Free Slaves

The western human-animal world cherishes freedom more than dignity. Rape has to be proven in a harsh and degrading sexual inquisition where the woman is emotionally re-raped and de-robed, and her private parts psychologically exposed to public gaze and comment. Her word and her trauma are considered, by the men who draw up society’s laws, insufficient evidence to sentence a man. Man-made laws are devised to protect the status quo of male law-framers and their cultural morality.

The cultural-moral genealogy of western, and English, laws can be traced to the Quran, Torah and Bible – books that were written by educated men bereft of divine awakening.

Until the late 1990s, a woman in the west could be beaten at home, and the United Kingdom’s police forces found excuses not to intervene on her behalf. She was owned. Mentally, spiritually, emotionally, and physically she was owned first by her father and then by her husband.

From the 1930s onwards, western, and in particular English, doctors led the way in imposing rules of conduct and behaviour on women – for example, forbidding them from expressing pain, stress, and agony during labour. Indian women who entered maternity wards were screamed and shouted at, and spoken down to by the nursing staff, for moving their bodies into positions that alleviated the pain of giving birth. English women, baulking at the naturalness of their Indian counterparts’ expression, claimed that they were somehow superior in dealing with pain!

Ironically, the British Medical Council now advises women in labour to express their discomfort, and contort their bodies to ensure maximum comfort during labour. ‘Enlightened’ staff in maternity wards also encourage women to express their agony vocally. The penny has dropped, and it is now widely acknowledged that screaming mutes pain and can in fact increase a person’s pain threshold.

A question worth asking is: Would women-run institutions have turned women into a conveyor belt of reproduction, like chickens laying the mandatory egg, as the medical men of yesteryear deemed fit?

No. I firmly believe they would not have entertained such an idea.

Another question worth asking is: What precipitated pregnant womens collusion in the conveyor-belt mentality imposed by men?

Free slavery.

Free slavery is a form of mental domination, where the subject is intellectually browbeaten into submission on the basis of ‘evidence’ marshaled by the educated. Postgraduate researchers come up with one fandangled idea that marks them out from the rest of the crowd, and institutions impose it as a kind of gold standard, the norm. In the context of the post-1930s English maternity mindset, pregnant women in labour felt they could not act contrary to what the ‘experts’ demanded. Hence, they were free slaves.

Similarly, immigrants and other powerless people in society – though they may feel themselves to be free to all intents and purposes – are treated as if they are non-people. They exist in the imagination (and in policy) as Schrodinger’s immigrant: too lazy to work while also taking our jobs.

Consider the Grenfall Tower fire in west London and the attacks that preceded it. Are we really to believe that these are unconnected? The fire at a predominantly Muslim tower block occurred just weeks after a spate of Muslim radical attacks elsewhere in London and in Manchester.

We are asked to believe that the Nazi gas chamber style cooking of a largely Muslim ethnic minority living in Grenfell Tower, mostly on welfare benefits, was triggered by a faulty appliance. I know from experience how regularly appliances in my own home malfunction and the brakes on my car fail. It is easy to create such situations. Trained security experts can enter a standard home and improvise an incident to take place at a later date. In Grenfell Tower, the fire started in a kitchen, and transferred itself along the outside of the building around right-angled corners.

I hope I am wrong, but it seems to me that accelerants were placed at convenient points to aid the progress of the flames around the tower. If my immediate premise and instincts, while watching the inferno unfold, are correct, then the security experts working for the state apparatus manufactured the Grenfell Tower deaths – of course, without the knowledge of government ministers. Until categorically proven otherwise, this must be understood as mass murder committed by renegade security personnel in order to settle scores following the carnage caused by Muslim radicals in preceding weeks.

But why?

Because immigrants and other powerless peoples, as I stated earlier, comprise a dispensable non-class, while believing they are free.

Globally, races live as slaves, albeit that they flourish financially and academically throughout the span of western, and especially the English, empire. The fact is that their lifestyle and success are micro-managed. Only a selected few are moved up the career ladder, promoted as window-dressing, and sometimes even given top positions as long as they spout European propaganda. However, when the powers-that-be tire of their presence, some personal weakness or other is brought to light, their impartiality and integrity are attacked, and ‘proof’ is wheedled out of some dark corner in order to dethrone them. Far graver misdeamours by a European race person in the same position of course go unpunished. The point is that there is no possibility of ability-linked advancement amongst the race-slaves; but they are made to believe that their successes are their own.

This is how free slavery works.

Indians encouraged into British East Africa are a prime example of free slavery. While the strings of power, and total arms control, were in the hands of the Europeans in East Africa, an Indian mercantile class was lured into running the artificially manufactured country. Kenya’s businesses and entire civil service structure were managed by Indians, while the British retained ultimate control.

