Michael Speaks - February 23, 2020 - State Of The Planet

[Bobby 18,832]

MEntity:

Hello to each of you. We are here, now. We can begin. 

 

We are speaking to you today under the general request for our perspective on "the state of the planet."

 

This is a pivotal year for humanity.

 

There are pivotal years for individuals, for relationships, for families, for communities, for nations, for continents, and humanity.

 

For a year to be pivotal for humanity, it means that every level of pivoting is happening on a large scale.

 

In other words, it is not just people here and there, or families here and there, or communities here and there, or a country or two, but many individuals, many relationships, most families, most communities, most nations, and most continents.

 

We remind you that a "pivotal year" is a result of a pattern or patterns that have escalated in the need for necessary and vital change to disrupt those patterns so that one either makes a breakthrough or has a breakdown.

 

We cannot say if this pivotal year for humanity will bring a breakthrough or a breakdown because that is yet to be seen.

 

One of the greatest causes for this pivotal year to lead to a breakdown for humanity comes from the combination of INFORMATION GLUT and ANTI-TRUTH. 

 

First, if one is participating in modern society, one is taking in too much information, period. You are bombarded with news, opinions, perspectives, advertising, choices, decisions, threats, pressures, etc. that demand of you absorb and process all of it effectively.

 

When one is in an Information Glut, it becomes noise.

 

It no longer serves you in terms of making decisions or choices and tends to leave one paralyzed and waiting for something to distract, disrupt or change.

 

When information turns into noise, the Truth then becomes vulnerable.

 

When the Truth becomes vulnerable, then it can be targeted and dismantled.

 

It is a bit of a misnomer to say that "truth becomes vulnerable and targeted and dismantled." It would be more accurate to say that one's capacity for discernment is compromised and that makes one vulnerable to manipulation.

 

There is a difference between not knowing the truth, and not wanting to know the truth, or rejecting the truth, and ignoring the truth.

 

There are more people than ever who are now rejecting or ignoring the truth.

 

To help in this pivotal period for humanity, it will be helpful for our students to consider:

 

WHERE AM I IGNORING OR REJECTING THE TRUTH?

 

And

 

DO I NEED A BREAK TO CATCH UP WITH MYSELF?

 

We can suggest that while information can be compelling and important, trust yourself if you know you are taking in too much.

 

By giving yourself permission to step away, step back, to give yourself time to process, you strengthen your capacity to invite, discern, and sustain the truth.

 

These two factors: Information Glut and Anti-Truth are far more of a threat to humanity than even the environmental concerns, wars, disease, famine, etc. because the rejection of truth and the fatigue from noise reduces every possibility for recovery or solution for all other threats. 

 

We cannot stress this enough: Truth, Love, and Energy are building blocks of your universe, both in literal terms and in terms of one's experience of existence. If one of these is rejected or denied or ignored, collapse is imminent. 

 

Ironically, Love nor Energy are under assault or in danger of being rejected.

 

But Truth is in danger.

 

Truth will exist with or without humanity, so when we say that Truth is in danger, we mean that humanity's trust and receptivity to the truth are in danger.

 

In this pivotal year for humanity, the Infinite Soul candidates are all aligned by now and if there are Manifestations, the emphasis will likely be themed in Truth.

 

Infinite Soul Manifestation probabilities are now at 88%.

 

Humanity could resolve environmental threats and threats of war, oppression, division, economic collapse, etc, but if Truth is lost, so is the capacity to resolve these threats.

 

We can delineate various areas of concern for humanity at this time, but this is the primary and key concern for those students who want to understand and help in contributing toward the shift toward breakthrough.

 

If our students wish to help contribute toward patterns of breakthrough, we suggest the following:

 

1 - Remember that the Truth is simple.

 

Truth is never complicated.

 

It can be complex, but not complicated.

 

2 - Face your own Truths.

 

Truth exists on a Personal, Community/Global, and Universal Level. If you tend to avoid your own Truths, it makes it easier to avoid shared and universal Truths. 

 

In other words, be honest with yourself about yourself.

 

This means you must stop lying to yourself about even the most superficial of things, such as your degree of beauty, worth, and acceptability.

 

These are qualities of a person that never have a single or conclusive truth.

