Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Larken and Amanda Rose of The Rose Channel join James in Acapulco to answer some questions from our previous conversation about how to talk to statists.
Watch this video on BitChute / Minds.com / YouTube or Download the mp4
SHOW NOTES:
Interview 1510 – Larken and Amanda Rose Shine Candles In The Dark
I am dissatisfied with the answers provided by Mr. and Mrs. Rose. It appears that they are not thinking things through.
What if you have a tribe of 25 families. One of these families is absolutely contaminating something (water or land) that absolutely affects the other 24 families negatively. The other 24 families are going to form a voluntary association to respectively request that the 25th family please stop what they are doing. What if the 25th family WILL NOT stop the contamination FOR ANY reason? What do you think the other 24 voluntarily organized families are going to do? They are going to voluntarily FORCE the 25th family to stop contaminating or leave. Can you see what has just happened? The voluntary association has formed a government. (THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED!!) You can see where this is going? Do you think that that “voluntary association” is going to cease to exist after the 25th family has been taken care of? I’M AFRAID NOT! Over time the number of families in the tribe will grow but “the voluntary association” aka “government” will stay to take care of other conflicts and issues within the tribe. It will become a tradition.
Please straighten me out?
The mere fact 24 families are forcing the 25th family to do something (or in this case, stop doing something) does not constitute government. If 23 families would bestow the divine right upon 24th family to do as they please and then 24th family struck a deal with the 25th family to keep the ball rolling while pretending something is being done, but alas, bureaucracy is slow, you know how it is; then surely you would have a case here.
Even if these 24 families would start to transmute into a government, that’s still leagues upon leagues away from bombing a random nation back into the stone age several continents away.
I’m not saying these are the perfect answers to many questions, but I don’t see Larken pledging to become the all-supreme leader of the Milky way so I wouldn’t say he really needs not provide one size fit all solutions for all issues, both contrived and otherwise; that’s more to be expected from a politician.
My point was that you can’t get away from government. Not necessarily Big Government(s), and Larken did refer to big established government(s). However, Governments are going to evolve from something small to something big whether we like it or not. My example was how a small one might have started, but once started, will not go away, and over time will grow in size and scope. This seems very natural. It seems un-natural for a government not to evolve. I don’t think it’s a matter of social conditioning.
Mkey, I see what you mean and agree but in defining terms here the genesis of your last word above has to be LAWYER. What do they do ? Stand around the temple all day and exchange money from the real world into money for the fantasy ie.abstract world. There by creating the cancer on healthy communities. You describe them perfectly.
This guy Ayyadurai has a good description, explanation of the fathers of all swamp creature.
https://youtu.be/u_PCnK45wjI
I agree with you when you say in your example that “The voluntary association has formed a government.” The twenty four families have come together to form a governing body which imposes its will on the other family. The twenty four families have become an authoritative body. Every member of that authoritative body is then subject to the authority that they created. Can anarchy exist? In such a society every member would have to recognize every other member as being equal in every respect. Since we are not all equal in intellect and physical abilities it is likely that a hierarchy would naturally evolve. That(a hierarchy) in itself is a form of government Some individuals would necessarily be submissive to others. Those in a higher position of power would take advantage of and rule over (govern) subordinates. I cannot think of an example among the lower social animals where a hierarchy does not exist There are the queen bees, alpha males, herd bulls etc. The hive,the pack and the herd have a social structure or in essence a government. In the past societies of humans have formed governments to, as the preamble to the US Constitution alleges,” establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,…” It is the only way one group with the same values can protect themselves from individuals or other groups with different values. I don’t have the answer for how to create a perfect society. We homo sapiens are social beings. Those individuals with the same morals and values will come together and form societies. Those societies will make rules ie. form governments, to protect themselves from societies and individuals with different morals and values. One of the problems as I see it, is that most (99.99%)of the members of the modern corporate state (United States, European Union, Iraq, Australia, etc..), have always been subjects to a form of government over which they have never had control.
No, it’s not the application of FORCE that is the definition of Government.
Every individual has the right to self defense.
If a person upstream of me is tipping poison in a river that I drink from, that person is threatening my existence and I have a right to self defense.
If I’m a reasonable person I’m going to try peaceful negotiation with them first, however if negotiation fails, I still have the right to protect myself using FORCE. I haven’t become a government at this stage. I’m just an individual who is exercising their right to self defense.
