“History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren’t there.” ~ George Santayana

History, by and large, is the stories we tell ourselves and pass down to our children. This is probably unavoidable given that whoever wrote things down had biases that inevitably color the narrative. For the distant past, we have no firsthand observers to interview, no video footage. Statistics are skewed, unavailable, inconsistent, and unbalanced.

The eventual victor held the high moral ground and if he didn’t…well, he did!

Let’s put it this way: we struggle enough to understand what’s really going on today. Yet somehow, we think that by watching a documentary or reading a history book, we grasp what really happened in the distant past. Sure, we might get closer to the truth over time. But that depends on whether people are more interested in the truth than in feeling good.

So, what will people choose between a comforting history and a truth that makes them uncomfortable? How about you?

… I was never a follower or a big fan of Scott Adams or his Dilbert comic strip. However, I did read a novella he wrote some years ago called “God’s Debris.” It was interesting as it showcased him as a thinker who deals with profound origin questions that most people avoid for various reasons of childhood comfort-blanket indoctrination. But that’s not the subject here, at least not directly.

When I first wrote about Adams on the blog, it was in 2016 during the Trump-Clinton presidential race. Long before that, I had predicted Trump would win. Scott was one of the few predicting the same outcome, albeit for different reasons. My reasoning was that Hillary embodied everything people hated about the Clinton presidency. Bill, ironically, wasn’t that bad of a president in terms of policy. It’s the Republicans who started this whole lawfare thing by going after him for getting a BJ in the Oval Office. They didn’t have the courage or integrity to go after him directly for that act; instead, they targeted him for lying about sex—a rather common and human thing to do. But Hillary was just so unlikable, and Trump was energizing. It was obvious to me early on that Trump would take it. And I was right, as was Scott Adams, although his prediction was based on his analysis of persuasion and so forth.

So, Scott Adams is a thinker, but I can’t say I was ever really a fan. I don’t glom onto people like that…and he has this daily morning podcast that just isn’t my kinda thing. Then, about a year ago, I picked up on him again, admitting he was wrong for getting the COVID jab. But his analysis was self-serving and ridiculous. He laboriously explained how he had made his decision, analyzing it in a way that supposedly justified his actions. He claimed those who didn’t get the shot were like stopped clocks—right twice a day. Disingenuous.

He was taken to task for that, and of course, he had his big dust-up by suggesting that people reconsider racial separatism. It wasn’t based on racism but on statistics and what we were seeing in cities with wanton looting, BLM, and so on. Arguably, it was dangerous for a white person to be in that atmosphere. But you can’t argue that way because it gets taken as veiled racism for political purposes. That’s how the world works.

This was all fine and good until about three months ago, in March. I saw a tweet or something from him that made me sit up. It was like witnessing the metamorphosis of Bill Maher—completely different kind of things. Maher starts off as a complete leftist, always has been, whereas Adams has always been… well, I’d describe him as neither Republican, nor Democrat, not even libertarian, but rather an independent thinker.

He went off on DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion). I will quote what I said about what he said, and then we’ll move on from there to the latest thing and connect some dots.

Now to Scott’s latest and his very interesting integration, which is how coming to grips with all the lies from childhood gives him a superpower compared to younger people today.

I found that to be an ah-ha moment, for me.

So much so, that I went digging for more and related from Adams, struck f-bomb gold, and then after dealing with that, I have related it to the other big-ass lying elephant in the room—the justification for the Ukraine Proxy Way against Russia.

… As a final note before moving on to the meat course, I’m asked all the time how I get the big trends and the big moves so right, so often—even going way against prevailing opinion and even against the supposed sages of the ages (look how many highly regarded Republicans were wrong about Trump from day 1 and how many still are…though no longer from positions of the prominence they once enjoyed). You can read references to my “predictive powers” in member testimonials.

Do I have a superpower, or something? Nope, I simply lack a critical handicap. And I teach how to rid yourselves of that handicap in a series of 114 short lessons I call “No-Pill.” Originally drafted over 35 years ago, they have undergone continual updating to integrate wider realms of human experience. They’re going through a revision now, through No-Pill #65, the latest re-published.

