with evidence that COVID-19 came from a laboratory in China was deleted by Google’s Nazi AI. This happened because those who created the AI “knew” that any two-sided discussion of COVID origin would give voice to “a political party of racists” and their outrageously evil leader. To Google, the Chinese lab origin theory was an infectious lie that required a broad-spectrum antibiotic — censorship. They honestly believe to this day that the feeble-minded public needs Google’s benevolent protection from liars and the misinformed.

But we don’t.

Even now that the truth of COVID origins is coming out, there are still scientists (@2:14 on this linked video) who seem to imply that the censorship was justified because a “racist” president promoted the Wuhan-lab origins theory.

A more destructive example of our culture banning two-sided arguments is the “woke community’s” effort to change the definition of racism.

Originally racism meant treating anyone unfairly because of their skin color.

Now, under a woke delusion of outrage, racists can only have white skin. People of color cannot, by definition, be racists anymore. How convenient. Any questioning of the fairness of this doubletalk, or its irrational and illogical construction, or the obvious insanity of embracing an evil that you claim to oppose, is halted with the following judgmental sentiment: “If you even ask those questions, you’re a racist and you don’t get it.” No debate, just attack the opponent personally.

It reminds me of the way the “New Atheists” deal with Intelligent Design: attack the people, not the evidence or their logic. Like any one-sided weak argument, the “woke” paradigm requires censorship of rational thought and the skill of shaming.

Wokeness is a mind-virus pandemic that has infected education at all levels and has largely taken over corporate culture. As much as I hate genuine racism, I think “wokeness” is even worse because it justifies one brand of racism, promotes racial hatred, and bans rational discussion of the topic. It looks to me like a blatant example of totalitarian mind control disguised as moral righteousness. It’s like a mood pill that makes you feel morally uplifted when you’re actually participating in evil and violence.

Like the CIA who fights international dishonesty with their own brand of dishonesty, and like the Darwinian Nazi medical doctors of WWII who believed that survival of the fittest was nature’s truest morality, allowing them to systematically torture and kill their human “patients” for a “higher cause,” the woke community of today will occasionally admit that “the value of fairness is overrated” and winning at all costs is an acceptable strategy, at least for now.

Fortunately, the “woke-ban” on thinking rationally about racism is a fragile thing and survives only as long as they can ban debate through shaming, censorship and ruining the careers of their opponents. It’s like a holy war, it can’t last forever.

Another treacherous censorship on the COVID front comes to us now from the binary thinking of Silicon Valley. Google’s Nazi-like AI is banning information on what may actually turn out to be the most highly effective anti-COVID drug so far, Ivermectin. The drug is cheap, so naturally Google/YouTube can’t allow people to hear about its effectiveness. Instead, the G-monopoly silently deletes Ivermectin videos.

But you can watch the video here as Matt Orfalea brings you an MD with international data on Ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19. You really ought to click the link (https://odysee.com/@Orf:b/youtube-censored-the-senate!-(ft.-pierre:4) and watch it. The more we learn about Ivermectin, the more shocking its censorship becomes. (Unfortunately, WordPress software won’t allow me to feature a video from Odysee.com, so I can only link to it.)

Here’s Alison Morrow, a reporter who left the mainstream’s 90-second “news” machine. She interviews Matt Orfalea and discusses parts of his “dangerous” video, highlighting the facts on Ivermectin and noting the irrational behavior of Google’s Nazi censorship monopoly.

At the moment I can’t claim to know whether the current scientific data on Ivermectin should be considered conclusive evidence of its effectiveness. The Big Pharma experts monopolize healthcare in the US and stand to lose billions if a cheap and effective alternative to their drugs-in-testing should arise. They tell us that the data on Ivermectin is “inconclusive.” They don’t have a negative word to say about it as far as I know. It’s just that the holy grail of infallibility has not been achieved yet for this drug’s use against COVID.

