Friday, April 11, 2025
🇨🇦 gender roles
Do anyone even know what they are talking about. Ask yourself: do you have the qualifications of a doctor. Neither does Mark Carney. My point here is this. That if you don't care. And only wish to take away the right a person must have to adjudicate their lives on a universal level. Then, I accuse you of being a conservative hypocrite. What you could suggest, is how people with having gender identity taken away from them, want to be given the right to make that choice in a safe a manner as possible. This is not a hard concept to grasp. It is very basic to our personal human understanding. The needs the same people go through in using their gender identity, for example, being treated as equals is basic. Hypocrites acting morally superior because they have no justification to look down on gender identity as something that makes you more principled than others.. is also just basically obvious.
Carney is leading. LEADING ON THE BASIS CANADIANS CARRY V-A-L-U-E-S. False Canadians across the board need to wear a badge for their own bigotry. This is what this point in history comes down to.
~Marco
Which is more perverse...
¹mentality into judging those whose gender preference should NOT be given as a personal choice being made.
²dogmatic association: That an individual choosing to be themselves in their own image are deliberately playing god against those with false attitudes toward them. (Gender based stereotypes.) Is this type of thinking about gender identity not normal or only intended to be hurtful in this particular role.
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1Bm6QU53NP/
All women ever did to show me she had boundaries was manipulate me for sex. Meaning all she wanted from me was sex. Women in my experience went straight for my pants Fast forward. . Now that I realize all this as I've mentioned herein - my purpose is to refuse her sex If she sees I cannot be manipulated through her using me as sex. She then realizes I reapect her without it. No boundaries. Zero bullshit. Just respect All class
Not my fiction
The Loop Is Not Yours Until You Break It
Here’s something most of our culture still doesn’t want to admit:
We’re not just watching the world.
We’re participating in its construction, moment by moment.
Not in a “manifest your dreams” way. Not in New Age fluff.
But in the hard, empirical truth of neuroscience, cognitive science, and systems theory.
Your brain isn’t a camera. It’s a prediction engine.
It doesn’t see reality. It hallucinates a best guess of what’s out there, based on memory, sensation, and expectation.
And when those guesses line up with others, we call that “reality.”
So no. Reality isn’t something out there you’re passively experiencing.
It’s a loop. A recursive feedback system between body, memory, emotion, and interpretation.
That has consequences.
Especially now.
Because fascism doesn’t win by arguing. It wins by hijacking that loop.
It floods it with fear, simplifies it with slogans, and convinces people that its version of reality is the only one that makes sense.
It offers a fake kind of stability. A cheap version of “truth.”
One that reduces complexity into control.
But we can break that loop.
Not by yelling facts.
Not by arguing harder.
We break it by raising the signal, not the volume.
We do it by telling better stories. By helping people remember deeper.
By refusing the easy answers that erase what makes us human.
We do it by living in a more complex, embodied, emotional truth.
Fascism is a closed loop.
We are an open system.
That’s the fight.
And that’s the invitation.
Thursday, April 10, 2025
Representational ideas
••○○•••°
I sit in my emotions. Only if I don't cheat them. Nothing beats it. Most actors are neurtoic (e.g. impulsive, uncontrollable, response) in that they internalize and program thought. However, that insecurity is not only seen by an audience. What happens is... an audience knows you are planning your next move. The audience can see how a plot unfolds. What an audience wants is to experience shifts in the actor without knowing why a choice was made. The emotional scale of the character is always present in truth telling by an actor. The actor cannot edit what is going on around them. The actor must be IN their BODY which translates into the psychological space that is your own mind. Most neurotic actors are insecure and not emotionally available to the scene in many ways. Therefore, it becomes an exhibited form. The shape and style of a scene must involve a special awarness that an actor conveys this silence to the world within them. The image than meets the audience. (Not felt in the action of what a scene entails.) The world around the actor is separate from being observed, this is because the audience doesn't know the inner life of the character. Only the actor knows what is space and time.
The surroundings are based on such an image of the actor.