 

If you have decided you are ugly, you are ignoring the truth that many do not agree. If you have decided you are unlovable, you are ignoring the truth that many would not agree. And so on.

 

But we also speak about the lies you may tell yourself in other ways, as well.

 

3 - Take a break from curated reality.

 

Reality is a collection of truths that shape your perception.

 

When your reality is no longer in your own hands, but in the hands of sources that curate what you read and see, you exist in a curated reality.

 

Curated reality may or may not be truthful, but direct experience cannot be beaten.

 

The State of the Planet this year is one that could be described as PRECARIOUS, but these turning points are simply growing pains. We survived many.

 

We will open the queue now for 3 questions to start: ***QUEUE IS NOW OPEN***

 

Maureen: At this time, what do you see as the probability for each of the top 5 Democratic candidates, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Mike Bloomberg, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, one of which will be running for president against Trump, that they could/would beat Trump if they were to be the nominee?

 

MEntity:

It is the same probabilities for all: This currently stands at 58%. The reason it is the same probability for each is that it is not the candidate that determines this election, but the voters. It may be anticipated that one candidate over another may result in fewer voters or losing voters, but those who are voting for the corrupt King are voting for the corrupt King, regardless of any claim or assumption that they are weighing options.

 

Maureen: Thank you!!

 

NEXT

 

Luciana: like you to comment on the political situation in Brazil. I see that people here usually idolize politicians and then the person's favorite politician becomes someone who can't be criticized. And if you criticize this politician the person who is a kind of fan of this politician thinks that you are against Brazil. And there are people who, I admit that I'm in this group, have lost faith in politics and think that it makes no difference who they vote for.

 

Luciana:  because it doesn't matter who the politicians are there for their own interest and nobody is interested in improving the country.

 

Luciana: so I'd like you to comment a little bit on this scenario that I see in Brazil.

 

MEntity:

In the best and strongest of democracies, the cult of personality can wear away and diminish that democracy. Cult of personality requires that the truth be disregarded and when the truth is disregarded, everything becomes dependent upon that personality.

 

Effectiveness may be diminished when there are cults of personality and corruption involved, but there are many ways in which one makes a difference. It will always serve you well to consider that there are ways to make a difference, even as you may be worried that no one cares or that you cannot make a difference. 

 

In other words, it does matter who the politician is. 

 

NEXT

 

Royce: I am incredibly susceptible to infoglut and influence from others. This has added to confusing relationship patterns where I just add to the noise rather than have a fixed perspective, having a fixed perspective on what the truth is also feels so incredibly unnatural to me but I recognize many others don't seem to have that issue and it is obvious what the " right" perspective is. I want to join humanity and cut through the chaos of perspectives. You say that the truth is simple and that it does not harm but how could you help someone like me ( I assume there are others) who sees that simplicity in multitudes of perspective? What can a chaotic/confused mind do to trust one truth/path to focus on over another, even when other perspectives have their slivers of truth too? I want to be on the " right" side of the future but god I find it hard to trust one truth over another when there is so much we don't KNOW yet. The only answer that comes to me is " Play and choose anyway" when it comes to infoglut

 

MEntity:

From what we can see in your words, you are not speaking about the truth. You are speaking of something else. What is an example that confuses you so that we can more directly address this question? 

 

Royce:  ok, let's say veganism. I have been vegan for 6 years now and it has always seemed simple and obvious to me but over the last couple years it has become less simple and obvious and I still choose it but I also am just adding to the confused noise when I speak on it. there are SO MANY truths around a subject like this

 

Royce: and many leave because of that infoglut

 

Royce: so how can you really trust in the midst of the noise?

 

Royce: so that my voice is not messy but maybe useful again

 

MEntity:

We think we understand and will respond. 

 

Royce: thanks angel, I understand my question was a bit infoglutty itself

 

MEntity:

Veganism is when one actively chooses to reduce harm to others as much as possible, in particular, those animals who are subject to unnecessary and extreme cruelty and suffering. Veganism is another word for Compassion. Compassion is the choice to care for and reduce the suffering of others.

 

The truth is that when one has a choice, one CAN refuse to participate in the cruelty and suffering of others. If one does not have a choice, one may or may not be able to refuse in that participation. But it will remain true that when one has a choice, one CAN. The rest of the noise is distraction. 

