Health and Healthcare
Artwork credit to the Hybrid Collective
Two paradigms of thinking are vying for control of the field of medicine:
Identifying the correct paradigm is the first and most important aspect of any policy approach to healthcare.
Any policy, no matter how generous and well-intentioned, is counterproductive if it employs the wrong paradigm.
Before worrying about how to fund medicine, we first have to make sure we know what medicine actually is.
The paradigm that most of us "modern" folks are familiar with is the mechanistic one. Quite simply, it approaches the human body as a machine.
In it, the doctor functions like a car mechanic. When a part breaks or has trouble, he goes in and fixes it. And that's that.
It's very much about action and reaction. Something happens, and the doctor's job is to reverse it. There's a force, and the doctor counters it with an equal but opposite force. It smacks of Newtonian physics.
And indeed, it emerges from the 17th Century philosophical lineage known as "materialism", which Newton was part of. Materialism states that Reality consists of nothing but physical matter - that which can be scientifically studied - and contains nothing else.
Other prominent figures in this era were Descartes, who posited that the Universe was one giant machine, and every living being (us included ) is a machine too.
But this is not how medicine began. This attitude has only been around for a few centuries - but medicine is as old as Life itself. People were practicing medicine long before the materialistic, mechanistic medical paradigm came to prominence.
In a machine, there is a finite number of parts, and the whole contraption has finite complexity. There is a finite number of things to know about it, and it's very possible for one person to know and understand every single part and aspect of that machine, completely. It's possible to make an instruction manual that covers every function and every conceivable aspect of repair. If something breaks, there will be a page in the manual for fixing (or, as a last resort, replacing) the broken part.
Furthermore, and in the cases of more complex machines, expertise may be spread out, with different people becoming experts in different parts. Nobody needs to understand the full machine, as long as he knows his specific part. No matter what part breaks, you can call in the specialist for that part, and he can fix that part, without concerning himself with the rest of the machine. If your car's muffler breaks, all you need is a muffler guy - and he doesn't need to know anything about the engine, nor care.
And this is because machines have finite complexity. Each machine has a finite and precise number of parts, because they're made on assembly-lines. Your computer has a finite number of parts. It might be in the thousands, if you include all the chips and stuff - but it's still finite.
And each part is a semi-isolated unit, with a specific, finite number of types of interaction it can experience with other parts.
But it shouldn't require a genius to figure out that there's an enormous problem with applying this paradigm to medicine.
The human body is not a machine. Ecosystems are not machines. Life is not a machine.
Life is a dynamic system, wherein each part has an infinite number of potential relationships with every other part. In fact, there is no such thing as a "part" at all, because, there are no clear dividing lines between them. Where does your wrist end and your forearm begin? How many parts are there in a finger?
There are an infinite number of "parts".
And there is no instruction manual. There never could be one.
And specialization is of limited usefulness. No matter what "part" is being addressed, the rest of the body is intimately involved in its functioning.
It's impossible to even understand a part without understanding the whole body. You must address the whole body at once, even in the midst of addressing whichever "part" you're focusing on.
The mechanistic paradigm is the wrong way to look at it.
It does have some limited uses.
But for long-term health, and for the addressing of chronic illnesses, the natural paradigm is the one that makes sense. That's because it treats the hpatient as the dynamic system that we are - and not as a machine, which we aren't. It has a more accurate relationship with reality.
Haven't you noticed? In politics and on television, there's a huge debate about healthcare, but no debate whatsoever about health?
The only question you ever hear asked by the corporate media is, "who pays for the medicine?"
But never "Why people are so sick in the first place?"
Two Paradigms of Medicine
And that is how the technocratic medical paradigm treats living beings.
But we are not machines. Each part is a constituent of a larger context, and cannot be understood without first understanding that wider context.
There are two ways to look at health. They're not merely differing strategies, but entire worldviews. Modes of interacting with reality itself.
They've been fighting for dominance of the human world.
The 2020 pandemic hysteria has brought this struggle to the foreground in mass-consciousness. The world is currently witnessing the climax of an ancient, largely hidden war, finally spilling out of its containers, the disguises falling away as both sides make their last-ditch plays.
Finally, the fight has captured the attention of the world. And this is good news.
Very good news.
Since the conflict is no longer hidden, it's going to be brought into mass-awareness, confronted, and processed - and then resolved, once and for all.
So what is the conflict?
What are the two paradigms?
The original paradigm - known by various names, including naturopathic medicine and holistic medicine - approaches health with the attitude of systems thinking. It treats the whole body as one interconnected system, in which every part potentially affects every other part.
In fact, it acknowledges the person as more than just the body. We are Beings. We are consciousness. And consciousness affects the physical world. Our mind and spirit affect our bodies.
