Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
On this month’s edition of “Questions For Corbett” James fields your questions on anarchism, free banking, bitcoin, veganism and much more.
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).
WATCH THIS VIDEO ON ODYSEE / YOUTUBE / DOWNLOAD THE MP4
SHOW NOTES:
“Washington’s Pope”? Who is Pope Francis?
Bitter Past: Pope Francis and Argentina’s Dirty War
President Obama to Pope Francis: I’ll Pick You Up At the Airport
James Corbett: The Revolution Of The Mind Is The Only Revolution That Matters
James Corbett on The Mind Renewed: Anatomy of the New World Order
Fed’s Once-Secret Data Compiled by Bloomberg Released to Public
The experience of free banking
Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve
Episode 262 – Solutions: Pirate Internet
Dr. Katherine Albrecht on StartPage and StartMail
How Roger Ver Got Hacked, and What He Did to Stop it
UltraScience ’97 Electronic Mind Control
These revelations about Hastert and the rest of them were NEWS to me likely due to the Blackout. Honestly, I did not even know the name of ANYBODY mentioned. Sibel was wrong to leave us with the impression that we just do not care, obviously we do CARE!
Solutions? The general public does find this behavior and subsequent cover up irrepressible. The slap on the wrist is just insult to injury and I believe this only exacerbates the crimes. So this is NOT what the problem is here.
Identify the problem: the public just does not KNOW.
Solution is to greatly increase the public’s awareness of exactly what did/does happen. These are not guesses or speculations, but concrete proof of crimes committed and the specifically the criminals’ names.
So…what has worked in the past to expose crimes amid a blackout on every level?
I would have to say carrying signs of images (and politically INCORRECT ones at that) and a leaflet of 5 sentences maximum. Picketing with with just ONE image or a maximum of 2 words. “Hastert Rapes”, Pedo Blackout”, “Children SOLD”, this should be EXTREMELY minimal so as to circumvent phys-ops and provocateurs, who are SURE to invade to dilute and subvert the truth.
I contend that the problem is that nobody KNOWS. And further, as soon as the names and crimes get out, the rest will take care of itself.
Solutions:
(1) Develop, as you have, one’s ability to tell truth from falsehood. In other words, being alert, using one’s critical faculties, monitoring carefully what one takes on board. We are not only what we eat but all that we take into ourselves.
(2) Linked to (1) not giving ourselves to mind control techniques used for millennia such as divide and conquer, controlled opposition, the monetary system, ‘food’ and ‘medicine’, obfuscation, exploitation of primal fears, the illusion of time, religion, false flag attacks, indoctrination (education system), subversive symbology, control of the mass media, the denial hassle ridicule factor and the poisoning of worldview (‘too many people’ etc). An excellent resource in this regard is researcher Mark Passio’s podcast series on whatonearthishappening.com
(3) Communicating truth as widely and freely as possible.
(4) Learning about history and I would add, etymology (which simply means ‘the true’), for most mind control is done through language.
(5) Never giving in to fear but constantly aim to expand one’s consciousness (what true love is) however dark the reality
(6) avoid as much as possible areas such as the military, banking, the police, the entertainment industry under greater psychopathic control
(7) associating with like minded individuals for it is true that strength lies in numbers.
(8) making art
Thanks James & bubromer, to go straight to the point about Passio’s work on that topic, start with the conference Order-Followers & The Destruction Of The Sacred Feminine, a crucial piece of information, a must watch, I sincerely urge all of you to check it out. Then follow with the Natural Law seminar if you feel to dig into to his enormous amount of work. BTW James, I think that Mark Passio would be an awesome guest for you show, he was on Gnostic Media, IMHO he would in here perfectly too.
Keep it up!
I agree that he sometimes takes shortcuts from etymology to play on the words, but most of the word definitions he does are relevant, not to say absolutely essential for some. Most of his work is the product of Trivium method research (and when it is not he disclaims it, e.g. Cosmic Abandonment), it requires more than name calling “crap” to dismiss his work. Indeed I believe that he has good intentions even he is sometimes far fetched (and only on peripheral topics, I never caught him being blatantly wrong on core topics, on the contrary), unlike your sarcastic comment that I don’t believe being well intended.