 

The path to how one reduces that harm is one that may vary among individuals, but this will still have no bearing on that simple Truth that if one has a choice, one CAN refuse to participate in or contribute to the cruelty and suffering.

 

Royce: yeah , the spiritual takes and other teachings dealing with abstract " body needs" throw me for a loop the most but when i return to simplicity it usually is " because I have a choice"

 

MEntity: 

As we said, the rest is noise. There are no justifications when one has a choice.

 

Royce: thanks angels

 

MEntity:

This is an example of a simple truth.

 

Keep in mind that when one has a choice, there will still need to be a path and those paths may vary in pace and possibility for how one can actively choose compassion. Choices build upon choices.

 

There are no Sentient Species in existence who have to cause cruelty and suffering to exist.

 

They may cause cruelty and suffering, but they do not have to. They have a choice. And every Sentient Species creates their path toward Compassion. This is called Soul Age.

 

NEXT

 

Brian: What would a breakdown vs breakthrough look like over the next five years?

 

MEntity:

We do not know.

 

Bobby: lol

Brian: LOL

 

MEntity:

Breakdowns on this scale tend to lead to a kind of reset of some form on a large scale. Breakthroughs on this scale tend to lead to leaps forward in ways that bring all of humanity closer.

 

We can say that all of you will survive this either way, but we only know you in your futures that came from a breakthrough.

 

We will conclude here for today. We have much more to say about this pivotal year and we will continue our discussion with you in further exchanges. Good day to each of you. Goodbye, for now. 

 

 

 

 

[KurtisM 13,358]

Given the context of this transcript, I think everyone would benefit from reading this transcript on how to nurture the Health of the Intellectual Center, which helps us access and be receptive to the Truth:

 

Love how this session ended on a paradoxical, morbidly hilarious and mildly reassuring note.

[DianeHB 15,901]

12 minutes ago, Bobby said:

MEntity: We can say that all of you will survive this either way, but we only know you in your futures that came from a breakthrough.

 

 

What the hell does that mean? 

[Janet 16,022]

@DianeHB -- it would definitely be something to ask more about. 

 

Wasn't there something in a session (maybe at a TLEGG) about how Older Souls can choose not to participate in some scenarios because they've been there, done that, aren't interested? Maybe our future selves come from breakthrough because we just opt out of the breakdown scenarios. 

 

Or a more positive interpretation might be that the breakthrough occurs in the majority of parallels branching from here. 

 

[Juni 7,387]

23 minutes ago, Bobby said:

We can say that all of you will survive this either way, but we only know you in your futures that came from a breakthrough.

 

Whaat. This sounds...a bit ominous.

[Janet 16,022]

I've been sharing this on Facebook. It was originally shared in my feed by Barbara Taylor, and I love the succinct list in the image that came with the article, but the complete article is very useful as well. 

 

I think it's important to recognize that it's not just the "other side" that shares fake stuff. I've seen a fair amount of bullshit from all sides. Too often we assume that the items that suit our beliefs are accurate without bothering to look more closely. 

 

How to Recognize a Fake News Article

 

[Bobby 18,832]

30 minutes ago, DianeHB said:

 

What the hell does that mean? 

 

Troy shared this afterwards that probably explains it:

Oh that’s probably because Michael can’t get through to us if we are in survival mode. There needs to be some level of stability, prosperity, and survival distractions at a minimum.

[DianeHB 15,901]

5 minutes ago, Bobby said:

 

Troy shared this afterwards that probably explains it:

Oh that’s probably because Michael can’t get through to us if we are in survival mode. There needs to be some level of stability, prosperity, and survival distractions at a minimum.

 

Well that's comforting. 

[KurtisM 13,358]

We already have a version of us moving towards Unimaginable Global Dystopia. It branched from November 2018, related to the American Mid-term Elections retaining a corrupt right-wing house of representatives.
Do we seriously need to merge into them and experience the death of democracy and a backlash that slaps us so hard we land in the Dark Ages again? 