Marco Almeida 2025
-The Peg
°•○●○○•○○•••
“Nietzsche’s idea is that things and actions are already interpretations. So to interpret is to interpret interpretations, and thus to change things, ‘to change life.’ What is clear for Nietzsche is that society cannot be an ultimate authority. The ultimate authority is creation, it is art: or rather, art represents the absence and the impossibility of an ultimate authority. From the very beginning of his work, Nietzsche posits that there exist ends ‘just a little higher’ than those of the State, than those of society. He inserts his entire corpus in a dimension which is neither historical, even understood dialectically, nor eternal. What he calls this new dimension which operates both in time and against time is the untimely. It is in this that life as interpretation finds its source. Maybe the reason for the ‘return to Nietzsche’ is a rediscovery of the untimely, that dimension which is distinct both from classical philosophy in its ‘timeless’ enterprise and from dialectical philosophy in its understanding of history: a singular element of upheaval.”
–Gilles Deleuze, from “Nietzsche’s Burst of Laughter” Interview
Photo by Bruno de Monès
°•○••••••
How do you know what the truth is underneath if you don't even know how to present the truth in itself? The truth is being present (in reality), is it not. Only then can someone be their truth. Like art, it is subjective. I am not making this up. I do acting as an artist because I want to fantasize. That is what makes art and makes it interesting. Truth, in my view, has to be rooted in philosophy. Not just anyone can do it. Which is why people get to be psychologically unstable and they bring it to performance based art. I am a cross between a Shakespearean and a romantic.
-Marco Almeida 2025
The Peg
°●•••●●°●•●
April 11th 2025
To what disease is of the mind and what is its cure if not a dream state into curing it.
Marco Almeida ©️ 2025
-The Peg
°●°●°○°●○°○°
What is the shadow vs what is projection of the shadow . . . In most cases what Jung is saying is probably right if not misunderstood. To properly distinguish or to characterize "the other" (i.e. the other = "person") What Jung wants us to refrain from doing is making "the other" (person) not subjected to our personal vices projected onto the other. This involves a tremendous amount of self awareness. Therefore, as we are aware of ourselves as what is the other person absorbs or are in the process of acquiring information incalculably. The source of our actions as related to the feedback they give you WITHOUT conflicted (e.g. dogmatic) thinking. Your self expression is in constant validation of the other - you just never know the difference. Unless we are aware of what is? To the other = the other plugs into us or unplugs from what is happening in direct relation.
MA2025
°●°○°○○°○°●°
You cannot be a musician by merely knowing how to sing. You may know all the steps of a dance but if you have not creation in your heart you are only functioning as a machine. You cannot love if your object is merely to achieve a result. There is no such thing as an ideal because that is merely an achievement. Beauty is not an achievement, it is reality, now, not tomorrow, and if there is love you will understand the unknown, you will know what God is, and nobody need tell you and that is the beauty of love. It is eternity in itself. And because we have no love we want someone else like God to give us that. If we really loved, not an ideal, do you know what a different world this would be? We would be really happy people. Therefore we would not invest our happiness in things, in family, in ideals. We would be happy and therefore things, family and ideals will not dominate our lives. They are all secondary things. Because we do not love and because we are not happy we invest in things, thinking that they will give us happiness and one of the things in which we invest is God.
J. Krishnamurti
Madras 6th Public Talk 23rd November, 1947
My Response:
What Krishnamurti is saying is to (a) understand love of "the other" ...this kind of machine-life you unconsciously lead and to understand (b) "what is" love are two separate things:
1 - that when you understand anything worth knowing you do not need to have a source to know it. (i.e. "the other") Therefore, love is something we do not necessarily ever think about... let alone understand as we think of acquiring knowability we can both tear down or build back up again and again.
2- if you take the first part of what you think, slice that in half, then if you consider what is you might know. What is Love turns into second hand knowledge. You are living life as a lie. Let that part of you go. Only this is the true way to god. (In unlearning what copies the idea of god and you act according to a machine-life. A lie.) You become something extraordinarily difficult to endure life if you do achieve this type of thinking onto others.
