Also available as an audiobook.
There are also many interviews of the author online talking about mass hypnosis.
Quick sample of his ideas:
https://rumble.com/v1brjhb-dr-mattias-desmet-on-people-who-are-in-mass-formation.html
Full interview:
https://rumble.com/v1b6tgr-the-psychology-of-totalitarianism-interview-with-mattias-desmet.html
Everyone hates Oz, so I'm not going to tell anyone they're wrong for turning up their nose to him. However, after looking into this issue, I've discovered a lot more nuance in this race than can be easily transmitted en masse.
For one, Trump's original endorsement - Sean Parnell, who would have made a great candidate - got out early on because of a divorce case in which his wife accused him of abuse. That left Trump with no good options. Kathy Barnette, who ran in the primary but lost, is an up-and-coming star, hopefully, in the Pennsylvania Republican Party. But she's an unknown at this point, which Trump pointed out. So he felt that she's unelectable for now. How is Trump's judgment in such matters to be taken lightly? McCormick is a boot-licking RINO. There's no way anyone can argue that he would be better than a Trump/MAGA-controlled Oz.
The thing with Oz is this: he's got huge name recognition and experience in the public eye, AND he can be marketed as sufficiently moderate to appeal in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is the most purple and "swingiest" of current battleground states. This is no small consideration in a state where it is quite doubtful whether Mastriano, the Republican candidate for Governor, has much of a chance, being considered so deeply MAGA-Republican as he is. Anytime Pennsylvania has a Republican in statewide office, that person is always more of a mainstream Republican. We all know that they cheat in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, but even without cheating, no one can argue those are two very large and liberal obstacles to overcome.
Finally, because Oz's entire political career will be 100% beholden to Trump and to his endorsement (he only beat McCormick by a thousand votes!), no matter what Oz might personally think, he will be have no choice but to adopt the goals of the MAGA Movement. And now Oz stands a good chance of winning, with his opponent Fetterman having suffered a serious stroke (no ill will, just sayin').
To find out more, start watching videos with Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, Jon Rappaport, Dr. Sam Bailey, Dr. Stefan Lanka, or Kevin Corbett.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DWqulaZuLuzw (Brief explanation)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EqwPajvIhivM (Longer explanation)
Watch the documentary called "The Viral Delusion":
https://www.bitchute.com/video/YYOsNZw1cjDq
Read, or listen to, the book "Virus Mania", 3rd edition:
To find out more, start watching videos with Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, Jon Rappaport, Dr. Sam Bailey, Dr. Stefan Lanka, or Kevin Corbett.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DWqulaZuLuzw (Brief explanation)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EqwPajvIhivM (Longer explanation)
Watch the documentary called The Viral Delusion:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/YYOsNZw1cjDq
Read, or listen to, the book Virus Mania, 3rd edition:
I have followed a high fat, low carb diet for eight years and I love it. It is how I live, and I will never go back to living on carbs. The energy is steady and always available, the appetite is perfectly controlled by the automatic rebalancing of appetite hormones that naturally occurs, and the mental clarity is astounding. Running on fat for fuel instead of carbs produces about 30% less metabolic waste, so it's much cleaner than burning glucose (all carbs [sugars and starches] are broken down into glucose). As far as your mitochondria are concerned and how they make all the energy for your body, it's the difference between heating your wood stove with rolled up newspapers or heating it with hardwood. I only feel like eating twice a day, I NEVER get cravings (you will no longer find bread tempting, or even chocolate cake), and I never have to watch how much I eat or exercise to stay trim. I eat like a king everyday with fatty steaks or cuts, ground meat, bacon, unlimited eggs, cream, butter, sour cream and cream cheese, cheese, whole milk yoghurt, and animal fats of all kinds like butter, lard and tallow added to everything, as much as I want. When you eat fat as your fuel, your body tells you when to stop, so precisely that it signals you to the very bite by taking your desire away to take another bite. You've experienced this before when eating something fat-rich like chocolate mousse. But it happens with every meal when you are fueling up with fat and your body is "fat-adapted." As long as your carbohydrate intake is low enough and your fat intake predominates, you can eat all you want, sit around all day, and you will lose weight and eventually become thin. It happened to me, and it happened to everyone I've ever advised who started eating this way.
It's the reason you've never seen a fat wild animal. Animals in the wild, eating what they are designed to eat, eat as much as they want, but never more than they should. And if they're hunters, they sit around all day except when hunting. Of course, they're not conscious of any of this, but nature takes care of everything. And we humans don't have to be conscious of it either. When a human eats the way it's designed to eat, its body signals when it's had enough. ALL mammals run on fat as their primary fuel. Herbivores turn the plant fiber (cellulose) they eat into mostly fat, some protein, and a little bit of carbohydrate. Carnivores eat the fat of the herbivores, and take in no other carbohydrates than the little bit of sugar circulating in the blood and muscle of their prey. Humans thought they were getting a free ride when they invented agriculture and started living on carbohydrates. But all they really did was cheat themselves of their natural, God-given design as mostly fat eaters that came about during the eons before agriculture when humans had converted to hunters.
