We have clearly moved beyond the rule of tradition. Nowadays, one is required forced to defend every belief, every value, every action, on fundamental principles. Those who deny fundamental principles and also deny the value of traditions are in a hopeless situation, already lost. Those who have traditions but no fundamental principles will be mere spectators, at the mercy of others. Those who have traditions and fundamental principles may be able to justify some of their traditions from fundamental principles. Those who have only fundamental principles are bound to rediscover the value of some traditions. This is not a bad situation, we had to face this challenge sooner or later, but it is definitely stressful. Let this stress motivate you to think wiser.

What could be the real purpose for advanced nations being forced to pay $$$ trillions into United Nations fund to compensate developing nations for “anthropogenic climate change”? The stated reason is obviously not true. I suspect that the money is intended for building smart cities and the social credit system in Africa, with the ultimate aim of population control. Global population growth cannot be managed without controlling human reproduction in Africa, so this would be an obvious (but extremely controversial) priority for the UN/WEF and their affiliates.

No need to have MyGovID to get the Director ID. This way the Director ID is not digitally portable, but simply a number, like TFN. I would strongly advice against MyGovID for security reasons; the more digital the ID the more dangerous it becomes if hacked or misused by the authorities.

This article is a good example of how Trojan horse disinformation works. They exploit disinformation/leaks/anecdote (https://t.iss.one/NormalParty/2187) previously planted among controlled entities who question the safety of covid vaccination to now misdirect public emotions from the suspicious (but not undeserved) deaths, of culprits who colluded in the spread of malignant disinformation, to how those deaths were interpreted. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63719246.amp

The illusion of choice.

The Greens exist only to show you how much worse things could be if you did not vote for the status quo.

Those who allege ‘stollen elections’ fail to understand that all elections are fake, although the scope of electoral deception is never greater than what it needs to be to achieve the required outcome. The illusion of fairness is part of the deception.

The irony of people who live on top of one another in concrete blocks, attracted to the most artificial, pretentious and disconnected trends, also vote “for the Environment”, blaming humanity for their own emptiness and contradictions.

If ALL the votes were for Dan Andrews (like they were for Stalin) you would start asking questions, have doubts about the integrity of the process, right? This is why not all the votes are for Dan Andrews.

Electoral Syllogism: Only human votes are valid. Those who vote for Dan Andrews are not human. Therefore, Dan Andrews did not win the election.

I expect Dan Andrews to “win” the Victorian election, precisely because this would humiliate Victorians the most. Dan’s stage persona is so exquisitely vile and morally perverse, a kafkaesque caricature of the anti-human. The populist theatre needs an emotive caricature in order to disgust, entertain, captivate, move, provoke, possibly even cure.

You didn’t seriously expect that THIS would just go away? Grooming is always incremental.

Victoria will scream in pain.

What a cryptic message. One can speculate about the meaning of “a positive plan to benefit” and what “committee” he is deferring to?

Make them gasp for air, Dan. Bring back the Ring of Steel. They WILL eat the bugs.

How to teach a child to be rational from an early age

Humans (especially children) are motivated less by gifts/rewards/trophies than by internal accomplishments of their will. Any reward for obedience is a lesser motivation than the power to respectfully disobey.

The formula I am proposing:

A) Set your rules and expectations applicable to a child.

B) If the child does not want to do something that is expected of them, ask them to give you reasons why the expectation is unreasonable at this time. If the reason given is unsatisfactory, explain why it failed. This way you are adhering to the same rules of argumentation that are expected from the child, and this imprints a principle.

C) If at the end of this process the child would demonstrate a reasonable effort to argue consistently and on relevant merits, a concession to the rules/expectations should be granted. The reward of ‘respectful disobedience’ then becomes a powerful incentive to argue more consistently, identify relevant merits, and (in time) to develop sufficient understanding not to dissent on inadequate merits.