Big Pharma has hammered that holy grail message of infallibility into the mainstream MD’s head to the point where almost no one questions the dogma that double-blinded, randomized, placebo controlled, prospective trials of huge size are the only route to medical truth. All other facts, including epidemiologic studies and basic science research, fall into the category of “there is no evidence that treatment A does anything to alleviate disease B.”

Of course, Big Pharma has no intention to study Ivermectin or any other cheap drug. Money is to Big Pharma as air is to a person. The CEO risks corporate death without lots of money coming in. And besides, he works for a higher cause, just like the good folks pushing woke values down our throats.

Since Google has now literally and openly joined the pharmaceutical industry, it must do the logical thing and censor videos on Ivermectin, all for a higher cause.

Nevertheless, Ivermectin has a history of safety, and its current international data shows with overwhelming clarity that it deserves a large clinical trial with open discussions on TV and YouTube.

No, Ivermectin doesn’t deserve this, humanity does. At the very least, COVID patients should be allowed to see the data, discuss it with their doctor, and decide whether to take it or not, along with everything else Big Pharma is pushing on us in their wise benevolence.

Uncensored love,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

PS: I just want to say, like the “New Atheist” movement that shouts down and ruins the careers of Intelligent Design scientists, the brittle and brutal “woke” movement is composed of good, extremely well-meaning people who are struggling to do what’s right, trying to promote the truth as they understand it, and trying to improve the world. Everyone should respect them for those intentions. If you don’t sense the centrality of this point at the level of the heart, then you miss what I’m struggling to say here. Your opponents in any field are not the real enemy. Censorship via monopoly is the enemy. Whether we are atheistic believers in scientific journals or religious believers in old books, whether we’re woke bigots, sleeping bigots, or just deplorably colorblind bigots, we in the free world are all on the same side of an underlying battle against our own elites who seek totalitarian rule. Politics, race, religion, gender, socio-economic class distinctions, tax wars, all these sorts of things don’t matter to the elites except as they are useful as tools to divide, conquer and control us while bringing in money.

As much as we all may love the way Google’s Nazi AI helps us find fascinating stuff, we should force ourselves to abandon YouTube and the Google search engine. We should support democratic, censorship-free alternative sources of information before it’s too late, before the G-monopoly owns and controls the minds of the entire human race.

If you still trust your favorite political TV flavor, you’re making a mistake. The amoral “news” machine will do its best to control and own you by myelinating the neuronal pathways of outrage in your central nervous system, outrage towards the very people whom you should be meditating upon so you can deepen your capacity to love. (“Neurons that fire together wire together,” and so repetition of the feeling of outrage makes you more and more of an “expert” at feeling that way. Avoid TV “news” and stay loving and lovable.)


Love notes to Google and Facebook from John Steward Mill

“All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility.”—John Stuart Mill, All Minus One: John Stuart Mill’s Ideas on Free Speech

“We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.” — John Stuart Mill

“Not the violent conflict between parts of the truth, but the quiet suppression of half of it, is the formidable evil; there is always hope when people are forced to listen to both sides; it is when they attend only to one that errors harden into prejudices, and truth itself ceases to have the effect of truth, by being exaggerated into falsehood.” — John Stuart Mill

“Strange that they should imagine that they are not assuming infallibility, when they acknowledge that there should be free discussion on all subjects which can possibly be doubtful, but think that some particular principle or doctrine should be forbidden to be questioned because it is certain, that is, because they are certain that it is certain. To call any proposition certain, while there is anyone who would deny its certainty if permitted, but who is not permitted, is to assume that we ourselves, and those who agree with us, are the judges of certainty, and judges without hearing the other side.” — John Stuart Mill

“The whole strength and value, then, of human judgment, depends on the one property, that it can be set right when it is wrong; reliance can be placed on it only when the means of setting it right are kept constantly at hand.” — John Stuart Mill