Fair enough. Indeed etymology is crucial, it’s the first step of the Trivium method: grammar. And it should be taken seriously. Most of Passio’s etymological definitions are relevant and in good faith from him to fulfill that goal. But he sometimes mixes it with play on words just to be pedagogical in making a point, he should disclaim that it is not etymology (despite the fact that one can notice it by himself quite easily usually), I agree on that.
He knows full well that he can be discredited on peripheral topics, secondary issues or even superficial ones. He doesn’t want to comply with these standard, that’s why he warns people not to pay attention to all of this at the beginning of his conferences, but just focus on the message, he ads that he has no intention of changing his presentation style :-p
Maybe there are other researchers out there who explains this better than him, but I don’t know any so far. This is crucial to understand that we cannot make any progress before changing our minds, elevate our level of consciousness by understanding Natural Law principles and applying it. The huge works on solutions made by James is not a starting point, it is what we will manifested into reality after having changed our mindset, not the other way around (except the fact that geeking around with these solutions might accidentally lead us to a higher level of consciousness, but not guaranteed and counter-productive, many get lost on the way, or stalled having found a comfort zone or placebo alternative in these solutions). That’s what Passio explained to the audience of the Tesla Memorial Conference about free energy (if it exists?), they think that free energy will save the world, but they Put The Cart Before The Horse.
You’re confusing two distinct approaches to words that Mark Passio uses distinctly.
– etymology: origin of words (such as conspiracy from to breath as one)
– green language: surface form of words and what clues this might give (such as money = mon eye, one eye, or individual, not divided or dual).
Mark Passio makes the distinction explicitly in his work. You were just not paying enough attention.
Also I have Greek and Latin to an advanced degree (it’s my undergraduate degree) so I know for a fact that Passio is NOT a shit etymologist.
When it comes to the “what can I do?” question, I suggest what you have also pointed to. When you can do your business locally.
I recently bought a simple cup to enjoy my tea for $20 whereas I could have found something more than adequate and more precisely made for a fraction of that. But I could buy it from the hands of the person who made it. That is what we can do.
I buy local milk, because it is very good and I talk face-to-face with one of the people who milks the cows.
I buy Red Ape Cinnamon because it is very good and I have interacted directly with the owner, or Chief Primate. They employ those less able to do other things in life. I respect that and he has earned my business.
I buy Numi tea because it is very good and the principles’ heritage is from Iraq. It is my way, as an American, to apologize to a degree to the people of Iraq.
Your desires or issues will be different, but the fundamental is the same: Buy with principle in mind before price. Change the world around you.
Love your neighbor, buy local!
One “solution” I’ve personally been carrying out is to “de-corporatise” as much as possible.
Firstly in utilities – there are lots of small firms providing utilities which often don’t get the big advertising opportunities with, for example, money-saving websites. You have to hunt them out via online forums etc. They often seem more expensive initially, but you get long-term savings as the big corporates carry out sneaky practices like nudging bills up when you’re too busy to notice. Also if you overpay, small companies tend to return your money quickly. I no longer use any big corporates to supply my utilities.
There are new types of mobile phones emerging, like the Ubuntu and the FairPhone. Ubuntu also does laptops and tablets.
I also try not to buy clothes made in sweatshops. It doesn’t mean never buying products made in developing countries – just trying to ensure that the producer monitors the factories where the goods are made for safety and labour abuses. Maybe I’m mistaken here, and I’m sure I make many slip-ups but it’s not about ME trying to be a super-ethical pure person, it’s about putting pressure on corporates globally to give workers a better deal, one step at a time.
I’m trying to be self-employed after years as a corporate worker – it’s a struggle but well worth it.
I buy about half of my food from a very cheap independent grocer – sadly organic is beyond my budget currently. Next step will hopefully be growing my own organic food.
I’m also trying to wean myself away from banks and towards credit unions.
A quiet protest – it would be great if it could become a quiet revolution.
I was with you all the way until you mentioned Yanis Varoufakis and George Galloway! Seriously?
Apart from that a very interesting post!
I also suspect that the refugee crisis is at least partly orchestrated. It looks as if the powers that shouldn’t be are trying to “clear” the “Fertile Crescent” – their ultimate aim is always plunder.
I agree with James that people should have a right to live wherever they want to in the world. But these refugees are pawns in a chess game.