The mechanism behind why eating fat doesn't make you fat, but eating carbs makes you fat, is rooted in the role of insulin. Insulin is the only tool the body has for signaling fat storage. When your insulin is too high, your body will convert the carbs you eat to fat for storage, even if your body needs those carbs for immediate energy. This is why overweight people are hungry a lot. They are not overweight because they are hungry a lot, they are hungry a lot because they are overweight. Being overweight is in essence a state of artificially-induced starvation. Conversely, the only tool the body has for signaling the release of stored fat, is a relative absence of insulin. The only thing that causes your insulin to be too high is carbs. Cut down enough carbs, and your insulin drops. As soon as your insulin drops sufficiently, your fat cells start releasing their stored fat for burning to energy. All you have to do is take your insulin levels way down by lowering carb intake. It's that simple. Eating fat does not affect insulin levels, and you can run on fat permanently without any need for carbs. Fat and glucose (carbs) are the only two options your body has for fuel. So when you cut down carbs, you must replace them with fats, otherwise you'll go hungry. Making yourself hungry is completely unnecessary for effortless weight loss, and in fact will set you at war with nature which you will most assuredly lose.
My top recommendation for learning about all this is a relatively thin, well-written, well-researched and somewhat humorous book called "Low Carb High Fat Diet Revolution", written by a Swedish doctor named Andreas Eenfeldt. Another great book if you want to take a little deeper dive is Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat". I can also recommend other sources for anyone who wants to delve even deeper.
I'd love to have a discussion about this with as many people in this community as possible. I think this community is a perfect match for an Ancestral way of eating. And if you all have any questions, I'd be happy to answer as best I can.
This is a long post, but only reading to the dollar signs will be enough if you're not interested in the Fluoride article.
Water fluoridation is an unbelievable topic in its own right. The article below from the Fluoride Action Network is really worth reading, especially because of the recent flurry of fluoride coercion, and because a major understanding has come into focus for me recently. I haven't had time to put a collage of points together, so I will just give you the raw points.
Centralization of authority to mandate fluoridation has just passed in New Zealand and the UK, and will soon go full bore. Canada and Australia are already heavily fluoridated, like the US. Ireland too has a great deal of fluoridation. It's quite minimal anywhere else in the world, so it seems like a project of the British crown and its commonwealth nations. This also aligns a great deal with the nations most savaged by the public health warfare currently raging.
I am absolutely convinced that fluoridation has been a project from its beginning to poison the population, specifically I believe that its effects (or at least believed effects) on the pineal gland have been understood by clandestine groups for a time extending before water fluoridation. The pineal gland is very very important to the occult world. Once you realize that it is symbolized by the pine cone, you then start seeing the pine cone everywhere in their symbolic transmissions. The most recent example is in the new Matrix film trailers, in which the book ends in the office behind Neo's psychiatrist are in the shape of pine cones. Anyway, for now, if you haven't seen this already, you'll have to rely on me when I say that the pine cone is everywhere, and you see it all the time once you know to look for it.
If in fact the pineal gland serves the function that certain traditions ascribe to it, then water fluoridation has been a tool to diminish the pineal gland's function in the population at large.
This is a short but fascinating article that may be the best single historical analogy to what may be taking place currently among the power factions of the world, if the Q phenomenon does in fact represent genuine opposition to the ascendant NWO Cabal:
It may be that the power structure has fractured, and that the non-debauched are attempting to clear out the corruption by those who have usurped the traditional corridors of power which would include the mystery societies themselves (this implies that even freemasonry is not inherently bad or good, as of course even a tremendous amount of founders of our country were masons, including G. Washington). So at this point, I don't see such mystery societies/rites as nefarious in themselves. Certainly one could even interpret Trump's decorating his penthouse with Apollo imagery as something done in opposition to the Dionysus god figure, who is the figurehead of the current degenerate cabal seeking to transition to its techno-fascist NWO. Those two figures, Apollo and Dionysus, are generally pitted against each other. The Apollonian represents the high-minded aspect, while Dionysus the base.
The military is always the undergirding of all power. Q said that taking back the country by the military is the only way, though never stipulated the degree of overt action the military would actually take. Is it meant to remain covert, spilling out into the open as in the Las Vegas shooting? Was the military the last bastion where the patriotic and non-debauched congregated and regrouped to take back the traditional institutions of power? If not, then we are screwed! It means that Trump is controlled opposition, which would make him the deepest and most effective deep plant in history.
This is why I lend so much credence to the possibility of their being genuine opposition, because if there is not, then it won't matter what any of us believes. We are as pilots going down in a plane, without any clear idea as to the possibility of there being a way to rescue the plane, yet we continue to believe there may be a solution. Because we could never know if a solution existed unless we tried, then according to the hard and fast rules of logic, that is in fact the only possible logical way one could react under such circumstances.
$ $ $ $ $
As an example, here is a brief bit I found that ties it to Kubrick's imagery:
"In the final stargate scene of Stanley Kubrick's "2001 A Space Odyssey" (1968) masterpiece, at min. 5:41 in the video above, there appears the famous -5 that are completed into- 7 pyramids/diamonds, that quite a few Kubrick 'decoders' have puzzled about; typically the most consistent explanation has been to assume they represent the 7 CHAKRAS as vortixes of light into/from the ETHER, yet while that is quite accurate in my opinion, the above quote from Rawles link adds considerable more detail to the generic theme of chakra reconfiguration implicit in the film scene (as astronaut Dave Bowman is transitioning from 3D materiality into 4D more evolved ascension). That these 7 pyramid/diamonds are a stunning hidden reference to a TORUS geometry in relation to the CHAKRAS is not something to just frivolously dismiss as unproven, because in accordance to Kubrick's notorious penchant for 'offering clues' in key words or symbols we indeed find that he did film some of his movies in London's famous PINEWOOD Studios, the clue here being the word "Pine" as a direct reference to the Pineal Gland which is considered the gateway of the Crown Chakra and Third Eye, nonetheless.
