More on Ordinary Communication and the Doubly Reflected Communication in Religious Philosophy
Judith Butler’s philosophical thesis continued on from where Foucault prematurely abandoned his work can be used in a myriad of situations. In her book “The Force of Non-Violence” what I take away from this writing is periodically witnessed in one of the most commonly manifested situations based on a delusion. Historical forms of delusions of evil, as we had seen prior to the Women’s Rights Movement, and during the years of imposed black slavery, but are not limited to these events solely but also make their way into the everyday lives of individuals, who, suffering some type of psychic loss that forces them into foreclosure against another person, group of people, or an entire family. Butler wrote,
“That is my thesis, my way of offering a supplement to Foucault by bringing Fanon to bear on the question of how racial schemas enter into the racial figurations of what is living. Of course, there is a vast continuum of grievability, and populations can be grieved in one context and remain unmarked in another; and some modes of grieving may be acknowledged while others are dismissed or go unrecognized. And still, the dominant schemas by which the value of life is allocated rely on a modulation of grievability, whether or not that metric is ever named.”
The innate logic in this above quote is one that implies the force that was applied against my person in the form of electronic targeted assaults and psychotronic torture coming under the umbrella term of gang stalking is one that lies on the fringes of social acceptance. The dominant schemas by which the value of life is allocated rely on a modulation of grievability, whether or not that metric is ever named. I am forced to wonder why my “grievablility” arrived after I put on 75 lbs. and seemed to begin in intensity towards the end of 2015? Why is now the right time for “safeguarding” but not “memorializing” the necessary preservation of my life? Could it be because someone was “found out” and murder has no statute of limitations? (That is to say, why in 2015, when electromagnetic assault intensity increased and psychotronic torture increased could someone supposedly say, “That is because your’s is a life worth living, worth preserving”; for I cannot believe that human torture expresses this philosophy. In fact, the whole reason behind human torture is to express the complete opposite meaning.) That is to say, “These are lives that ought to expunged, snuffed out because they are a mere nuisance to the community in which we live.”
In psychoanalysis we sometimes discuss “the phantasmagorical of delusions” and as racial phantasmagoria operates, it also points to its signifiers, and could unwittingly unveil other delusional phantasmagorias. One of the dominant personalities that manipulated the U.S. psychic stage in this light was then President Donald Trump. Donald Trump’s presidency took part in dual schemas, one political schema, and one Black and White / Immigrant schema. During this time, U.S. surface tensions of America were coming to a head, and the political schema where Democratic tensions were also heated coming to a head. Both were at work in this phantasmagoria between Republican and Democrat, immigrants and Black, and White lives. “The attribution of an essence to either a racial, political, or ethnic minority can be a way of negating the value of that life, but also of negating in advance the very possibility of apprehending that life as a life.” The very perception of the essence of Nancy Pelosi had already been tried and blamed prior to January 6, 2021, and when the mob sought her out, forthrightly, with a lynching rope we understood its implied meaning. We can see how it works as a thought sequence, crystallized in the moving images of history, entering into a deliberation process that ultimately slams the gavel to negate the life claim of the person whose life is at stake — how the phantasmagoria of the political, racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientation can operate within the metric of grievablility. We can recount it in the sequence of the life of Eric Garner when he was placed into a chokehold by police in the United States in 2014, and then audibly announced he could not breathe and visibly can be seen to be unable to breathe, and it is registered by everyone at the scene that he will not survive the prolongation of that police chokehold, which then, after the announcement strengthens to become a stranglehold, strangulation, murder.
If he was female, naked, and in the process of making porn it would be called a snuff film. What is it exactly in the sequence of innocent victims like Erick Garner, George Floyd, and every female prostitute that has been strangled by someone as she places herself in a vulnerable position? Is it that walking into a grocery store, or the simple act of walking down the street, or accepting a strange man’s advances in a bar make it likely the victim will attack? “Or is it simply that this life is one that can be snuffed out because it is not considered a life, never was a life, does not fit the norm of life that belongs to the political, racial, ethnic or gender schema; hence, because it does not register as a grievable life, a life worth preserving?”
