5. Philosophy

The Influence of Philosophy on Society

The influence of philosophy on society is much greater than we may surmise, even today.

The nihilistic, reductionist scientific paradigm of today has produced a schizophrenic society, which on the one hand accepts scientism’s claims about the origins of the world, while on the other hand is desperate for the mysterious and mythological; the mystical experience, so necessary for spiritual health.

The consequences of this divergent state are spiritual malaise, with excesses in murder, rape and suicide.

The problem of the lack of religious belief is not so much that people do not believe in God anymore, but that now they will believe anything.

It is the spiritual content of life, which makes it interesting and worth living and this is neglected in the rationalist-scientist framework.

It is seen as inessential, because it does not produce – it is not an economic unit.

Yet it is the spiritual content in life that loves, gives and exchanges.

The poverty of rationalist civilisation lies in the negligence of the spirit.

Rationalism can only take; it takes the spirit and imprisons it in the materialistic idea – the economic unit – and consequently tries to take its produce.
In the long run this will exhaust anyone.

Education is the key here.

If reason and intellect are to be developed, then emotion and sentiment must be nurtured as well.
Economically, a happy man with a balanced personality will produce more.
This has not yet penetrated the reason and intellect of the materialist.

If emotion and sentiment are neglected, there is less incentive to work, there is more sickness and when working, the work performed is as little as possible, because there is no happiness to be gained from it.

In particular we overvalue the mind, that flimsy collection of learned words and verbal connections; the mind, that system of paranoid delusions, with the learned self as the centre.
And we ignore the non-mind, non-game intuitive insight, which is the key to the religious or mystical experience - the love experience.

4. Medical advancement

How far has medicine advanced?

In medieval times, doctors were as they are today – pompous adherants to theoretical medicine and bunglers in its practise. What was needed and sorely lacking was honesty about the state of knowledge regarding the patient and his problem. If a patient died under the ministrations, the disease was balmed for his demise. This is today not a single iota different from 5 to 600 years ago. It is in effect an admittance of incompetence and inability. The admittance of incurable disease falls in the same category of ignorance and incompetence.
There is however a way, in which the physician can live up to his high and only mission – to cure the sick. There is the need to listen to the patient, since he is an expert on his own suffering – he knows exactly what is wrong, what makes it better or worse and all other little details, necessary for the doctor to know to enable a proper prescription. The physician must be well-versed in his remedial means, so that he can expertly prescribe – he must know his medicines as his best friends; trustworthy and certain. Thus the meeting between doctor and patients becomes a meeting of experts.

These are the qualities that a doctor needs, according to Paracelsus. He did not use the same words, but his intentions were like that. In his time, mathematicians wasted their time and talents on fruitless combinations of letters that would give the key. He who found it would be the master of all secrets, for it would confer on him the power ‘to make appear what had been occult, or hidden’ and ‘bring to perfection what is imperfect’. He would instantly know all the harmonies of the universe and thus follow his destiny.
By his process he would influence Nature through his consciousness and Nature would be doing what she always does best, in an optimum manner. Knowledge ended in universal Love, just as the Veda teaches. Paracelsus used a similar testimony as Trithemius. He postulated that the lover of Nature will obtain her secrets and receive the power to use her forces.

Therefore, the logical conclusion that the application of this principle brings about, is the rejection of Galenius. He stated that contrario contraris, or contrary cures contrary. They applied cold to get rid of heat and vice versa; moist was used to drive our dry humours and when one had frostbite, they stuck your feet close to the fire or in very warm water. This is still the case today – burn victims are put in cold baths, which keeps the heat inside and can cause hypothermia, especially when much of the skin is burned.
Folk doctors knew that when you burn yourself with an iron, the same iron will take the burn away. No blacksmith or baker is ever the victim of a burn. Every experienced cook knows that putting the burn close to the flame for a few seconds or by running warm water over it the burn will not develop a blister and the pain will be gone in ten to thirty seconds. They knew that like cures like. This famous maxim, this law of nature, was revived by Samuel Hahnemann in 1790, who is the founder of the homoeopathic school.

With good reason, we count Hippocrates and Paracelsus among our spiritual and methodical ancestors since they advocated that poison, when given in appropriately small doses will be the cure for a disease that resembles the action of that poison. The oldest reference to the Law of Similars, which Hahnemann traced back as far as Hippocrates, who derived the idea from the Arab physicians, who in turn took it from Vedic India, is found in the Bhagavat Purana, which was written 5.000 years ago. There it literally says, amayā yas ca bhūtanam yayate yena suvrata tad eva hy āmayām dravyām na punāti cikītsitām. ‘Oh good soul, does not a thing, when applied therapeutically, cure a disease which was caused by that very same thing?”
This is the only logical conclusion anyone can arrive at in the treatment of disease. We come now to another important part in the treatment of people, which I feel should be given the utmost attention, since it often neglected in the treatment of disease, even among the homoeopathic fraternity. This is the absolute necessity of the administration of the single remedy. Paracelsus also stressed the use of what he called specifics.