This is an interesting passage from EH Cookridge’s book “Gehlen: Spy of the Century” p81 (1971 paperback):
‘Goebbels… had drawn up a more sensible plan for “a new Russia” aimed at winning over the peoples of the Soviet Union, and particularly her many ethnic minorities, for the idea of “a new Europe based on freedom and equality”, though, of course, under German [Nazi] tutelage.’
“A new Europe based on freedom and equality” – oh wait, isn’t that what we have now?
Any number of mutually effective solutions depend upon a high degree cooperation/synchronization. There is no magic bullet and any solution would suffice – provided it can be revised and gain consensus with changing circumstances. When people feel connected, understand they are not alone, part of something bigger, need not be afraid…well the rest is just details. These “apathetic” people are (ironically?) disconnected and properly terrified. This is the first order problem to be solved as I see it.
#QFC
James, can you give us your opinion of Alex Jones? I know you’ve mentioned that he got you to start looking at a lot of issues back around 2006 but in your recent “what can we do” BFP round table, you brought him up in what felt to me like a strongly negative light (e.g. he’s an over-the-top entertainer type). I’d really be interested to hear both your current (and previous!) thoughts on him.
#QFC
James, one of the biggest hurdles I have with libertarian philosophy (and probably it applies to anarcho-capitalism as well) is property rights. It makes no sense to me how people claim ownership of natural resources (e.g. land, water).
I’ve heard Tom Woods talk about “having the best claim” (e.g. I saw it first) but that seems incredibly flimsy to me. What if someone else claims “well I can do more productive stuff w/ the land that you saw first”? And what if someone else says “this is holy land and I am the most religious”. Who amongst us can really decide which of those arguments is best?
Also, if we believe in privatization of land and water, would this also extend to “privatization of air”, should the creation of such a mechanism be possible?
Basically when taken to an extreme, this stuff gets to the point of absurdity.
“I truly believe that as long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be war, and until we can protect the most vulnerable in society we will all live in slavery.”
Though I’m a hypocrite/carnivore, it really is an interesting point you make (and one I’ve thought of as well). One counter-point to that, however, is that even vegans are killing things all the time (e.g. bacteria from washing your hands or maybe from cooking or cleaning). I understand that killing bacteria doesn’t quite “feel the same” as killing a chicken or cow but it does feel like to me (though I’m certainly open to dissenting opinion) that’s it’s kind of a logical extension. If you disagree, where is the cut off and what is the rationale for the cut off? I guess it could be argued that, if left unchecked, bacteria could kill you. So basically, you’re not violating the NAP if you’re defending yourself against it.
As another point, I do feel terrible (though it hasn’t led to action) about my role – as a carnivore – in the killing/enslavement of animals. I think James made a great point about how being removed from the actual kill makes eating animals a different thing. I remember once ordering a fish at a restaurant that came as a whole fish (including eyeball) intact though fried. I couldn’t even eat a bite of it. Seeing a filet though is a different thing entirely. Maybe it’s just another example of how society removes us from things that, as humans, we would instinctively react to in a certain way. If I had to kill a chicken or a cow to eat chicken/beef, I very well could end up being a vegetarian (or possibly vegan).
Btw, I’d be interested to hear the reason you chose veganism over vegetarianism and how you view vegetarians (e.g. are they still initiating violence against animals).
#QFC
In a discussion between perloff and kelly (http://tkelly6785757.podomatic.com/entry/2015-10-15T15_21_38-07_00) kelly mentions that DHS has allowed +100000 muslims into the country covertly somehow. I came to think about a couple you interviewed regarding libya that claimed 300000 libyans were on their way to US with passport and money in the bank awaiting them etc. At the time I found it non credible until further poof had arisen. I haven’t seen any but now when kelly brought it up I wonder if you can follow up on this couples claims. Appreciate if you can do that in the next QFC. Thanks!
#QFC
Thank you for putting my thoughts into words, Aimec. Your assessment is 100% correct.
@James: This is my first post to your website, even though I have been following your work since its inception and I have listened to every one of your podcast episodes. I have supported your work through donations for many years now but never bothered to post a comment or send a message because frankly I thought I had nothing valuable to add to the conversation. In my opinion your assessment of almost all topics you cover is correct and you are the person who’s opinion I value most when it comes to political and philosophical questions. You opened my eyes to the 911 false flag, made me question everything and ultimately contributed to me learning my way into voluntarism. Which is exactly why I feel the need to post my first comment to you, now.