And holistic medicine treats the entire person, as a person. It recognizes that even though an ailment is showing up in a specific organ, it's really an ailment of the total person, since the organ is part of, (and inseparable from), the totality of the person.
It's looks for the big picture. And if disease shows up, we inspects it within the context of the total patient: mind, body, and soul.
And the other paradigm...
...the one known as allopathic medicine, or technocratic medicine...
...only looks at the body, and only at the specific area, organ, or system where the disease is appearing. It dismisses the importance of any "bigger picture", as irrelevant at worst, and peripheral at best.
It emerged from the materialist philosophy, and as such, denies the existence of the spirit, and severely discounts and ignores the role of the mind.
If it recognizes consciousness at all, it's as no more than an "epi-phenomenon" - an "accident" - of the brain. Essentially we are, in the words of one Jamie Lannister, "nothing but sacks of meat and blood, and some bone to keep it all standing."
Just walking lumps of cells - atoms, really - which just happen to be "carrying around" a mind, located on the top floor.
It views human beings not as Beings, but merely as bodies, which, in turn, are nothing more than very complex machines.
It views all of Life as a machine, and thus, it approaches medicine from a perspective of mechanical engineering.
When a machine breaks, you summon a technician. And that's what a "doctor" is, in the allopathic / technocratic paradigm.
You summon him when something breaks.
He looks at the specific part that's not working, and then fixes or replaces that part.
And that's it. Then he leaves.
There's no need to know anything about the rest of the machine, as long as he/she knows what to do for the one part that "broke."
That's how machines work. That's how a car works. If your transmission isn't working, you fix the transmission, and then that's it.
And that's how this paradigm approaches human health. Like we're machines.
It's all about actions by the doctor - adjustments that he or she does, to you. From the outside.
And this reflects its origins in the materialist philosophy's exaltation of physical matter - the world outside - as the "only reality", dismissing the very existence of the world inside.
It views healing as something that must be obtained.
A product or service to consume. An extension of capitalism.
But naturopathic / holistic medicine acknowledges the world inside, in addition to the one outside, and focuses intently on the relationship between the two.
And so, if disease shows up, we entertain the possibility that it could be arising from within the patient.
It's a condition, or challenge, from the inside, manifesting in the physical body on the outside.
For example, if a person has atherosclerosis (heart disease), we'll try to figure out how and why the person got into such a condition in the first place.
What choices have they been making in their life, leading to this condition?
Have they been consuming animal products every day?
Beef and cheese and all of that?
Despite these industries being extremely cruel?
Have they been building up a lot of karma from contributing to the torture of animals?
Could that be manifesting in the form of their clogged arteries?
After all, the heart is the plexus of compassion - and if a person suppresses his/her compassion instinct regularly, and suppresses their spiritual heart, then could this have something to do with the condition of their physical heart?
This is a deeply inconvenient and humbling set of questions to ask. It's even downright offensive to some people.
"How dare you suggest that I made myself sick!"
"What a privileged, insensitive thing to suggest!"
"Hey! Stop blaming the victims!"
And this is where the allopathic / technocratic paradigm rushes in to "save the day", by helping the patient evade these questions.
It invented the idea of genetic determinism, to convince people that their diseases were written into them from birth, and there's nothing they could have done to cause any of it - and, more importantly, that there's nothing they can do to change any of it.
And then, to fill the hope void back up again, it rolls out the technology.
It builds a technological apparatus to "patch" the problem, so that you won't have to engage in any of that messy introspection. It shields you from self-knowledge. It absolves the ego of responsibility.
And it pursues that goal with more zeal than the goal of actually healing you!
It's more of a talisman against humility than it is "medicine."
Instead of teaching you how your choices led to your condition, it will just give you some pills, cut you open, rearrange your tissues, patch you up, and send you on your way.
It even goes as far as to treat disease as a foreign invader - an entity in and of itself - which must be "defeated." You can hear this in phrases like "Fight cancer."
And to "fight" this "war", it deploys the big guns, in the form of chemotherapy, which is a misnomer, as it is not a therapy in any way shape or form. It is poison.
The doctors admit this. They don't dispute the assertion that showering someone with nuclear radiation and pumping their blood full of toxins does not improve their health. It simply kills. It kills everything in its path. And the theory rests on the medieval, ghoulishly simplistic hope that the disease - the cancer cells - will die faster than the rest of the patient.
It's not medicine. It's violence.
In one paradigm, the body is a battlefield, and the goal is to defeat the enemy - to destroy disease.
But in the other paradigm, it's to cultivate health.
The holistic / natural paradigm builds health throughout the person's life, in every arena, and treats every day and every interaction as an opportunity where choices can be made, either to ignore health, or to cultivate it.
And in this paradigm, the role of a doctor is to teach the patient how to do that.
