A Tale of Two Narratives : Twitter Edition


Home Forums The Automatic Earth Forum A Tale of Two Narratives : Twitter Edition

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
  • #123246

    Vincent van Gogh Autumn landscape 1885     We’ve done quite a few episodes of commenter TAE Summary’s “Tales of Two Narratives” through time
    [See the full post at: A Tale of Two Narratives : Twitter Edition]


    This one says ‘tomato’, that one says ‘otamot’. One relates to an existing thing; the other to an imaginary something-or-other.

    V. Arnold

    I don’t know; have no idea…
    I read most everything; believe nothing; trust nothing, but, as usual, follow my own council…
    So far so good…

    John Day

    TAE Summary, you are still the same guy you were back in 2008, Old Timer!
    (Not like Deflationista who got body-snatched by a Pro-Pfizer-Pod-Person)



    Tony Fauci is a good example of a narrative, a story. They are all narratives. Jeff Bezos owns Washington Post. Elon Musk bought Twitter. Corporate Media simply tells stories that benefit their owners. There was a counter coup by global oligarchs to seize control that is spectacularly effective since no one, to date, admits that it occurred and that democracy is dead. For example, since the AIDS pandemic and the regulatory capture of government, the intent of pharmaceutical research is simply to develop treatments that will make money for corporations, stockholders, and their overseers. Unprofitable cures and the public’s health are of no matter. Opioids killed tens of thousands to make billions of dollars. Likewise a million Americans died in the coronavirus pandemic and China is now reopening and the contagion is spreading to keep its economy from collapsing.

    21st century wars are profit centers to maintain financial dominance. WWI plays out in the trenches of Ukraine. The lives of others are of no matter. Yes, the narratives are lies papered over reality. A simply alternative is taxing billionaires and corporation income at progressive taxation rate of 75% to spend on the public good, give peace a chance, or western civilization will bite the dust.


    Who do you trust to collect those taxes, and who to spend the collected receipts?

    What authority does anyone have to speak for and act upon a public good? If billionaires exist as specific individuals who need to be taken from, are they aloof from the public, included within it, or the only ones among the public to have such resourceful responsibilities? Or will all the public likewise face a tax of the largest majority of their wealth, life, and time the law enforcers get away with?

    The public good, if it is real, either demands from everyone some participation in securing it or there is a selection process, taking from those with means to give to those with need, to effect an end that someone declares matches the best model of what looks like “the public good.” Billionaires have influence and thus wealth and assets, so the public good will come for that, and the more armed to enforce this, the better, right?

    But, what will happen when the public good, realizing a previous attempt to secure health of the public good through mandatory participation in particular protein-forming processes producing profoundly protracted pains resulted in infertility and crippled masses, decides it has the right to the healthy wombs and functioning organs of the unsocial, impolitic, and outsider reprobates who refused that earlier call to work and act for the public good, those who chose out of selfishness and spite to keep their bodies unprotected, whose inactions to care for the rest of the people demonstrate their unwillingness to do The Right Thing and thus the necessity to make them care, make them share, make them bleed and birth so that the public —now dying, now birthless, now shivering— now lives?

    The logic that makes a person think it right to take from one-who-has to give to one-who-suffers justifies the next phase of compulsory health, particularly when the language of separation enables us to think it’s right to view the ones-who-have as selfish, self-serving, self-centered and unlike the rest of us who gave all that we are for the good of the public comprising Us, the true givers, the truly needful, the truly suffering: the unselfish who sacrificed self for the public good already.

    What works to enable some to think it right to take from the greedy billionaires: will work to take from the greedy unmodified. The fact that these people go around calling themselves purebloods, who celebrate their separation from the rest of us like the indecent and uncaring they are, makes it that much easier to see how right we are to take their organs, their wombs, their blood —they aren’t even using these things correctly, for science or for the public, or for the betterment of society, but for themselves! for their selfish self-interest! And if having money and out-sized influence and yachts too big to fit under old bridges is no protection from The Need of the public good, what could really ever stop our need for relief from Our Great Suffering, from taking the health of these other selfish and uncaring people and using their assets appropriately, correctly, rationally? They are only using those organs for themselves anyway, when they should be using them for all of us, the way we did, when we chose to join together in our collective biolabor and mass produce specific proteins for the public good. Just as my mask protects you, my immune system protects you, so make their immune systems work for us, and if we can’t convince them to join us, willingly donate their organs and their blood and their wombs, then we must mandate they give them, or there won’t be any public good left for which we do these things to ourselves.