“Yet it is as evident in itself, as any amount of argument can make it, that ages are no more infallible than individuals; every age having held many opinions which subsequent ages have deemed not only false but absurd; and it is as certain that many opinions, now general, will be rejected by future ages, as it is that many, once general, are rejected by the present.” — John Stuart Mill

“For while everyone well knows himself [herself] to be fallible, few think it necessary to take any precautions against their own fallibility, or admit the supposition that any opinion of which they feel very certain may be one of the examples of the error to which they acknowledge themselves to be liable.” — John Stuart Mill

“… the present age … has been described as ‘destitute of faith, but terrified of skepticism…'” — John Stuart Mill

Two days before the election, my daughter asked me who would win. I told her I had a premonition. Biden would win, then Trump would do a recount and win, then Biden would do a recount and win, and that would be the final decision.  So far we’re on track. I don’t much care.

In my humble and yet infallible opinion, democracy in the US is a thing of the past. We seem to have an unelected shadow government that probably overlaps with the anonymous private stockholders of the FED. These people make the big decisions and the big mistakes, as best I can tell.

So I don’t let myself waste emotions and time on politics.

But freedom of speech is another matter, an entirely greater issue than the question of whose aged puppet lives in the White House for a few years.

The gatekeepers of science journals and the censors of the internet probably do more harm to humanity and the Earth than our shadow government ever could. They do it by silencing and marginalizing the outliers and politically incorrect voices of society, gagging those who disagree with the latest cultural dogmas and the so-called settled science, a term reflecting convenient ignorance of the history of science.

If only these powerful unelected leaders of ours would read and embrace John Stuart Mill’s love notes to them.

And where the devil is Monty Python when we need ’em, anyway?

“John Steward Mill

Of his own free will

On half a pint of shandy

Got particularly ill.”

Socrates showed us that to have a worthy opinion, you need to engage in debate with those of opposite opinion. That would mean listening to those who trigger you, those who upset and disgust you, and those who would ban and outlaw your worldview for the “greater good” of their own. Long ago, the people in charge understood this…

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” – The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

Today, more than ever, having a reliable opinion means listening to those whom you instantly recognize as liars. You know they’re lying because their so-called facts contradict the true facts delivered to you by those you trust.

But we all trust our sources mainly because they agree with our own opinions. Might as well admit it. This human tendency is never wise. Scientific breakthroughs, for example, struggle long uphill battles against the reigning dogma of the day and its intrenched adherents whose grant money depends on status quo research.

Both sides of every question must be openly spoken and debated, but the fact is, in today’s PC-controlled world, discussing controversial issues has become nearly impossible. You’re often not allowed to speak. For instance…

If you doubt CO2 is the major cause of climate change,

if you think that the currently lower COVID-19 death rates despite rising infection rates cast doubt on the wisdom of a renewed lockdown,

if you doubt that the complexity of our genetic code could be the sole product of random mutation, genetic drift, and natural selection in a mere 13.8 billion years,

if you doubt that advanced human technology came about for the first time on Earth in the last 12,000 years, starting with about 300,000 years of hunters, gatherers and drooling troglodytes,

if you doubt the wisdom of preaching depressing, nihilistic “scientific” materialism to children as if it were anything more than an untestable assumption of religion-phobes,

if you think the COVID-19 virus might have originated in a research laboratory,

or if you have an opinion about UFOs that differs from the mainstream media’s casual reports, then…

Well-intentioned gatekeepers and the shadowy power heads will silence you, cancel your account, lie about you, discredit you, or at least keep your voice confined to an AI info bubble limited to people who already agree with your ridiculous ideas.

And many of your neighbors will thank the control freaks for their disservice to truth and human awakening.

So this is my plea for open-minded discussion and the questioning of every “indisputable truth” however painful it is to question. We must all place our sacred cows under the spotlight of sincere discussion.

