The title of this piece is the last “quote” from the sayings of the fictional character Ben Rand from the movie Being There. It questions the nature of reality as perceived by man.
A man who believes that he wants me physically but yet cannot or will not provide me leadership or direction other than to demand that I indulge him whether according to his own standards or some standard created for him by other women is like an infant. However, I have no sexual feelings for infants. If I did, then, well, I would have a different problem.
Is it the infantile needs of men that inspire the “rape culture” delusion as manufactured by Machiavellians? Does an infant “rape” his or her mother? No wonder Feminists have rejected motherhood in droves. That’s probably for the best because who really wants to perpetuate the genes of persons of such deluded thought patterns?
I can have affection for infants, like Chauncey Gardiner, the main character of Being There, played by Peter Sellers, but that doesn’t mean I’m Shirely MacLaine as Mrs. Rand, that is, I am not turned on.
Naturally, I would not expect to sustain a relationship where sex is the only means of affection only that it helps to have such a spark when embarking on a new relationship. What is “spark”? Is it necessarily female dominance? I don’t believe so however as I get older it would appear that this is the demand made of me by most to include those who find my revulsion at their infantile desire to consume me either stimulating or a problem that only they can fix (regardless of ability, sensitivity, perception, or female anatomical group selection bias).
Warmists and other Atheists like to believe that they alone are in possession of “facts” and universal reality itself such that spin and Machiavellians do not exist, only facts. A fact, of course, is determined by a consensus of Warmists and Atheists, who self-define the nature of “Science” and therefore themselves.
Right and wrong, to them, are fluid concepts, in service to their agenda. While I concede that indeed, human trends have cycles, I believe that the only universal authority as to what is right and wrong is God. Warmists and other Universalist Atheists however believe that Machiavellians have all “facts” in terms of what is “right” and “wrong” and are therefore God-like humans incapable of sheer excess of power. Thus we mere mortals should be compelled by force of law to accept their “rightness”.
That “spark” that Warmists feel is all of their power being drained out by the Machiavellians (and if you don’t see any, you are one), to include their own supposed supplicants demanding salves for their own hysteria in exchange for peace and sex. I’m sure that it’s heady, for a while. I’m sorry but I must pass, and it’s not about “phobia” or “hate” but rather sexual revulsion.
Without God there is no Hope and it is Hope which enables people to get up every day and go about living.
If there is no Hope or God however, then, there really are no limits to the following song except entirely human ones of “right” and “wrong”:
Those youngsters who believe that Nihilism is something that they invented may wish to be disabused of this conceit by the above link. For the record, I love the song, even if I would prefer to hear “lude” as “lube”, which of course, would make me abnormal.
On a side note, evidence of the above song and its date could easily be used to defend Mr. Quaalude himself, Bill Cosby, who I believe played a little bit too close for comfort within the power base of other Machiavellians to include the patrons of some of his “victims”.
Fortunately, Nihilism and Loss of Hope don’t necessarily kill oneself directly, at least not right away.
Is Hope Good? Or is the logical consequence of Atheism to remove all Hope and to otherwise condone and encourage suicide by all non-Machiavellians as well as disappointed Machiavellians?
Do Machiavellians believe that they can survive simply by ruling their own sycophants or robots? What will they do when not only oil is gone or otherwise not obtainable at a profit but all Hope is gone? Is the consumption of all Hope sustainable for any society or “utopia?” Of course not. That’s why belief or faith is necessary, even “in the shadow of death”.
There is more than one way to commit suicide. There is Terrorism or there is simply the ability to drive Atheists, Warmists, and other Machiavellians to murderous rage upon oneself, such as to consume the Denier detractor by sucking out all his (or her) air, prior to of course consuming each other. Perhaps that is the true meaning of the Crucifixion myth, which persists through various archetypes of various religions, but which is indeed represented through various human beings who channel such archetypes consciously or unconsciously—such as via God or by mere overemphasis on Machiavellianism as the only avenue of legal survival within an overreaching technocratic state.
Such is one of the powers of Art and Myth to evoke archetypal events.
Those who follow me to my other forum will perhaps see exactly what I mean about Warmists. Others are too obsessed with Machiavellian-spun “facts” which curiously omit data.
Meanwhile, I am inspired by Cristina to submit some of my own Art for your review. Should I sell it? Burn it? Transform it into an opera? Make it nicer? Add a “spark?”