in

The Biggest Obstacle To Real Freedom Is The Belief That We Already Have It

If you live in one of the so-called free democracies of the western world, the worst mistake you can make is to buy into the hype. To believe you are a free individual in a nation that respects and protects your freedom and individuality.

Reading by Tim Foley.

Article version: https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/the-biggest-obstacle-to-real-freedom

Thanks for watching! Subscribe to caitlinjohnstone.com for email updates on all my new stuff.

Written by Caitlin Johnstone

Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. My exasperation and boredom with the NWO Narratives and Manufactured Crises are full tilt into the red zone. I doubt this Agenda 2030, Green Fraud, Social Engineering, Control System will be sustainable much beyond the collapse of the Federal Centralized Financial Empire, but in the meantime… It's supremely dehumanizing and sickening to observe and experience the Unfolding Tyranny. It's disturbing that this Evil Movie gained a Cult Following, but "it is what it is" and may the Obedient Servants Of Darkness be rewarded with their destiny according the measure they deserve. They certainly are Legion in number. 🙏

  2. Thank you Caitlin and Tim, this is very true as my child has ECHP at a special needs school and in process of deregistering from school to teach him from home, I’m having to go through so many hoops to get permission to home educate my son. We definitely aren’t free.

  3. Excellent commentary.
    I don't know how typical or representative I am, but unfortunately I find that I have to struggle to remain attentive and focussed to the naration, having to relisten to the entire video or back up and "rewind" at various points, because my mind or attention drifted, while the naration sped forward.

    I suppose the naration is probably very good, but sometimes I think that perhaps it is being performed with perhaps too much attention to the formal presentation, an even pace or flow, a clear articulation of the words, some intonation or lack of monotonal or "machine like" reading and the like, and perhaps, well, I'm not sure, but I fancy the idea that communication occurs more effectively when the reader or presenter slows down at various points, as if understanding that it takes some time for certain ideas to be absorbed and understood, and when, as it were, the reader/presenter is "going through the exercise" of re-understanding or intently mentally focussing on what he or she is saying or trying to communicate during the attempted communication, as if the unseen dance and contortions that go on inside the mind of the reader somehow helped that dance and those conceptual alignments to occur in the mind of the audience, as if through some "osmosis" or some only vaguely understood or recognized "resonance" phenomenon.

    I realize that a "soulfull" presentation of such a large volume of content must be difficult, and there is something about the very subject matter that is apt to make it sometimes awkward and difficult to communicate, to make it so that one feels perhaps embarrassed for having perhaps belaboured a simple point or idea and simultaneously that the belabouring was perhaps yet inadequate to smash through the occlusion and have the idea understood. And there is actually a great intellectual feast being presented here and in similar commentaries, perhaps somewhat analogous to a figure skating performance where there are deft and delicate leaps and twirls to appreciate, and as in the usual presentation of art, it must be up to the viewer or receiver to determine what and how much they will appreciate and "take in".

    Perhaps then it is largely a matter of style, or "shyness", a repeated offerring of some tempting intellectual treat that seems to timidly retreat until the audience conjures within their own mind their own resemblence of what they just glimpsed, whereas someone like myself, would, rather immodestly, attempt to plant and transfer ideas directly into the mind of whomever I and similar individuals were trying to communicate with.

    Like a priest who'd place the "host" directly into the mouth of the recipient, we'd use our words to place the understanding directly into the minds of those willing to listen, or at least, such would be our intention and approach.

    Or perhaps this distinction is principally nonsense, and perhaps it has nothing to do with modesty, immodesty, character or style, I don't know. But I do sometimes get the impression that it would be far easier for me to understand and "follow along", if Tim, the reader, would slow down a little and present some of the thoughts as if they were as profound and significant as I believe them to be, and less as if he were presenting some mindless chatter you might we better off ignoring, – well no, that's far too harsh, and a gross exageration I know, and I'm sure it's more a kind of modesty that is being conveyed, and perhaps at Caitlin's own urging. Perhpas, if it were up to only Tim, he would be reading Caitlin's words with reverence, as if they conveyed the most important and sacred instructions. I don't know, but hey, I do appreciate the excellent commentary and the great presentation guys.
    Love and God bless

  4. If you watch fox news chances are you probably hate China, and if you watch the rest of the MSM you probably hate Russia – it's like they divided up the propaganda work to cover both adversaries

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading…

0