In order to fully appreciate the concept of the single remedy, it is useful to understand the following analogy. When a person, animal or plant is sick, it is comparable to being locked into a room. The tumblers in the lock represent the different symptoms, the totality of which needs treatment, if the lock is to be opened. At the same time there is only one key that will open the lock, although many different ones can be inserted, without being able to turn the lock. Therefore, there is only one remedy that will fit all the tumblers and open the lock so that the patient can be set free of his symptoms.

Paracelsus also worked along those lines in his parlance; gift meant potion or poison, medicine or an aphrodisiac. As he said, poison is in everything and nothing is without it. It depends on the dose whether it is poison or medicine.

There are some that think Hippocrates and Paracelsus have nothing much in common with Hahnemann, but these are the ones that neither understand what homoeopathy is about, nor about the fact that it was common knowledge in antiquity – and in further recesses of time than they can imagine.

Their doctrine of like to like was based on thinking that there is nothing in heaven that is not in man. This is non-different from the homoeopathic approach, which says that the mentality in the plant much match the mentality in man. The plants are equally governed by the stars as man and all else on this planet, regardless anyone’s denial. As above, so below is true for all creatures and from the harmony occasioned by the right remedy, this correspondence is only further borne out.

Please comment.

2. Scientific Hoaxes

Insiduous Business

Of all the businesses the so-called Free Market uses, the pharmaceutical is the most insidious.

Under the pretext of helping and health, they drug the people from shortly after birth throughout their lives.

The side effects of one drug is combated by another, which requires another and another and so forth, ad infinitum.

The Psychiatric Department is the fastest growing - witness the bible for psychiatric conditions.

Now every emotion, such as the anger with this scam or the sadness at seeing humanity go to waste, will be classed as a psychiatric problem and in need of some drug.

ADD is caused by vaccination - A future subject. Remind me if I forget.
All these kids are fed ritalin which equals speed.
Also known as amphetamine.
Simply turn them into junkies and dealers at a very young age.

Teacher says to say no to drugs and hands them the ritalin.

Why should they trust anyone?

When such damage to the brain then turns to murder, he is locked up or in some countries killed.
In a fair system of justice, the doctors and the pharmaboys would be in court, but their victims end up in jail instead.

And why would you trust the doctors?

Well they are there to help you when sick, is it not?

They are there to make money for the pharmaboys, who have to satisfy the shareholders.

The pharmaceutical industry is about 1000 times as large as the Arms industry.

Go figure.

Where the arms industry kills about 1 million per year, the pharmaboys kill half a billion at least.
(Yes, that's right: 500 000 000)

How did i get this figure?

From the WMO yearly statistics.

1 in 160 dies of side effects every year. On a population of 6.3 billion this is 375million people.

Per 1000 hospital admittances, 13% comes out feet first.
The statistics are not exactly in my head on the total amount of hospitals and the total amount of patients.

But it amounts to quite a few million too - like 70 to 90 million.

Doctor's (admitted) mistakes account for 8% more. That is another 25-40 million.

Medical procedures going wrong account for another 6%. There come another 20 million

Wrong prescriptions account for 2-5 %, depending on the country. 4 to 20 million

The lowest percentages, except for Aids victims, are Third-World countries.

Not so many detrimental services available, apart from loads of antibiotics.

375 plus 70 makes 445; plus 25 makes 465; plus 20, plus 4 makes for 489 million in the best situation.


Affluent countries have the higher percentages.
375 plus 90 makes 465. plus 40 makes 505. plus 20 makes 525.
Plus 20 makes 545million people in the worst-case scenario.

Oh i ALMOST forgot. OOPS!

40 million more from AIDS every year and all those that suffer from epidemics like cholera, typhoid and other devastating diseases, whom they simply leave to die.

It is almost as if we should be thankful, because otherwise we would suffer an overpopulation problem.
So when it comes to the crunch, the half billion is the lower guess and it is closer to 600 million or over.

Who is being hoodwinked here?

If medicine is good, it cures the people and costs nothing
Medicine depending on more money for more drugs, operations and radiation is useless medicine, for it defeats its own purpose.

That is the evidence and whether we call them this or that name or the Medical Industrial Complex, does in my mind make no difference.

I dealt with them in courtcases and i know the MIC by their names and affiliations. So far, they have not been able to shut me up or down.

BTW, if you care to find out, i guess they will deny having had me in court, because they were defeated.
They tend to hide and destroy such records, for it embarrasses too much.

1. Political Scams





The so-called Free Market.