"Most people are completely unaware that in esoteric circles the Pine Cone is for this reason a notorious symbol, located in high places like chairs of the Grand Master in masonic lodges, etc; therefore they do not make the connection to the Christmas Pine Tree (and LIGHTED PINE CONE ornaments) as a secret symbol of the lighted Pineal Gland -reason for the lighting of which, expressing the "new birth" of the Third Eye in ascended individuals-. That the Pine Cone geometry is of well known Phi configuration should go without saying here, but also evidently the Pineal Gland was named after it because its shape resembles a Pine Cone, and the Pineal Gland is a CRYSTALLIZING organ; in esoteric wisdom it is considered a "tuning fork" of crystal resonance to the higher-dimensions via the Ether, that is presently DEVOLVED and "switched-off", thus incapable of SHINING in supernal light inside the brain as it was supposed to. Any correspondence between this shining and the title of Kubrick's other famous film "The Shining" is strictly coincidence, right...? In this sense, the Pineal Gland in its ascended state tunes consciousness and Dna to the fractal higher embeddable waves of the infinite dimensional existence, "connecting" one to the "All-Is-One" TORUS field."
Here is the latest message from the premier anti-water fluoridation organization on the current fluoride tyranny. Consider joining their newsletter, and perhaps sending a small donation. They are among the worthiest of advocacy groups.
Fluoride Action Network
The Greatest Threat To Non-Fluoridated Communities Is Here
As you will see in today's bulletin, FAN's work over the coming years will be more important than ever. If your water comes from a small or medium sized unfluoridated public water system anywhere in North America or Australia (for now), you will be at high risk of having your water targeted for fluoridation starting in January. Instead of accepting the science showing harm, the pro-fluoridation lobby is doubling down where they have influence; with politicians, bureaucrats, and the chemical industry. Help the Fluoride Action Network defend the public's water and health!
The U.S. Centers For Disease Control (CDC) has partnered with the chemical industry to target 19 million residents in 32,000 small and medium sized communities across the United States that do not add fluoridation chemicals to the public drinking water. Using your tax dollars, the CDC provided funds to private business to develop a fluoridation delivery product for water systems serving between 50 and 10,000 people. The widespread sale and promotion of this new product will start in January throughout the US, Canada, and Australia. The American Dental Association (ADA) has joined the CDC in pushing this new strategy. FAN is responding with our own new technology to defend the public's drinking water, which we will explain in tomorrow's bulletin.
In July, the CDC held a "Public Health Grand Rounds" presentation on fluoridation. While there was no mention of the large number of new studies linking low levels of fluoride and fluoridated water to neurotoxicity, this was essentially an infomercial for a new technology that the CDC and ADA were calling "a game changer" in their efforts to expand fluoridation. Below is a slide from that presentation, where you can see they intend to increase the percentage of fluoridated water systems from 73% to 77%--representing 19 million people on 32,000 water systems--by 2030.
This goal isn't exactly new. The CDC and ADA have utilized a number of strategies over the past decade to expand the practice, but largely due to FAN and our network of local volunteers and professionals, the number of fluoridating communities has actually decreased, while the population served has increased slightly due to urban growth. Some tactics they've tried, and continue to utilize, included introducing statewide mandate legislation in places like New Jersey and Hawaii, as well as providing federal and state funding for fluoride equipment and public relations campaigns. FAN has successfully helped fight off these mandates, working closely with legislators, local organizers, and private water companies. And while the equipment grants have certainly slowed the trend of communities ending fluoridation when aging equipment breaks, it hasn't stopped it, because now more communities are also considering the numerous studies showing harm.
Now the pro-fluoridation lobby has a new strategy:
To accomplish this significant increase over the next 8 years they intend to utilize a new fluoridation system specifically designed to be simple and cheap enough for even the smallest water systems, which could include private systems, or even colleges and public schools. They're calling it the "New Wave Fluoridation System." It utilizes compacted sodium fluorosilicate in a tablet form designed to dissolve over time in a small amount of water, much like the deodorizer tablets used in urinals.
We have learned that this process started in 2013, when CDC's Chief Fluoridation Engineer, Kip Duchon, suggested that the CDC help develop a product that was feasible for small and rural communities. Soon thereafter the CDC announced a Small Business Innovation Research grant opportunity for private business to develop and test the idea. KC Industries, of Mulbery, Florida was awarded two large grants, one to develop the tablet and the other to develop the injection/feeder system.
KC Industries is a small chemical manufacturer with a handful of employees. According to their website, “The plant was built by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and began producing Sodium Fluorosilicate in 1957 as a raw material to manufacture aluminum.” KC Industries purchased the facility in 1999 and appears to have focused heavily on the “dry” fluoride drinking water additive market with Sodium Fluoride. Here is their page on their Sodium Fluoride product; it’s worth a quick look.
Over the past twenty years, more communities have switched their additive to fluorosilicic acid, which is an incredibly dangerous and corrosive liquid, but is cheaper. This led to a massive decline in sales of dry additives, and KC Industries' profits. According to their press release, they were struggling until the CDC's grant, which they say provided "a new lease on life" for the chemical company. They're expecting "an immediate return on investment" as communities clamor for the new system.
The New Wave Fluoridation system will be marketed by DuBois Chemicals throughout North America starting on Jan. 1, 2022. KC Industry representatives have said that interest in the system has come from around the world — including Canada and Australia — and that they expect to be implementing the system soon in communities in Colorado and Georgia, followed by an additional half-dozen communities within the first few months.
The CDC employee who initiated this process, Kip Duchon, has retired from the CDC and is now a consultant to the ADA’s National Fluoridation Advisory Committee. Even as a CDC employee he apparently worked closely with the pro-fluoridation lobby. Here’s a photo of him as a government employee alongside a co-founder and board member of the American Fluoridation Society, wearing their t-shirt.