Because I am sincerely no longer interested, even morbidly, in that future. I was in 2018, I know I have two versions of me focused on "saving the world before it's too late" and "resigning into utter despair and futility" that branched then. But I am definitely not now.
I didn't work on my fears, regrets, addictions, opening up to myself and others and finally actually liking myself & my life to end up in a world in which I and everyone else I know and love resigns to & dies in a fiery authoritarian hell. But I suppose none of us here intended that. I doubt many of the people in the great depression & world war 2 that were just trying to live their life or rose up to fight for democracy intended to end up in a parallel world ruled by Fascism from Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and Soviet Russia either. But that world likely exists, also because of complacency.

 

Anyways, I'll definitely follow up on the tips Michael gave here to move us towards a Breakthrough

[Crystal 1,932]

You know you're corrupt when...even Mid-Causal Teaching Entities who have seen and done it all think you're corrupt. And, that is what I've been trying to tell people: don't try to peel off Fuckface voters. Their minds are made up. Reach out to nonvoters instead, and rally our base.

 

Thank you, @Troyand Michaels, and to @Bobby for transcribing and posting. I've been dealing with sick cats and other personal drama so I've not been able to attend monthly chats lately. But this is so useful. We really are under an information glut. I'm curating my social media and cutting back on what I want to read and take in just for my own peace of mind and mental health. (I figure the New York Times and Washington Post are probably pretty trustworthy. I will NOT get my news from Facebook - which a lot of people do, apparently! The NY Times gives me the news, FB is for keeping up with my old friends.)

 

I hope we go to "breakthrough" rather than "breakdown." 58% for a Democratic election is way too close to be comforting.

[Meg 296]

2 hours ago, Janet said:

@DianeHB -- it would definitely be something to ask more about. 

 

Wasn't there something in a session (maybe at a TLEGG) about how Older Souls can choose not to participate in some scenarios because they've been there, done that, aren't interested? Maybe our future selves come from breakthrough because we just opt out of the breakdown scenarios. 

 

Or a more positive interpretation might be that the breakthrough occurs in the majority of parallels branching from here. 

 

Ironic such confusion comes up in a session on Truth.  (is this a joke, M?  Wait don't answer that.) Anyway  - here's a another interpretation - (1) it's M who themselves "chooses" to opt out of hanging around so-called breakdown scenarios lol?  Seriously folks, if "we" are there, "they" know us for sure, I'm pretty sure that's how it works.  So I'm going with (2) Janet's interpretation for now: that this implies there's a "remembered" future we're all going to imagine... That, or (3) humanity ends, full stop ("resets"), or (4) as below (Troy), people are too stressed out to receive support (but sorry,  respectfully I just don't buy it), or (5) that was just a typo d'oh! Janet's is sure the nicest I think, thanks

Edited February 24 by Meg
typo lol!

[JohnM 500]

Once again; an enlightening and moving session.  Yes, I'll agree there was some "scary" in there too - but for whatever its worth, I'll offer my take on the comment from M that they only know us from the futures where there has been breakthrough:   M has said before of our lives / experiences that nothing is wasted - everything ultimately leads toward our continued growth and evolution.  So if we end up on the breakdown path, we'll still eventually make it to breakthrough because our growth and evolution is "inevitable".  We may end up taking the longer (and scarier) path, but we'll still get to that breakthrough just the same.  So putting on my cloak of optimism I'm going to firmly believe that we're going to move directly ahead to the breakthrough because that is the next step on our path.  I'm not looking for a shortcut, but also not very interested in heading off the main trail.   Truth, Love and Energy will remain even if we've lost sight for a moment.  We will find our way because we're worth it.

[CurvyWords 2,099]

The last bit of this video brought me to tears because it brought what Michael is saying here to life. I don't often admit the Truth to myself because I feel like if I do I will be compromising something. My integrity, my principles, my hard fought positions on the side of justice and genuine equality. But, the truth is. I am scared, like REALLY scared. And while I do have a considerable amount of courage (the bastard only shows up when fear is present), I have to be honest. My fear can make me incredibly exclusionary and intense. I draw hard lines and I can get zealous and stubborn. 

 

I don't feel safe enough to actively, consciously move towards +Compassion and that fucking sucks. Because it is where I thrive and I am at my best. It just doesn't feel like a time where I can be at my best, because everything is so fucking bad and it feels like too many of us just want to point out how bad it is instead of risking, instead of fighting, instead of holding a line.

