Since mid-July this blog has been offering up Articles that have been swirling around two general issues, one involving Good and Evil ruminations and the other involving reductionist materialism and its personal and societal ramifications. In a recent piece, we looked at some of the language in statements from the BRICS XIV 2022 Declaration (the day after which a more recent 2023 Declaration was published saying more of the same) to examine it for signs of the sort of cognitive blindness that the reductionist materialism evidences. (Simply put, an over-emphasis on the left brain approach, as discovered and defined by Iain McGilchrest an accomplished neurologist, clinical psychiatrist, philosopher and author.)
Then, in looking at the two BRICS Declarations along with a few pundit commentaries, we reflected on the narrative strenuously promulgated by Presidents Putin and XI, namely that the US-NATO axis is an unprincipled, self-serving globalist tyrant imposing its ‘Rules-Based Order’ on other nations in ways that always and only benefit its own interests, whilst on the other hand the ‘Global South’ or ‘Rest of the World ‘(‘RoW’) is finally pushing back against this Hegemon determined to build a better, fairer world based on mutual cooperation not hegemonic plunder, violence and exploitation which has been the Way of the West for several centuries now and counting.
In the recent BRICS conference in Johannesburg from which came the latest XV 2023 Declaration, ten nations asked to join with another thirty or so already lined up, the main thrust being that of resisting US-led Hegemony which dominates and exploits them without contributing to their own development, indeed hampering it with crushing IMF debt. Six were granted entry with more no doubt to be accepted in coming years. There is a feeling from this latest conference that a paradigm shift is underway, that Old World Order is now giving way to Multipolar New World Order which is no longer maybe happening some time in the future but is already here and with epoch-making potential. At the same time we noticed in their language that any executive functions implied in many of their published Articles involve existing United Nations or other prominent NGO’s like the World Health Organization (WHO), all funded by public-private partnership, in other words both governments and private foundations sponsored by international oligarchs like Bill Gates.
So: the over-arching narrative is that the RoW is creating a geopolitical alternative to the existing post-war world order dominated by the US-NATO ‘Western’ axis, especially since the 1991 demise of the communist USSR. For sure, there is some truth to this narrative.
But what if it is yet another Big Lie? This too is possible. After all, the IMF, WTO, WHO and so on are all funded by the same occluded Big Finance forces that are behind the UN and dominate all Western governments. In the US, everyone now has heard the term ‘Deep State’ though few can define it. To some it is a perpetual Civil Service that has more clout and less public accountability than elected officials, including Presidents or Prime Ministers. To others it’s a more shadowy network of old Banking Houses who own the City of London and the Federal Reserve and who also control senior branches of national Intelligence which together seem to steer national and international policy, trumping whatever lesser influence elected representatives may bring to the table for a few years here and there. Some say that huge investment houses like Vanguard and BlackRock really run the West, being the visible tip of the iceberg of such hidden Deep State power networks. No matter what they are and who leads them, there does seem to be some truth in the notion that they not only control most Western polities but also the international bodies they created like the UN, WHO, WEF etc. And now here come recent BRICS Declarations openly stating that they are aligned with recent UN accords and initiatives. So it seems that BRICS and the UN and the WEF and the Deep-State-run Western Hegemon and the RoW are all following the same play book. If so, then surely the meta-narrative of The Hegemon versus Rest of the World is false? Is there any other conclusion to draw?
And if so, does that mean that all the positive, mutually cooperative rhetoric coming out of the Multipolarity Movement is a lie and the Hegemon is indeed as benign and generous as it proclaims to its own populations? Probably not, since again there is some truth to the ‘Hegemon versus RoW’ narrative. But that doesn’t make the emerging Multipolar Narrative necessarily true either. Which is where the thrust of this blog comes in, namely exploring various traditional contemplative issues in the light of everyday occurrence, in this case the inter-relationship, indeed possibly interpenetration, of so-called Good and so-called Evil which was being explored before the latest flurry of geopolitical Articles arose.
This rumination theme returned in a recent email to an old friend, Roger Tucker, who runs the geopolitical aggregator site www.sitrepworld.info.
“Well, I’m not fully on board with the dissidents. [Those claiming Multipolarity movement is a Deception.]
Something have been exploring with my articles of late is the inseparability / coemergence of light and dark, good and evil. I think some of the things going on are mixes of both good and evil rather than either good or evil.
The [Multipolarist] cooperation and emphasis on win-win development seems real, indeed admirable.
As does the observation that overly exploitative IMF policies have deliberately suppressed development in poorer nations for far too long. This cannot continue. That seems true as well.