I suspect Duchon's consulting services to the ADA's fluoridation advisory committee will focus on promoting this new technology. The ADA has already called it a "game-changer" and lobbied Congressional members to include taxpayer funding for this technology in the recent Infrastructure Bill. FAN also reached out to these congressional members, and while the ADA's efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, the Infrastructure bill does provide some general funding for drinking water improvements focused on sustainability, security, and lead removal. I suspect the ADA will continue to lobby for federal funding in future budgets and bills, and will attempt to have local and state governments re-allocate and misuse some of these infrastructure funds in the meantime. FAN will continue to track and combat any of these attempts.
Meanwhile, the CDC continues to give very large taxpayer funded grants to states to pay for public relations campaigns to promote fluoridation. FAN asked them to suspend this practice, and in response they agreed to organize a meeting with experts on fluoride neurotoxicity.
FAN will be working to stop this expansion of fluoridation. We have to, because our health and the safety of our drinking water depends on it. Please join us in this effort.
Thank you,
Stuart Cooper Campaign Director Fluoride Action Network
Make A Tax Deductible Donation Today! Fluoride Action Network Binghamton, New York [email protected] fluoridealert.org
Dear So and So,
It appears we would not be a match, because I won't be getting any injection, ever. I do not trust pharmaceutical companies, at all. They are proven among the greediest, most corrupt companies on the planet, right up there with petroleum, military armaments and Wall Street. Their annual lobbying expenditures in the US are by far the highest of any industry, nearly double that of the second-highest industry. They are shockingly privileged with zero legal liability for the injections they produce. As I would never ever consider buying a car from a company with zero legal liability, so I would never accept the product of any manufacturer of any sort of product who didn't bear such accountability, much less one that will be injected directly into my body. As corporate entities, the pharmaceutical giants have all been convicted of criminal felonies an astonishing number of times, produce (often patently) fraudulent "safety" studies of their products, and if all that were not enough, the unfathomably obsessive and coercive manner in which they are currently pushing their latest injection is so over the top as to be interpretable only as a kind of psychological warfare. More than one of these companies are on record from exposed internal documents as having determined, as a business practice, to endanger the health and lives of millions because the fines and legal payouts total only a fraction of the profits . . . and that's for the products WITH legal liability. It isn't hard to speculate just how much less they care about what happens to the recipients of their products that have NO liability. So, I have as much inclination to accept the injection as I would have to invest in Wall Street mortgage-backed financial derivatives circa 2006.
In any case, I appreciate your interest. Good luck out there, I hope you find what you're looking for.
Sincerely,
Me
I am convinced that the personal meaning of the film 2001, for its creator Stanley Kurbrick - and there is more than one level of meaning to the film - is meant to convey the idea that the cinema, and by extension modern audio/visual tools, is Kubrick's weapon that he (and the ruling class that he represented) has discovered useful in bludgeoning those who would oppose their capture of the modern-day equivalent of the film's primitive watering hole, i.e. the entire planet earth. This is a very literal interpretation of the film, perhaps the most literal possible, and one which I've never seen anyone point out. I did watch one person's video in which they interpreted the monolith as the actual cinema screen upon which we are watching the film, but then they did not take it further to create an exact and literal parallel of this cinema screen as the latest iteration, like the bone before it, of a weaponized tool for violent domination.
The very opening scene with the celestial body alignment and the "Thus Spake Zarathustra" music is the first instance of the celestial alignment, and the only alignment that takes place not concurrently with an appearance of the monolith. But this scene is actually happening with the intention of invoking the film and the screen it's being projected upon as the monolith, with the title of the film appearing on the screen to reinforce this. So this scene does actually stay consistent with the other occurrences of celestial alignments that are invariably coupled with an appearance of the monolith: The opening scene is meant to signify the film and the screen it's being projected onto as the overarching, evolution-inducing force that the black monolith symbolizes throughout the film. Also, the "Zarathustra" music occurs here and in total three times, so that in every case it accompanies an epiphany scene that leads to the dawning of a new era of greater social and material complexity.
Along this line, the puzzling last scene in the bedroom invokes the pre-industrial forms of myth perpetuation and their weaponization as a form of mass control: painting, sculpture, architecture, all cultivated by aristocrats or social elites. Experiencing an epiphany while eating his meal and accidentally breaking the wine goblet, Bowman has eaten all the meat on his plate, but not the vegetables, exactly parallel with the pile of animal bones the first ape was crouching over during the primitive epiphany scene, following which the eating of animals is initiated. The old man is then visited by the monolith for the last time, which is actually the cinema screen self-referencing itself as the very screen that we are watching (in fact the black monolith in the film is in 2.35:1 aspect ratio which is the same ratio that the film was originally released in for theaters back in 1968). The "Zarathustra" music plays, signaling that a momentous epiphany has occurred and a new era has been initiated of a more advanced tool intended for violent domination. This is in perfect parallel with each previous shift ahead to a more advanced tool. The old man puts out his finger in a gesture reminiscent of Michelangelo's "The Creation", as though the new bone tool/monolith itself bestows new life to its discoverer as when God touches Adam. Old man Bowman is reborn and he (and we via a camera zoom) enters into the monolith. The next thing we see is the moon, moving upward, in exact parallel to the rising bone that the ape threw up into the air. The new tool for domination has been discovered: the cinema in general and, via the medium of the cinema screen, the faking of the moon landings in particular. As the moon moves upward, we realize that the camera is panning down to planet earth. The moon goes out of the picture and the star child is seen viewing the earth. I believe a triadic relationship is being set up here between the moon, the earth, and the star child, who represents Kubrick. In effect, we have moved into a new era of myth creation and mass control via the new bone-shaped tool of cinema. The cinema screen (black monolith) will be used as a new tool of violent domination. This cinematic tool, as the monolith symbolizes, has in fact been the teleologic force driving mankind through each phase in the film, and marking Kubrick's epiphany of its potential power as the most recent apotheosis of domination tool development.
