Sometimes I wonder if
this whole bizarre ordeal with dogs has some deeper and therefore
more sinister meaning. If you like conspiracy theories, you will love
this one.
During the heights of
the demise of four kittens, last year, I came in contact with the
official dogcraver on facebook. Every time I had conversations with
her, I wanted to tell her the truth, what I think of her, that she is
petrified almost good looking young woman, whom lives alone and has
two mentally disturbed brothers as neighbours, and that her love for
dogs and her monster pet pack that she has in her place, is nothing
more than a projected fear of being raped by her neighbours. But I've
held my horses tight, and respected her situation, although I had to
deal with the absolute avalanche of dog bullshit mantra that she
threw at me every single time when we had a conversation.
However, trough her, I
was able to find the E.S.D.A.W.
ESDAW stands for
European Society for Dog and Animal Welfare. This organisation got my
attention right away and I started to study them. It didn't take me
long to realise that I've actually hit the jack pot. This
organisation is THE MOTHERSHIP of all organisations that are active
in my part of “Eurasia”.
When you click on the
“About us” button, you will be taken into the belly of the beast.
There is usual mantra about humanity and care, then there is a funny
statement about the mission (there is always A MISSION) and then the
fun begins. The thing that is so wonderful about ESDAW is how bluntly
honest they are, in their effort of promoting the craver's agenda (
there shall be no pet animal than dogs and all shall love them and be
their slaves). Let's begin from the title, European Society for Dog
and Animal Welfare.
First question is: why the Dog and Animal
Welfare? Isn't the dog an animal also? Why separate dogs from other
animals if all animals matter? Well, it appears that ESDAW policy
thinks that dogs are somehow different and special, that they are a
bit more equal than other animals. Umm, fat chance.
Actually, the ESDAW
clearly states, in their title, that the dogs are NOT animals, yet
that they are something else. Something else that is ABOVE animals,
since the dogs go before animals (dogs and animals from the title).
So according to their beliefs, the dog is an uber animal which I
found to be a bit slightly racial supremacy context, coated in the
sweet animal story. An animal Nazism.
As you go trough the
“mission” text, fun things start to appear. Their area of
operations is EU and Europe. EU and Europe? Aren't those two the
same, I mean European Union and Europe? How many Europas exist on
this planet, 1,3,18?
Of course this bogus
statement actually sheds the light on their real agenda, which is to
spread the “eternal light of dog shit” onto all surrounding
countries that are planned to be in the European Union, in the Great
chess board game, written by the God of western geopolitics, Zbigniew
Brzezinski. You will find this man fingerprint, behind every single
major political event in the world from the Carter era till this day.
Personally for me,
Zbigniew is a deranged maniac and the classical example of 19th
century logic, that revolves around imperial context, commonly known
as “ fortress under siege”. In this context, the world is divided
into two parts, one behind the walls of mighty fortress and the one
outside the walls. Everything that is within the walls of fortress is
valuable, meaningful and civilised, it should be upheld and honoured
and everything outside the fort walls is a hostile wilderness, full
of barbarians and beasts whom seek to bring down the fortress. And it
is worthless, and therefore the fortress has every right to conquer
and exterminate it. It has duty to bring order to the bad lands
populated by lesser forms of life. That is its mission.
So trough this bogus
statement on the ESDAW site, it is quite clear that ESDAW is a
political project and it has deeper agenda behind it. The question
is, what they want? What connection exists between dogcravers and
mystical imperialism of the 19th century?
Well, depending how
deep you want to go, the answers are pretty much self explanatory.
The bond between
dogcraver and the dog is driven by pure mental pathology. But aside
from that, that relationship is a master and servant type of
relationship, defined by mutual dependency of its participants. So,
the first rational question that arises out of this is, why would
European Union promote this kind of relationship, that is based on
master and servant principles? When this type of relationship is in
essence undemocratic. If the European Union stands for freedom and
democracy, why it promotes the dependant relationship? It doesn't
make any sense. Oh, but it does. It does because in this case EU is
the master and the Europe is the servant, meaning that all nations
that want to join the EU must be obedient to its master's voice. And
the way how it is done is trough promoting awareness of animal
rights. Promoting awareness is actually a synonym for paying
attention and attention is THE thing that the dogcravers crave the
most. So by creating aware citizens in those nations, trough
promotion of animal rights, you are actually creating population that
is willing to do what ever you want, aka you are creating pro
European movement. So if I say that dogcravers are narcissistic ego
maniacs, that project their internal insecurity onto the outside
world trough dog, making the dog inverted image of that weakness, aka
the dog is strong and fierce and he is the protector of me, me whom
is vulnerable and fragile, I am automatically seen as anti European
and isolated (neutralised from the mainstream or any public
discussion). Also in the light of “fort under siege”philosophy, I
am barbarian that needs to be destroyed since my barbaric ways are
automatically seen as attack on fort's walls, that protect
everlasting good.
So the thing that fort
is asking of me is to be tolerant.
Unfortunately, being
tolerant in this sense, means that I should not care for the things
that dogcravers do. Being tolerant means that I shouldn't stop them
in their lifestyle, that I shouldn't judge them and under no
circumstances I should confront them with their crimes. I shouldn't
protest when they kill a cat or kitten, when they kill a child or
grown human being, when they bite me, when they deprive me of sleep,
when they take every joy from my life. When they degrade the public
space with their crap. When they defile a graveyard.
Let's cut this bullshit
right now, because being tolerant means that I have to cancel my self
as human being. To put it as bluntly as possible-
what is required
of me is to commit suicide, in the name of tolerance and
civilisation.
This process of
constantly pushing for even more rights and liberties, has lead to
another extreme, equally destructive as any other rigid totalitarian
regime. What has happened actually, by my humble opinion, was that,
in the effort to liberalise the society and achieve higher freedom
standards for its population, those societies simply went on to
cancel the state itself. They became so liberal up to the point of
demeaning the very notion of the state. So once the state
disappeared, all the “contracts” up on which it was formed,
disappeared as well. It was no longer possible to form a coherent
consensus about anything, how that society should behave, what are
the common norms, values and morals. Everything became individual and
prone to subjective judgement. Up on this new ethos, where there is
no common ground up on which consensus could be formed, various
groups were formed to protect their beliefs and value systems. The
logical consequence of this state, is that, since there is no common
consensus, yet there are many opposing consensuses, those consensuses
come in conflict with each other. So instead of achieving harmony in
the society, this situation created an everlasting conflict
situation, kind of permanent low intensity conflict within the
society itself.
This situation, where
you have constant struggle and constant fight is unbearable state of
living. The fact that you are constantly living in fear that
something can come out of nowhere and with its jaws and claws, destroy everything that you
hold dear, including your own life is so degrading and so demeaning
that it inflicts a permanent damage, both on the individual or/and the
society. Cause in essence, the society doesn't exist as a whole and
therefore the common norms and morals doesn't exist either.There are no common good in this.
This society is equally
brutal and chaotic as the nature itself, and it is governed by one law only-
the survival of the fittest.