About writing. And reading. And being published. Or not published. On working on being published. Tangents into the pop culture world to come. Especially about movies. And comic books. And movies from comic books.
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Saturday, March 16, 2019
Friday, March 15, 2019
Monday, August 6, 2018
The Sugar Conspiracy
You eat a lot of sugar. That is, if you live in the United States and eat "normal" food the way any "regular" person does, you eat a lot of sugar. A lot. Per capita, more than anyone else in the world. By a lot. It's kind of staggering how much, actually.
And you don't even know it.
Sure, sure, people say it (like I just did), so you have some vague intellectual knowledge that you eat a lot of sugar, but you don't know it. Not in any kind of experiential way. It's not like you're pouring sugar on your Sugar Frosted Flakes the way my friend used to do when I was a kid. Because that's just what you need on your sugar cereal, right? I'm sure you feel perfectly comfortable with your sugar intake because you're not actively participating in how much you consume.
And, you know, so what, right? So food has sugar in it; what's the big deal? It's not like it's hurting you, right? You can't even tell that it's there.
Which, actually, is the problem. You can't tell that it's there. Also, you can't tell any of the flavors of the food are there, either.
Once upon a time, I was just like "you," you being the "average" person in the US. I ate all of the packaged food and drank all of the sugarbomb drinks. And boy did I! All I drank was soda. And I didn't think there was a problem. Everything just tasted "normal."
Without getting into it, there came a time when we cut sugar out of our diet. [I'm sure I've got old posts about that, if you want to go look for them. Or maybe I don't. I don't remember.] It wasn't until after the sugar was gone that I realized how much flavor food has. No, seriously, actual flavor textures and complexities. And some things were sweet that I had no idea about. Like carrots! But when you eat sugar all the time (and you do), by comparison, a carrot is not sweet. In fact, it's just kind of crunchy and flavorless.
Bell pepper was my big surprise. It's not a food that I had ever really liked, because, compared to sugar, it's an even more crunchy, flavorless, even kind of bitter food than carrots. But that's totally wrong! And bell pepper has different flavors depending upon what color it is, which amazed me. AMAZED! Red is my favorite, followed by yellow. Orange is okay, and I tend to stay away from green. It's not that it's bad, but it's nowhere near as good as the other three.
It's not until after you quit eating all of the processed crap full of sugar that you can taste all the flavors in real food and realize that the processed stuff is basically flavorless other than a vague flavor of sweetness. Sometimes with salt. It's more than slightly disturbing. I can't drink soda anymore. It's so sweet as to be disgusting. And kettle corn (because they always have that at the fair or any other kind of crowded live event thing)? The smell of it (just the smell of it alone!) is so sweet that it makes me sick to my stomach. But that's only because I don't consume sugar all the time, because I used to think it smelled good.
It goes without saying, not even talking about the health implications, that I think "you" should probably cut sugar out of your regular diet. Not only will food taste better, but you'll actually be able to appreciate the things you eat that have a need to contain sugar (like homemade cookies). [Yes, chemically speaking, some things need to contain sugar.]
Of course, I'm not talking about sugar at all but about the trashy media you put in your brain that works the same way as sugar. (Not that I don't mean what I said about the sugar, too, but I think that's a better way to illustrate the problem than trying to talk about what you entertain your brain with.)
Not that the Left is completely blameless, but the adding of "sugar" to what you watch is something the Right has kind of turned into an art form. Starting with Fox news way back in the early 90s, they have constantly and consistently been covering the flavor (truth and facts) of what they present with sugar (falsehoods and propaganda). It skews your view of reality when you can no longer tell what is fact from what is not.
When I quit eating sugar, I almost immediately lost a lot of weight. "Effortlessly," as it were. I didn't have to go out an exercise or try or anything. Other than whatever "trying" went into not eating sugar, which wasn't as difficult as it sounds. BUT!
People asked me frequently how I lost all the weight, and I would say, "I quit eating sugar," and, without fail, they would respond, "Oh, I could never do that."
Fuck that shit! I grew up drinking nothing but soda, nothing!, and I quit. And it wasn't really all that hard. Ahead of time, I thought it was going to be hard, but, upon doing it, it was really pretty easy.
