You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
When you say "winners" you refer to history in terms of conflict. Every conflict has three different points of view...the winner who plays down his shortcomings; the loser who plays up his shortcomings and the biased and unbiased views of everyone commenting on the conflict. Test this on a schoolyard or any playground soccer game and you will always get three different stories for the same event.
History is HIS STORY, which means it's based on the perception of those who're telling it. On the grand-scale the best explanation for history is "a lie agreed upon", but for the individual a so called history has to be treated like every story presented; by the three building blocks...1.Origin, 2.Intent, 3.Target. The target is always YOU; the intent is either positive or negative towards you and the origin is either from above you or from below you. If the origin of any given story comes from above you; indicated by an infrastructure capable to spread it widely among those beneath; then the intent is always to uphold the power it came from, which means it's to suppress the power that might come from below; which means the intent is always negative.
If you comprehend these three fundamental points and are presented with a work you deemed negative; then you only have to look for that within that could negatively influence you, which will be based on a contract of belief. Names; dates; events etc. None of those matters; they are all interchangeable and act as analogies to hide the offer for a contract of belief. Take any story and try to find that which the origin tries to make YOU agree to. Then avoid it at all costs.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Blood-is-Nature ago
When you say "winners" you refer to history in terms of conflict. Every conflict has three different points of view...the winner who plays down his shortcomings; the loser who plays up his shortcomings and the biased and unbiased views of everyone commenting on the conflict. Test this on a schoolyard or any playground soccer game and you will always get three different stories for the same event.
History is HIS STORY, which means it's based on the perception of those who're telling it. On the grand-scale the best explanation for history is "a lie agreed upon", but for the individual a so called history has to be treated like every story presented; by the three building blocks...1.Origin, 2.Intent, 3.Target. The target is always YOU; the intent is either positive or negative towards you and the origin is either from above you or from below you. If the origin of any given story comes from above you; indicated by an infrastructure capable to spread it widely among those beneath; then the intent is always to uphold the power it came from, which means it's to suppress the power that might come from below; which means the intent is always negative.
If you comprehend these three fundamental points and are presented with a work you deemed negative; then you only have to look for that within that could negatively influence you, which will be based on a contract of belief. Names; dates; events etc. None of those matters; they are all interchangeable and act as analogies to hide the offer for a contract of belief. Take any story and try to find that which the origin tries to make YOU agree to. Then avoid it at all costs.
[–] yt4cz9 [S] ago
Like I said, the Jews.