Marco Almeida ©️2025
- The Peg
°●°°°○°°○○°○°
All acting – all of it... an actor should only act because it should be timeless. Otherwise, you are not taking risks. Otherwise, the actor is only being what is rational to the part. The actor's job is to transform themselves into a character, or the audience could thereby think to themselves, what is stale performance art. Any classically trained, an actor, plots their humanity in reality, tests it outside of life's convention - if it crosses with performance art. (That is the challenge.) Any actor that would rather cheat or cop out on the truth, NOT trusting their true to life emotions are not at the center of the art. Here, is where metaphsyics joins in my personal space. I recall being in Winnipeg where I was in your seminar. Of which during the lecture you gave, I demonstrated exactly what I am talking about. My intent was raw as it felt. I did not feel a need to connect with the other actors. My attachment came from within. It was real to witness. It was to the moment, because I stayed in what that moment was. I was the only actor in that exercise who took risks and made choices. I didn’t haveto trust a process. I didn’t care what anyone else thought. I executed. Where the objective was met, you thought I was beating myself up post exercise. I WAS NOT!! I was investing in the catharsis I experienced in doing the exercise. ¹ If you are not feeling liberated as an actor. ² My point is if not. ³ Then, doing it for the wrong reasons is not on me. Full disclosure, Steve B~ / Marco Almeida ©️ 2025 -The Peg
°●•●°○°○
Wednesday, April 09, 2025
Porn isn't real
Porn is sleezy and shameless. That's not what is. What is the reality is that porn acts as an industry, to watch prostitutes prostituting themselves. What we see is not a line being crossed between performers commiting performance art. The line between reality and porn (gets blurred) when you believe what is happening is real when what is actually happening in porn is suppose to be seen as "fake". The truth behind porn is in asking what happens if that line is crossed? It is becoming more and more culturally normalized in American society. And that's the problem.
Centerpieces
I wrote this to describe a certain aspect of myself on a purely effectual level. I have changed a lot throughout my time on this plane of my existence. If you happen to notice anything I have written throughout the years and say you have learned something from it is of great pride for me. (Unless you outright diminish my truths then that is also your right.) Although I would call you a liar if you search through my past writing over Facebook and you say there is no relevance whatsoever.
I urge myself under the guise of a person that I call the most influential human being I have ever met. I reach out to her often. She is Diane Gall.
When I first joined paths with Di, I had long hair and was a bit of an eccentric freak. I am happy to declare I broke that mold and tried to reinvent myself. I remember well the first time I cut my long bohemian hair style to Di's surprise. The first thing that came out of her shock was 'are you going conventional on me.' I was never more disappointed in myself than that exact moment. I will never forget it. It is the reason why I have grown my hair back to that same length circa 2014 at this stage.
The moral of that synopsis is how I was going through a transient time in my life as a student and to impress myself unto others in the matrix that is university.
I have grown through all of that as pieces stored in my minds puzzle as fragments. The most important retrieval of information one can obtain in life is not of ownership but how memory shapes your inertia, and that as you hold onto it then it might morph into something you never thought possible.
°●°●°○°●●°○°○°
Paradoxical existence
What is the paradox of existentialism?
Paradox, in the context of existentialism, means thinking above and beyond absolutes such as right or wrong, good or bad, angelic or evil. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) refers to black and white thinking or all or nothing thinking as dysfunctional thinking.
°●°●°○°▪︎°▪︎▪︎°
HERMENEUTICS
Hermeneutics refers to the theory and practice of interpretation. It describes both a body of historically diverse methodologies for interpreting, primarily, texts, and a theory of understanding. As such, it is concerned with making the unintelligible intelligible, and communicable.
Have you noticed how many wisdom traditions rely on stories and parables to communicate their various messages? Have you noticed, too, that that demands a certain intuitive hermeneutical skill? Why not just explain and clarify and set out, clearly and concisely, what is being said? Why insist that everyone must interpret meaning for themselves?