In free slavery, people are compelled to follow a template for appropriate thought and conduct set by slave-masters. They are encouraged to believe that they are in charge of making decisions, when in fact these decisions are the inevitable outcome of the cultural logic and deductive process imposed on them. Which is to say that they are slaves to a system of thought and practice, but falsely believe themselves to be functioning as free individuals. They are dupes, compelled into a system that’s been rigged to subjugate them while instilling in them the illusion they are free.

The illusion of freedom has systematically corroded and destroyed intuitive-based racial-cultural psyches, de-culturalising and de-humanising people, and replacing primordial dignity with mimicry of the slave-master races. Witness Afro-Caribbeans in the western world – they have lost their language, culture, and heritage. Their DNA lineage has been virtually destroyed. But for a public announcement to the effect, they are a new species of humanity.

Global free slaves haven’t fared much better. Unceremoniously, systematically, and clinically, these races are perniciously engaged in their own psyche-gene editing. Their bio-organism is being thoroughly defused, and their intuitive-psyche capabilities curtailed. They are successfully being groomed into becoming non-beings.

Global free slaves are turning their backs on their natural heritage of divinity; they no longer entertain the idea of a seer-divine birth. They are culpable in pioneering a genome with a lower-awakening configuration, where the divine creative field and its attributes are diminishing. They are helping turn themselves into aberrant beings.

The narrowing of the neuro-thinking range is creating a landscape where the multi-gene is being replaced by a narrower bandwidth, where psychical mutations are rendered useless.

The only remaining difference, that of outer skin pigment, is also being procedurally tackled. The implementation of pigment-less skin, where once pigmented skin was hailed as a natural protection against the sun’s and earth’s electro-magnetic presence, is now a targeted and desirable outcome. Global free slaves will become like the race Europeans of the preceding generation. But then what?

The fear of artificial intelligence, created by race-European numbskulls chasing ever elusive financial gain, is a danger that human-animals have already suffered in our collective past.

You will not like the next paragraph…

Race-European pigment was created to make them stand them out from other human-animals: as a destructive psyche-genome (for use of a better word) that compels that bio-configuration to kill, destroy, and amalgamate; to overlook commonsense; and to champion artificial intelligence, where synthetic blood-like fluid (as yet awaiting formulation) will aid in developing an autopoietic AI race, culture, and communication with a sense of self-worth…all at the cost of natural-pigmented human-animals.

However, in tandem with that technical fear of AI, the viral/bacterial violence awaiting human-animals poses a far greater and imminent threat. Race-Europeans have, in their haste and haughtiness to eradicate viruses and bacteria, instead consolidated the eruption of those life-forms’ mastering control mechanism. I will not at this moment share what that controlling mechanism is. However, history is in the process of repeating itself all over again, unless race-Europeans amend their attitude to existence and forego the belief that they exist above the natural, creative force and energy system.

My humble warning…

It will take only a single bacterial attack on the new look-alike pigment-less humans, who will be unable to defend themselves against such a nature-induced attack, to end human civilisation as we know it.

Advertisements

Reflections on proposed caste discrimination legislation: or ‘What is this thing called caste?’

The question I put to the British parliament is this; Why is her Majesty and the entire stratum she occupies not included in the proposed caste law, and why is it limited to race and aimed only at South Asians as it is currently tabled?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary definitions of caste are as follows:

  • One of the hereditary social classes in Hinduism that restrict the occupation of their members and their association with members of other castes.
  • A division of society based on differences in wealth, inherited rank, or privilege, profession, occupation or race.
  • The position conferred by caste standing.
  • A system of rigid social stratification characterized by hereditary status, endogamy, and social barriers sanctioned by custom, law, or religion.

My argument:

Please read Caste, Class and Community in India: An Ethnography Approach by Balmurli Natrajan (William Paterson University).

The article’s argument supports my view that we are confusing class/economic distinctions with caste, such that the economic status of social groups is being projected onto, and even conflated with, social caste.

The fact is that like-minded social groups gel and function together as they have intimate nuanced understanding that cannot be accessed by other groups. To put it another way: we humans are neither psychologically nor socially identical, and do not share the same life experiences. This does not, at least in various Indian cultures, emerge as prejudice but is rather a form of snobbishness verging at times on hostility.

Precisely because of this, it makes sense therefore that individual social groups practice social endogamy and establish their own kinship clubs – Gurdwaras are a case in point. And they should be encouraged in doing so.

My point is that caste is a paradigm encased in structured cosociality rather than in subjugation and unequal power relations.

(And if we are talking about the latter, it is worth noting that I have repeatedly experienced rejection by well-to-do so-called lower castes – which blows apart the idea that oppression works in one direction only!)

