Dr J Sydenham. The Romans built their temples on the sites of Ancient Briton temples. The Christians built their churches on the temples. Now the churches are converted to offices, houses, halls and warehouses.
>The secular state has the same social power in 21st century England as the pope in 14th century England.
Good analogy that explains a reason for why State policies are justified as enforcing itself on private issues instead of public ones. This is expanded to Corporate policies too, like CEOs as you say.
The challenge is to convince the public that something -- or someone -- will regulate their private lives regardless. The West is freeing itself of the shackles of Christendom. OK great. At least Christianity had regulated life in public ways for the West. States and Corporations are also regulating lives but do it quietly.
Shaming of speech while claiming to be advocates of free speech is a current example. The online pornography laws in the US is the most recent example. Few US citizens are aware that the majority of US States have gradually ate away at adult content by enforcing real IDs while online (https://action.freespeechcoalition.com/age-verification-bills/) The observant citizen will recognize that these new laws aren't limited to conservative party politics. This example serves as a warning: regulation will move quietly, and when reported on will claim it acts for the public moral good, while infringing on citizen's privacy.
I'm shocked by these laws, not because they're about porn, but because using real IDs while online has been debated. The debate had sided with privacy concerns for decades. The times have shifted to enforce public moral good via secular State laws. How have State legislatures gotten away with this? If Pew were to poll Americans about porn, perhaps the majority now believe the State should regulate such morals. So despite the secular vacuum left in the wake of fewer pews full in Christian churches, the public is handing over moral regulation to the State. Instead of limited government, there will be more government. (That's just my guess based on the legislative action because I've not seen a poll.)
Corporations are also quietly enforcing their morals onto employees. Gone are the days of companies like Chik-fil-A publicly saying they're closed for business on Sundays because they're Christian. Now corporate social policies enforce the private actions of employees. My sister had an encounter with social policy. She was confronted by management about her desk not appearing to celebrate Black history month. Her reply was that she wanted to keep things professional, and had also chose to not celebrate other events at her desk, like Christmas. She felt shamed for staying impartial about celebrations at work, enough so that the told me the story, and left the company later on. I had a similar experience with a previous employer quietly pushing their social policy. A coworker asked me why my email signatures did not include my gender identity. The company had sent several templates that heavily encouraged gender language in emails to clients. I told my coworker that clients can simply call me by my name if they weren't sure about my gender. Nonetheless, I began to feel uncomfortable, and despite several years of service I left the company. Companies are now proudly aligning themselves with social policies, and these policies are enforcing a set of morals or at least a world view onto employees. The differences between a Church herding adherents towards social policies compared to a Company nudging employees towards another set of social policies are minor differences in my opinion. It's the same goal but done by different institutions.
>An area that grows a single crop could be devastated by a single storm or crop disease.
Another great analogy that I think also deserves literal interpretation. Globalization can be stopped by shifting our views about where and how we live. For example, local food webs of diverse crops that are locally adapted and resilient. The challenge with seasonally adjusted local food webs is that Western diets must change.
That's a great article and hits the nail on the head. But it should implicate China.
China has 3 trillion dollars of foreign exchange that it spends in the West on acquiring companies and paying bribes to further its psychops campaign. Much of the money flows into the Cayman and Virgin Islands offshore banking centres and then into shell companies. After that it gets lost in the Western financial system. No-one knows where most of it is being spent. A trillion dollars would buy you a controlling interest in both Meta and Alphabet. Chinese funds for this subversion are growing at $500bn a year.
China is fully supported by the WEF. Chinese "Partners" in the WEF such as Bytedance and CITIC (together worth 2 trillion dollars) are financing the WEF to subvert the West.
China and the Corporate Elite have formed a dangerous alliance to change the politics of the world to oligarchy under their control.
>The secular state has the same social power in 21st century England as the pope in 14th century England.
Good analogy that explains a reason for why State policies are justified as enforcing itself on private issues instead of public ones. This is expanded to Corporate policies too, like CEOs as you say.
The challenge is to convince the public that something -- or someone -- will regulate their private lives regardless. The West is freeing itself of the shackles of Christendom. OK great. At least Christianity had regulated life in public ways for the West. States and Corporations are also regulating lives but do it quietly.
Shaming of speech while claiming to be advocates of free speech is a current example. The online pornography laws in the US is the most recent example. Few US citizens are aware that the majority of US States have gradually ate away at adult content by enforcing real IDs while online (https://action.freespeechcoalition.com/age-verification-bills/) The observant citizen will recognize that these new laws aren't limited to conservative party politics. This example serves as a warning: regulation will move quietly, and when reported on will claim it acts for the public moral good, while infringing on citizen's privacy.
I'm shocked by these laws, not because they're about porn, but because using real IDs while online has been debated. The debate had sided with privacy concerns for decades. The times have shifted to enforce public moral good via secular State laws. How have State legislatures gotten away with this? If Pew were to poll Americans about porn, perhaps the majority now believe the State should regulate such morals. So despite the secular vacuum left in the wake of fewer pews full in Christian churches, the public is handing over moral regulation to the State. Instead of limited government, there will be more government. (That's just my guess based on the legislative action because I've not seen a poll.)
Corporations are also quietly enforcing their morals onto employees. Gone are the days of companies like Chik-fil-A publicly saying they're closed for business on Sundays because they're Christian. Now corporate social policies enforce the private actions of employees. My sister had an encounter with social policy. She was confronted by management about her desk not appearing to celebrate Black history month. Her reply was that she wanted to keep things professional, and had also chose to not celebrate other events at her desk, like Christmas. She felt shamed for staying impartial about celebrations at work, enough so that the told me the story, and left the company later on. I had a similar experience with a previous employer quietly pushing their social policy. A coworker asked me why my email signatures did not include my gender identity. The company had sent several templates that heavily encouraged gender language in emails to clients. I told my coworker that clients can simply call me by my name if they weren't sure about my gender. Nonetheless, I began to feel uncomfortable, and despite several years of service I left the company. Companies are now proudly aligning themselves with social policies, and these policies are enforcing a set of morals or at least a world view onto employees. The differences between a Church herding adherents towards social policies compared to a Company nudging employees towards another set of social policies are minor differences in my opinion. It's the same goal but done by different institutions.
>An area that grows a single crop could be devastated by a single storm or crop disease.
Another great analogy that I think also deserves literal interpretation. Globalization can be stopped by shifting our views about where and how we live. For example, local food webs of diverse crops that are locally adapted and resilient. The challenge with seasonally adjusted local food webs is that Western diets must change.
The "values" are coming top-down - see https://therenwhere.substack.com/p/the-world-economic-forum
Ah yea the WEF :)
I just saw Shellenberger reported on another example: the SkyNews censorship by "fact-checkers": https://public.substack.com/p/elite-crackdown-on-free-speech-worldwide
That's a great article and hits the nail on the head. But it should implicate China.
China has 3 trillion dollars of foreign exchange that it spends in the West on acquiring companies and paying bribes to further its psychops campaign. Much of the money flows into the Cayman and Virgin Islands offshore banking centres and then into shell companies. After that it gets lost in the Western financial system. No-one knows where most of it is being spent. A trillion dollars would buy you a controlling interest in both Meta and Alphabet. Chinese funds for this subversion are growing at $500bn a year.
China is fully supported by the WEF. Chinese "Partners" in the WEF such as Bytedance and CITIC (together worth 2 trillion dollars) are financing the WEF to subvert the West.
China and the Corporate Elite have formed a dangerous alliance to change the politics of the world to oligarchy under their control.