Whether you are an Iroquois and Black or African, what is the answer? Is your cousin and you see the ignorant people trying to hurt you, hurt him. There is the story of the French servant from Malta who worked for two families raising children. He was required to leave when the children turned 18. He had no idea what he was going to do and became very embittered against his owners. He was never allowed to have a family of his own. He was a bit more neanderthal and was not in the propensity and proclivity for family yet of his own but , like a machine, he knew how to cook, clean, wash, buy clothing and take the children to school or piano lessons. He was told to imagine they were his own. But, he tended to resent them for things like ownership, legitimacy and place in the family and also inheritance. He wanted to inherit Luke the children. He had his salary and was told to give a small sum to them if he believed they were his children. He stole from the mother's satchel when she came back from market where she sold honey and candles from the family farm. They let him stay anyway. Read Rousseau on family. They shot him as he would not leave when asked. They missed but he was injured in the process and then he kept harassing the family. It is just that the father wanted to now raise his children with all of the hard work done with the tying of laces and wiping the mud off of boots. The servant came back and killed the entire family when he said he did not want to be rejected. But, the job was over. The contract is concluded. You had 18 years of work. That was good. If you understand and do not argue, you would usually get a job as a foot men on carriages or in the Royal Mail since you were faithful. You pray for the children and say hello to them. You get invited to their weddings. Maybe you meet with them and have a laugh at the pub or at church as they grow and change into older members of society. Maybe the son will ask you to watch his children and take them to music school. This is positive. But, instead you say you fear looking up to him. What does that mean? Where are you if you are looking up to him? Instead, you have been impersonating the son in a Court of law Who are you? What are you? Then, you could start your own family. This is the ancestry of a certain anthropology.

Whether you are an Iroquois and Black or African, what is the answer?  Is your cousin and you see the ignorant people trying to hurt you, hurt him.    There is the story of the French servant from Malta who worked for two families raising children.  He was required to leave when the children turned 18.  He had no idea what he was going to do and became very embittered against his owners. He was never allowed to have a family of his own. He was a bit more neanderthal and was not in the propensity and proclivity for family yet of his own but , like a machine, he knew how to cook, clean, wash, buy clothing and take the children to school or piano lessons.  He was told to imagine they were his own.  But, he tended to resent them for things like ownership, legitimacy and place in the family and  also inheritance.  He wanted to inherit Luke the children.  He had his salary and was told to give a small sum to them if he believed  they were his children.  He stole from the mother's satchel when she came back from market where she sold honey and candles from the family farm. They let him stay anyway.     Read Rousseau on family.        They shot him as he would not leave when asked. They missed but he was injured in the process  and then he kept harassing the family.   It is just that the father wanted to now raise his children with all of the hard work done with the tying of laces and wiping the mud off of boots. The servant came back and killed the entire family when he said he did not want to be rejected. But, the job was over. The contract is concluded.  You had 18 years of work. That was good.  If you understand and do not argue, you would usually get a job as a foot men on carriages or in the Royal Mail since you were faithful.  You pray for the children and say hello to them.  You get invited to their weddings.  Maybe you meet with them and have a laugh at the pub or at church as they grow and change into older members of society. Maybe the son will ask you to watch his children and take them to music school. This is positive.  But, instead you say you fear looking up to him.   What does that mean?  Where are you if you are looking up to him?  Instead, you have been  impersonating the son in a Court of law Who are you?  What are you?  

  Then, you could start your own family.  This is the ancestry of a certain anthropology. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Image

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH & FLEET STREET FINANCIAL DISPATCH LONDON — SEPTEMBER 2025 — SPECIAL ECONOMIC INVESTIGATION THE ARCHITECTURE OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM AND THE MECHANICS OF UNIVERSAL DEMAND An Analytical Examination of the Post-War Industrial Order, the Fallacy of Unfettered Laissez-Faire, Mechanisation, and the State-Guaranteed System of Participatory Remuneration BY OUR SPECIAL ECONOMIC CORRESPONDENT IN FLEET STREET, Warren A. Lyon with Cheuy Leon Stephen Lam Tom. LONDON — In the tenth year following the cessation of European hostilities in 1955, as the Western world navigates the transition from wartime economic controls to the mid-century industrial consensus, thoughtful observers in Fleet Street, Westminster, and the City must confront a fundamental problem of political economy. The modern capitalist apparatus—stretching across the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth, North America, and Western Europe—operates upon a single, immutable law: the imperative equilibrium between Supply and Demand. Yet, despite the vast expansion of mechanized production, factory automation, and electronic computation, our financial architectures continue to suffer from a crippling structural defect: the systemic failure to guarantee requisite consumer purchasing power (ability to pay/ATP) across the whole of the populace. I. THE LESSONS OF THE POST-WAR CONSCIOUSNESS: SUPPLY, DEMAND, AND THE ELECTRIC CIRCUIT To comprehend the crisis of modern industrial organization, one must discard the antiquated Victorian dogma that human existence is defined solely by manual toil. Under the classical doctrine of laissez-faire, labour was treated as an elastic commodity, hired when factories required muscle and cast aside into poverty when machines replaced handiwork. In an age dominated by automatic machinery, conveyor systems, and early electronic computing, such a doctrine is not merely obsolete; it is actively destructive to the civic health of the realm. Consider the macro-economic structure as an electrical power grid carrying a constant current of thirty amperes. Under a rational and balanced order, this current is bifurcated equally along two parallel conductors: fifteen amperes are directed to energise the lamp of Industrial Supply (the manufacturing apparatus, capital investment, and technological innovation), while the remaining fifteen amperes flow uninterrupted to power the lamp of Demand—the Ability to Pay vested within the consumer public. In an unregulated laissez-faire system, however, an artificial blockage is introduced along the conductor powering Consumer Demand. It acts as a deliberate obstruction—resembling a corkscrew jammed into the brass fittings of a ship's engine room. The electrical energy, unable to reach the lamp of Demand, encounters extreme resistance; heat builds rapidly within the circuit, insulation scorches, and the entire socio-economic edifice is threatened with catastrophic conflagration. Energy in an economic system, like energy in physics, is never destroyed; if it is denied its proper outlet in legitimate consumer spending, it manifests as market collapse, civil unrest, shoplifting, and social decay. Click here.

Post a Comment