Former East Lobby
Browse this archive by month
Find a post by date published
January 2020
« Jun    
Dead Hyperlinks

All of this material you see on my blog archive has been moved from its original place. This means that whilst I have preserved the old blog, many of the links have been broken. In the course of time, these will be repaired. However, you will most likely be able to find articles that are linked by using the search function – since most of the broken links are internal links to Yorkshire Viking. So if you find, for example, that a link to the logo does not work, write “logo” in the search field. That may be a good temporary fix until the old links can be updated.

musing Thatcher Berlin Wall

I’m Back!

Welcome To My Muse. I am blogging again after a rest of two years.

CQD, my last blog, was primarily concerned with Peak Oil. Before this closed, it briefly split to form the separate 11th September blog, CQD 911. Both were closed at the end of July 2007.

With respect to Peak Oil, this week’s announcement by the French oil firm Total proves that I and everybody else who vainly tried to wake people up, were right all along. The world is now heading into the energy crisis that we were warning about. As for the 11th September, it is clear that the official version of events – that most people including myself accepted without question after those horrendous events in 2001 – is completely discredited. More and more people are coming to the same conclusion that the ever growing number of building professionals, now nearly nine hundred, have reached. It is a matter of time before that will become the biggest news story in this century.

However, for several reasons, I shall not now be writing a blog that is directly political; I shall however try to make you think. So without further ado, let me try to do just that…

One of the amazing things about Facebook is that you can come into contact with people you haven’t seen for years. Indeed, this week, I was contacted via Facebook by a person I have not met since Þe olde days of my childhood. Having then posted a picture from that time, she went and “tagged” someone else in that picture, and suddenly I was back in contact with that person – and through that person with some other people, and so on.

Anyhow, and back to lady that started all this off, I was chatting. Suddenly she commented that I had not changed. Well, I wanted to know what she meant….

In many ways our discussion could be likened to Pilate’s question. You’ll remember from your bibles that he had asked what truth was. Well inasmuch as until recent times (11th September understood) the idea that our governments could work against their own people would have been unthinkable, those of us who are not convinced of this might well ask this same question.

Furthermore, something very disorientating occurs with your identity, when you grow up believing – as “we” did (we of course being we in the West) – that you were on the “good” side, and then you find out that your side wanted to crush those who tore down the Berlin wall. The hypocrisy of course is all the more disturbing: we grew up in the cold war believing that that was a bad thing, and that the communists were the bad guys. Then the BBC goes and reports that Mrs Thatcher and the French wanted, not only to stop the opening up of the wall (so as to stop German reunification) – but that “we” were wanting the Russians to use the military to stop the wall from falling! Had “our” wishes been granted of course, “we” could then continue saying bad things about the communists for the very thing “we” (behind closed walls) had persuaded them to do!

So to the remark that I hadn’t changed..  I was informed that that was because I could argue strongly for this or that, but that this did not change anything. That I had to give her. Nevertheless, in this my musing, let me continue with some rhetorical questioning.

Nothing is changed, or gets changed by knowing what we now know, or by pointing it out. Yet perhaps that is not quite true. You will notice that I put the pronoun “we” in quotation marks. Certainly, for my part, something very fundamental has changed, and that is that whatever it is that makes you think of yourself – from birth through your formative years – as being part of something, has most certainly been changed. The very premises, if you like, of who I am (I cannot speak for anyone else) have been shown to be false, and therefore everything else that has been built upon those premises has – at the very least – to be reappraised.

Another way of looking at this is by thinking of your average school class. Is not something going on here, that is to say, are “we” not building a society in the hearts and minds of the young. Of course, indeed the whole point of schooling is to impart “our” values and so on. It is a building project: flesh and blood are the building materials. That is why we feel the concept of shame if we break the conventions and rules that get laid down during this time. I suppose that, if you want to analyse it, that is where the stigma comes from about going to prison. The connection is, in other words, to the first authority in one’s life, when one was a part of that building project that is “our” society, that is “us”.

Now – please note that I am NOT discussing here whether the US Government were behind the attacks of the 11th September, nor “our” desire  that the Russians should crush the reunification of Germany by military force – I ask what this does for us EXISTENTIALLY, in terms of who we are, IF (rhetorically and hypothetically speaking) such monstrous things BE admitted to be the truth. 

It does not change anything at all to point out things that actually have been declassified – as in the case of Mrs Thatcher and the reunification of Germany. Yet what if your upbringing were Christian. How do you, for example, continue to go to church professing righteousness and truth when you – being a part of that “we” in speech marks – are consequently part of anything but? It is no good saying that you personally have nothing to do with this  (well yes you can, but then you have to change some of the premises of what you stand for), because your faith is not a private matter. If yours is, well sorry, but mine is the expression of something “we” believed in as the body of Christ.

I suppose I am grappling with existential things hard to explain.  Nevertheless, in the simplest terms possible, where it is demonstrated that what “we” stood for – “we” who thought we were on the good side – was evil and plain wrong, at the very least that concept of “we”, “us”, “our”, and “ours” fall apart. The trouble is that undermines the legitimacy of every authority that rests upon “our” values, since “we” as such can no longer exist…