In the frequent deployment of indirect communication and the structuring of ambiguity. The distinction between direct and indirect communication is to be drawn in terms of the difference between unequivocal (clearly stated) and ambiguous language (unclear, silent semiotics, and veiled meaning which expresses, as a characteristic of the perpetrator a high degree of sadism). This connects philosophy to the silent semiotics (ambiguous dialectic) of electronic targeted assaults and psychotronic torture as a form of indirect communication as well as to the philosophical theories of Michelle Boulous Walker and also, too, interpreting visual arts by analyzing signs, symbols, signifiers, and iconography. In my case symbols for sex (sex symbols).
Those individuals who are being electronically targeted, electronically physically assaulted from a distance, and suffering the effects of psychotronic torture through a form of gang stalking have come under the “charge” of another similar to Eric Garner and George Floyd coming under the charge of police authority. They have become “Prisoners” in a game that continues to play out in the life of the Targeted Individual, or at least a fractional portion of a population with whom contends with this silent semiotics of language. This is, of course, is nothing more than a recapitulation of some past perceived violation by the perpetrators of such crimes similar to the protagonist’s actions in the movie “Prisoners.” The Signifier’s actions point back to the past toward some unresolved issue(s) in which the life of the signified has been rendered as “ungrievable” and “not a life”. This is nothing more than a recapitulation, signaling a profound lack of introjection and working through the original traumata. It is no different with electronic physical assaults and psychotronic torture suffered through gang stalking.
In silent semiotics, ‘ordinary communication, objective thinking, has no secrets; only doubly reflected subjective thinking has secrets; that is, all its essential content is essentially a secret.’ This doubly reflected subjective thinking plays out in acts of gang stalking, electronic physical assaults, cybercrime, and gang stalking. Why? Because of the sense in which it is directed not only towards abstract ideas, propositions, arguments, and the like but also towards the concrete particularity of the individual thinker. This sets up the ultimate gaslight over inferior populations such as the mentally ill and those lacking advanced levels of education with which to understand and describe such phenomenon (incarcerated populations).
The distinction drawn in the above paragraph is between what is accidentally and what is essentially secret, and private and the claim that what is indirectly communicated is essentially private. And my personal comment on this point would be, I would not change the word “private” but also add the word “personal.”
I believe Soren Kierkegaard’s main idea in his work Philosophical Fragments is as follows:
“But God can’t make himself understood because he’s completely unlike every other human being. God has not sinned, whereas every human being has. This is a paradox but the ultimate paradox is that a single individual who looks just like everyone else is God. “The thesis that God has existed in human form, was born, and grew up; is certainly the paradox in the strictest sense, the absolute paradox.” Christianity is also a paradox as well as the forgiveness of sins. Kierkegaard is saying that the Moment the individual comes in contact with the Paradox is of utmost importance because this is where the decision is made. This is his Either/Or Moment. Either believe or be offended. Reason is attempting to understand the Paradox but comes to its own limit and can’t understand what it knows nothing about.”
Here is the reason why “God” (the purveyors of electronic targeted physical assaults and psychotronic torture, as well as cyber actors committing cybercrime) wants to be known but can’t possibly make himself understood. It is because he isn’t real, or rather, he presents himself as a “ghost” or an “imaginary character.” Since he is rather an imaginary object, a ghost, an alien, some monster from a fairytale, or some superhero with superpowers he fails to exist in reality. He is an ordinary man and not an imaginary being. And herein lies the philosophical problematic when it comes to electronic targeted physical assaults and psychotronic torture and events similar to the Colonial Pipeline hack. The perpetrator, because he chooses to veil himself and hide his identity, can neither be wholly known neither. For he is likening himself to an imaginary “God-like” character or superhero. Similar to the very concept of “God,” its meaning presents us with a contradiction in terms. He, like God, in one breathe says, “I love you my child, but dare you disobey me and I will strike you down dead.” And this of course cannot be love. Love by its very definition is in direct conflict with the imaginary character because it bears all things, even the painful, uncomfortable truth it so desperately seeks to avoid from introjecting. That is, it is hell-bent on Truth and philosophical knowledge and understanding.
It is such a simple and quick act to become psychically foreclosed against another person. Yet electronic targeted physical assaults and psychotronic torture in the act of gang stalking requires timing, planning, precision, and intelligence to pull off the targeting of a fractional portion of the United States’ population known as Targeted Individual. How would you explain it?
