Documenting the Current Armageddon since 2017

I happen to be awake throughout the night on Mar. 11th, and saw in the market a candlestick freezing on top of a circuit breaker. It’s been three years since the talk goes around town, about our debt piling up reaching a dangerous breaking point per its ratio to GDP.

And it’s been three years since my friend introduced me to the term Apocalypse and Armageddon, not as Bible stories, but as forecasts. I thought he could be a bit lunatic. I didn’t understand the Bible as a screenplay of world events.

But indeed everyone felt it’s a strange time we live in, drama surfaces, casino owners showing their cards. Zoom outside of looking at just one arena, be it financial, economical or political, just for a moment, to gauge it all as one orchestra, you saw the eerily loud prelude in 2016, where the reality TV actors of politicians steered the mass consciousness into two extreme ends.

In 2017 Trump tweeted about an act under a code name, Covfefe. Nothing like the interpretations on Wikipedia, it doesn’t have to do with his “feud” with the press. No one has a feud with anyone in a good cop bad cop play.

However, some of us understood that Covfefe triggers the speed up of the endgame. Anticipating an economical and social collapse since 2017, we forgot about it in the long waiting. Even when Coronavirus spread in China, it did not come to us that this is it, the black swan.

Lately, an open-source engineer who built Apache, Jon Stevens, shared this video on his Facebook.

Count 90 years as a cycle, for human to repeat their mistakes. Herding with the alternating fiscal policy and monetary policy — the first 45 years, grow the crop; the next 45 years, reap the crop. The pendulum, with this pumping force of the productivity and the reinforcement of a molded group consciousness to direct this productivity propels us along an agenda.

Slumbering Americans bounce between a short spectrum of greed and fear. On the way to the stupid Singularity they will cut our connection as One. The spiritual dimension of this cacophony, stands almost at the center of it all, I will explain in the last part of the article.

We entertained the idea of all the worst-case scenarios, of a very segregated and totalitarian world. In concerning war and chaos, I invite the math minds and intuitive minds to join to understand the grand scheme and get the social discourse going. (Clearly there isn’t enough time for me to understand the current finance world before the next change hitting us, so I will keep coming back to expand this writing as I learn. This was supposed to be my fiction material, and now I’m throwing it out for free as Gonzo journalism in Medium. (And so far they won’t publish it. Sensitive info? ) Because changes happen in a matter of two days. At this rate, in one month, instead of writing sci-fi, I would be writing history and feeling loss that it didn’t help to actively forge the path at this critical time.)

Historically the Public Debt to GDP ratio peaks at the time of Civil War, WWI, WWII, and Now.

In history, a sudden dramatic money multiply happens before a war to fund the war. It results in wealth transfer (the Mystery of Banking by Murray Rothbard). Though purchasing debt through repo market took place of federal reserve banking, but notice the direct relation between money printing and militant expansion throughout history. 

Three zenith points make 2020 comparable to 1930S, an era faded into black and white picture and only a few alive to remember: the gap between rich and poor, the debt to GDP ratio, the rise of populism.

Toolkits that the central bank uses:  We currently are witnessing a great wealth transfer where Fed is owning the industries through stock market bail-out. This measure in reality just worsened the wealth distribution. The large asset holders just got bailed out with many sold their stocks low.

As some have said, it resembles a socialism society. But Fed is not a government agency. There is yet any term for this newly emerged Cthulhu type of thing.

Fed adjusted to 0 interest rate desperately in trying to stimulate the spending and generating paychecks, which, smacks on a pandemic lockdown where people are not spending (this is fresh).

Despite all the money printing, the money supply is not enough. The liquidity shortage will bring a deflation and the current financial toolkits are losing it. 

Is there a war and revolution looming in the coming decade? We stand right at the edge of it.

As we already predicted, from the early news on Central Bank Digital Currency, and the cover of a 1980’s Economist magazine, a global currency is in the making. A central bank puts money directly to your pocket without using the commercial banks for expansion and contraction. What does this mean?