I urge you to reconsider your viewpoint with regard to animal rights. As Aimec correctly points out the non-aggression principal applies to all sentient beings. Just as no one has a right to force another human being into slavery no one has a right to rob animals of their dignity and of their equal right to inhabit this plant by degrading them into mere products existing purely for human consumption.
You take an easy way out when sating that you would first rescue a baby instead of a dog and the logical fallacy in this argument is blatant. No one argues that animal lives are more (or even equally) valuable than human lives. The question is whether you (or anyone else) have a right to deliberately kill another sentient being for your own pleasure and without necessity (because unlike earlier parts of human history the times we are fortunate to live in, allow us to live a health life without relying on meat or other animal products).
Please don’t fall for the excuse that “elites” have used for centuries when committing their atrocities. Namely that so called “higher” beings have a right to rule over so called “lesser” beings in whatever way they see fit. Just because another (human or animal) being is less fortunate, less intelligent, less wealthy or less able to defend itself does not justify to enslave or murder it.
Moreover, this is one of the few issues which you as an individual have a direct influence on. You vote with your dollars (as you always preach). And it’s not about going from 0 to 100 %. Just as a voluntaryist might feel pressured into paying taxes or sending his kids to state-run schools, a vegan might be pressured (by the way our food industry is structured) to (consciously or unconsciously) eat animal products. Nonetheless, it’s the understanding of the underlying problem that matters. It’s not about calling yourself a voluntaryist, a vegetarian or a vegan and not about doing the right thing all the time. It’s about taking the right decision to the highest extend possible. I.e. choosing not to support the state/the animal slaughter industry whenever the negative consequences of doing so are limited to a minimum. I.e. sitting in a restaurant, looking at the menu and ordering a vegan meal instead of one containing animal products. Eating animal products might be necessary in certain “emergency” situations or for health reasons (milk for babies, etc.) but where it can easily be avoided it’s a moral obligation to do so. Or in other words: When given a choice between food from animals and food from plants, do not kill another living being that feels pain and appreciates life just as you do… It’s as simple as that.
If you need a first incitement you might want to have a look at the documentary “earthlings” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlNXG1_gheI) and this related comment (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLqLe0nciz0) (which might be comparable to “Loose Change” and the necessary discussions which followed in the 911 context).
Finally I want to let you know that I planned to end this post by offering a 100 $ donation for an honest reply from your side but I figured that this would infringe on your objectivity when choosing questions for your future episodes. Therefore, I just want to let you know that this topic is important for a lot of people and (from my point of view) forms an integral part of the voluntaryist philosophy. An honest reply would hence by much appreciated (and the donation will follow anyway).
Be ensured of my continued support and thank you for opening my eyes to voluntaryism (so that yours might in turn be opened for the “animal aspect” thereof).
Best regards
Here lies the hypocrisy with vegans , its alright to end the life of a mosquito , as it is somehow justified in their reasoning , but its not ok for another to end the life of a chicken – even though they would actually do so to eat it .
Everyone should make their own choice , as has been said “draw their own line” , but a life form is a life form , wether you destroy a broccoli plant or a corn stalk , it is still a life form that is no longer alive now.
One could make the same example as James in the video , substituting the baby child for a mosquito or celery plant , and asking the same question which would you save …..
Being aware and grateful and respectful of all life forms in all their appearances and eliminating this need of labels to describe out eating habits would go a long way in not falling into the hypocritical web the “system” wants us to be in .
By eating vegan or vegetarian you are supporting the same corporations that run the animal and fishing ones . Exceptions would be those that grow their own food to eat , which even then would only account for a portion of their total diet .
Making divisions is the same ploy that industry keeps wanting us to do , to have 2 sides arguing and finding fault with each other yet at the end of the day both are at the whim of the industry . Lets not
keep falling into these pre-set traps .
Fishing industry killing oceans , vegetable industry killing soil , grain industry killing forests , etc etc ….
different angles to same problem , to make it seem as though there is a difference , keep the majority of people debating and distracted .
I would like to consider the animal rights question from an Anarcho-Christian perspective, with the caveat that the title of Christian, Muslim, or even Atheist does not put one into a lockstep monolith.