In summation, Kubrick is revealing that he will employ the cinema to film the moon landings, thus inventing a new means for mythology creation that will be used to dominate the earth (i.e. watering hole) and its inhabitants (this is the triadic relationship established right after entering the monolith/cinema screen from the bed of old man Bowman). And in case there's any doubt as to the entirely insidious intention of this scheme, the star child turns until at last he is looking directly into the camera, meaning that this traumatic treatment is intended for all those watching the film (or at least, those who do not realize that the new tool will be used against them).
There are other details that reinforce this interpretation, some of which I only discovered once I realized the literal parallelism between the various coordinated appearances of celestial alignments, the monolith, the "Zarathustra" music, and the epiphany or realization of a new more advanced tool for violent domination. Of course, we are left no room for alternative interpretations on the first transition from a primitive weapon to a more advanced weapon, with the space ship literally replacing the bone on the screen. And this is obvious, of course, but how many people actually look at that space ship and also realize how much it looks like a gun? And of course, so much of NASA and space exploration being a hoax, pretty much the entire part of the space exploration program that was real has been a cover for military development of missiles and developing space as a theater of war. But of course, Kubrick is not so blatantly obvious in handling the final transition from the previous form of weapon to the next form of weapon. He does, however, clearly show us that the carniverous old man has had a transformative epiphany, that he has been reborn a new man, and has entered the monolith/cinema screen, and from the vantage point of the monolith (self-referencing itself as the screen we are looking at, just as in the very opening scene), we see first the moon going up, then the earth, then the star child viewing the earth, then the star child viewing us. And I might add that that child has a pose and a look on its face that are just ambiguous enough to be unclear, but could reasonably be seen as sinister.
From my new point of view, the film expresses unfathomable venality, as in to prostitute one's talents for mercenary considerations. But that is the meaning at the first or autobiographical level. And Kubrick confirms it through his moon landing hoax confession film, "The Shining" (see the online video "The Shining Codes 2.0"). I do believe there are also two other layers of meaning. One of these is that Kubrick most certainly crafted the film to also be a Masonic initiation ritual, which form it follows very closely, substituting, however, the modern scientific view of man's origins through the mechanism of evolution for the older creationist story used in traditional Freemasonry. The best analysis of this layer of meaning of the film was done by a guy named Jay Weidner, whose film "Beyond the Infinite: Kubrick's Odyssey II" is well worth the four-dollar rental fee at iTunes. The third layer of meaning is the exoteric message, the one intended for the masses, which is not entirely different in essence from the esoteric, masonic ritualistic message, but is more in line with a typical sci-fi story about future technology, aliens, what constitutes whether someone is a real living being, the nature of artificial intelligence, portraying future tech devices, and things like speculating on the way man will live in the future and the dehumanized context he will live in, as well as the government cover up of the discovery of the monolith on the moon. These are the popular themes that most people saw and understood and took away from the film, and which fill up the vast majority of commentary and interpretations of the film over the years. The presence of so many layers of meaning is a primary reason why the film is so amazing and thought-provoking.
There is, as well, the small but significant embellishment of the young photographer taking photos of Dr. Floyd on the moon: he has an uncanny physical resemblance to the young Kubrick, who himself started in professional photography. This photographer in the film is wearing a suit that very much resembles the skin of a leopard, similar to the leopard seen in the first part of the film. As well, similar to the flash of light we see in the leopard's eyes (due to the front projection screen light), we see a flash of light reflected off the photographer's cuff links which, because of their proximity due to him holding the camera with both hands, very much resembles the pair of leopard eyes. This relates well to the recurring themes of domination via violent tool development, and carnivory (with the photo camera here being linked to the later advancement of the cinema as the modern dominant tool par excellence, as well as marking Kubrick as the first true master of the new, more advanced tool). Something resembling flashing eyes also occurs in other scenes, such as in the landing scene of the ship that takes Dr. Floyd to the moon, as well as the small "eye ball" flight module that HAL uses to murder Frank.
Then there are other details like the fact that the lead ape is called Moonwatcher, and the lead astronaut's name is Bowman, the former invoking the moon, obviously, and the latter a reference to the god Apollo who was, among other things, the Greek god of archery. Bowman launched like an arrow into space to explore Saturn, but ended up discovering something even more exalted. Both names refer to the faked moon landings that Kubrick was preparing simultaneously to the film 2001 and for which 2001 was serving as a research and development project for. However, I don't think Kubrick made 2001 solely as a preparatory exercise for the moon landings. It may actually be the other way around: he may have agreed to do the Apollo con job in exchange for future unlimited budgets and unfettered artistic autonomy. Who could ever say how many untold millions of dollars officially allotted for the Apollo missions were siphoned off for Kubrick's productions, both 2001 and later films? Kubrick would have also demanded complete artistic autonomy for the rest of his life, which by the nature of his films it would appear he was granted. His films are towering marvels of tightly controlled artistic coherence. It's also tempting to suspect that Kubrick, as an occult adept, would have wanted to be the first artist/occult magician of the "new tool era" to recast the ancient esoteric mystery rites into cinematic form, as well as to be the first to splice into the ritual the new evolutionary biology in place of the old creationist accounts. He certainly left plenty of clues woven into the visual rite to loudly infer what he was up to, and how he himself, through creating this film and referencing himself within it, was personally participating in the age-old rite initiation. Besides newly adapting this rite for the screen, his most unique and individual contribution to this ancient initiation rite may actually be the principle depicted in the film in parallel occurrences in which those who bludgeon everyone else for control of resources set for themselves and everyone else the course of human evolution. In short, Kubrick's outlook here could be interpreted as a very sophisticated and artistically elaborate justification for the idea that "might makes right."