TV and media is kind of the same way, mostly in that you have to find something to fill all of that time with that you currently spend immersed in your sugarcoated media world designed exactly to keep you consuming it. And to keep you from thinking about how much of it you're consuming or, really, thinking at all. Like sugar, see.
"Don't bother thinking for yourself; we'll tell you all the thoughts you need to have."
It's more than a little disturbing.
It's amazing, though, how much easier it is to see the lies when you're not ingesting them all the time. Of course, church doesn't help with any of this, because church sort of pre-programs people to believe fantasies, fables, and mythology as fact and truth. But that's a story for another time...
Monday, April 24, 2017
Day 17 (a future history)
Monday, February
5, 2018
Christ on a cracker! They made us watch stupid Trump
and his stupid special TV broadcast at school today! We had to do it as a big
assembly in the auditorium on a big projection screen. AND WE’RE GOING TO HAVE
TO DO IT EVERY SINGLE DAY! EVERY DAY!
No, I mean it. Every day. Even on the weekends. It’s
mandatory for everyone so they can tell us how the war is going. Or something.
Is this what a war is? I want to say that it doesn’t
feel like a war, but how would I know what a war feels like? Whatever it is, it
certainly doesn’t feel normal. Life feels weird now. All of it.
We eat almost the same thing every day now.
There’s no TV.
There’s no Internet.
People are disappearing from school.
Everyone is going to be issued a special ID status
card.
Oh, yeah, the cards. They’re going to make us carry ID
cards that we have to use to check into the daily broadcasts. And we won’t be
able to buy anything without them. Or go anywhere very far. They’re going to
check the stupid cards for everything!
Maybe it does feel like a war. Just without any
fighting. At least any fighting here. Trump said there is fighting in New York.
With the Chinese. And THAT doesn’t make any sense. Why would the Chinese be in
New York? Wouldn’t they be in California or something? But he said we’re
fighting the Chinese in the streets of New York.
He also said there are a lot of traitors in the
military who are refusing to fight against their own people, and that doesn’t
make any sense either. If it’s the Chinese and they invaded New York, why would
the Army be refusing to fight? People at school are whispering about it really
being a civil war, but no one is saying it out loud. The teachers won’t talk
about it. My parents won’t talk about it other than that my dad says that’s
crazy talk then goes off on a rant about the Chinese and their horrible commie
propaganda.
But that’s the only thing that makes sense to me, and
that’s the scariest thing of all.
Except for the Russians, because Trump has asked the
Russians to help take and hold New York.
He just went on and on about how great our friends the
Russians are especially after they helped us take over Syria. Or we helped them
take over Syria, because Russia got Syria.
And now they’re gonna get New York. Because that’s
what happens. Syria. Korea. Afghanistan. Russia “helps” us, then they get to
have the country. I don’t want to be the United States of Russia!
If it is a civil war, then I understand the thing
about going to California, now. Or any
of those places. They must be the places fighting against Trump.
I don’t understand why no one is talking about what’s
going on and why none of the adults will talk about it. Except my dad. HE
believes Trump. The idiot. He's made at Trump about the TV, but he still believes every word that comes out of his mouth.
But my mom just shushes me when I try to ask
questions, and none of the teachers will talk about anything that’s happening.
Oh, the principal said they’re going to be bringing in
special counsellors for any students who need to ask questions or have someone
to talk to. I don’t know why they think I would want to go talk to someone I
don’t even know, though.
If this is what war feels like, being scared all the
time, I don’t like it.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
army,
California,
China,
Chinese,
Civil War,
Day 17,
Korea,
military,
New York,
propaganda,
Russia,
Russians,
Syria,
Trump,
TV
Friday, December 30, 2016
Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth (a book review post)
To put it mildly, I am not overly fond of "Christianity" right now. To be clear, when I say "Christianity," I do not mean Christianity; I mean the modern farce that people pretend is Christianity, whatever that actually is. Because it's clear that there has been a division about what is or is not Christianity right from the very beginning.