In the Bible a person or an animal is alive in context, but a plant is not since it does not have blood (Gen 9:4, Lev 17, Deu 12). Pre-fall plants and perhaps plants alone were food. Post the fall animals are also food.
As a Christian I have freedom to enjoy all kinds of food, but not to the point of offending others (Rom 14). My freedom does not allow me to impose on others to eat what I eat, nor restrict others from eating what they desire. There is no issue with both perspectives coexisting as long as one does not impose on the other. It is the Lord who imposes that I don’t impose.
The issue gets messy when a vegan imposes on the carnivore to restrict their diet by legislation or physical action, or the carnivore imposes meat on the vegan overtly or covertly. I suggest this is where it becomes unacceptable.
While the Non-Aggression Principle is a good foundation, I suggest it is aggression on others to impose the principle on behalf of animals. An issue with the Non-Aggression Principle from a secular perspective is that is has no foundation. It simply makes sense to agree that I won’t impose on you if you don’t impose on me. However, from a Christian perspective we have the same principle in Lev 19:18 with “you shall love your neighbor as yourself”, and the foundation with “I am the Lord”. This is clearly man to man and not man to animal.
I don’t believe we can even begin to move away from a oligarchy without general shift in peoples attitude to electoral accountability.
Even in an Anarchal society, people will volunteer to assume certain responsibilities and be be selected to do so.
So long as the citizens deciding the appointment accept a system in which they have no recourse when what was promised is not even perused, the the worst of people will fight for the position…or the best of people will become corrupted.
Is the starting point of any change the requirement for ‘Voter Consumer Rights” and can that only happen by diligent voters require that candidate ‘Opt In’ to be taken seriously.
Though a long-time follower/listener of the Corbett Report, I only recently delved into the archives, where I discovered Questions for Corbett. In fact, it was the question on veganism that prompted me to become a CR member, so I could read and perhaps even contribute to the comments here!
I especially appreciate the thoughts shared by Aimec, Tyler73, and Guilherme de Souza. My way of expanding this conversation is to point to the literally thousands of quotes on animal ethics (and 500 photos of animals) that I compiled over the course of a year and published in 2010. You’re welcome to click on my nickname “CQ” — which is short for Creature Quotes — if you’d like to read these quotes, most of which are organized chronologically (where I know the year of birth of the author).
Note: Though set up in a book format, with 28 chapters, it’s a FREE e-book!
Because James lives in Japan, where the number of vegans is apparently quite low, I’m including here a link to a new essay written by a vegan woman who lives in Okinawa: http://gentleworld.org/spring.
Her gentle words remind me of my own motives: Far from “taking a side” in a battle royal between vegans vs. non-vegans, I’m simply following my heart, which instinctively, like a little child, loves all animals — including mosquitoes, who do not bite or bother me; hmmmm, I wonder why that is? 🙂
T.T. points out (above) that in answering the question “Are you vegan?” James sounded like there’s no possibility he’ll change his meat-eating ways.
Well, I believe James and all of us on this website are subject to dramatically changing our views and actions in multiple aspects of our lives. None of us can predict exactly *what* will trigger those changes or precisely *when* our hearts and minds will be ready to advance, evolve — whatever word you choose.
Which reminds me of a quote on the home page of Creature Quotes. It’s written by an unknown author: “If nothing ever changed, there’d be no butterflies.”
Hi James,
Regarding veganism (I’m happy to say I’ve recently become one), you mentioned you would be interested to hear more. I highly recommend watching the video below. It’s 1hr 10 mins long but the speaker is extremely direct and knowledgeable.
————————————————————————————–
Best Speech You Will Ever Hear – Gary Yourofsky
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es6U00LMmC4
————————————————————————————–
Glad you mentioned Gary’s impressive GA Tech presentation, which he gave in 2010 — coincidentally, the year I started heading away from animal activism and toward 9/11 Truth research. For several years I shared this video with friends who have compassionate hearts; most of them responded positively to its message and the way Gary imparts it.
I can’t believe his speech has reached more than 4M views in the past eight years. Well, actually, I CAN believe it.
BTW, Gary made further points during the follow-up Q&A, which has exceeded 600K views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIkC4OJEx3c