Would it really be a peaceful transition? And surely down this road, there is AI lurking in the horizon asking more from you, probably bio implants to merge with the network of intelligence. Just like how we predicted the downfall of the economy since 2017, we see an underlying theme here. It wants more order and control, and we are entering into the era of AI and Space.

The push and pull of Populism and Communism might emerge again, but this time do you need to tread on the old Lenin Stalin path again? It’s not even that different from the extreme right. Every thought experiment came after the Great Depression failed us by missing the middle path. The lack of a constructive practical social economical model in the group minds prevents us from bringing it into reality. Just, the fact that everyone is lashing out on Fed yet No One has came up with a replacement plan is like a society being blindfolded from dreams.

If we are unhappy with one entity exploiting us using money, how does a community of people maintain markets and trades without that money? Do we need everything built with global supply chain? How do we sustain an industrial world globally?

With all these questions calling for answers, I asked some smart friends to come up with a practical economical model that’s not promoting the current pyramid structure.

It’s not easy. For the economists just don’t have a panorama of how things coming into being in this universe, and don’t yet boldly hold on to the magical possibility, that by changing minds, you change the reality.

There is some scientific spiritual preaching we need to do before getting everybody on board to lift us up from the pit.

See the story under, how manipulation of mass psyche and energy being used by Edward Bernays, the father of Mass Communication and nephew to Freud, in self servitude.

As a law of the universe, this kind of manipulation produces backlashes. In an individual, it’s your personal emotional off-balance and plight; on a massive scale, it’s Depression and war. We’ve been locked in this pendulum for over 5000 years in mass hypnosis — at the lower part of the composition of human nature. You, as a beast, and you as a soulful being, pans out in totally different behaviors. One of you could be tucked in anxiety and the feeling of incompleteness and the consequent depression or aggression, and the other you could be just chilling in Baroque music. As a group, you can imagine. And last century the pendulum was just swinging higher and higher.

Where is everybody at in this organized chaos.

Marc Fleury released Two Prime FF1 on Mar. 10th, right on the crash. He responded to the situation with this 39-page pamphlet, mentioning AI and Peaceful transition. You can get it here or ask him for a copy. As Fleury is known for interacting with mystic energies, he continues to perform rituals in progressing the projects and receives 6666 in response in his Google authenticator.

Archer Norton, spiting out Robert Anton Wilson level of truth to Robert’s research subject at Occupy Denver 2011 — a movement grew out of Fed’s response to 2008 Financial Crisis.

Meanwhile, just before the market freefell, former OTO student Archer Norton voted with his feet and moved from the occult capital Denver to Oklahoma the capital of bison to grow plants, getting shared supplies from neighbors and the community.

The anarchist density in him is dangerously high. The hazardous amount of TNT in the box could knock us back into the stone age, where we all enjoy barter economy and robbing coffee from neighbors. As usual, he self-triggers on the word money or blockchain and performs social shaming.

“Money is enslavement. Money is energy. Bank is the bank that guides water, it guides money through society.” he rants to my earphone in two two-hour calls, “Work does not need the reward of money. I work because I want to. Native Americans in South America live a good life.”

7 Replies to “Documenting the Current Armageddon since 2017”

  1. It’s in fact very difficult in this busy life to listen news on Television, thus I simply use
    internet for that reason, and get the latest information.

  2. Economics may be defined as simply “Energy Exchange”
    and one might say EVERYTHING is Energy.
    Atoms contain Energy and even Thought itself is a sort of Energy.

    Such said, considering set theory
    M : E E : P P : (p)W

    That is to say Economics (“E”) is a an emergent subset of Morality (“M”).
    Politics (“P”) is an emergent subset of Economics (“E”).
    War (“W”) is a Potential (“p”) emergent subset of Politics (“P”). That is to say “War” is a potential emergence of Politics failing.

