dark star in a crystal bowl

Madonna. A live Masonic ritual? The dark and esoteric side of kabbalah? The all-seeing eye in the center of the stage as part and package of ancient practices mixed with religious rhetoric with Madonna as Dark Star. Does she consume body parts and wash it down with virgin blood? gurgle. gargle. maybe she’s just a vampire that can suck cash from a stone. Madonna has always given rise to the deepest passions of the conspiracy theorist; she seems to incarnate that collision between intuitive transcendental belief, the theory of the interconnected and the empiricists who stake and skate over the evidence, a frozen lake of the random and coincidental.

--- “The Superbowl is kind of like the Holy of Holies in America. I’ll come at halfway of the “church experience” and I’m gonna have to deliver a sermon. It’ll have to be very impactful.” It is rather appropriate that this Kaballah-intiate referred to the Superbowl as the “Holy of Holies” as it was the name of the most sacred place in Solomon’s Temple. No one was ever permitted to enter the Holy of Holies but the High Priest. This privilege was only granted on the Day of Atonement, to offer the blood of sacrifice and incense before the mercy seat. Madonna’s analogy was therefore telling of the mindset behind her performance.--- Read More:http://vigilantcitizen.com/musicbusiness/madonnas-superbowl-halftime-show-a-celebration-of-the-grand-priestess-of-the-music-industry/

Madonna’s mysticism: Kabbalah is a broad Hebrew term for every current in Jewish mysticism over a stretch of 2,500 years. It compares to, say, philosophy. Calling yourself a Kabbalist is about as informative as calling yourself a philosopher. Madonna, … has become Esther, as part of her adherence to “the” Kabbalah. The term now appears in media outlets the way “anarchism” did in the anti-globalization phase just before 9/11: widespread, vague and ill-defined.

A Toronto Star piece said its “goal” is “knowledge of the divine” via a “finely shaded approach to experiencing God who conceals and reveals himself, who is both transcendent and immanent in the world.” Something scandalous lurks here since, in the Bible, God relates to the world only through His words. He never inheres in or is part of it. That is a key division between Bible-based religions and all others. When Kabbalists speculated on immanence, they flirted with pantheistic heresy. But you get none of that from the anodyne phrase, “conceals and reveals himself,” without context….

---Vogue ends with a symbol that is consistent with the Egyptian-Babylonian theme of the performance, one that is also of highest importance in occult Secret Societies such as Freemasons, the Rosicrucians and the Illuminati: the Winged Sun-Disk.---Read More:http://vigilantcitizen.com/musicbusiness/madonnas-superbowl-halftime-show-a-celebration-of-the-grand-priestess-of-the-music-industry/

…Yet really, what’s wrong with inserting another version of spirituality into this forlorn world, even if it’s a bit stupid and commercialized (“Kabbalah water from very pure springs”)? Well, calling a thing spiritual doesn’t make it so, any more than using the word Kabbalah means you’ve actually said something. At times, spirituality feels like another word for privatization: the reduction and introjection of the public or social to tiny personal size. Read More:http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/topic_2006.html

Conspiracy theory is itself an industry…

---What happened to the white car apparently involved in Diana's accident? Was there a second gunman on the Grassy Knoll? And why did it take so long to scramble US fighters on 9/11? And we can't help but be fascinated by them. Perhaps it's because deep down, we're all story tellers. It's one of the things that makes us who we are. Since the dawn of time, we've been creating heroes and monsters as a way of trying to make sense of the world. In the beginning, we told those tales round camp fires. Now, it's through internet chat rooms or on mobile phones. But it's still basically the same process - weaving stories out of real life. --- Read More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6368341.stm image:http://theunhivedmind.com/wordpress/?p=22222

… a business model based on the simultaneous repulsion and attraction of the idea of secret workings, shadowy activities behind every collapse. A secret of drawing virtue , trying to locate meaningful moments in a plotless flow of life, one turns to the art of storytelling as cultural marker with conspiracy as a locus of meaning that mediates our lives and the celebrities at the center of events attributed to unfathomable machinations. There is a desire for a sense of an ending, closure,   but with what Walter Benjamin would call “messy antics” , the seed of revelatory emancipation, but somewhat infinite and vague resembling  the inconclusiveness of real life, a nice stream of disavowals, good honest lies that contain hints of meaning.  As long as it feels true. A sense of a story without too many literal encumbrances.


h="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true">

But as former Nixon aide G. Gordon Liddy once told me (and he should know!), the problem with government conspiracies is that bureaucrats are incompetent and people can’t keep their mouths shut. Complex conspiracies are difficult to pull off, and so many people want their quarter hour of fame that even the Men in Black couldn’t squelch the squealers from spilling the beans. So there’s a good chance that the more elaborate a conspiracy theory is, and the more people that would need to be involved, the less likely it is true.

Why do people believe in highly improbable conspiracies? In previous columns I have provided partial answers, citing patternicity (the tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise) and agenticity (the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agents). Conspiracy theories connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency. Add to those propensities the confirmation bias (which seeks and finds confirmatory evidence for what we already believe) and the hindsight bias (which tailors after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened), and we have the foundation for conspiratorial cognition.Read More:http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-people-believe-in-conspiracies

This entry was posted in Feature Article, Ideas/Opinion, Marketing/Advertising/Media and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>