But also China’s rise has been largely due to their allowing top-level Western corporatism and finance into their nation in return for access to Western markets which in turn, quite predictably, hollowed out Western manufacturing greatly harming millions of peoples’ lives about which ‘Globocap’ types couldn’t care less. The point being that China didn’t do this on her own and still isn’t. Western elites are part of China’s rise.
Does that make the BRIC bloc’s desire to do things differently a hoax? I doubt it.
But are they as independent and purely motivated as they portray? I doubt it.
Same with Putin and Russia. Which makes the seeming birfurcation and conflict true on some levels but not on others; there is smoke and mirrors in the mix. Probably like most times in history the aristocracy who frequently consult with each other as fellow peers even as their populations on the ground are slaughtering each other in the trenches as enemies. As I like to say there are always layers within layers and levels upon levels; endlessly so.
Exhibit 1: the entirely unnecessary Ukraine war which has cost the lives of several hundred thousand young men for absolutely no good reason. But at the same time allowing all these geopolitical changes to move forward more rapidly and as far as concerns the West, the elites are not seen to be driving such changes rather responding to the other side which is painted as evil, authoritarian, stubborn etc. – ‘the Enemy’. Indeed both sides can excuse what is happening by blaming the Enemy.”
Then yesterday in a well established alternative media publication called the Off-Guardian, I came across an article about Russia well worth reading; here is their closing argument:
“So, we think the real question is – in this stark new post-2020 reality what does “pro-Russian” (or pro-American, or pro-any state anywhere) even mean any more?
What big moral questions divide them? What real options are we offered?
– Being coerced into getting poisoned by SputnikV rather than Astra Zeneca?
– Being locked up and lied to by Biden as opposed to Putin?
– Getting Agenda 2030 served up via Moscow as opposed to DC or London?
– Having your CBDC in programable dollars as opposed to programable rubles?
Currently to be “pro-Russia” is to be pro-Globalism, pro-Agenda 2030, pro-phony pandemic legislation and pro-clot shots.
We absolutely are not pro any of those options.
Are you?
So are you NATO shills now?
Yes. Yes, we are.
Even though we have literally never endorsed a single action NATO has taken. Ever. Even though we have only ever pointed out NATO is, and always has been, a force for chaos and evil in this world…
we are now “NATO shills”.
That’s the great function of the fake binary – it turns intelligent people into human on/off switches, blinded to nuance or free thought.
If you don’t side with Team A, then you must be siding with Team B. You have to pick a side even if the only difference between them seems to be the color of their jerseys. And if you refuse to pick a team someone will pick one for you and insist you are in it.
What we want to say to these people is this –
If you strip off your pre-2020 preconceptions, turn down the feel-good, psychologically manipulative speeches from beloved leaders – what government anywhere is currently working for a better world, or any world beyond the Great Reset, carbon-monitored Agenda 2030 New Normal hellscape?
I think the answer to that, dear binary-hugger, is – none of them.
This is where we are right now and why we are no longer saying things that can be defined as “pro-Russian”.
Our values haven’t changed. The situation has changed. The reality on the ground has changed.
But wait, I hear some of you cry, ok Putin may be shilling for covid and ok, he might be promoting the same globalist nightmare as every other major world leader..
but you can’t deny he’s fighting Nazis in Ukraine!
Surely this gives Russia back some small amount of moral ascendancy?
Well, in so far as Russia – or anyone – is genuinely fighting Nazis they will continue to have our support, which is why we were quick to point out last year the hypocrisy and deception of the Western media version of events in Ukraine.
But let’s not be hopelessly naive…
I mean that’s Propaganda 101 after all – if you want to quell dissent, divert attention from unpopular policies and rally faltering support – start a war.
Sorry, I mean a “special military operation”.
Do we agree Russia is suddenly absolved and suddenly a righteous cause again just because it moves some troops into Ukraine – while at the same time continuing the same anti-human agenda of lies and fear porn?
Well, surprisingly, no, we don’t. Any more than we think this is about Putin “defending humanity” against Schwab, Gates and the globalist hordes.
But we’ll be talking more about this curious, contradictory and puzzling “not-war” – and its stenographers and apologists amongst the alt media – very soon… “
For those interested, the first critical article I read was BRICS – a key instrument for establishing the New World Order. Yourie Roshka’s style is overly forthright perhaps, but he makes good points, cites the Declarations frequently, and also links to the next piece about good and evil coexisting which is really the topic of this Article.
This last piece is from author Iain Davis, a staunch critic of the Multipolarity agenda though no fan of NATO Hegemony.