    There is then “Money”, which may be defined as a Centrally Controlled abstract (i.e. psychological construct/illusion) as applied to a mass for purposes of Economics.
    As such the nature of Money itself invokes a
    Central MASTER Control -> SLAVE User base

    It may be noted that “Monetary Economics” is not in and of itself a necessary, but simply a potential emergent subset of Economics. It is also to say that whenever “money” is invoked, it by it’s very nature, puts a Central MASTER Control -> SLAVE User base relationship into place and action.
    That Central MASTER Control can be Priests of a Church called Central Banks. It can also be Machine Intelligence (ala “A.I.”) made a god with a subservient Priest or Deacon class of I.T. engineers; the arguable “In The Algos We Trust” zeitgeist architecture of today’s High Frequency Trading and cryptocurrency bot laden structures.

    This is not to say “money” is a good or bad thing, it is simply a tool, but it is a tool that inherently denotes something about the set boundaries, that is to say “Morality”, to which it’s Economic participants subscribe.

    The smaller the scale is that money is applied, the closer it’s individual participants are to the Central MASTER Control. The closer the individual participants are to such central control the smaller the chances are that the MASTER will become abusive to it’s SLAVE adherents (note, this simply lessens the likelihood, but does not eliminate it).

    One of the arguable negative aspects with “money”, is that it grants incentive to the narcissist/sociopath and manipulative control mind set to find a way to establish itself as the Central Control while getting the mass to both not understand what money is and to increase the scale of it’s use. Efficient forms of slavery do not require whips and chains.

    As it pertains to economics, one might wonder why any given significant mass would call for monetary economics to begin with as it is literally equal to a call of “WE WANT TO BE SLAVES!”

    David Graeber’s book “Debt: The First Five Thousand Years” speaks about the invention of money and its original purposes. From his research as an anthropologist he concludes that money was a way to ensure fair reciprocity between parties who do not trust one another. Originally, money was rarely used within communities themselves and mostly between communities of distance. In essence, it’s scale was kept limited.

    However, because “money” is an abstract, a literal psychological construct built on faith of a mass, it can easily lend itself to and incentivize manipulable “bad” actors of action (as prior noted).

    When a government says its coffers are low, so we must tighten our belts and accept a hundred million dollar cut to education. People are only thinking in numbers and are motivated to make the numbers look even. They aren’t given a full picture of where money is coming from or the mechanism(s) by which it is created (and it’s not created by the “rich” per say), where it is going to over all, what its actual impacts are, and they have no conception of scale. The government debt may be very low, but even a million dollars can look like an immense amount to a household that is making less than $50,000 a year.

    So let’s say governments can no longer talk in monetary numbers, but must speak in actualities. The government does not have enough material goods to build more warships. To gain those materials they decide to deprecate children’s schools. They must now tell the public: “We will be tearing down 1,000 schools and firing 30,000 teachers in order to have the materials to build warships.”
    The public may then ask, “how do we educate our children and how are former teachers to be fed?”
    To which the government would have to answer: “YOU will (or will not) teach your children and the former teachers will be left to starve.”
    The public can now move on to make much more of an informed conscious choice about their compliance with the government relative to their actual Moral set.

    With numbers you can hide all the potential consequences until it is too late. After the schools have been torn down it is very hard to get them back. A cunning government will of course select to destroy schools in areas where the people have little heard voice or power. Those who are used to being secure, will continue to feel secure and wonder what the more ghetto types are fussing about. Through media and else the controlling establishment can then give further incentive to the less disenfranchised to find ways to see more and more differences between those who are keeping their schools and those who are not, which then makes it easier for people to shut down their empathy and allow a growing have/have not divide.

    This brings to question, how to address issues of morality, notably within large scale communities that have been educated for generations to act in ignorance and/or toward their own narcissist and sociopathic benefit?

    Perhaps a first step is to not so much worry about fixing a world of others, but, as you seemed to imply in you writing, take some time for self reflection, recognition of environment actuality, and taking responsibility for one’s own actions. A second step, as you also seem to point, is where and when possible, calling others attention to or otherwise questioning “elephants in the room” as it were rather then just remaining passively compliant. When a house is on fire, one doesn’t simply ignore the fire or devote time to discussing the finer points of the most effective way to exit the house. They take action, alerting the others in the house to the best of their ability, and take to acting in concert with others in the house to evacuate while salvaging as much as they can.