 

Anyhoo, we're all doing our best, let's just try to be as kind as we can to one another even as we are critical of systems. Let us all try to be brave as we snatch our destiny back from the brink of collapse, and may we all be guided this year by Truth to our own personal highest good, that feed into the highest collective good.

 

Please watch this video if you get most of your news from cable. It's incredibly insightful about what's going on in the media and how to navigate the info glut. And since I do not get my news from cable but I spend WAY too much time on social media and in far left spaces I am deactivating Twitter for a while so I can stop subjecting myself to the tensions, anxieties, and frustrations of cynical, disaffected politics that only make my heart harden and don't foster compassion. I'm being honest about the fact that I am scared, I am not always 100% sure of my convictions, and that I need to make more time and space to listen.

 

We're all in this together. I love you guys.

 

 

[AnnaD 8,337]

@Meg, I agree with most of what you have said, but, I doubt that the Michaels' would "opt out" of following our lives if our lives took a turn for a breakdown. I think that the Michaels' are here for a long time and not necessarily a good time if you know what I mean, in that, I suspect that they are curious about our choices and trajectories and consequences either way, that they are in it for the duration and not just for the t shirt. I don't think they are quitters lol but if they are, don't tell me, that would be more than upsetting not having their perspective on things. I would hate to think that they would "check out" on us. I.e. Gods away on business please leave a detailed message and we will get right back to you. Hmm.

Edited February 24 by AnnaD

[Sky Goldy 589]

Veganism is another word for compassion . Enough said!

[Troy 18,439]

4 hours ago, Crystal said:

You know you're corrupt when...even Mid-Causal Teaching Entities who have seen and done it all think you're corrupt.

LOL Michael has always been ok with adjectives that are factual. They don’t use them often, so when they do, it certainly is something to note. 

[Troy 18,439]

2 hours ago, CurvyWords said:

The last bit of this video brought me to tears because it brought what Michael is saying here to life.

Sharing. Thank you!!

[ckaricai 5,735]

What I recently noticed (On social media) regarding current American politics is that most democrats are scared to the point of cynicism. Most are saying something like X candidate can’t beat trump because moderates/undecideds won’t vote for him/her. It doesn’t matter who the candidate is it’s being said about ALL of them. These same people also say something like, there’s no point voting for someone who can’t win but the person who might isn’t my candidate so I’m not sure if I will vote. I find this baffling and beyond stupid. I don’t give a shit who the democratic nominee is even if it’s my least favorite I will vote for them because they need my vote to beat trump. The only way to beat him is for everyone who can vote to vote. This isn’t fucking rocket science. The goal and solution are both simple so why make this so fucking complicated? Everyone just needs to vote. 

Edited February 24 by ckaricai

[WolfAmethyst 1,007]

2 hours ago, AnnaD said:

@Meg, I agree with most of what you have said, but, I doubt that the Michaels' would "opt out" of following our lives if our lives took a turn for a breakdown. I think that the Michaels' are here for a long time and not necessarily a good time if you know what I mean, in that, I suspect that they are curious about our choices and trajectories and consequences either way, that they are in it for the duration and not just for the t shirt. I don't think they are quitters lol but if they are, don't tell me, that would be more than upsetting not having their perspective on things. I would hate to think that they would "check out" on us. I.e. Gods away on business please leave a detailed message and we will get right back to you. Hmm.

 

Elie Wiesel's words, and various videos I've seen of Elie Wiesel speaking came to mind.  
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/1049.Elie_Wiesel

Especially anytime he refers back to some version of questions asking where God was at Auschwitz

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/wiesel-yes-we-really-did-put-god-on-trial-1.5056

"I was there when God was put on trial."

"Why should they know what happened? I was the only one there. It happened at night; there were just three people. At the end of the trial, they used the word chayav, rather than ‘guilty'. It means ‘He owes us something'. Then we went to pray."

[AnnaD 8,337]

@WolfAmethyst, I had to search it to understand what exactly you are referring to. Is it this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_on_Trial ? Not to hijack this thread, but I have no doubt that these conversations must have been had during Auschwitz Birkenau.

[WolfAmethyst 1,007]

2 minutes ago, AnnaD said:

@WolfAmethyst, I had to search it to understand what exactly you are referring to. Is it this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_on_Trial ? Not to hijack this thread, but I have no doubt that these conversations must have been had during Auschwitz Birkenau.