    The road to good intentions is paved with hell.

    Let the public die. They have earned their karma. They bring about their own suffering and delight in bringing misery to others. I won’t support theft, whether from the uninoculated, the uninitiated, or the unencumbered, because committing crimes to prolong the lives of the unlearning defeats each person’s responsibility to work out their own karma with fear and trembling. It does not help that I no longer recognize any government as having any legitimacy; monopolies on violence end up always the same, because the fear of death enslaved the powerful and functions as their true King.
    But that one is not my king.

    Maybe at some point it made sense to die willingly to protect another, like a parent for a child or a god for a supplicant. But who will receive and who will take, now at the end of all things, when the naked public revels in revealing who hasn’t been learning their lessons? I have nothing to do with billionaires, who likely gained that power through corruption and dark magics, and to take their wealth for my benefit just makes the darkness pass into me. Just as it will for the ones who loot for it. It doesn’t heal my soul, won’t cure my intentions, can’t even bring me joy as the rising sun and the play of cats can. All that liquid milked or squeezed from their assets, given to the same people now clotting away with poor choices, won’t change that, won’t heal them, won’t ease their suffering, but might prolong it, might further blind and hobble them, will further prevent them from the great work of rebuilding themselves into better people. They are not children, nor have they chosen wise gods. They have to own their karma. In living my life, I have daily to own mine and embrace the justice of what I chose, over lifetimes of refusing to learn from this indifferent merry-go-round: genuine love is genuine disentanglement from coercing an end.

    But, maybe you’ll get your wish. Maybe they’ll confiscate today’s wealth and distribute it wisely for tomorrow. Do you think that will end it, once and for all? Will the public good rest its hands from taking, and say, “From here on out, it’s just?”

    V. Arnold

    Do you think that will end it, once and for all? Will the public good rest its hands from taking, and say, “From here on out, it’s just?”

    No! It won’t…

    Thats quite a post Polemos, thanks…


    Polemos. That was fucking awesome.

    Terrifying and brutal in it’s simplicity. I give thanks and I think I will re-read.

    I feel like we are getting somewhere.

    Thanks so much to the tale of 2 narratives.


    Musk is focused on taking tax-payer money from the government and at the same time keeping the us tax-payers down, hence his well known anti-union stance. Musk collects money, he knows what is important, and he will not let unions take money from him. Free speech, he doesn’t care about free speech, he is a business man, he cares about revenue, which is why he is courting the right wing Twitter haters.

    Wake me up when a leader emerges who actually gives a shit about the average person and will do something that improves our income and enables us to keep what we work for. Of course, the reatrded fanbois, like Boscohorovitz, will keep braying but hopefully the majority will see through this cheap Twitter stunt and wait for someone with something better than nothing.

    The Markster

    Brennan and the Team Obama machine are filled with venality and projection. Legacy of fueling public hate and divisions, indeed. Just look around, or try and post a Trump lawn sign in the Portland metro area and count the days until your property is vandalized, or worse.

    “Let the people die”, spoken in righteousness and anger, is just where they want us to be. And precisely where the USA has been going since the Reagan counter-revolution, now led by team blue. An entire world like Caracas, with armed guards at the high-rise compounds and fortified hillside villas for the 1%, with sprawling favelas and nasty brutishness for everybody else.

    Yesterday I played a rat pack CD from the 1960’s, and when Dean sang a line about not paying union dues the room erupted in jeers. And people still cared about each other.



    A Tale of Two Narratives : (You will enjoy the following)
    Addendum: Freedom and Liberty in Ukraine
    Volodymyr Zelensky and ethnopolitics
    by Thierry Meyssan

    The Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has been named by Time Magazine as the “Person of the Year 2022”; an obvious choice, according to the magazine’s editors. Indeed, he embodies an infectious courage that has enabled his people to resist the Russian invasion.

    It is not to have realized his coup de force of July, in favor of the war. He had all the political parties that opposed him banned; assassinated the personalities who resisted him; controlled all the media, written, audiovisual and internet; banned the Russian language; destroyed 100 million books; confiscated many of the assets of the oligarchs, including the one who personally financed him; nationalized the assets of Russian investors and companies; and finally banned the Orthodox Church.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.