Now moving on to what Scott Adams himself identifies as “his Superpower”…

Everything I was told about America as a kid was a lie. And most of the science I learned was fake.

That gives me a superpower compared to younger people. I know everything we are being told NOW by “the experts” and our elected leaders is ridiculous bullshit.

The young people who still think news is real, or that history is real, or that science follows anything but money, are literally going insane because nothing makes sense to them.

They think Orange Hitler is going to steal their democracy. Sounds like a hard way to live.

I don’t have that problem.

“The young people […] are literally going insane because nothing makes sense to them.”

Once young people hit their teenage years and puberty, something kicks in their brains, making them think their parents have suddenly become stupid. This phenomenon is suggested to be an evolutionary adaptation that encourages the young to go off and make their own way. It’s healthier for the genome because it prevents interbreeding and ensures genetic diversity. The scientific explanation for this is that a bit of distance and animosity towards the family unit helps the young more widely propagate the species and makes for a stronger genetic pool.

But then, you’ve all heard the saying, “The older I get, the smarter my parents become.” This transformation happens because, as people age and have their own kids, they start to realize the wisdom behind the advice they were given. They think, “My parents were really smart,” or “They knew all this.” You get it, right?

However, here’s the kicker: this realization often isn’t the case anymore. With the advent of computers, smartphones, networks, and the Internet, information is ubiquitous. Sure, there’s a lot of bullshit and lies out there, but there’s also more truth. The difference between truth and lies is simple: truth requires no maintenance. Lies need constant updates and revisions to remain believable. Truth stands on its own.

So, in this ocean of information, there’s a lot more propagation of truth and reasoned arguments despite all the noise. What happens is that the traditional cycle—where people think their parents are stupid and then come back to their values—gets disrupted. There’s just too much information and better ways of doing things now.

Take religion, for example. Old-time religion just isn’t cutting it for young people anymore. Yes, some folks remain very religious and pass down their beliefs to their families, but that’s becoming less common. As adherence drops off, it accelerates because people start questioning it and there are fewer numbers of adherents to give the basic comfort of “that’s what everyone believes.” Instead, it’s a double-whammy: the pressure they begin to feel is not to hold the faith, but dump it, so they feel less and less intelligent for sticking to outdated beliefs, leading to a rapidly accelerating decline.

What’s the replacement for the parents’ old-time religion? It[‘s] [was] wokeism, leftism, communism, socialism, altruism—all the stuff counter to traditional values like work ethic, entrepreneurship, and personal responsibility…church…God & Country. But these modern ideologies aren’t satisfying the young either. We see the necessity to keep propping up these lies, and when that fails, there’s a doubling down. We’re in the double-down phase now, and it’s getting ridiculous.

That’s why figures like Bill Maher and Scott Adams are gaining influence by speaking out with integrity. We’re on the cusp of a real breakdown and a tipping point. As this accelerates, even cherished old-time religion ends up on the chopping block. It’s inevitable.

I won’t belabor this point more than I have before, but because religions are structured differently in some parts of Asia, there’s a different kind of religious animosity compared to many other regions. In Southeast Asia, China, Japan, and Korea, Buddhism is universally well respected. Ask around. 97% fucks given in Thailand. There’s no reason for that to break down because it doesn’t demand anything of people other than a little bit of the Golden Rule and a little bit of the Silver Rule.

The Golden Rule is “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” I prefer the Silver Rule: “don’t do unto others what you wouldn’t want them to do unto you.” The Golden Rule implies a bit of an obligation on your part to actively do good to people, whereas the Silver Rule just says don’t do bad to people. Don’t do anything to people that you wouldn’t want done to you.

Those sorts of ethics and morals can remain—your bread and butter stuff. Don’t lie, cheat, steal, harm, kidnap, rape. It’s the stuff that everybody agrees on anyway, no matter what religion they follow. That’s ultimately where everybody is headed. They may have different traditions.

If you look at Judaism, it’s 1,800 years older than Christianity. They’re fairly rational about their religion in terms of the woo-woo and mystical stuff, the superstitious elements.

Here’s the thing: everybody’s religion before yours came along is superstitious in your eyes. They came out of superstition into what your religion is now. Whatever future iterations or new paradigms of religion arise, those people will look back on where you are now and believe you were superstitious.