Yes- I was referring to the trial Elie Wiesel himself was witness to, as well as comments he's made to the effect that, at the time, he'd thought God must have been absent / taken a vacation while the horrors of the Holocaust unfolded.

And yet Elie Wiesel himself survived...I'd like to think Michael is trying to convey that the possibility exists for us to survive, too.

[AnnaD 8,337]

@WolfAmethyst, Ok. I was wondering sorry what you were meaning. Thanks for explaining that. 

[Maureen 18,395]

7 hours ago, Bobby said:

Maureen:  At this time, what do you see as the probability for each of the top 5 Democratic candidates, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Mike Bloomberg, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, one of which will be running for president against Trump, that they could/would beat Trump if they were to be the nominee?

 

MEntity:  It is the same probabilities for all: This currently stands at 58%. The reason it is the same probability for each is that it is not the candidate that determines this election, but the voters. It may be anticipated that one candidate over another may result in fewer voters or losing voters, but those who are voting for the corrupt King are voting for the corrupt King, regardless of any claim or assumption that they are weighing options.

 

Maureen: Thank you!!

 

Interestingly, what Michael says about the probable 2020 election results, if Democrats get out and vote in numbers, matches exactly what Rachel Bitecofer says and has been saying since before the 2018 elections. She's brilliant. If you haven't seen her in an interview or read her ideas you're in for a treat. 

 

Rachel Bitecofer, a political scientist at the Niskanen Center, in Washington, D.C., thinks that most pollsters and forecasters rely on outdated ideas about how candidates succeed. She argues that the outcome has far less to do with the candidates’ ideology than we think it does. Her perspective has been controversial, but in July, 2018, months before the midterm elections, her model predicted the Democratic victory in the House with an accuracy unmatched by conventional forecasters. And it suggests that Democrats should stop worrying about losing, and focus on firing up their voters.

 

Here's more... with a link below.

 

"What if everything you think you know about politics is wrong? What if there aren’t really American swing voters—or not enough, anyway, to pick the next president? What if it doesn’t matter much who the Democratic nominee is? What if there is no such thing as “the center,” and the party in power can govern however it wants for two years, because the results of that first midterm are going to be bad regardless? What if the Democrats' big 41-seat midterm victory in 2018 didn’t happen because candidates focused on health care and kitchen-table issues, but simply because they were running against the party in the White House? What if the outcome in 2020 is pretty much foreordained, too?"

 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/02/06/rachel-bitecofer-profile-election-forecasting-new-theory-108944?fbclid=IwAR33vbf20v_oqeBaeSW8qV-IcvdzijwHLtyeVqlm78B6yxUFMSIBbI7ATeA

 

[DanielaS 9,130]

11 hours ago, CurvyWords said:

Please watch this video if you get most of your news from cable. It's incredibly insightful about what's going on in the media and how to navigate the info glut.

 

 

Relevant here is a Michael Speaks session from 2002, 18 years ago, that I've had on my list of questions for a couple of years now. I wanted to ask if it is still true that the news media is simply "innocent" and "slow."  I suspect this session was done before the radicalization power of Fox News gained dominance. I do not think that Fox News  is "innocent" and "slow." But I do think that the CNNs/MSNBCs, etc that Carlos talks about in the video are still in the "innoccent" and "slow" camp, maybe less so than they were 18 years ago, but they are still have roots in traditional, old-fashioned news media. Which was always aligned with corporate interests. 

 

Question: The news media in the US is extremely narrow and biased. Would Michael please address this and suggest a reliable source?

 

MEntity: We believe there is too much undue emphasis given to the possibility that your media is “biased” and “narrow.” A more accurate perception, from our point of view, is that it is “innocent” and “slow.”

 

We have rarely seen your media “hide” anything for long, or distort it for long, or manipulate it, etc. The truth does get out, even if not in the first few reports. We believe it is helpful to “follow” the news as it unfolds and remind yourselves that the people collaborating in reporting are humans involved in their own lives, fears, and agendas as you are.

 

In general, Local News is fairly accurate over a shorter period of time. News Shows, such as 60 Minutes and Dateline can be more concerned with presentation than with the truth, but a great deal of truth is there, even if cloaked.

