When the love of my life died a few weeks ago (sudden catastrophic health thing in an otherwise incredibly healthy person, pureblood BTW), I did a bit on online digging on how to handle grief of a spouse's sudden death.
Easily 1/3 of the online pieces that talked about "how to re-establish daily routines" suggested --going to sleep with the TV or Palm Slab on --going to sleep with the TV or Palm Slab tuned to NEWS
Familiar faces and voices.
I was so horrified I haven't looked up anything online about grief since. And these sites were written by psychologists, counselors, ministers, "mental health professionals," etc., who were literally telling hurting, aching, lost, disoriented people...to replace their spouse with the f'in godbox and its Current Events Horror Porn.
What's the difference again?
:^D
I want to see the ledger of their bank/investment firm deposits.
Been there, groaned at that.
But I also understand. I read the piece last night after seeing it in another thread. Then read it again this morning before errands, then this afternoon afterward.
And frankly, right now, I'm feeling sick and--for me--remarkably emotional about it all. There is anger. There is impatient confusion that things are still this way. There is weariness--how many nights back to October 28, 2017, losing sleep, following threads, trying to understand, digging to learn, gut reactions going "YES, THIS," and continually, repeatedly processing/downloading/releasing the vomitous sense of just how bad things are.
There is also the dim hope (should I? dare I?) that somewhere beyond my daily life, a fight for Light and Life is going on, and it's like no war ever before fought, and we are called to PRAY, and act in whatever ways seem open.
Or maybe it's like every war ever before fought, and the hacking and slashing and blowing up cities was just Shock and Awe Theater to distract from the real war: People of God, versus Powers and Principalities. Shock and Awe Theater for the cover of magazines and the nightly news cold open. Lucrative theater, that, and war debt even more so. A Constitutional Republic framed by Providence--in the crosshairs of the Adversary.
And all this is with, what, nearly SEVEN YEARS' worth of having followed Q since the very first drop on /pol/.
Also...reading Joe's piece, I have a sense of continuity that is newly, horribly welcome to me, here in the flotsam and jetsam of having suddenly, devastatingly lost the most perfect, beautiful, loved soul mate spouse of 25 years, not a month ago.
There is a sense of thanks-giving. I.e., that from the beginning I was at that place, that time, with the sometimes inexplicably mysterious/twisty life experiences God set up for me, to read, learn, discern, process what the Q team and anons were sharing. To try to share that with others. To support those who got it, and for those who didn't, try to find ways to challenge and extend their thinking. Even as I felt despair at how resistant to the message most were.
There is grotesque stinging loss, that the one person I could share all this with in real life, in the day to day, without holding back, editing, or concern about how I'd be received...is now so suddenly gone. That person would have devoured Joe's piece this week, and taken heart from it, and taught others about it.
All of this...from reading one Substack entry of one writer.
We tend to think of reading as this kinda neutral thing. You run your eyes over words on a page/screen. You take them in. You know something more than before. The harder you read, the more you learn.
But reading, like all language activity, is a gift of Logos. A transformative sacrament in one way...a spiritual challenge in another. That's real language activity, not the cheapened counterfeit type. The grunting of Big Ag food labs on the cereal box ingredients label. Pop music lyrics. Ad jingles. TDS shibboleths. Robot voices on the call tree, barring your access, herding you down pretermined cattleramps, counterfeit language.
And there are times that what one reads is so much bigger than one's entity, it just feels overwhelming. Even if one spends all of life trying to be more discerning, more informed, stretching to learn and grow, language as boot camp, pilgrimage, and holy war--------even so, there are things that are SO big, SO complex...it's...overwhelming.
This is one of them. I have always been in awe of the Q operation for daring to take on this shamanic/transformative role. And doing so, so effectively. And cheaply. (I think that's the real reason Q was reviled and propagandized against. All the MSM/deepstate trillions spend on mindf!ck...undone by a bunch of nobodies on a Mongolian basket weaving forum.)
So in closing, people who, as TaQo says right up above, inhabit "short attention span theatre"--people who read for dopamine hits--are simply not going to be able to follow certain topics. Yes indeed, it is very frustrating...though not unprecedented in the annals of Wisdom speaking to human ignorance. "Those who have ears, let them hear...."
And the Light shone in the darkness. And the darkness did not comprehend it.
God bless each and every one of you. Archangel Michael protect and deliver your warriors. Christ stretch forth your hand to shield Your People. Logos make us more courageous, effective, and skilled.
This is superb. A wonderful summary of years' worth of Q drops, proofs, deltas, comms...day after day, night after night, trying to understand, trying to figure out how to serve this massive unfolding of truth. Thank you x 1,000.
My fellow Americans, the Storm is upon us.
I should read other anons before commenting--that was what I got from that blatherblock myself.
Wait, the mayor of the District of Columbia went to the Department of Homeland Security to ask for the US Secret Service to...um...do what exactly? That word salad sounds to me like planned insurrection.
I have massive problems with the "social" "sciences," especially "psychology." But it thought it would be fun to see what Psychology Today had to say about this very very good question.
A Fragile Ego Leads to Attempts to Distort Reality
Some people have such a fragile ego, such brittle self-esteem, such a weak "psychological constitution," that admitting they made a mistake or that they were wrong is fundamentally too threatening for their egos to tolerate. Accepting they were wrong, absorbing that reality, would be so psychologically shattering that their defense mechanisms do something remarkable to avoid doing so—they literally distort their perception of reality to make it (reality) less threatening. Their defense mechanisms protect their fragile ego by changing the very facts in their mind, so they are no longer wrong or culpable.
Another place I thought of to look--Ted Kaczynski's "manifesto," in which he traced out the liberal/left mindset so well. E.g.:
“It is obvious that [leftists] are not cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality.”
Also:
The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it.
And finally:
Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power.
Did they try looking between the sofa cushions? I find all kinds of stuff in there. Sometimes money. Not that much, but maybe they're using big bills.
Oh, or maybe they should check to see if somebody put a pesky recursive formula in Excel. That can turn littler numbers into bigger ones as fast as you can say Zing Zing Zelensky!
Never forget the three thousand Americans who lost their lives that day, nor the millions more who died in the years that followed from the senseless war on the Middle East.
And, I request, we also remember those who were in Manhattan that day, and in following weeks, doing emergency and relief work...and died of horrific health problems, some many years later.
I had a dear/close friend and business colleague who was in Lower Manhattan that day in his work as an art conservator. He was giving away his services to a folk museum. He spoke something like 8 different languages, and he immediately stepped up to serve as an interpreter for the Red Cross and anyone else who needed him. He spent three weeks, trying to help people sort through things, find loved ones, get services, deal with paperwork/passport issues, navigate the chaos. It was the kind of guy he was. Helping others in any way he could. Always.
Within months of going home after that service, he started having chronic health issues--a cough that got worse and worse, e.g., and bad headaches and vision problems. Then digestive problems. In a few years he was a shadow of his former self.
He was always very healthy before 9/11. Traveled the world, careful what he ate and drank, never got sick in the winter, just one of the most energetic and robust people I ever knew.
I remember EPA head Christine Todd Whitman saying, "We have seen no readings indicating health hazard." It seemed like such a tricky way to put it. Not, "We studied it and the evidence indicates it's safe" but "We have seen no readings." I.e., we aren't bothering to get data that could cause me to have to do my job.
I still wonder how many people had their lives cut short as a result.
(three octave sub-bass):
I find your lack of faith disturbing.