I've given an example below if you want to test your hermeneutical skills.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It came to pass that the reputation of the Taoist sage, Chuang tzu for profound wisdom reached even the ears of the Emperor Chu. No fool, the Emperor was always quick to recruit learned men to his counsel, not simply to advise him on affairs of state, but to enhance his reputation, and the reputation of his court. Like all rulers, the Emperor Chu was at heart a political animal. He immediately sent two ambassadors to offer Chuang Tzu a ministerial post.
The two ambassadors, themselves both ministers of considerable repute, found Chuang Tzu, fishing on the banks of the Chu river. They were shocked and outraged when Chuang Tzu refused the offer of a ministerial post. They demanded an explanation.
Chuang Chu, still fishing, replied, "Have you seen the mighty turtle shell hanging on the wall above the throne? It has been there for longer than anyone can remember. No bigger turtle had ever been caught. I know this to be true because otherwise it would be hanging on the wall. So venerated is this mighty turtle that once a year it is taken down and a ceremony held to honour it. Now I ask you, though no doubt it is a great honour to be the largest turtle ever caught and killed, is it not true that the turtle would prefer to be still alive and dragging its tail in the mud?"
The two ambassadors reluctantly agreed that this was so.
"Then leave me here to drag my own tail in the mud."
Emil Cioran
Tuesday, April 08, 2025
Marco
We revolt against political and economic slavery but not against psychological.
Why ?
°●°○°○°○°▪︎°▪︎°
Nothing wrong with psychological slavery. Krishnamurti himself would say it's up to us to observe that and transcend it in looking at it without any obejctive or result. If not, then, we also acknowledge conflict.
April 8th 2025
Here is the truth about me....
The book is out on me.
Everybody knows it. They
Know (that I know) exactly
What is thought about me.
I do not (of course) care.
Why?
Because others rather unsubstantiate what they think they know about me. So, instead they create labels associating me to what they think they know - opposed to that I do know.
So I am lableled as delusional.
(That's not on me.)
The other part of this is that whatever the book out on me (is) what is that matters isn't that others believe I'm using manipulation as motivation to try get what I want. The truth is if you knew the difference would you acknowldge it without copying what is my pattern of behavior on here.
I use facebook as a tool. A medium to perform. To get my otherwise unpublished ideas into form. To inform myself as a universe gone blind.
I am sick of being looked down on.
Put into perspective I know exactly what is the difference. And only because I care to make myself known for my ideas does a criminal.
I stand here for no other reason.
Marco
Saida is off on this one. Bad poetry by bad writers is the one below good writers that know poetry who don't care. Think about it this way: the scholar that has a proficiency for language against another person of the opposite sex whose proclivity is geared toward emotional intelligence. (You may get the idea here.) It's that no matter what is the person of the opposite sex is doing, if it only depends on which person leads as the protagonist - the protagonist will always win or lose in the end. Point being what Saida tells us is either both trivial misconception or out of scope with how reality works. The poet who is dangerous comes from the heart. Rejection is futile. The power the poet has cannot be compromised. The antagonist over compensates for everything to get what they want, so if the person of the opposite sex doesn't care about poetry written to her, she's easy to manipulate. Which to the poet is a automatic turnoff. Women with authority wouldn't know the difference. Poetry always wins.
°••○○•°•••
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/164WeTBcEQ/
Wittgenstein
“What makes a subject difficult to understand — if it is significant, important — is not that some special instruction about abstruse things is necessary to understand it. Rather it is the contrast between the understanding of the subject and what most people want to see. Because of this the very things that are most obvious can become the most difficult to understand. What has to be overcome is not difficulty of the intellect but of the will.”
–Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Occasions 1912-1951
Sunday, April 06, 2025
Debunking suicide
Suicide is not to be romanticized as a practical device of someone else's reckoning in that they commit to self-murder. Allow me to descibe this as follows...
What I can acquire myself, in saying this about suicide... is that innately speaking... I am too much of a coward to do so.
In conclusion: my personal belief? Is that someone who commits to suicide has resorted their last line of defense to end something beautiful. It is one of the most honorably repsected acts of one's purpose. IF WE USE SOCRATES AS AN EXAMPLE??