I am convinced that the personal meaning of the film 2001, for its creator - and there is more than one level of meaning to the film - is meant to convey the idea that the cinema, and by extension modern audio/visual tools, is Kubrick's weapon that he (and the class that he represented) has discovered useful in bludgeoning those who would oppose their capture of the modern-day watering hole, i.e. the entire planet earth. This is a very literal interpretation of the film, perhaps the most literal possible, and one which I've never seen anyone point out. I did watch one person's video in which they interpreted the monolith as the actual cinema screen upon which we are watching the film, but then not taking it further to create an exact and literal parallel of this cinema screen as the latest iteration, like the bone before it, of a weapon for domination. The very opening scene with the celestial body alignment and the Thus Spake Zarathustra music is the first instance of the celestial alignment, and the only alignment that takes place not concurrently with an appearance of the monolith. But this scene is actually happening with the intention of invoking the film and the screen it's being projected upon as the monolith, with the title of the film appearing on the screen as well. So this scene does actually stay consistent with the other occurrences of celestial alignments that are invariably coupled with an appearance of the monolith: The opening scene is meant to signify the film and its projection screen as the overarching insight that the black monolith symbolizes throughout the film. Also, the Zarathustra music occurs here and in total three times, in every case accompanying an epiphany scene that leads to the dawning of a new evolutionary era. The last scene in the bedroom invokes the pre-industrial forms of myth perpetuation and therefore mass control: painting, sculpture, architecture, all cultivated by aristocrats or social elites. Experiencing an epiphany while eating his meal and accidentally breaking the wine goblet, Bowman has eaten all the meat on his plate, but not the vegetables, exactly parallel with the pile of animal bones the first ape was crouching over during the primitive epiphany scene, following which the eating of animals is initiated. The old man is visited again by the monolith, which is actually the cinema screen and is self-referencing the very screen that we are watching (in fact the black monolith in the film is in 2.35:1 aspect ratio which is the same ratio that it was originally released in for theaters back in 1968). The Zarathustra music plays, meaning an epiphany has occurred and a new era has been entered of a more advanced tool usage intended for domination, in parallel with each previous shift ahead to a more advanced tool. The old man puts out his finger in a gesture reminiscent of Michelangelo's The Creation, as though the new bone tool/monolith itself bestows new life to its discoverer. He is reborn and he (and we via a camera zoom) enters into the monolith. The next thing we see is the moon, moving upward, in the same manner as the bone did that the ape threw up into the air. The new tool for domination has been discovered: the cinema in general, and the faking of the moon landings specifically, via the medium of the cinema screen. As the moon moves upwards, we realize that the camera is panning down to planet earth. The moon goes out of the picture and the star child is seen viewing the earth. I believe a triadic relationship is being set up here between the moon, the earth, and the star child who represents Kubrick. In effect, we have moved into a new era of myth creation and mass control via the new tool of cinema. The cinema screen (monolith) will be used as a new tool of violent domination. This cinematic tool, as the monolith, has in fact been the teleologic force driving mankind through each phase in the film, as though Kubrick's epiphany of its potential power were the most recent apotheosis of domination tool development. In summation, Kubrick is revealing that he will employ the cinema to film the moon landings, thus inventing a new means for mythology creation that will be used to dominate the earth (i.e. watering hole) and its inhabitants (this is the triadic relationship established right after entering the monolith/cinema screen from the bed of old man Bowman). And in case there's any doubt as to the entirely insidious intention of this scheme, the star child turns until at last he is looking directly into the camera, meaning that this traumatic treatment is intended for all those watching the film (at least, those who do not realize that the new tool will be used against them). There are other details that fill in this interpretation, some of which I only discovered once I realized the literal parallelism between the various coordinated appearances of celestial alignments, the monolith, the Zarathustra music, and the epiphany or realization of a new violent tool for domination. Of course, we are left no room for variant interpretations on the first transition from a primitive weapon to a far more advanced weapon, with the space ship literally replacing the bone on the screen. And this is obvious, of course, but how many people actually look at that space ship and also realize how much it looks like a gun? And of course, so much of NASA and space exploration being a hoax, pretty much the entire space exploration program has been a cover for military development of missiles and developing space as a theater of war. But of course, Kubrick is not so blatantly obvious in handling the final transitioning from the previous form of weapon to the next form of weapon: He does, however, clearly show us that the carniverous old man has had a transformative epiphany, that he has been reborn a new man, and has entered the monolith/cinema screen, and from the vantage point of the monolith (self-referencing itself as the screen we are looking at, just as in the very opening scene), we see first the moon going up, then the earth, then the star child viewing the earth, then the star child viewing us. And I might add that child has a pose and a look on its face that are just ambiguous enough to be unclear, but could reasonably be seen as sinister. From my new point of view, the film expresses unfathomable venality, as in to prostitute one's talents for mercenary considerations. But that is the meaning at the first or autobiographical level. And Kubrick proves it through his moon landing hoax confession film The Shining. I do believe there are also two other layers of meaning. One of these is that Kubrick most certainly crafted the film also to be Masonic initiation ritual, which form it follows very closely, substituting, however, the modern scientific view of man's origins through the mechanism of evolution for the older Bible creation story used in traditional Masonry. The best revealing of this layer of meaning of the film was done by a guy named Jay Weidner, whose film "Beyond the Infinite: Kubrick's Odyssey II" is well worth the four dollar rental fee at iTunes. The third layer is the exoteric message, the one intended for the masses, which is not extremely different in essence from the esoteric ritualistic message, but is more in line with a typical sci-fi story about future technology, aliens, what constitutes whether someone is a real