Now, the other 23 people who live downstream of me, drink the water and who are also being poison, each individually have the right to defend themselves against the polluter.
Now it might turn out that the polluter out guns each of us individually and is not going to take no as an answer, if we all decide to pool our resources to produce a combined force that is greater than the polluter, we have not created any NEW rules at that stage, we are still only exercising our rights to self defense and we have not become a government.
The moment a group of people create rules that they don’t each individually have the rights for themselves – that’s when a group becomes a government.
Although it is unwise, there is nothing morally wrong with a group of people getting together and deciding they would like a government and creating rules that govern themselves, provided that the rules only apply to members of the group and association with the group is purely voluntary. Even so, they can’t use FORCE to enforce a rule on an outsider.
This last bit tunes in with Constitution of no authority. If these 24 families understand that their agreement doesn’t extend to anyone but to its signatories, there’s no foul play.
They may leave the agreement to their posterity, but it is up to them to decide whether they wish to abide or ignore it completely.
Octium/mkey
I appreciate how you guys expressed things. Thanks.
“The moment a group of people create rules that they don’t each individually have the rights for themselves – that’s when a group becomes a government”
Devil’s advocate question:
What about eventual group decision to expel a member for some major unforgivable transgression?
It’s reasonable for such a rule to exist, still no individual member of a group has a right to expel someone.
Of course they do.
As you have the right to associate with whoever you want, you also have the right to disassociate.
Thanks for answering my question. You can pronounce my “login-name” as 67.
I like thinking from different perspectives.
In the previous video, I noticed that the answer is Responsibility.
https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1510-larken-and-amanda-rose-shine-candles-in-the-dark/#comment-71309
Responsibility:
You can not force other people to be responsible, without a clear
indication of damage. That is a difficulty in both anarchy (hygiene, burning tires) and government (pesticides, 5G).
We may teach other people to be responsible, but that might
take time.
The government often takes responsibility, but that does not mean
that the problem is solved. It often allows companies and lobbyists
to be irresponsible. It also teaches people not to be responsible
themselves.
In religions, there is also a governmental system.
You must pay the church some money and do your daily prayers.
People in free cultures are much more free-thinking in many ways,
and do not force a certain belief onto you.
History of governments and wars:
It might be interesting to look at anarchy in a historical concept.
Tribes were often religious, but the leaders were based on age,
votes, religion and birth. The whole government thing in Europe started when farming developed and people organized in towns and villages.
We got the Greece and the Roman empire, and their wars.
Later, the government was the Roman Church and farmers who hired people to do their work.
Some organized groups to rob or defend other people. And these became
the nobility and first kind of government. They were there to protect their group
and to attack other groups. These attacks often became wars between small governments or big states.
The same happened in Asia, but with different waves of wars.
In all cases the wars seemed to lay structures for the governments
that followed. The mixture of governments and wars seems the most
destructive, but also the strongest survivor. The cultures that
did not have strong armies simply disappeared.
So, is the government the solution against wars or the cause of wars or both?
I think it is both.
But can some non-governmental structure survive the warring governments?
“You can pronounce my “login-name” as 67.”
Damn!
Finally!
Now I know.
If I ever get banned, I think I will add 2 to my name.
Started using it in a game, and was easy to remember.
I sometimes complain to people using numbers as login-name.
And now some databases have registered a person with a sir-name Zevn
Would love to use Null as a name too.
Full name Null;Drop tables
I don’t think that this is a good solution:
Drone to stop loud neighbors
https://imgur.com/gallery/8quvGjQ
But how do you stop loud music?
I think that the anarchy people want to replace “government” with human-human interaction. The interactions in a community can also solve a lot of problems.
If it goes out of hand, because of quarrels, there could be some service of people that help to solve the problems. The problem is that this “service” could become a mafia triad by themselves. There is also the historical problem of organized invaders who are better armed.
Absolutely excellent!!!!
So we shouldn’t have environmental regulations because eventually the regulators will be “bought off?” I find these answers not fully formed. People who live in close quarters make rules–I guess it’s anarchy until it’s written down, but good fences do make good neighbors. If I know I can go to authorities or legal representation, that means I don’t have to personally confront someone and potentially get into an altercation.
We can set up different checks and balances to ‘trust but verify,’ and while liberty is paramount, cooperation is advantageous.
Government at it’s best is an organizing principle, and it allows us to tackle bigger problems together. It seems like a fear of corruption, however justified, shouldn’t prevent us from coordinating our resources.