Love through listening,

Morrill Talmage Moorehead, MD

Please send this to a Monty Python fan or to a young person who has no mnemonic for Western philosophers.

 

 


You Can’t Be Silenced

487791_414530215250952_2101266633_n

The picture above  is from Paria Canyon, Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness, Colorado Plateau.

Seriously now, if you were making layered jello you might be able to get the kind of bend you see in the right side of the geologic column (at about 3:00). On the other hand, if you were making the same layered mould using cement instead of jello, allowing each layer to harden for a few million years before adding the next, how would you get that bend?

To ask this question is to invite ridicule. You might be labeled a religious fundamentalist who believes that the age of the earth is, I don’t know, six thousand years? Your sanity, as well as the thickness of your cerebral cortex would be minimized. An elite laugh would try to cower you, shut you down and shut you up.

Humans attack those who dare pose politically (culturally) incorrect questions. Especially in science. We can’t seem to help ourselves.

But if you have trouble getting along with your lover, a counselor will say it’s unfair to turn arguments from the potatoes to the spouse.

We’ve all done it…

“Pass the potatoes,” he says.

“Please!” you snap back – uh – innocently and benevolently.

“Please pass me the damn potatoes.”

“What’s wrong with you? All I ask is a little respect! I am not your servant.”

He yells over the thing you’re about to say. You hear the word, “potatoes” somewhere in the mix.

But potatoes, like the other things you can’t remember, are irrelevant. Yesterday it was… What was it? The TV remote? You really can’t remember. Tomorrow you won’t remember the potatoes.

What politically incorrect question could you raise here?

How about…

“Is it possible that our culture is wrong about the merits of a 50:50 relationship between husband and wife?”

To ask this question is to say, “I’m a sexist,” in western culture. But my mother-in-law doesn’t hesitate to ask it. She says that both husband and wife must be willing to give in and let the other have their way more than 50% of the time.

It’s part of love.

In some other cultures, to mention the western notion of a 50-50 deal between husband and wife is to demonstrate that you should never have left home and gone to America to be brainwashed. “Nothing good comes from abandoning our traditions.”

No matter what culture shapes our perspective, most of us feel we can’t afford to question local dogma when it comes to certain issues. It’s suicide, either figuratively or literally, and perhaps there’s not an infinite difference.

Story characters, on the other hand, can afford to ask anything. They’re expected to shake up our thinking and comfort zones.

Well, I guess Salman Rushdie proved I’m wrong about that. He’s the exception that disproves the rule, since exceptions don’t prove rules in some parts of the universe.

But for the most part, a fiction writer’s characters can push the envelope without getting their author into trouble.

And our characters must push.

As a fiction writer with readers, you and your characters are central to the evolution and hopefully the improvement of human values. You have more influence than presidents, preachers and all the cute yellow journalists who’ve lost their way and can only spout bias. Unlike them, you and your characters can still question the unquestionable without losing your job or being trampled by the IRS and other elite groups.

Your sympathetic round villain or misguided protagonist can be a hateful, ignorant, narrow-minded nazis with tiny frontal lobes and thinly veiled racism, but readers will be curious because “no one can take their eyes off a train wreck.”

And while you’ve got their attention, a few million of your readers will question a hidden assumption for the first time in their lives.

No matter our culture, we find truer answers when fictional characters show us our blind spots.

M. Talmage Moorehead

If you’ve ever suspected that the currently embedded host of scientists has a blind spot wide enough to fly a 37 foot UFO through, please read my in-progress novel Hapa Girl DNA, starting here (as a “one-page” document). I hope it’s a fast ride, but at this point it really needs more conflict – let’s be honest.

If you like my fiction and want to be notified when each of my novels is done (possibly before the next ice age) please join my list here. (No spam or sharing of your info – ever.)

Ka-Pwing!

By the way, if you like my stuff, please tell your weirdest and best friend about this blog (www.storiform.com). Maybe in an email. Thank you!!!

Talmage