In fact, the word "doctor", which comes from Latin, literally means "teacher." He/she teaches you how to analyze your own environment and lifestyle choices, to help you understand the causes of their ailment.
A true doctor doesn't heal you - he teaches you to heal yourself.
Student and Teacher.
Machine and Technician.
And it's obvious which paradigm is the right one. Think about this:
Although the technocratic paradigm has performed a lot of wondrous feats, it has also constructed the maddest society in history, and pushed our planet to the brink of ecological collapse.
Indeed, it has eradicated some contagious diseases, extended life expectancy, and solved a lot of other specific problems. And looking beyond medicine, to other fields, it has dazzled us with its cleverness.
It's given us cars, and TV's, and airplanes, and space shuttles, and iPhones, and the biggest and most diverse selection of entertainment ever available. It has hypnotized us with a stupefying array of shiny toys, flashing lights, and things that go whirrrrrrr and boooooom and weeeeeeeeeee!! But it has also produced a society in which the majority of people have debilitating mental illness, and cannot function (or even resist the urge to commit suicide) without daily psychiatric pills.
The technocratic paradigm has achieved so many wondrous things... but it has done so at an enormous cost - a cost so high, it's poised to outweigh - and even nullify - all of that impressive progress. How can we consider such a paradigm "successful", when it's destroying the fundamental life support systems of this planet, and thus endangering the survival of its own civilization? What does it matter how many flashy toys it produces, or how much it extends the life expectancy of the individual, if it destroys its own planet, and thus itself, along with all of humanity? The technocratic materialist paradigm has a terrible track record when you consider the fact that its whole history was one crescendo towards mass-suicide.
It was a failed paradigm. And perhaps it's not wise to listen to a failed paradigm on the subject of medicine. Perhaps technocratic medicine is just as foolish as the rest of technocracy. And it's very important to answer these questions soon, because the technocratic paradigm is guiding the response to the coronavirus situation, which could determine the future course of human civilization itself.
And if we let our response to the coronavirus situation be guided by a failed paradigm - one with a fundamental misunderstanding of reality - it won't fix the situation - it'll make it worse. And maybe lead to a complete societal collapse. Or a totalitarian fascist nightmare dystopia, where medical police form the new Gestapo.
And up until now, its dominance over the field of medicine has been mostly unquestioned. Only a few people on the fringes, like naturopathic doctors, have questioned the reigning paradigm. And they've been marginalized and belittled and humiliated and ignored by most people. And for a while, most of us were somewhat OK with this. We tolerated it. They weren't taking away our ability to practice our medicine - they were only denigrating it, with their words. We had an uneasy but stable detente. We would tolerate the technocratic paradigm reigning over other people's medicine as long as we got to keep our medicines. As long as choice remained. Truth be told, they did make some attempts to come after our medicines - like with "Codex Alimentarius", which was an attempt to severely restrict herbs and other natural medicines by force of law, and censor all information from naturopathic healers, to prevent the population from learning about it. But we managed to hold those attempts at bay, and they (mostly) failed. All in all, we've been able to practice mostly unmolested, with the notable and extremely important exception of people working with psychoactive herbs and fungi - the visionary flora. Even though many of us fought, we didn't fight like our lives depended on it. We always could relax, knowing that the two paradigms would respect each other's territory, and we'd be able to continue practicing ours, and the public would still have choice in which one they wanted to follow. But now, because of the coronavirus, and the global debut of medical fascism in response to it, we no longer have these excuses. Technocratic doctorism has now begun to force itself on us. They have forced us into a lockdown that's collapsing the economy and demolishing public health as it prevents the activities necessary for health to flourish. It has forbidden us from socializing, from exercising, and from getting sunlight - all things that are central to immune function. Quite ironic that they're engineering a mass-immuno-suppression in the name of fighting a "virus", no? They want us all inside our houses, all day, shivering in fear on our sofas, as the TV pumps us up with industrial-strength panic-porn. And what does chronic anxiety do? It suppresses the immune system. It sends blood from the internal organs to the extremities - the arms and legs - because, in our evolutionary past, "fear" usually meant there was something to run from - a tiger, a lion, a wolf pack, and so forth. Chronic anxiety keeps all the blood in our limbs, and away from our internal organs. It demolishes our health - including our immune systems. Quite ironic that they want us shivering in fear, suppressing our immune systems, in the name of fighting a "virus", no? In their frenzy to fight a virus, they're engineering the greatest mass-immuno-suppression in history. This is what you get when you allow a technocratic medical paradigm to reign. Soon the supermarket shelves could be empty, due to the economic collapse. In poorer countries, they're already empty. The WHO predicts that 200 million people in developing countries will starve to death as a result of the economic collapse brought on by the lockdown. 200 million people! Not from the virus - but from the starvation that the "oh so humanitarian" doctors just engineered - on purpose! This is what you get when you allow technocracy to corrupt medicine. They are not looking at the bigger picture. They are not viewing the coronavirus within the context of the total body of society. Their minds are literally incapable of doing so. In order to become doctors, they had to endure decades of training in medical schools to sabotage their ability to think holistically. As a result, all they're capable of seeing is their own narrow field, and they're completely oblivious to how their actions affect the greater whole.