The explanation that regulators are bought off is a side tangent to the core idea that some people have the authority to indiscriminately cause harm. It’s hard to imagine that there might be a way to resolve the issue because much of our imagination has been quarantined inside a narrow spectrum of consideration via social institutions like compulsory education, entertainment industry, scientism, etc.
Government in the context of the discussion that James, Larken and Amanda are having is the idea of a fictional body who is permitted to cause harm. There are other means of people gathering like what Amanda mentions in communities, committees and organizations. With strength in numbers, a greater will can be imposed like boycotting, exposing deceit and sharing alternative ideas. It does not take the rule of authority to make this happen.
I think the point here is in the reason people are not voting. If they don’t understand the reason then the tally doesn’t matter.
But the guy who didn’t contribute, didn’t gain as much as the others. Everyone who contributed got a road plus the respect of the other people, the guy who didn’t contribute, just got a road.
Few cubic meters of concrete is not difficult, it’s damn hard.
“Some impulsive action then comes to break that off, and then things happen”
This approach functions up to small community level, but it is not scalable. Big things hasn’t been done this way, ok, maybe there are some notable examples.
They might need, want, use Golden bridge, but even building something smaller could well be beyond their reach, possible only in imagination, and that is the end of story.
Small communities are the only way for anarchy on the short run, on the long run bigger structures have to emerge. I think it’s impossible people will just give up things that need highly organized society for producing them.
Technocracy works just fine for them. Technocracy is not about blindly sticking to the plan, when adjustments are needed they are applied. Of course, to put every minute detail to the plan is close to impossible, but that doesn’t mean an attempt is nonsense.
Social engineering works quite well, look around. It’s not necessary to get us, black sheep, to get majority is good enough.
I like the one about books and experience. Some knowledge from books rely on belief author is not cheating, so it is belief-knowledge.
Well, books can give you something you hardly get from experience, abstract reasoning.
Occasionally I really have hard times explaining things from their domain to craftsman I’m working with, because in their opinion math and physics are for students and the ilk.
Didn’t know Jung built house by himself. Beautiful, he lived not just in a world of ideas, he lived in material world too.
Of course with help (probably not just one), otherwise would take eternity.
No crowd funding in anarchy? No big businesses with big business interests? Granted, insane public works that serve no other purpose but for the cronies to get in on the action via juiced up contracts and making a landslide on sweet land deals would go the way of the dodo, much of the infrastructure would be doable and reasonably maintainable.
o que diabos? ROTFLMFAO!
_______________
Thanks for the Jay Dyer links….. Ugh.
I found a word in Portuguese to sum up my thoughts on the McGowans and Jay Dyers to explain the syndrome they suffer from: Assolismo!
Nope, I’m not buying it. Too many instances I wince at their logic. I just don’t know where these guys are coming from? They don’t actually explain the mechanism, because they can’t. Much, or all of their shit is conjecture. I take it with a chunk of salt “for what it’s worth”. which is in the vicinity of minus zero.
There’s more to discuss.
__________________________
I liked your fixing the road story. You might have a little the of Zapatista circulating in your veins!
_____________________________
That link with Lennon and Yoko in bed singing “Give peace a chance”, and showing clips of massive ant-war protests, I had asked what’s the difference back then? You know what the difference is, nobody had any f**king cellphones! They were actually in the moment, they weren’t taking selfies every two seconds, and texting and talking and contextualizing it on their Facebook and twitterizing it on their twitter…. There was one clip where a girl was paying attention to something that she was shielding in her hands, and she had a look of concern, and I think because there may have been a little light shining on her face that my mind automatically thought, oh, the girl is distracted with her cellphone, and I literally felt disappointed (I forgot the scene was from 45 years ago). And then I noticed that it wasn’t a cellphone, it was candles she was shielding in her hands….
That’s the difference between now and then.
The algorithmic control exerted by technology wasn’t toted around wherever one went, as it is in today’s reality.
Cheers.
I started to watch the program you mentioned – Rogan and Jones – for all of about 40 seconds. Man, did that Jones put on some serious weight. Wasn’t he on a program to buff up and trim down with all those special pills he hawks on his websites? He looks like a guy who’s been doing some serious steroids, but quit doing any of his serious exercising. Jones is a queer guy, and Rogan is too full of himself. The only show of his I actually watched was when Rogan had on Graham Hancock, who’s at least scholarly and has researched some really intriguing stuff. Graham’s got a brain that’s not swamped by ego, eg., Rogan & Jones.
