War on Ideas? No - war on Communication

https://off-guardian.org/2019/10/17/social-media-ground-zero-for-the-war-on-ideas/

Title comment:

'War on ideas' is also an idea. The 'war' is on freedom of communication on proprietary internet sites - and ultimately a proprietary  controlled internet. Where does 'ground zero' come in? As for HOW the war is waged - look to doublethink running unchecked as a currency of deceit - NOT to the false flagged 'causes'  that are derivative expressions of a deeper slavery pursued as freedom.

War on ideas would thus be war on consciousness itself - by which ideas arise so as to deny it ability to threaten the idea of dominance as denial of others. At some point this can be recognised as identifying with the dead against the living - or BACKWARDS! Until such point the mind runs  its world backwards in belief it is right and necessary.

Determining what is real, good, true, worthy:

When anyone in a position of power selects some ideas as  officially 'valid' while rejecting other ideas as invalid they impose a rule on thought that becomes hierarchical in deriving its validity from an extension of an accepted meaning. 

Unlike discernment within life - judgement upon or over life uses comparison and rejection from its past 'meanings' as the basis for sustaining an exclusive sense of right or need. (Private agenda).

In other words the evil is used to justify the asserted 'good'.

This mentality is the basis of 'divide and rule'.

Relational communication has a living context for truth in terms of resonant recognition. Rule-bound or rule filtered communications operate more like the algorithms of the article above. SYSTEM is always some form of rules applied - and internalised systemic thinking operates a 'war of ideas' in which conflicting ideas are held in the mind as doublethink or self-contradictions that inherently and inevitably war with reality under invested identity in survival set over and against 'evil others' and yet all such division unites as one in its war on truth or exposure of its lack of true substance - and will keep conflict running by all or any means to divert and engage attention in a fictional identity conflict.

An inducement to enter the proprietary parlour of another to partake of extended powers conferred by another is a pact with deceit. Not that you cant communicate through such means but that someone else holds the means to control, choke it or bury it and use it for unintended purposes

https://off-guardian.org/2019/10/16/at-the-feet-of-mammon/#comment-98433

Tolkien foresaw the consequence of substituting the power of the word by a dark-crafted technology of deceit. The true power of the word is to extend a recognition of shared worth. The true sustainability of the truly fitting. What we have running now as general currency of acceptance is fitting a sacrificial population to the sustainability of a corruption of the word. False thinking accepted and run in place of true. "Tidying your room" might be taken deeper so as to accept responsibility for your consciousness - in any moment of noticing - such as to consciously embrace meanings or ideas accepted - and thus given witness to by our responses of reaction.

Everyone is a learner. Everyone is a teacher. But the attempt to learn the false must teach ourselves and each other awry.

Deciding what you teach on the basis of what you choose to learn is in some sense coming back online after a period of running AWOL or as autopilot from old inherited programs. Where do we give our focus and why? To see the errors of others - such as a social structures of control that effectively deny us a voice - merely as a call to judge and blame or attempt to shame into compliance - is to identify in thoughts of powerlessness, denial and rage - with associated depression or damage from suppression or indulgence.

Now it may be that there are some who like being 'Them" in the role of perceived power - but the fact is that when we frame everything in terms of what 'They' do - we give responsibility and power away by our own definitions - by our own word.

You may say that I can meet consequences as a result of my acts - such as are meted out as social exclusion to any who don't comply and conform who are in any position of influence. Well everything we think, say and do has consequence. Is it then not better to be able to stand in our own life and meet our consequences on our terms, rather than be defined under terms and conditions that are alien to our true desire?

If there are 'win-win' solutions or practical step toward the possibility of solutions we cannot now imagine - then I seek them. Debts are not only financial and the consequences of taking from others and for ourself what belongs rightly to them is to become indebted. These entanglements are complex and part of a false solution to them is limitation, degradation and denial of consciousness - over which an elitism seeks its sustainability. Many here can see this in their world, but can you see it in the structure of your own consciousness?