Logans Run. I mention that film a lot, and give it thought often even though I only saw it a few years ago. And where we find ourselves now in society, leads me to wonder if we are in the pre stages of such a dastardly idea, as we wonder with many a ‘storyline’ these days.

The premise if you don’t know it, is a large group of people live in a domed city, and have implants in their palm, which turns red when they turn 30 (in the book it was 21). Marking the age of being extinguished, which they wrap up as an ascension of sorts called the Carousel, and keep everyone placated and simple throughout their lives to keep the cycle going. Until someone does manage to break through it all. It’s a great film and much more to it.

The terms that get used these days for where they want to steer society, the grandiose ideas of the global organisations heading them, sometimes make me wonder. And although this does fall into the conspiracy theory pile, I still give it thought. Agenda21/30. It could simply be what it says, enacted in 1921 set to run and complete by 2030 – not started in 2021 as some speculate. I also separated the wording in my mind. So, it becomes ‘A Gender 30’. Thinking just perhaps they might be working towards one gender, to go with their one world everything. They blur the lines so much; it fits neatly into the future ideas for a separated completely homogeneous part of society. And it could well be, those type of places already exist, where people have been grown and manipulated in a secret separate society, and if you look around, it seems that it is the case. So only partly conspiracy theory then it seems, because we are very clearly being steered by a selected group who have been ‘educated’ differently and do wish to impose their ideals on people. ‘Smart’ cities and other things with that prefix, are not smart for us, but for them.

They have never had the interest of the individual in their mind, it appears to be a collective they are working towards, and if they ever do appear to embrace individualism, it serves a purpose. The idea becomes mainstream, indulged, distorted and ultimately corrupted into the groupthink. Sounds very Borgish to me, you will assimilate. And with the new word on the street for the future augmented ‘human’ being Homoborgensis, you may see why my mind might come to these conclusions. And if you read my previous articles, I have already speculated on this, but every day seems to herald new information or research which ties in, or is at least painting the picture of that occurring. Anything that seems to be about helping small groups isn’t what they are about, it’s the group as a whole they are thinking about, and you either serve a purpose or are in their way, with both resulting in being expendable. We would do well to not forget it.

(c) K Wicks

There seems to be much debate at the moment over what it is to be a Woman, and that people suddenly seem unable to define what that is and how it differs from a Man. And equally, I’m sure we will have issues with the word man soon as well, because you know. Equality. Even in confusion apparently, we should be equal. However, it is an odd reality to see grown men, and yes, women, trying and find words to use other the perfectly good ones we already have in use. The fact that a small group of society, who are not women, try to make it a taboo word, isn’t going down too well. And correctly so, it seems a rather deviant and shifty move to try and commandeer the term woman and what goes with it, while at the same time trying to stop it being used in its applicable context. From where I am sitting, it looks a lot like ‘imitate to infiltrate’ and is not for any good purpose. And it’s odd, to want to be accepted as something you are actively trying to erase, shout down and not allow as they are, as if the majority don’t see it as a tactic of just getting your own way, in the game of society. Acceptance needs to be within yourself and should never be expected from anyone else, or required. Be happy in your own skin they used to say, until suddenly they had ways to make lots of money in offering you ‘new skin’, in the form of make-up, clothes, jewellery, cosmetic surgery, lifestyle, etc. Money, money, money. If they couldn’t make any money from all this, do you think they would be in the slightest bit interested if someone felt sad, or depressed, or at odd with themselves internally. And do you think, that once they realised they could encourage those things in people, and it would make them lots of money, that they just shook their head and said, oh no, we couldn’t do that, it would be unethical?

We are a product of our environment they say, and I guess they gave it away with the wording. We are a product to them, to be manipulated and steered at every possible opportunity for the benefit of their profits. I’ll share another paragraph from the book I am reading to give you an idea of just what they think of us, and how they went about spending billions of dollars, just to work out how to make us spend more money and consume more. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it, but like they say, you’ve got to spend money to make money.

The Hidden Persuaders – “Thus it was that merchandisers of many different products began developing a startling new view of their prospective customers. People’s subsurface desires, needs, and drives were probed in order to find their points of vulnerability. Among the subsurface motivating factors found in the emotional profile of most of us, for example, were the drive to conformity, need for oral stimulation, yearning for security. Once these points of vulnerability were isolated, the psychological hooks were fashioned and baited and placed deep in the merchandising sea for unwary prospective customers”.

Quite shocking really, but not surprising. They have been working out who you are before you even knew, helping to steer and shape the desired outcome, check out my other article Nudge, nudge for a little more on current methods being used to force compliance in a more communistic approach.

But back to the current issue about the ability to use words that have a meaning, because some people don’t like the meaning or definition, because it doesn’t define them. Like I said, odd times. To me it’s like insisting you join a chess club, then moan all the time about the people playing chess, and start insisting they should be playing darts. So, instead of being logical and joining the darts club, or starting one, they bully and hound the chess players until they either give up and leave, or give in and stop playing chess and start playing darts. It might seem like a silly analogy, but that is how it seems. And I won’t lie, there appears to be an awful lot of issues towards women, coming from people who claim to want to be one. And by trying to dismiss concerns around it only seems to confirm there is a problem, otherwise it would be a normal open discussion or debate.

But are we just the sum of our sex, our sexual interests and our anatomy? Does that completely define who we are as they are telling us it should? We seem rather stuck on the perception of the external presentation of ourselves, trying very desperately in some cases to convey on the outside what is on the inside. I wonder why that is. And why it seems to be pushed as a dominating agenda in the public mainstream, encouraging that people need to be validated because of who they are, whatever that should be. But why? It is not important to me that people see on the outside how I feel on the inside, I am not a greenhouse. Showing your emotions is one thing, or wearing your heart on your sleeve as they used to put it, but trying to be a see-through entity that everyone can and should know and fully understand by just looking at you, is weird. And some people having, what appear to be full-blown tantrums or mental breakdowns in public (and private I guess), and displaying very aggressive language and threats sometimes, because someone mis-labelled their exterior in their view, is just too far out, beyond the realms of normal and severely lacking in any etiquette. Are they of such a limited emotional capacity that they simply cannot cope when encountering a normal interaction in the ordinary society most of us know or a differing view to their own? Or are they genuinely expecting everyone else around them just know what they are doing, how they are feeling, what they trying to be? And that goes for anyone who is trying to externalise their inner self, and then expects people around them to ‘act accordingly’ to pander to it, and I guess, stroke their ego, or alter-ego as may be the case in some instances.

Now more than ever is it important to know who you are and how you feel, not because someone told you to, or because you are expected to, but because you know it within yourself. Because as I have written above, there are forces at play looking to find, exploit and manipulate your vulnerabilities, just for the purpose the Consumerism.

(c) K Wicks