Anyway, I took your warning seriously. You know, about the arse, about the goo? Hell, no, thank you!
____________________________
You say you love the Roses?
Well, I love A. Rose. 🙂
___________________________
But, on just as serious a note, ha ha:
I’m not so sure about the viability of anarchy on any sort of a large scale, let alone a global scale. I don’t see voluntarism working too well, either, beyond a singular community. In other words, two voluntary communities side by side, may or may not work out in harmony with each other.
Anarchy and voluntarism aren’t necessarily interchangeable. Supposedly, anarchy is leaderless, while voluntarism doesn’t share that criteria. The members of a voluntarist community need only to be free agents, and not coerced in anyway to either join the community, or be restrained from leaving the community.
Also, someone on one of these podcasts, explained anarchy, by breaking down the word “anarchy, saying that it meant without a leader, but added, not necessarily without rules.
I say, once you have so much as a single rule imposed – written or implied – on any given community, you’ve got yourself a government, brother…. What exactly does a “rule” do? Isn’t one “governed” by a rule? So, anarchy with rules is anarchy with government. Some body, or some persons, come up with the rule, or rules, as they see fit. Even if everyone in the community can raise their hands, it’s still a government – a government unto themselves, perhaps, but, still a government. One hopes they won’t steal from one another….
I absolutely agree with the Roses, that Governments do steal. Though, should we soften that a bit? Maybe they take your money and simply misappropriate it?…yeah, right. But, they steal other stuff, too. They’ve been known to steal sons and daughters, or rather, coerce conscription into their war machines – another way to fatten up their wallets, and their friend’s wallets. And to the extent that government is excessive with their legislation, they steal rights and liberties, unnecessarily….we vote these bastards in, and they just go haywire.
continued below….
continued….
I thought Larken answered the first part of Libertydan’s question of “what would a world without government look like” really excellently. I’ve always closely held to the concept that nobody has a monopoly on ideas, and that was the gist of Larken’s answer, in a sense. Very clever of Larken to start with the premise of explaining what the world “wouldn’t look like”, eg., no one would think it a good idea of their neighbor’s to ship yourself off to go blow up some people you don’t know, etc. That was an anecdote A-well-told!
But, the second part of Libertydan’s question was of the $64,000 variety – “….and how do we get there?” That is, how do we get to a world without government. Larken didn’t answer it.
But, that, honestly, is a very, very heady question.
Anyway, I like the title of Larken’s book “A Most Dangerous Superstition”. Maybe I’ll write away to get my autographed copy!! I actually have an odd feeling it may, indeed, offer some insights to silence my lingering doubts.
Though, ha ha, I’ve never been superstitious:
Jeff Beck ~ “I ain’t Superstitious”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvDMAHHT2TI
One of my old favorites…….
You’re a slow reader, too?
Funny comment about War of the Worlds with “sugar” on top. That’s probably the very least of what HG Wells used to come up with that novel in the first place. Doesn’t HG Wells figure into some corner of the den of conspiracies roaming around conspiracists alleys of the mind?
Okay, so agreed. Anarcho-voluntarist society will not be big. No room for global corporatists, bankers, and other madmen, bent on sticking their grubby hands down everyone’s pockets. Strictly small scale, and comprised of only the sane?
Now, there’s a problem here….Mankind. Some people aren’t altogether sane. Or nice. Or gentile. Etc. Etc.
It’s funny. I knew this woman who couldn’t say enough about her daughter. Gosh, was she proud of her little girl. So gleeful to commend that her daughter was a “leader!”, in such glowing terms…. Wow, did that hit home for me. No doubt, the mother was correct about her daughter. The little girl definitely had spunk. But, in very unglowing terms, I knew this girl was, in actuality, a little, back-stabbing, nasty little bitch. Like a demon seed. That was years ago, and hopefully the little girl grew out of that stage. Who knows. But, my point is that given a generation or two, or three, the so-called, sane anarcho-voluntarist communities may no longer be composed of 100% sane individuals. It being just a matter of time before some natural “leaders” come along to spoil things, to fuck-up the works….
But, maybe I’m being too superstitious?
Though, I ain’t superstitious, it’s just that damn black cat keeps crossing my trial!
