haha fridge PhD diploma time

dont take this too seriously, of course, but do realise what it says - because the synthesis is too complete (spanning too many domains), and because i didn’t waste 250 pages explaning the same, it wouldn’t clear the bar

https://claude.ai/share/fecf3631-2dfa-4dd0-9032-a4e6f8e9b2ad

i think the masons are back, commenting on my substack. certainly feel that way. i’ve muted a number of them in the past, because they refuse to argue the core point.

version 3.

i think it’s done, now. even sorted them in the correct order.

the only defense here is full visibility. exposure.

they developed this through distributed general systems theory components, standardised through ISO.

i made this point in my essay on maxwell. i stand by this even stronger after having dived a final time through marx.

https://escapekey.substack.com/p/maxwell?utm_source=publication-search

yesterday’s substack stats:

facebook+twitter+google = 0.84% of all my impressions - down from 0.87% the previous day. four days in a row with less than 1% of all traffic.

i see, so you’re gradually reducing it to zero, believing that by doing so gradually, it’s not visible as all hell?

https://t.me/escapekey/4149

i keep writing the same essays, over and over and over again, from different angles. it suddenly appears to me that i’ve seen that entire marx table before, just from a different perspective. but that essay needs to be properly developed, slowly and methodologically, because of the implications.

Marx’s closed-loop model system which works on basis of alleged prediction MUST eliminate the independent price signal, because otherwise there's unpredictability baked into the pie

but in reality, by eliminating the market price signal it doesnt eliminate lack of predictability, it just moves the issue elsewhere

now that twitter’s moved grok off site, and demand payment for ‘expert’ analysis, i’m not completely sure there’s a point to my twitter account anymore. might delete it.

logged out for the time being

PDF

back to 'moral and dogma', and it just confirms the same picture, from a different angle.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130410065541/http://rosecroix.org.au/gen-62.pdf

Gloria Dei est celare verbum

so the story in the media goes that the us attempted to seize an iranian tanker, shots were fired in retaliation, and now CENTCOM acts all innocnet

it's just non-stop lies. the Iraqi information minister clearly works in some current american capacity

so now that labour and the tories are suffering election collapse in local elections, the BBC decides to barely put it on the front page?

hah the bs ‘hantavirus’ episode is of sufficient importance for twice as much space in more premium locations than local elections in the uk which don’t go the fabian parasites’ way

marx's system of flow in essence ends up with atheism and materialism, where the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' is integrated through infrastructure

ashlah runs through religion, which aligns with hermann cohen, who saw religion as a channel of 'moral' encoding

but ashlag also routes through laitman, who then through burstein and negoita integrates with kabbalah system theory which leads to knowledge systems, AI, finance, and social systems

all three lead to a population processed through a clearing function against conditions it didn't set and can't audit. and the primary tool in this regard is conditional CBDCs

and it all traces back to moses hess

choose one or the other, wont matter. all end up in the same place

hess, marx, lenin, bogdanov, leontief, ashlag, laitman, burstein, negoita… every single one works to solve the same problem: how to surveil and manage flows so that the output serves the alleged ‘social good’

Hess: money as social blood, flows must serve the common good
Marx: flows must serve the workers through administrative allocation
Lenin: accounting and control - flows must be visible and directed
Bogdanov: universal organisational science - all flows in all domains must be integrated.
Leontief: input-output matrices - all flows quantified
Ashlag: flows must serve divinity through ‘altruistic bestowal’
Laitman: flows must align with the laws of lights and vessels
Burstein and Negoita: flows must be processed through sephirotic fuzzy logic - computationally optimised bestowal

every single one worked to direct flows for ‘the social good’ - and no-one is ever asked what they believe that 'social good' should be about. that's dictated through dubious 'science' which you're not allowed to call into question, lest you ‘endanger our collective future’

we could even include the freemasons here as well.