(The resolve it takes to commit suicide.) It must be done of sound mind if for no other reason, you have been given a certain death sentence by illness or disease.
°●°●°●●°●•●
Interlocutor¹
and what about incurable depression?
°●°●°●°●°●°●°●°°
My rebuttal
Not sure what that should entail, because I am not in a position to know what suicide prevention looks like for a true professional. But because I take my talent at philosophy very seriously... the power of my imagination comes to aid. To answer your question: depression is not incurable. It would be unreasonable of me to assume so. Tradtionalists that play a role in psychology would only suggest that the role of clinically depressed patients, should be rehabilitation as an end. That means the result driven focus will entail well being as a practical operation for people with depression.
Motivational factors include:
¹medication, ²education or ³what is better known as ⁴cost benefit (self-help tools), ⁵spirituality such as no better part of a ⁶religion (think: connectedness relationship to god), ⁷socially invested goal oriented behavior using "talk-therapy" (coping) as a helpful model... that follows, ⁸psychoanalysis for guidance throughout your journey into being in touch without thinking reality is all negative? (All of that can be outlining a depressed person's awareness of everything that happens without depriving them access to the same freedom everbody else has in life.) To prevent relapse which is the final stage of ultimately getting better.
My point is: when you find yourself with depression, you can regulate yourself, and using coping mechanisms without resorting to patterns of behavior that you feel stuck in. When you find yourself overcoming life's obstacles (or what I called "relapse") with time you feel relapses becoming more and more normalized. When this happens, you are moving forward.
°●•●•●•●°●°▪︎•
Interlocutor²
Bravery and selfishness are not mutually exclusive.
Many people feel relief after they decide to commit suicide, and the people around them are surprised once they do, thinking that they had seemed so positive recently.
I think it takes more courage to live with pain than to end the possibility of more pain.
If suicide is brave, then considering suicide would have been scary, otherwise what need is the courage
•□•●•□•□•□•□•
how does that resolve preclude selfishness?
I did not suggest the dead feel relief. The relief comes when the living person sees an end to their pain.
°•○●•••••
My rebuttal:
I don't know... it just seems like a problematic statement. If you obviously suggest that person 'x' commited suicide for the same reason they feel relief even prior to suicide. How do they know? How can they possibly know suicide is the answer to find relief EVEN IF they are personally accounting for the suicide to bring them that relief. It seems like an improbability to me. Which if you read my query correctly... leaves room for human error (on the person commiting the act.) I can't make it any clearer. Your statement is not only ambiguous but vague in its complexity. The only room you have for argument taking place, is that the actor is at peace with their decision. Therefore, the action of suicide IS the relief. Even if the actors relief can be implicitly implied - makes for shaky argument with cracks in it, perhaps. Perhaps - I am completely off base here... but unless I am called out for totally being in the wrong, I graciously accept that fate.
To your ²nd point:
How does resolve NOT preclude selfishness. What I mean by adding the adverb 'NOT' is how to infer the meaning behind a suicide. My example is: using my cowardice as an example to make that point. My point being the suicidal psychological impact a person must have to completely abandon all self-doubt NOT commiting suicide takes RESOLVE. A type of resolve I would never doubt. I am not condoning suicide for your information. I feel that renouncing suicide, in an apriori metaphorical role a suicide has in that person's life... takes on a type of resolve unknown to most of us. It's a resolve not just anyone possesses.
•○●●○•••••••
Interlocutor³
some are seriously mentally ill; no bravery there. no bravery when you leave a family that needs you. perhaps brave when one is so unhappy with life that death is better ... but i don't see 'bravery' as an aspect of suicide. why would it be brave? selfish, well, i suppose. but that is really meaningless as it their body and life, not yours. and rational selfishness is a virtue.
°●°●°●°●●°●°●
My rebuttal:
rational selfishness is not a virtue. It is a contrivance.
rational selfishness cannot be clear or sound rationale if you are improvising your morals out of convenience to get what you want in life.
here is my grievance with your take, Steve. If we practice or participate in supporting the courage it takes to perform suicide. Then what is a life living without rational selfishness. My answer to you is this: that if I am a rationally selfish individual. Is comitting myself to performing suicide a rational choice. And seeing if my choice is rational. How do I know.