I think there’s truth to what your saying. Sanity begets sanity, so to speak. In the same way that evil begets evil (not that I believe in evil, per se*), which we can readily see in the perpetuation of pedophilia, when many times the victim goes on to be the perpetrator.
Oh God, a world without bitches? And bastards, too?
Well, if they’re to be eaten, at least the anarcho community will never go hungry!
May you never lose your idealism, alexandre!
* To put it in a nut shell, I tend to think that what we take as being some sort of conscious evil in the world, is actually the lack or absence of conscious love, and the understanding that goes with it.
Rereading your post, you do have a caveat. Because you frame your argument in terms of having a successful “small” community.
And, there I have to agree with you. I think on a small scale, a thoughtful anarco-voluntarist community could work, and work out very well. It could even be completely vegan. lol
By the way, do you suffer from back pain? If you do, I have some simple advice for you. I had suffered big time with spinal stenosis for several years. And now it’s completely gone for a while now. Let me know what ails you.
Well, very lucky for you, that you found the right sorceress. No doubt, with all the tricks up her sleeve, she could have well left you a cripple…. “Now, hold still there, alexandre, and let me wack you good!”
But, that is the crux of the issue, being a slight bit bent out of shape, misaligned. It doesn’t take much. Like I was saying, I suffered for about two and a half years with what the MRI said was mild to sever stenosis. I was like one of those old people you see at the supermarket, leaning bent over their shopping cart, kinda pushing it along. I couldn’t walk the equivalent of a short city block without having to stop and bend over, squat ,stretch, whatever. It was such a drag. But, there were two thing I did. I got off my crappy fold-out bed, with the shot springs and the shot mattress, and began sleeping on the floor, on about 5 inches of foam. And also, ever since I was a kid, from the time I first had a wallet, I’ve always stuck it in my back pocket. And, as I got older, I started to suffer from fat wallet syndrome – not especially full of cash, but ID, credit cards, other cards, receipts, notes, etc., etc. And, it was, generally speaking, always pretty fat. But, from reading various blogs, I learned that by always sitting on that damned thing, it was actually throwing my spine out of wack. Since learning this, I carry my wallet in my front pocket….And I do believe that made a lot of difference. I remember how strange it felt at first driving without it in my back pocket – it felt as if there was a hollow under my ass. But, that was just an illusion. The fact of the matter was that by sitting on my wallet, it was literally contorting my spine.
So, those two things. Nothing in the back pocket, and sleeping on a firm, flat surface. Much like the traditional Japanese bedding…. Hmm, I wonder if that’s how Corbett sleeps? Right?
And oh hell, goodness gracious, I’ve probably used the better part of 500, already!
Lemme know what you think of Mr. Veitch and the Love Police. My ass aches trying to figure that character out…… 🙂
Marićon. Ha ha, funny!
I know precisely what you mean; but, between you, me and the lamppost**, I’m telling you, if it happened to mean the difference between both getting queer looks from people and also feeling a bit queer, between that and going back to walking hunched over in pain, again, I’d opt for doing the marićon thing. Hell, I’d even give it an extra few little wiggles, – in and out of the car! – if that kept the pain at bay….!
**”between you, me and the lamppost”, unfortunately, really doesn’t hold any water in today’s world. This particular idiom should be modified to now read – “between you, me, and an old-fashioned lamppost.” That is to say, one that’s not tricked out with Big Brother’s remote eyes and ears.
Of course, I could have said, “between you, me and the bedpost”, but, you know, that could have sounded strange given the topic. 🙂 And besides, if there’s an Alexa, or any of her cousins in the house, the “bedpost” form of the expression goes out the window, too.
Anyway, instead of my own failed stab at humor, check Victor Borge. Half comedian, half pianist. Old-fashioned and nostalgic. Excellent!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtDX1Vl-Jxk
Oh, btw, have you located your post replying to Veitch and the Love Police?
I have a problem with a line of thinking “we can’t foresee how certain things will go in anarchic society” and “people will find and invent solutions they always did”.
The latter is more or less ok, but the first is true in one way, but also in my opinion borders to intellectual laziness. Statists can rightfully reply, your anarchy religion is pipe-dream, you can’t even envision concrete solutions.
Sure, if you just want to put a screw not much thinking is needed, although a screw might in some way interfere with current situation or future situation. Usually with bigger things we do thinking and planning otherwise things have tendency to go undesirable way, that is a fact.
Therefore, from publicly outspoken anarchist thinkers I expect quite concrete proposals how to replace existing solutions provided by current system. Proposals not ten commandments.