The problem with the proposed legislation against caste discrimination is that it is embedded in the notion that caste is a form of unequal class/economics relations. It simply does not recognise the cosociality of caste as a valid, necessary and comforting form of in-group identity.

But consider this: in playgroups, babies can clearly be seen exhibiting strong likes and dislikes towards each other; they congregate in like-minded groups. Who taught them such prejudice? No-one. We human-animals psychologically attach ourselves to, and associate and intermingle with like minds.

This is not prejudice. What precisely it is, we have yet to sort out.

Now, for those who say caste as practiced today – in the form of class/economic inequality and hostility – is a historical phenomenon within South Asian societies… go learn your history!

Buddhism, Sikhism and Vedism in earlier times – before Bharat lost her substantial lands and succumbed to successive periods of colonization – did not apply caste divisions as we understand them today.

Indeed, caste division is not ‘Indian’ at all. It began in the west as a form of rigid social organisation whereby people were not permitted to work outside the occupational bandwidths set by the state, as happening to trades people in the United States. The Roman Empire relied on this to protect itself from implosion. Thus, caste refers in this sense to established western practices of restricting people to certain occupational domains, which restricted them socially and economically.

Such casteism continues to operate in the west today, as a cursory examination of recent English history illustrates. The cost of moving beyond the barriers of one’s caste was experienced by King Edward VIII when he deigned to marry Wallis Simpson – he had to abdicate. Even Prince Charles was not permitted to marry at will, but was shepherded into a marriage of convenience.

All of this is not to say that caste is not an aspect of Indian cultures. But as I noted earlier, it was certainly not a feature of earlier Buddhist, Sikh or Vedic societies, especially not in the western form of restricting people to particular occupational bandwidths.

Originally, in Bharat, children were given into the care of faith-teachers whose task was to find the appropriate occupation and role of their wards, and to encourage them to fulfil that. So, a farmer’s child with artisan skills would be encouraged in that direction, while the child of unskilled workers would move into farming if they exhibited the abilities for such work. It followed that people did not necessarily follow in their parents’ footsteps; they moved across groupings freely based on their skills-set.

It also follows that parents did not prize financial solvency when looking for life-partners for their children, rather they laid greater store by a prospective son- or daughter-in law’s capacity to manage their affairs responsibly and maturely.

However, older western societies have come to exert a strong influence on the modern construct that is Hinduism, which is itself the product of a socio-political revolution against the perceived rigidities of Vedic practices. Ironically, Hindusim has curated the kind of casteism for which the whole of India has become renowned, and which it erroneously embraces as an inalienable and intrinsic aspect of itself.

Consequently, we forget that caste refers to a bandwidth of in-group intimacies that in fact have been vital in enabling the successful transnational flow of people. Sikhs and others who moved to East Africa or to the United Kingdom were intrepid aspirants, but they were only able to ease the isolation that migration brings by congregating with others who shared their language, diet, rites and rituals, and who could advise them of local mores and provide a network of support.

Against the cosociality that caste traditionally referred to in older Indian societies and cultures, is the highly stratified system of difference which it exhibits in the west and which we forget to call out because we are so busy misunderstanding and denigrating our own eastern cultural heritages and practices.

And if we are in doubt as to the rigid boundaries that caste builds in the modern western world, let’s consider how our kids from North America and England emerge from university with degrees – equipping them to practice some trade or other, but which actively preclude them from switching trade or following another occupational strand. For that, they have to go right back to university and re-train, and get re-certified.

The same restrictions apply ofcourse to trades-people. Since the emphasis is on economic security and socio-economic mobility, very few people get to change occupational track despite showing flair and having accumulated skill-sets that make them ideal for jobs other than those they’ve been certified to do. The moral degeneracy of this situation is that it stratifies people, restricting them ‘to their own kind’. Yet, when they embody such stratification and hierarchy, we call them out and propose anti-caste legislation. When the system itself enforces this, why blame the people for imbibing it?!

And to what degree will anti-caste legislation be enforced? Will Gurdwaras have to provide a register of how many people of other castes (cosocial cultural groupings, as they themselves see it) attend in order to stay on the right side of the law? What counts as discrimination? Will I, as somebody who has repeatedly experienced discrimination from so-called lower castes, be safe-guarded and be able to pursue my case under law?

Will the British monarchy be allowed to continue to exist in its closed forms, while the average person on the street gets vilified for belonging to a group they know intimately and feel a sense of support, security and belonging with?

Clearly, I am missing the point of the anti-caste legislation, because it feels to me very much like a stick with which to beat Indians. And the best thing is, we Indians are culpable in this, because we know nothing of our own history or that of caste as a phenomenon.