We put these people there. We, as a society, elevated these people into positions of power and respect. We did this. We did it through our ignorance and complacency. All of our society's choices that we've been making in the past decades are now coming back to present their fruits to us. "The chickens are coming home to roost." And we're seeing, with an ever-shrinking lag-time, the relationship between all these causes, and their effects. These lockdowns are destroying the health of the body of society. And it's not going to stop there. If the technocratic paradigm continues to rule, then the lockdowns are just the beginning. The next step is the forced vaccinations. They're going to roll out a vaccine that they've just developed, and compel everyone to take it, under force of law. There will be no testing. Normally, vaccines have to go through 10 years of trials and studies before they're available for public consumption. But they're just going to roll this thing out, and everyone will just be expected to take it immediately. And they're going to force it. It will be mandatory. That's what they want to do. Now this might not come to pass - if we resist. If we resist hard enough, and overthrow these people, then they won't have a chance to enact this dark plan. But if we allow them to continue ruling us, then it's only a matter of time. And if we submit to the current lockdowns, our submission will embolden them, and they they will continue, and the next step will be the forced vaccination of every human being on this planet. You won't get to say no. They might not hold you down and cuff you while they needle you - it might not be that brutish - but they'll find ways to force you into it. They'll start by saying, "if you want to renew your driver's license, you have to provide proof that you've been immunized", and you'll need an "Immunity Passport" to prove your immunization status. The "passport" will then become necessary for an ever-growing list of activities. Boarding a plane. Crossing international borders. Trains. Buses. At some point, you'll need it in order to leave your house. The lockdown will not be lifted until everyone is vaccinated. Bill Gates (the vaccine kingpin) and Dr. Anthony Fauci, are on VIDEO admitting this. But it won't stop there. Once you need a little card or paper to leave your house, the argument will be put forward that it's "too inconvenient." After all, people will be forgetting them, and there will be situations where you step outside just for a minute, to go for a quick walk, and you'll have to be afraid because you didn't bring it with you... and "what if you get stopped and asked for your papers?" The solution offered will be the next step in the plan: to put all the info on a microchip, and then implant that under your skin, in your hand or forearm. And this will be coming out at the same time when Elon Musk is offering "Neura-Link", which enables you to live in an "augmented reality" via microchips implanted inside your brain. And compared to that, a simple RFID chip in your hand seems like nothing. The A.I. people are moving the Overton Window so far towards technocracy, that totally merging into a Borg is on the table. Compared to that, what's the big deal about a little chip in your hand? Then, once everybody has the chips, they'll tell us that we have to get rid of cash, because "cash has viruses on it." Credit-debit cards aren't much better, since they come into contact with card readers. The only safe way to perform financial transactions is with contact-less RFID scanning. The chip. You'll just wave your hand in front of a reader device. So convenient! And the chip will be the only way to buy anything at the store. Everything will be done with the chip, which means if you don't have a chip, you can't buy anything. You can't board a bus. You can't ride a train. You can't function in society without a chip. And if you have the chip, and the gov doesn't like what you're saying, and you're a dissenter, they can turn off your chip. And since there's no more cash, you can't go to those farmers markets for your food, because, even if they still exist, they'll require the chip too. They're aiming for complete totalitarian control of everyone and everything. They want to merge us with computers, and make us into a Borg. Does this sound like fun yet? Does this sound like the type of society you want to live in? The type you'd like for your children?
This is what you get when you allow technocratic doctorism to corrupt the field of medicine. This is the direction in which the technocratic doctorists are leading us. But...
Since the conflict has finally come to a head, we have the opportunity to shift the paradigm entirely. This is the hour in which Nature finally defeats technocracy.
When we free medicine form the clutches of technocracy, and have real medicine again, then our health as individuals and as a society will skyrocket, and we'll finally have the thinking abilities to solve the other problems - like ecological destruction, and war, and poverty, everything else. Shifting the paradigm on medicine is the beginning of the total liberation of humanity and the planet.
Healthcare - and more accurately, health - is the foundation of everything else in society. It affects our very ability to analyze problems. An unhealthy body makes an unhealthy mind - which, in turn, produces unhealthy solutions to problems. All those other issues you care about? The economy and the human rights and the animal rights and the environment and ecology and poverty and war and peace and all of it... we need healthy minds to solve it.