living being and the nature of artificial intelligence, portraying future tech devices, and things like speculating on the way man will live in the future and the totally dehumanized context he will live in, as well as the government cover up of the discovery of the monolith on the moon. These are the popular themes that most people saw and understood and took away from the film, and which fill up the vast majority of commentary and interpretations of the film over the years. There is, as well, the small but significant embellishment of the young photographer taking photos on the moon of Dr. Floyd: he has an uncanny resemblance to the young Kubrick, who himself started in professional photography, and is wearing a suit that very much resembles the skin of a leopard, similar to the leopard in the first part of the film. As well, similar to the flash of light we see in the leopard's eyes (due to the front projection screen light), we see a flash of light reflected off the photographer's cuff links which, because of their proximity due to him holding the camera with both hands, very much resembles the pair of leopard eyes. This relates to the recurring themes of domination via violent tool usage and carnivory (with the photo camera here being linked to the later advancement of the cinema as the dominant tool par excellence, and Kubrick claiming first mastership of such tool usage). Something resembling flashing eyes also occurs in other scenes, such as in the landing scene of the ship that takes Dr. Floyd to the moon, as well as the small "eye ball" flight module that HAL uses to murder Frank. Then there are little things like the fact that the lead ape is called Moonwatcher, and the lead astronaut's name is Bowman, the former invoking the moon, obviously, and the latter a reference to the god Apollo who was, among other things, the Greek god of archery. Both names refer to the faked moon landings that Kubrick was preparing simultaneously to 2001 and for which 2001 was serving as a research and devlopment project for. However, I don't think Kubrick made 2001 solely as a preparatory exercise for the moon landings. It may actually be the other way around: he may have agreed to do the con job in exchange for an unlimited budget and absolutely unfettered artistic autonomy. Who could ever say how many untold millions of dollars officially allotted for the Apollo missions were siphoned off for Kubrick's productions? He may have just wanted to be the first artist/occult magician of the "new tool era" to recast the ancient esoteric mystery rites into cinematic form, and the first to splice into the ritual the new evolutionary biology in place of the old creationist accounts. But he left plenty of clues woven into the visual rite to infer what he was up to, and how he himself, through the creative process, was personally participating in the age-old rite of passage that is depicted on the screen. His most unique, individual contribution to this ancient initiation rite may actually be the principle depicted in the film in parallel occurrences in which those who bludgeon everyone else for control of resources set for themselves and everyone else the course of human evolution. In short, Kubrick's outlook here could be interpreted as a very sophisticated and artistically elaborate justification for the idea that "might makes right."
I am convinced that the personal meaning of the film 2001, for its creator - and there is more than one level of meaning to the film - is meant to convey the idea that the cinema, and by extension modern audio/visual tools, is Kubrick's weapon that he (and the class that he represented) has discovered useful in bludgeoning those who would oppose their capture of the modern-day watering hole, i.e. the entire planet earth. This is a very literal interpretation of the film, perhaps the most literal possible, and one which I've never seen anyone point out. I did watch one person's video in which they interpreted the monolith as the actual cinema screen upon which we are watching the film, but then not taking it further to create an exact and literal parallel of this cinema screen as the latest iteration, like the bone before it, of a weapon for domination.
The very opening scene with the celestial body alignment and the Thus Spake Zarathustra music is the first instance of the celestial alignment, and the only alignment that takes place not concurrently with an appearance of the monolith. But this scene is actually happening with the intention of invoking the film and the screen it's being projected upon as the monolith, with the title of the film appearing on the screen as well. So this scene does actually stay consistent with the other occurrences of celestial alignments that are invariably coupled with an appearance of the monolith: The opening scene is meant to signify the film and its projection screen as the overarching insight that the black monolith symbolizes throughout the film. Also, the Zarathustra music occurs here and in total three times, in every case accompanying an epiphany scene that leads to the dawning of a new evolutionary era.
The last scene in the bedroom invokes the pre-industrial forms of myth perpetuation and therefore mass control: painting, sculpture, architecture, all cultivated by aristocrats or social elites. Experiencing an epiphany while eating his meal and accidentally breaking the wine goblet, Bowman has eaten all the meat on his plate, but not the vegetables, exactly parallel with the pile of animal bones the first ape was crouching over during the primitive epiphany scene, following which the eating of animals is initiated. The old man is visited again by the monolith, which is actually the cinema screen and is self-referencing the very screen that we are watching (in fact the black monolith in the film is in 2.35:1 aspect ratio which is the same ratio that it was originally released in for theaters back in 1968). The Zarathustra music plays, meaning an epiphany has occurred and a new era has been entered of a more advanced tool usage intended for domination, in parallel with each previous shift ahead to a more advanced tool. The old man puts out his finger in a gesture reminiscent of Michelangelo's The Creation, as though the new bone tool/monolith itself bestows new life to its discoverer. He is reborn and he (and we via a camera zoom) enters into the monolith. The next thing we see is the moon, moving upward, in the same manner as the bone did that the ape threw up into the air. The new tool for domination has been discovered: the cinema in general, and the faking of the moon landings specifically, via the medium of the cinema screen. As the moon moves upwards, we realize that the camera is panning down to planet earth. The moon goes out of the picture and the star child is seen viewing the earth. I believe a triadic relationship is being set up here between the moon, the earth, and the star child who represents Kubrick. In effect, we have moved into a new era of myth creation and mass control via the new tool of cinema. The cinema screen (monolith) will be used as a new tool of violent domination. This cinematic tool, as the monolith, has in fact been the teleologic force driving mankind through each phase in the film, as though Kubrick's epiphany of its potential power were the most recent apotheosis of domination tool development.