This entire war in Iraq – and all other wars – and all their consequences are determined and dictated by Big Business – oil, media, pharmaceuticals, technology etc. – to create a so-called Free Market, in which they are the only ones to sell their goods to everyone in all Countries and States. The true meaning of a Free Market is the availability of the best and cheapest products for all people. Each individual is supposed to have freedom, which is anchored in the Constitution. However, there are some obstacles to this goal. We shall enumerate them one by one.

1. The State is that institution of society, which interferes with the Free Market through the direct excercise of coercion or the granting of privileges, backed by coercion. They do this in the form of tax, which is that form of coercion or interference with the Free Market in which the State collects tribute - the tax - allowing it to hire armed forces to practice coercion in defense of privilege and also to engage in such wars, adventures, experiments, ‘refoms,’ etc., as it pleases and sees fit, not at its own cost, but at the cost of its subjects.

2. The Constitution is that declaration of the rights of free men, which opposes that freedom by granting the State the right to tax them; to coerce them into accepting privilege and/or draft them into an armed force, to exert coercion, war and other adventures as marked above.

3. The Judiciary is that institution of society, which interferes with free individuals through the form of direct coercion and force. It is hidden in the form of privilege, granted in the interests of corporations, as opposed to the interests of the subjects of the State, which the judiciary is supposed to protect.

Privilege comes from the Latin privi, private, and lege, law.
It is an advantage, granted by the State to an individual or a corporation and protected by its powers of coercion.
It amounts to a
law for private benefit.

4. Usury is that form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which one State-supported group monopolises the coinage and thereby takes tribute in the form of interest, direct or indirect, on all or most economic transactions. These are called the banks.
Which brings us to Landlordism, which is that form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which one State-supported group ‘owns’ the land and thereby takes tribute in the form of rent from those who live, work, or produce on the land. All of course backed up by coercion and force, so it is unavoidable.

5. Tariffs are that form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which commodities produced outside the State are not allowed to compete equally with those produced inside the State.
Capitalism is that organisation of society, incorporating elements of tax, usury, landlordism and tariff, which thus denies the Free Market, while pretending to exemplify it.

Democracy is that form of State organisation, that adheres in name to free elections, but coerces the voter, by making voting compulsory, or by adding the votes of the non-voters to those of the largest parties.
are the dummy by which the subjects are lulled into the sleep of promises. The time of rule is the rude awakening to the reality of coercion, taxes, landlordism, usury, and the fraud of electoral promises.

If voting would make any difference, it would immediately be forbidden.

7. There are conservatives, liberals, socialists, communists, Marxists, Leninists, etc. Conservatism is that school of capitalist philosophy, which claims allegiance to the Free Market, while actually supporting ususry, landlordism, tariff and sometimes taxation. It is a form of Capitalism, like all the ones we named.

Liberals follow that school of Capitalist philosophy, which attempts to correct the injustices of capitalism, by adding new laws to the existing ones. When the Conservatives pass a law, which creates privilege, the Liberals pass another law, which is supposed to modify privilege, leading the Conservatives to pass another, more subtly worded law, recreating privilege. This goes on till everything not forbidden is compulsory and anything not compulsory is forbidden.

8. Socialism is the attempted abolition of all privilege, by restoring power entirely to the coercive agent - the State - which is behind the granting and maintenance of privilege. This converts Capitalist Oligarchy into State Monopoly. That amounts to white-washing a wall by painting it black. Communism, of whatever persuasion, is a form of State monopoly and thus Socialism in another form – mutton dressed as lamb.

9. Anarchism is that organisation of society in which the Free Market operates freely, without taxation, usury, landlordism, tariff, or other form of coercion or pivilege. The Right Anarchists predict that in the Free Market people would voluntarily choose to compete with each other, while the Left Anarchists predict they would voluntarily cooperate more often than to compete.

10. We are being hoodwinked into this World Trade Organisation, which is the biggest threat to the Free Market and the largest Organisation of society that uses taxation, coercion, usury and landlordism, to keep us all enslaved to their idea of business.

11. The entire idea of ownership of that which you cannot take along at death is utterly ridiculous. Just imagine – I go into the forest and take something – a tree – which is not mine to take and then have the audacity to demand gold or silver in return. That gold or silver was found on the ground or extracted from ore, also found by others.

It belongs to the earth, yet we take it and declare privilege over the land where it was found and use force to keep others of ‘our property’.

12. Revolution is anarchy taking power. Most revolutionaries were anarchists. Lenin, Stalin and Trotski were communist in name only – especially Stalin. His idea was to coerce the population and by using force, he ceased to be an anarchist.

This is the problem all anarchists face, for it is a seemingly unsolvable riddle – a paradox. Once anarchy has power, it ceases to be anarchy, because it enforces an idea. Anarchy’s goal is to do away with coercion. It seeks to do this by political means and these ideas require majority vote.

Anarchism is opposed to rule by majority, yet for that to happen, the majority must agree to do it that way. Anarchism is really a self-defeating exercise, for the conundrum of selfrule cannot come about without all seeing the need for its general acceptance.