You’ve got to look at this stuff on a much wider range. Christianity has been around for 2,000 years out of the 200,000 years that modern Homo sapiens have been around. That’s just 2% of the time where we’ve had Christianity. Think bigger than that.

Think about this continuum. Before Judaism came along some 3,800 years ago, people believed in all sorts of things they couldn’t explain—existence, origins, deep burning questions—so they made shit up.

Then Judaism comes along. For one reason or another, it’s better. It answers more questions for people, so it gets adopted as the explanation. It goes along pretty well. They have scuffles with others, like the Egyptians—lots of stories about that. It’s the typical struggle because every religion tries to hang onto its core, particularly its authorities, who want to preserve the power it gives them.

So, monotheism wins out over polytheism globally. But then, somehow, it’s not good enough. A bunch of Jews get together and create Christianity. Yeah, don’t think of Christianity as a new thing. Jews created Christianity. It goes on for a while. The Romans get onto it and discover it’s perfect for political control and dominance. Still is.

Then you have former Jews or Christians, or some of both, saying, “No, this isn’t good enough.” Around 600 AD, you get Islam, which has some of the same features and characters. It’s a spin-off religion. You’ve still got Abraham in there, Jesus as a prophet, and then you’ve got other guys. It’s plausible to say that even back then, people saw these older religions becoming compromised and not strict or orthodox enough, so there are always these types of conservative movements.

Within Christianity and Judaism, you have various flavors. You’ve got Roman Catholicism, and closely related to that, the Greek and Russian flavors. Then Martin Luther comes along and starts a huge movement generally referred to as Protestantism. You’ve got Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and then the Evangelicals or Born Again Christians. Among those, you have Southern Baptists and non-denominational evangelicals. The list goes on and on. It never ends.

There are weird-ass offshoots of Christianity, too, like the Mormons. The thing is, if you look at this whole framework, you see people are never satisfied. Why? Because the answers are unsatisfactory, and increasingly so. They’re laughable answers to questions now—ridiculous. They’re even more ridiculous than nursery rhymes. Yet, people still adhere to them. Just like the Japanese soldiers on tropical islands who didn’t want to believe the war had ended, so they pretended it hadn’t. You always have that.

Christianity is an integrated wholesale pitch. The New Testament is the marketing sizzle, and it ends with Revelations!!! “Keep the faith; the end days are coming. All will be revealed. It will all make sense in the end.”

So…

… Well a discussion about lies governments tell isn’t complete without its war stories. Santayana’s quotes in the tagline and the header crystallize it. To Adams’ post above, someone posted this Norm MacDonald meme.

That’s not all. I said in the intro I went digging, and a friend of mine who’s a big Adams fan pointed me to this from just a few days ago. Start at about 44 minutes and listen for 10. Transcript. Pure gold.

Fucking beautiful.

And this…

Everything we know about the Ukraine war is completely made up.

Seems to be an energy play, has nothing to do with NATO or protecting the country or Putin is bad.

Can there be any question? Read this, then see who said it on live TV.

What did Trump do to get the weapons flowing? He created a loan system.

They’re sitting on 10 to 12 trillion dollars of critical minerals in Ukraine. They could be the richest country in all of Europe. I don’t want to give that money and those assets to Putin to share with China.

If we help Ukraine now, they can become the best business partner we ever dreamed of. That 10 to 12 trillion dollars of critical mineral assets could be used by Ukraine and the West.

Not given to Putin and China.

This is a very big deal how Ukraine ends. Let’s help them win a war we can’t afford to lose. Let’s find a solution to this war.

But they’re sitting on a goldmine to give Putin 10 or 12 trillion dollars of critical minerals that he will share with China is ridiculous.

You catch that? Can’t let a country that actually has deep ties to Ukraine going back over a thousand years have any access to its natural resources. That’s ridiculous. What’s not ridiculous is that World Cop USA—that has fuckall business in any of it—gets control over it. Anything else would be “a threat to our democracy,” and that’s ridiculous.

Such an evil fucking shitstain, that Republican, Lindsey Graham.