Strange Dreaming Patterns
Untrue. It is also known as reverse psychology. Better to be safe than sorry, and risk not being lazy about it.
All Pacino in acting the part
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DDKYnqOyt8V/?igsh=MXJwMjlrYXF4cDJjdg==
You know: (characters)
1 What they are going to do.
2 Where they are going.
3 Where they've been.
Saturday, April 05, 2025
If you got out and spoke to anyone outside of Facebook or , anyone who’s been here for the past 8-10 years, especially during COVID for all the unnecessary mandates and wrongful punishments, along with the morally wrong treatment of the freedom convoy and the misuse/mismanagement of natural resources, or over taxing of citizens, ETCETERA… you’d come across many people that actually work for a living that would disagree with your stance on the liberals these days… But let’s be clear, all these things considered, their beliefs as a result of all those events don’t make them far right or extremists.. they’re just people that have had enough of being taken advantage of and want a glimmer of positive change for their families and neighbours.
°•○●○○○•••°°°
I have opinions that are far more ingenious than whatever you may think of me based on what you hear (about me.) It will not end here.
Let me make everything perfectly clear. None of it bothers me. You - can - talk. Talk all you want to.
Now back to my shallow existence you've obviously cared enough to go on about...
(The insinuations you demostrated are all noted.)
You really want me to get into your red herring? (You may look at this as my response...)
Let's begin there:
I will justify what I think based on what I believe is truly going on.
The truth is this:
I am not a vicitm. I SEE IT. The truth (about me) is simpler.
1- I have a job.
2- I am am artist (as well) and...
3- the book is out on me.
I have a job I enjoy. (Despite what I feel... it is a backhanded attempt to devalue that.)
As an artist I speak to the human condition: I accuse you of making false claims. Something, you may realize I process. I take this as an invitation. Therefore, see (as I mention) what is going on. This signals...
I have used Facebook. It is a publsihing tool. I am an above average scribe whose ideation I express. Nobody else is obligated. On the other hand... this is what I know. (~now what is happening all the time) it is a question of being who I am. Who I am is important. That is "how" I funtion on here. To report how wrong you are about me, is more of an exercise of incredulity. I welcome it. Why? How I express myself is none of my business than from what others otherwise think about me.
I consider myself all these things.
Also....
I know people. (People in the acting community. People, who I respect more than others.)
I am a poet. (Not many people are.)
I have a metaphorical value for acting. (My ability just hasn't been tested in.)
I am unpublished. (Authorship)
I consider myself all these things.
I also consider myself logician, philosopher unknown to many and for that same reason (other's) are not synonymous with it. Even if they don't acknowledge me for it. I will.
To your other views:
I believe in covid vaccines. The convoy was an embarassing thing to witness. If that's not what you feel, then this take is moot. I don't feel sorry for those persecuted with due measure for the actors of the convoy.
Canada is not overtaxed. It is a trivial misconception. Conservatives say: too much?? The conservative dichotomy in Cutting tax is in many areas to decompensate for social programs. They call it red tape. It's a cop out. Plain and simple!!
Spending on natural resources is based on equal consideration across the board. (Not just for political gains.) Liberals are, whether you agree or not, the best form of government to the interests of allocation inferring natural resources long term sustainability. A political prostitute that is Danielle Smith thinks Canadian sovereignty depends on what Canada should be doing to "help Alberta". Ironic. Pierre Poilievre would liquidate our assets such as water (bending to Trump.)
Speaking of Trump: you speak of positive change at this point for historical value 2025. (The pride you possess for Trump.) Do it all you want. The fact is he employs his position with the following bubble mentality: "If I can't do what I want the way I want - someone else will get away with doing it." What that means is the same things Trump cares to accomplish... he is saying: DO IT MY WAY. The good news is you're absolutely right Jason. We can all think the same way Donald Trump does.
The difference in being decent is this - Trump is making sure he makes cowards of us all.