To much of thinking is oriented towards local, that is perfectly ok on short run, but on long run some solutions has to be found for bigger societal structures. Local is fine for survival, but it can’t accomplish bigger ventures and those bigger it can, certainly not efficiently. Going strictly small and local can only end up in sort of anarcho-primitivism.
I said efficiently and one might relate this with technocracy, well, I’m relating it to comfort. Why to put more effort than it is needed? You can always bet, people value comfort very very much and at the end it’s about better system for the people.
Here is a interesting decision making solution.
Voting can be very different from democracy exercising.
http://parrhesiajoe.tumblr.com/post/137131790234/property-rights-a-story-guide-for-anarchists
Why not QUADRUPLE efforts? Are you lazy?
Jeffa does have a point.
“They paved paradise, put up a parking lot” …
This type of thing has already been covered before but this would be another more recent example of how government will not look after the environment.
Evidence based science or prostitution?
https://multerland.wordpress.com/2020/02/27/evidence-based-science-or-prostitution/
It makes it hard to counteract the government story if their research is done in well equipped labs full of stolen equipment!
“About scientific prostitution, the impact of corporations on scientific research and how the dismantling of the environmental and human protection system in Poland has been dismantled, says prof. Janusz Mikuła from the Cracow University of Technology.
Author: Rafał Górski – Poland
Published: 25 February, 2020”
Intense confrontation over anti-police hat at Santa Ana council meeting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLczS4w7KtI
I think this can add something to this discussion. Badges, uniforms, guns and euphemisms can go a long way. Worth watching several times, quite a few gotchas.
Questions for Corbett
James,
For a few months now when watching YouTube videos, there is a little pop-up telling me I need to review a policy they’ve implemented, and I’ve ignored it. This weekend I get a “Before you continue” message that completely blocks me, stating “We’ll need you to do this in order to continue using Google services”*. I therefore have stopped watching youtube from their platform. Am I mistaken in thinking that by clicking “Next” I am somehow giving my approbation to this Privacy Policy?
*The entirety of the message is:
“YouTube a Google company
Before you continue
To be consistent with data protection laws, we’re asking you to take a moment to review key points of Google’s Privacy Policy. This isn’t about a change we’ve made — it’s just a chance to review some key points.
We’ll need you to do this in order to continue using Google services.
NEXT”
Thanks for all your valuable work James,
aab1710
Ok Alex. There is always places to learn more than you thought you could in one sitting. I like this guest, she is a good science writer.
Science not science fiction, however she does have her critiques.
She does address some of your questions, but there is so much more to search for.
https://youtu.be/aX-B0yDOR3U
She gets into 5g at around the 23min. mark.
Protip:
That video, like many videos, can be watched comfortably at 1.5 or 1.75 speed (you might even be okay with 2.0 speed), saving you a lot of time.
To change the speed, pause the video & click the little gear icon (near lower-right corner of video frame).
Carey unleashes a can of whoopass.
The myth of “majority rule” & why democracy fails
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn1_vnvP3YU
I don’t get it, alexandre? You’re an ad man. What’s with all these – as mkey says – whoopass truths being shouted out, like from a machine gun, a zillion miles a second, by some foxy young chica, who you might run into at your local charity gala? Black gown, hairdo, pearl necklace…. this is a psyop I can get into, man! Her words are true, but, fuck the words!………Talk about distraction!
okay, so let’s just wipe that shit out. No more ad man. Ad man gone. I mean like, heeeee is GOOOOOOONSSSVILLE!!!
Kidding.
Ah, man. I used to smoke. Camel nonfilters, baby!
But, don’t go making me thinking, hmm, tobacco? Me and my 5g, and my pack of Camels. Fuckin smoke’s gonna save the day, after all. SHeeeet.
Gettin’ back now…..
Yeah, with Dana Ashlie, I mean, I appreciate Broze, how he did a second look at Aslie’s work.
C’mon, tell me she’s not a little, um, who know, ditzy….
No, they have no need to defend themselves, Broze or Ashlie, from each other, or from themselves……[I don’t want to print lol]
By the way, very quickly, 5G and Covid-19 have virtually nothing material between them, virtually no connection in the “physical” dimension. However, the only common connection these appurtenances have on any level is Covid-19 as contagion, acts as a metaphor, for the newly birthing “contagion” we call 5G.
May logic and proportion never fail, and thus become dead.