“The notion that a political leader, or anyone for that matter, is entirely bad or good, is puerile. The same consideration can be given to nation-states, political systems or even models of world order. The character of a human being, a nation or a system of global governance is better judged by their or its totality of actions.
Whatever we consider to be the source of “good” and “evil,” it exists in all of us at either ends of a spectrum. Some people exhibit extreme levels of psychopathy, which can lead them to commit acts that are judged to be “evil.” But even Hitler, for example, showed physical courage, devotion, compassion for some, and other qualities we might consider “good.”
Nation-states and global governance structures, though immensely complex, are formed and led by people. They are influenced by a multitude of forces. Given the added complications of chance and unforeseen events, it is unrealistic to expect any form of “order” to be either entirely good or entirely bad.”
The text is both italicized and emboldened because it presents what this Article is about which is NOT whether or not the Multipolar Agenda is another Big Lie; determining that is something for each individual to decide for him or her self. Rather, it’s about the fundamental ambiguity of reality in relation to so-called Good and Evil, and many other similarly related yin-yang polarities. Good and evil are always present each and every moment in life because every moment we choose whether manifest virtue or not. Which means also that in our participation in the world, both our limited personal world and the larger societal world which we read about from afar but are also a part of and whose machinations effect our lives on the local level, we can choose a virtuous manner or not. As is rightly said: ‘manners maketh man’.
So my attitude is that insofar as some of the stated aspirations of the BRICS and Multipolarity bloc are positive and reasonable, we support them and wish them well. Maybe there are nefarious agendas hidden in the mix, including outright lies; these am not party to. And also not all people in the exploitative Hegemonic bloc are wicked so we can wish them well too and pray that we within such captured polities nevertheless can follow the better angels of our nature. We can hope that the US can restore its representative republic. There are people in the electoral process who are pledging to do so, namely Trump, RFK Jr and Ramaswamy. We can wish them all well and need not allow long established cynicism about Western decline to undermine such positive aspirations. Meanwhile of course we each have our lives to lead on immediate and local levels whilst not getting distracted by overly heady, abstract realms. But even when dealing with distant and abstract matters – such as this BRICS business – we can choose to maintain some sort of virtuous, positive, sane, basically good attitude about it rather than falling into some sort of cognitively dissonant, or mentally discursive, stupor.
This ties in with the materialism issue: by positing some sort of external ‘objective reality’ divorced from mind or any other intelligence, a ‘matter-only-is-real’ model, we conveniently absolve ourselves of any agency because reality is seen as something autonomous that happens on its own which we therefore have nothing to do with. Indeed, to the typical materialist atheist, the notion of valuing virtue is anathema, quaint, even absurd. Religious faith, basically, is for people with mental problems, people comfortable dwelling in delusion. That such a criticism can validly be lain at their door never occurs to them, and if one were to do so they would be unable to grasp it.
When contemplating social issues, like ongoing elections, geopolitical developments or the conflict in Ukraine, we tend to revert to materialist default mode, regarding these things as part of an external, objective reality. The instant we do so, we divorce ourselves from such phenomena erroneously believing we are disconnected from them.
Leaving aside any argument as to whether or not our attitude does or does not effect people and events far away, the fact is that our contemplation of far away events and people effects us. And at that point we do have agency, and again we have the choice whether to regard such things with sanity or confusion, with virtue or non-virtue, with compassion or disaffection. In this way, at least, we are very much connected to such things and thus also they with us. So how we regard them, how we feel about them, how we respond to them, is something active from within ourselves, not passive from external ‘objective reality’.
The point being that goodness is something done and felt, it doesn’t exist on its own in an (imagined) external objective realm. The materialist view tends to ignore this fundamental truth of human experience, that ignorance being essentially the same as the visual blind spots in the Gorilla and yellow spot experiments from recent Articles. This profound ignorance has far-reaching effects in that it becomes part of ways in which we both individually and collectively absolve ourselves of responsibility for engendering Good, or virtue, in self and others.
That’s one side of it. The other being that good and evil coexist within each of us, always. This perhaps is symbolized by the famous Tai Chi symbol. We like to think we can align with all-good, but it simply doesn’t work that way. So am comfortable regarding both The Hegemon and the Multipolarity movement as having both good and evil elements, as is the case with myself. Otherwise, there is a tendency to insist that my side is right and the other side is wrong at which point neither side can ever meet the other. This is the same as one’s own inner good side being unable to meet and greet one’s own inner bad side. No, the good side sees and accommodates the evil within, as well as the evil without. Both are always in play.
baronbrasdor.art 