I am not a coward. I have been blacklisted by the 🇺🇸 government based on my beliefs. I on the other hand see a problem with holding innocent people as political prisoners whether in their own country or not.
Marco Almeida 🇨🇦 2025
-The Peg
Portugal 🇵🇹
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DHwLF_Sotvb/?igsh=cDY1bGNrb3F1ODdy
The Moors have a history in Portugal. The Portuguese are a Jesuit nation. Hostility is an addiction to some people. But Portugal is a sovereign socialist Republic. Historically, this is the moden day Political spectrum of Portuguese rule. To my knowledge, dictatorship is a time during which Salazar took power in 🇵🇹 and their Republic became a fascist run state. Whereas that power dynamic held off communists penetrating from the East.
Fast forward to present day:
To limit reform based on a minority of religious-right activity, if they happen to be Muslim. (This might not exactly be a coincidence afterall.) To suggest that religious right wing extremist view is happening, would suggest terrorism is underlaying this geopolitical storm - is also not coincidental. To that end... Any form of violence against a minority can never be justified. However, if there is vigilance within those parameters, any threat of terrorist activity must be looked at.
It can also indicate that for that reason, terrorist mobilization should be investigated as a cause of what Islamic organizational influence may cause. This may be due to migration.
If migration is an indicator of terrorism. Then, the prevailing antidote will occur.
Significantly this leads us in how this situation needs to be addressed. Any ideology that the terrorist agenda has in place of mobilzation has to be dealt with first. Consider destroying the cause of terroists. Which is what? Probably racism.
Once you eliminate race from the equation what then. (Persecution = inquisition) Again, this falls under history repeating itself. Look at what aims history has brought to this point in time. The answer must be to eliminate relationship with foreign affluence but not the circus that racism creates.
If we begin there, the causes become much more clear. That any influence between world domination should not rely on how religion becomes a territorial advantage. Terrorists need to realize they cannot refer themselves as enemies towards a democracy. Government intervention becomes a problem: only if terrorists disobey signs contingent in which government isolates its own power.
That element being, true terrorist ideology should be met without hostility over the false cause of religion.
Muslims should be free to practice their religion in democratic nations. But, the terrorist cause must be set against the ruling class of a population. Which brings us back to Portugal. They are a Jesuit nation. They identify as socialist.
If you fail to see that in this day and age of terroristic threats, you need to maginify the cause. To lawfully persecute the non ruling class terrorists. But to persecute an entire religion? This requires little favor.
The conclusion is that Portugal is not the enemy. Look no further than how conservative function in the west. Neoconservatives are both irrational and psychotic in their ideology. In the face of terrorist ideology....Classic liberalism should combat that view to eradicte the difference in what act as threats to democracy. (Democratic rule is the final solution.) Where people can freely practice their religion. 🇨🇦 is a model of nonauthority on this (model.) 🇨🇦 prides itself on maintaining its sovereignty, where its values harbor the population to act freely but not without just cause. That is the basis of its charter. Documented rights are human rights. Advocacy against terrorist ideology has place in the world (hierarchy) of sustainable environment for its people. That is where customs are met without the persecution of innocent people that follow customs.
Finally, if the terrorist community do not care to follow or practice or participate on those countries customs, means the only solution is not to create a hostile takeover of that undemocratic ideology. The solution is to infiltrate a just society using its laws as a act favoring the community. Portugal need to act against the mentality, that infiltration of a small minority cannot happen.
The countries people must abide to rules. The customs of every Muslim nations rules has been seen as relgiously based on a historical level.
Therefore, terrorists cannot win.
This is a clear indication, in today's geopolitical climate, to abolish racism of those staging a crisis. (The minority terrorist groups demonstrate this.) The same countries values (Portuguese socialist rule) should also adopt - laws as made to be understood - and demonstrated through diplomacy. Muslims in this day and age have to treat the idea of democracy with emptiness. Not with fascist ideology, which the impact of Islamic authority adopts by default. Portugal is and will always be a Jesuit inspired country.
Marco Almeida ©️ 2025
-The Peg