    As I heard a friend put it recently, “GRAB THE LOG HISTORY! WE GOTTA GET OUTTA HERE!”
    or in other words, salvage the lessons we can and lets move on to doing something else.

    Personally, I remain optimistic and see your writing here as a part of that process of recognizing there’s an issue, calling attention to others that we gotta grab those logs for lesson review, and heading toward the nearest exit with readiness to do something else.

    Thanks for sharing…..

    where we came from is gone, where we thought we were going to weren’t never there, and where we are ain’t no good unless we can get away from it…..
    a glimpse at the logs indicate there seems to be an exit down the middle path there 🙂

    1. Al?
      How did you branch the Economy from Morality? I think there’s a society that you and I both want. That one seeks within; and there is the one we currently have, the one seeks out to space. We can’t put together the resources to launch rockets to Mars without financial tools. Barter worked locally in the beginning, but we scaled.

  3. “How did you branch the Economy from Morality?”
    -Lucinda Cheng

    Simply put, Energy Exchange only occurs with permission.
    As it regards conscious beings, permission may be coerced to some degree, but it none the less remains as an ultimate governing factor. One can not exchange conversational ideas or actions with a corpse.
    Subsequently, for economic activity between conscious beings, it is necessary that exchanges fall within value sets of the involved parties that remain within the boundaries of the parties willingness to co-operate.
    This value boundary set may be thought of both individually and party collectively as the “moral set”.

    some expanded idea on “values” here:
    https://wiki.altold.org/main/index.php/Values

    “We can’t put together the resources to launch rockets to Mars without financial tools.”
    -Lucinda Cheng
    In economics, “Finance” may be regarded as synonymous with the meaning “The choice limits of energy exchange possible” within the any given economic (aka “energy exchange”) set.
    As applied to “monetary” economics, “finance” thus means literally. “The given choice limits of energy exchange possible as decided by the Central MASTER Control”.
    While finance always exist within economic systems, the need for the finance to be Central MASTER Control limited does not. The statement on sending rockets to Mars thus may hold some technical economic truth, but any derived implication that such finance must be beholden to monetary economics is a departure from such technical truth and a fallacy.

    A fallacy is a flawed argument, following which can lead to disastrous results. Consider the statements:
    a. Every member of the investigative team was an excellent researcher.
    b. It was an excellent investigative team.

    Here a fallacy of composition occurs when one infers (b) from (a).
    Rational Choice Theory, notably here as applied to monetary economics, contains this very problem and subsequently allows for money to be used as a weaponized tool of coercion on the morality of others.

    a. “aggregate social behavior results from the behavior of individual actors, each of whom is making their individual decisions”
    b. “aggregate social behavior” from (a) results in aggregate social behavior.

    In a world without values, who will grow the trees to provide the oxygen for everyone to breath, who will care for the insects that support the ecosystems, who will lift a finger to clean the oceans? If valuable aggregate social behavior is the self-ordering of humanity resulting in paradise on earth, destructive social behavior leads to neglect and eventual systemic collapse. Aggregate social behavior does not distinguish between the two, and the current trend is resulting in a collapse of social behavior aggregation. The reason for this is that rational choices between preferences more often than not support values for choosing ones’ preferences and compromise values that result in valuable social behaviors. A possible solution is a social network that amplifies and motivates (not so coerced) values-based-behavior. However, to understand why the daily psychological sleight of mind must be completely clear.

    Imagine a poor man deciding whether to buy work clothes for a job interview, or bread for his starving family.

    The equation reads:
    B *=* W =* n$* = mB

    B *=* W represents the choice between bread and work clothes.

    W =* n$ represents the knowledge of the cost of the clothes.

    n$* = mB represents the amount of bread the man could buy with the price-money of the work clothes.
    https://wiki.altold.org/main/img_auth.php/5/5d/Work_or_feed.jpg

    No one would argue that such decisions repeated over time would create a society: a civilization of people trained to reduce their decisions to simple money-calculations, where the bottom line is always available and indeed called rational by the leading political-economy. In order to recognize what we have lost, and having an appreciation for the complexity of a type theoretical world, we can consider some examples that expand value to more inclusive categories than exchange price.