Which has nothing to do with what "Christianity" is, and has been for the last several decades at least, in America today. "Christianity" is a religion of hate, exclusion, and fundamentalism; the religion that supported a man to the Presidency who is completely antithetical to everything Christianity represents. Or says it represents.
And, no, the book has nothing to do with modern politics, but it does deal heavily with how different a thing can be from the actuality, the truth, that it was based on.
I think the audience for a book like this is probably fairly small, and not because it's not good. It is. It's well written, well researched, and well supported. However, "Christians" will dismiss the book as, I'll just say, liberal propaganda, which is sad, because it's "Christians" who need this book more than anyone. "Christians" need to be challenged to think beyond the shallow tripe they are spoon fed on Sunday mornings. Of course, being a book ostensibly about Jesus, there's no reason non-Christians should have any interest in the book... unless it's someone just curious about the history.
I'm not going to go into detail about the book -- you can read the blurb from the book for yourself -- however, I'll touch on one part:
The latter part of the book deals with a division within the early church between James (the leader of the church in Jerusalem) and Paul, who was one step removed from being a heretic. Much of our modern church, modern "Christianity" is built around what Paul wrote, a man who never met Jesus, yet claimed to speak with greater authority about him than Jesus' own brother (the aforementioned James) and the rest of the apostles. The piece that history loses is that in his day Paul was an outlier, someone trying to peel off members from the main body of the early church with heretical teachings and who stayed in conflict with James for much of his ministry.
In fact, Paul was losing. And bitter.
Probably, we would know nothing of Paul today had not two things happened:
1. James was assassinated.
2. The Romans leveled Jerusalem, the side effect of which was destroying the central power structure of the early Church.
Basically, this allowed the Church to become a more gentile-centric organization than it would have been if it had remained centered in Jerusalem. It allowed the New Testament to become a book of Paul's teachings rather than a book of Jesus' teachings, and the current "Christian" church relies much more heavily on Paul than it does Jesus. Not that the representation of Jesus is completely accurate.
Anyway...
As a Truth seeker, I found the book fascinating and would highly recommend it.
Which has nothing to do with what "Christianity" is, and has been for the last several decades at least, in America today. "Christianity" is a religion of hate, exclusion, and fundamentalism; the religion that supported a man to the Presidency who is completely antithetical to everything Christianity represents. Or says it represents.
And, no, the book has nothing to do with modern politics, but it does deal heavily with how different a thing can be from the actuality, the truth, that it was based on.
I think the audience for a book like this is probably fairly small, and not because it's not good. It is. It's well written, well researched, and well supported. However, "Christians" will dismiss the book as, I'll just say, liberal propaganda, which is sad, because it's "Christians" who need this book more than anyone. "Christians" need to be challenged to think beyond the shallow tripe they are spoon fed on Sunday mornings. Of course, being a book ostensibly about Jesus, there's no reason non-Christians should have any interest in the book... unless it's someone just curious about the history.
I'm not going to go into detail about the book -- you can read the blurb from the book for yourself -- however, I'll touch on one part:
The latter part of the book deals with a division within the early church between James (the leader of the church in Jerusalem) and Paul, who was one step removed from being a heretic. Much of our modern church, modern "Christianity" is built around what Paul wrote, a man who never met Jesus, yet claimed to speak with greater authority about him than Jesus' own brother (the aforementioned James) and the rest of the apostles. The piece that history loses is that in his day Paul was an outlier, someone trying to peel off members from the main body of the early church with heretical teachings and who stayed in conflict with James for much of his ministry.
In fact, Paul was losing. And bitter.
Probably, we would know nothing of Paul today had not two things happened:
1. James was assassinated.
2. The Romans leveled Jerusalem, the side effect of which was destroying the central power structure of the early Church.
Basically, this allowed the Church to become a more gentile-centric organization than it would have been if it had remained centered in Jerusalem. It allowed the New Testament to become a book of Paul's teachings rather than a book of Jesus' teachings, and the current "Christian" church relies much more heavily on Paul than it does Jesus. Not that the representation of Jesus is completely accurate.
Anyway...
As a Truth seeker, I found the book fascinating and would highly recommend it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)