In summation, Kubrick is revealing that he will employ the cinema to film the moon landings, thus inventing a new means for mythology creation that will be used to dominate the earth (i.e. watering hole) and its inhabitants (this is the triadic relationship established right after entering the monolith/cinema screen from the bed of old man Bowman). And in case there's any doubt as to the entirely insidious intention of this scheme, the star child turns until at last he is looking directly into the camera, meaning that this traumatic treatment is intended for all those watching the film (at least, those who do not realize that the new tool will be used against them).
There are other details that fill in this interpretation, some of which I only discovered once I realized the literal parallelism between the various coordinated appearances of celestial alignments, the monolith, the Zarathustra music, and the epiphany or realization of a new violent tool for domination. Of course, we are left no room for variant interpretations on the first transition from a primitive weapon to a far more advanced weapon, with the space ship literally replacing the bone on the screen. And this is obvious, of course, but how many people actually look at that space ship and also realize how much it looks like a gun? And of course, so much of NASA and space exploration being a hoax, pretty much the entire space exploration program has been a cover for military development of missiles and developing space as a theater of war. But of course, Kubrick is not so blatantly obvious in handling the final transitioning from the previous form of weapon to the next form of weapon: He does, however, clearly show us that the carniverous old man has had a transformative epiphany, that he has been reborn a new man, and has entered the monolith/cinema screen, and from the vantage point of the monolith (self-referencing itself as the screen we are looking at, just as in the very opening scene), we see first the moon going up, then the earth, then the star child viewing the earth, then the star child viewing us. And I might add that child has a pose and a look on its face that are just ambiguous enough to be unclear, but could reasonably be seen as sinister.
From my new point of view, the film expresses unfathomable venality, as in to prostitute one's talents for mercenary considerations. But that is the meaning at the first or autobiographical level. And Kubrick proves it through his moon landing hoax confession film The Shining. I do believe there are also two other layers of meaning. One of these is that Kubrick most certainly crafted the film also to be Masonic initiation ritual, which form it follows very closely, substituting, however, the modern scientific view of man's origins through the mechanism of evolution for the older Bible creation story used in traditional Masonry. The best revealing of this layer of meaning of the film was done by a guy named Jay Weidner, whose film "Beyond the Infinite: Kubrick's Odyssey II" is well worth the four dollar rental fee at iTunes. The third layer is the exoteric message, the one intended for the masses, which is not extremely different in essence from the esoteric ritualistic message, but is more in line with a typical sci-fi story about future technology, aliens, what constitutes whether someone is a real living being and the nature of artificial intelligence, portraying future tech devices, and things like speculating on the way man will live in the future and the totally dehumanized context he will live in, as well as the government cover up of the discovery of the monolith on the moon. These are the popular themes that most people saw and understood and took away from the film, and which fill up the vast majority of commentary and interpretations of the film over the years.
There is, as well, the small but significant embellishment of the young photographer taking photos on the moon of Dr. Floyd: he has an uncanny resemblance to the young Kubrick, who himself started in professional photography, and is wearing a suit that very much resembles the skin of a leopard, similar to the leopard in the first part of the film. As well, similar to the flash of light we see in the leopard's eyes (due to the front projection screen light), we see a flash of light reflected off the photographer's cuff links which, because of their proximity due to him holding the camera with both hands, very much resembles the pair of leopard eyes. This relates to the recurring themes of domination via violent tool usage and carnivory (with the photo camera here being linked to the later advancement of the cinema as the dominant tool par excellence, and Kubrick claiming first mastership of such tool usage). Something resembling flashing eyes also occurs in other scenes, such as in the landing scene of the ship that takes Dr. Floyd to the moon, as well as the small "eye ball" flight module that HAL uses to murder Frank.
Then there are little things like the fact that the lead ape is called Moonwatcher, and the lead astronaut's name is Bowman, the former invoking the moon, obviously, and the latter a reference to the god Apollo who was, among other things, the Greek god of archery. Both names refer to the faked moon landings that Kubrick was preparing simultaneously to 2001 and for which 2001 was serving as a research and devlopment project for. However, I don't think Kubrick made 2001 solely as a preparatory exercise for the moon landings. It may actually be the other way around: he may have agreed to do the con job in exchange for an unlimited budget and absolutely unfettered artistic autonomy. Who could ever say how many untold millions of dollars officially allotted for the Apollo missions were siphoned off for Kubrick's productions? He may have just wanted to be the first artist/occult magician of the "new tool era" to recast the ancient esoteric mystery rites into cinematic form, and the first to splice into the ritual the new evolutionary biology in place of the old creationist accounts. But he left plenty of clues woven into the visual rite to infer what he was up to, and how he himself, through the creative process, was personally participating in the age-old rite of passage that is depicted on the screen. His most unique, individual contribution to this ancient initiation rite may actually be the principle depicted in the film in parallel occurrences in which those who bludgeon everyone else for control of resources set for themselves and everyone else the course of human evolution. In short, Kubrick's outlook here could be interpreted as a very sophisticated and artistically elaborate justification for the idea that "might makes right."
The plot centered on an FBI agent investigating the murder of a young woman by her sexually abusive father. Also, a high ranking Air Force officer was involved in a top secret project, resulting in his disappearance to the "White Lodge".