    Semantic Values are words, whose meaning is gained through evaluation over the contexts of the expressions (grammar, social, body language, tonality). Ethical Values are words, whose meaning has contextual behaviors associated with them, of which the ascription to others influences and encourages said behaviors. Emotional Values are phenomena explicitly not interpreted by a semantic network, so that the users of the network have the capacity for enigmatic discourse. Now considering all of these potentialities, the central reason money as an organizing mechanism leads to evil is that it requires us to compromise values and reinforces us to prefer preferring, rather than considering how we could act ethically, that is at least in ways we would like to be treated. Instead, the work-clothes vs. bread argument will show that by following the mainstream of money-society, we choose evil because it is easier, not because it is natural. We are all poor: impoverished for shared values that would enrich our lives beyond imagination. In this sense, the meek shall inherit the earth.

    The result of a society fueled and fueling money as the organizing apparatus lends itself to the compromise of one’s values with every exchange. Again, as prior noted, efficient forms of slavery do not require whips and chains.
    The diagram found here:
    https://wiki.altold.org/main/img_auth.php/thumb/c/cf/Diminishing_returns_to_values.jpg/800px-Diminishing_returns_to_values.jpg

    shows how in seeking a money-ordered society, we sacrifice our potential to order based on what really matters. The value in question is family, and here is shown what happens to this man’s conception of family as he decides between feeding his family, or a chance to support them. Further examples of value-perversion within the box describing family offer insights into why we humans don’t do better, despite our capacity to do so.

    On the left is the values he sacrifices in considering buying work clothes and clocking in. On the right are the values he appropriates in the rational decision. The intersections do not represent intersections of values, but categories in themselves: justifications and excuses. These become supported values.

    Assuming he will buy the clothes, he must excuse the suffering of his family with ideas like “struggle makes strong” or “this will be better in the long run”, so while family well being is his goal, it is also a value that he has sacrificed or compromised. Now instead of simply focusing on family well being, he has a host of excuses which he must justify with statements like “family first” or “you have to be cruel to be kind”, however in truth family has now become second to monetary finance. While it is a supported value, its place is as a justification and not a thing-in-itself.

    Values don’t just guide our behavior, they also inform our enjoyment (“I really value that”). This explains why money cannot buy happiness, because its current usage as the main organizing paradigm compromises the capacity to enjoy commodities at every level. So those who seek a good life beyond thrill-seeking have the most to gain by engaging in their uncoerced moral values.

    “Barter worked locally in the beginning, but we scaled.”
    This last statement makes some big assumptions, notably as it regards the organizing of societal history WITH OUT coercion.
    Who and what is the “We” being mentioned on scaling?
    From whence is this “We” derived?

    It may be noted, that the “Nation State” was a forward progression of the previous existing greco “City State”. So is the “We” a reference to greco-roman and/or cannanite hierarchical “civilization”?

  4. In lieu of events of later May 2020, I’d like add some comments for clarity.

    First
    The espoused philosophies of Robert Anton Wilson were the furthest thing from my mind at the time that picture was taken. There was no particular philosopher or philosophy on my mind at the time. While I do not mind the picture being used, I’d like it to be made clear that the original comment of “Al Nesby, spiting out Robert Anton Wilson level of truth to Robert’s research subject at Occupy Denver 2011” is of the article author’s own invention.

    Secondly, while the author was contacted regarding what the pictured incident was all about, I am leaving it to their own discretion on if they would like to speak of what was explained or not. As per myself, my preference is toward speaking with my arts. As such, what is featured during the first hour a broadcast I conducted on Friday, May 29, 2020, I feel speaks sufficiently to both the current time (as of this writing) as well as to what was occurring in the past during the time the picture was taken.
    https://joindiaspora.com/posts/3cfa42d085a401381676002590d8e506
    and alternately
    https://archive.org/details/a23p5twonine

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.