 

Publicly funded radio is fairly accurate in reporting, but we have found this area of news to be severely subjective, which has its pros and cons. This is not to say it is inaccurate or untruthful, but there is far more potential for want of a specific point to get across, rather than the truth. Public Radio will vary from reporter to reporter and show to show. You must validate for yourselves with whom you relate.

 

We described the news as Innocent and Slow because it is. There is no real agenda of narrowness or bias, as we have said, but it is fair to say there are far too many considerations clouding the reporting which are distracting. This distraction slows the news, but it does get through. We say it is Innocent because most who are caught up in the world of reporting have a hard time seeing past the structures currently in place.

 

And finally, we have found that News from the North and East of the United States tends to be the most immediately concerned with accuracy and correction.

 

Question: I was concerned by the lack of world news, especially when it does not affect us directly.

 

MEntity: ALL news is only reported in terms of how it affects the general area reporting. This is true in all countries. It is not unique to the United States’ reporting methods.

 

To access what is happening in the world, we can suggest the Internet as an invaluable resource of accuracy and immediacy. There are “streams” of media from other countries, as well as “local” newspapers in English from other countries. There is a tremendous resource of alternative news sources inherent in what is called the World Wide Web. This takes up the slack where your local television or radio cannot fulfill.

 

As for those media, we can suggest BBC World News is accurate enough and accessible on the radio and cable, while the network called ABC tends to have World News presented accurately on broadcast television. Does this help clarify?

 

 

[Leela Corman 3,899]

Hey y'all, Elie Wiesel turns out to have been a notorious groper of young women, so let's let him fade. There are better and deeper writers on the Shoah, such as my main man Primo Levi, whose wrestlings with the experience left pointless discussions of "why" in the dust and engaged instead with science and human behavior (he was a chemist as well as a poet and essayist) and with mourning the fact that humans keep committing atrocities on each other, even after the Shoah, that we learn nothing (he frequently referenced the Khmer Rouge in his writings, as that was contemporary).

 

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound testy, but 1) a sexual harasser should not be lauded for his 2) sentimental writings invoking a nonexistent deity. The struggles of a person raised in Jewish orthodoxy with the idea that there's a god somewhere that "let" the Shoah happen are, to me, empty of meaning, and I am saying this as a Jew and a descendant of survivors, and as someone whose work has almost exclusively been about the Shoah for the a lot of my career. I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to sit at seders year after year and hear relatives do that "why did god let this happen" spiel. I think that line of questioning does real harm, because it is not a theorized deity we must query when we are examining human cruelty, whether that cruelty is on an intimate or a mass scale. It is human nature that we should be focused on if we want to come anywhere close to solving "a problem from hell", as UN Ambassador Samantha Power once termed genocide. Those who look to a supernatural entity to somehow stop these events from occurring, especially the idea that one's people are "chosen" and that somehow that means we've got some guy looking out for us, when history clearly shows us that the only thing we Jews have been consistently chosen for besides high cholesterol is state-sanctioned murder, are going to be continually disappointed and lost.

 

I care passionately about genocide and totalitarianism, and while religious convictions can really help people be brave in those situations, this particular discourse within Jewish life really upsets me. It's also the handmaiden of "god gave us the land of Israel, the people who were already there are the enemy, so we can take their land and homes from them". It leads to oppression and to repeating history, this time with us as the aggressors, even as we call ourselves victims.

 

The last thing I'll say is on the subject of asking "why". I learned this from the death of my first daughter. The question when something horrible happens to you isn't "Why you", it's "why NOT you". Bad things happen, unfortunately. There's no one up there controlling it, and none of us are exempt. I wasn't being singled out or punished when Rosalie died. She had her own reasons for coming and for going. Any meaning or learning I extracted from the experience was not "fated", it was due to my own abilities and privilege to exercise them. I mean this as a comfort, though I don't think I'm coming across that way: it's cruel to yourself to ask why something awful and random happened. It puts the onus of responsibility on you for things that may have been completely out of your control. Don't do that to yourself if you can help it. I mean yes, many things are preventable, wear seatbelts, use sunscreen, cross at the light etc., but life can throw some gnarly shit at you.