Vegans Eat GMOs, Not Banksters

We live in the age of increasing intellectual fascism: the herds think all the same, and vigorously charge the same way all the time.

Some of the latest fashions in the USA consuming the progressive consumer, are: off with diet sodas, off with aspartame, off with gluten, off with meat, off with fish, off with eggs, off with cheese, in with vegans, in with LBTGs (Lesbian Bisexual Transexual Gays), in with wine, off with antibiotics, off with the French and their perverse stuffing of geese with food, in and now out with electric cars.

Hunt, Kill, & Eat, Or Plutocrats Will Do It to You

Hunt, Kill, & Eat, Or Plutocrats Will Do It to You

[Man evolved into, and as, a carnivorous ape. Deny thoroughly this most human of all natural traits, paradoxically, puts civilization at risk of falling into the most demonic hands.]

This tendency to ever greater mental fascism, is perversely augmented by the Internet social networks, which practice “curation”. “Curation” means you will see ever more what you “like”, a new form of mental masturbation. It’s very seriously studied by researchers employed by Facebook, and published in the best journals. Facebook says it’s not its fault.

As the USA leads the world’s intellectual fashion into nothingness, one must pay attention. If one pays enough attention to all the preceding, one will pay no attention whatsoever to what the illuminati in charge like Obama, do, for real. That’s actually the main interest of the preceding (as far as the oligarchy is concerned).

Many of the fashions are laudable (out with aspartame, diet sodas), or ridiculous (out with gluten). Fake sugars, it turns out, are pretty bad, and can lead to diabetes (just like the real thing). Gluten is bad for those suffering from celiac disease (although how that starts is probably related to an incidence worldwide going from 1/300 to 1/40). I myself caught a related disease in Africa, and I watched my diet as a hawk. However, in all these cases, the fashion is to replace the offending substance by something worse, namely large quantities of plain old sugar.

Today I will focus on vegans. Vegans abstain from animal products. The reasons they evoke have to do with one’s health and one’s ethics.

The problem with the later is that, when one think highly of oneself in ethical matters, one may be led to two flaws:

1) we live in a highly unethical civilization. The person with high ethics may be prone to suffer so much distress, just looking at that, that it could not possibly be contemplated, and, thus, understood.

2) it’s highly unethical because too many wolves have been left alone, as they came to rule the sheep (banksters, oilmen, etc.). There again, the one distressed by the contemplation of evil may even be unable to visualize the possibility of demonic creatures of human origin.

3) For goodness to triumph, war is necessary. One should envision wisdom as Mars and Apollo, condemned to apply war, in the Sisyphean task of ever more clever progress, thanks to Prometheus’ gifts.

And now, having dealt with ethical health, let’s address physical health.


We Are Not Cows:

It’s well known vegans run out of basic vitamins and minerals. B12, calcium, zinc, are examples. Vegans counter that they can apply crafty vegetable assemblies. They often roll-out soy, as the do-all, be-all vegetable protein.

Unfortunately, soy act like an estrogen: at three quarts a day, soy milk will feminize a full special forces superman, complete with breasts. It has been done in Texas (unwittingly). Scaled down to a child’s weight, the danger is obvious: relatively small quantities of soy will feminize a pre-puberty child intensely.

How do cows digest grass? They eat lots of little beasties; snails, insects, etc., to start with. So they are not really vegetarian (that’s why Thatcher gave them insufficiently cooked cow meat, in “free market” anxiety). Moreover cows have special supplementary stomachs, and their gut is equipped with special bacteria prone to digest tough vegetable fiber.

How, and, by the way, most foods vegans eat are actually Genetically Modified Organisms. Beans were invented by the Franks in the Tenth Century, exploding quality and quantity of the population. Similarly for rice in South-East Asia a century later: that exploded the population there.

So had corn, much earlier, in Mesoamerica, and North America: Native Americans became very numerous, because corn provides lots with lots of calories. However, corn eaters suffered from the vegan disease: Native Americans degenerated physically. They became short and weak, at least those heavily dependent upon corn.

We know how the smart Aztecs resolved their (very bad) protein crisis…

Agriculture is nearly 100% Genetically Modified Organisms. Wild almond ancestors will kill you before they feed you. OK, there are GMOs and GMOs, depending upon which modifications are done. But I am making a philosophical point here: GMOs are not necessarily bad… and the VEGAN DIET is thoroughly ARTIFICIAL. (That makes it thoroughly human, as man is scientific and technological, by evolutionary definition.)


We Are Hunters:

We are the product of ten million years, at least, of carnivorous evolution from fruit eating apes. That is why we do need to eat Vitamin C (our ape ancestors got it from fruits), but also L Carnitin (our ancestors have been getting it from meat for at least five million years; without it, muscles break down).

I have known, for a very long time, climbers who got on a vegan diet. Although younger than me, their bodies literally fell apart. Specialists have been asking them to eat cartilage and bone soup (beyond being put on Glucosamine-Chondroitin treatment). Why? Our ancestors, for millions of years did not just eat meat, but bones, cartilage, tendons, ligaments, etc.

And now we need to hunt banksters and their supports, their lovers and admirers. To make this civilization as human as it needs, just to survive. Human ethology is what it is. Learning to live, is learning to live with it, instead of fastening for ourselves new chains from an imagination running on empty.Obsessing about tiny details such as getting enough B12 vitamin, is an unwelcome distraction. To be fully human, is, first, extending that courtesy, to ourselves.

(It did not escape me that banksters hunting is as dangerous as mammoth hunting; thus much of these obsessions with the most ridiculous fads is a rather successful attempt to distract oneself with innocuous subjects, and to display one’s innocuousness, for all to see. Thus, deep down inside, shallow fads are all about cowardice and laziness.)

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , ,

29 Responses to “Vegans Eat GMOs, Not Banksters”

  1. ianmillerblog Says:

    Patrice, while I share your dislike of banksters, I rather fancy the advice to hunt and eat them is a little too far. People who take this advice will end up in the jails paid for by your friendly banksters. I think something a little more subtle and law-abiding is required in practice 🙂


    • gmax Says:

      I think Patrice was tongue in cheek. She did not advocate seriously roasted bankster, bcs she did not present with a recipe.
      Anyway. It’s good to see morals of the Plutocratic age is safe, and you propose to have a law protecting bankster from 5 stars restaurants


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      As GMax said, there is no law against hunting banksters…Actually plutocrats claim there are no banksters, thus their laws don’t forbid to hunt them.

      Too much duplicity by subtlety blossoms into paralysis by analysis.


  2. gmax Says:

    You are what you eat! Eat like a cow, meh like cow… There is way too much moralizing about tidbits, and baby like wailing, about nothing… Indeed.

    Slaves are squeamish, masters strong and fierce, from their different, higher morality, as Nietzsche said… How do you dare to attack bankers, the slaves will whine?


  3. brodix Says:

    Would a non-controversial passion be an oxymoron?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Passion came from Latin, through an extensive stay in French, meaning “suffering”. Any suffering, indeed, will be controversial, and denying that, sharply stupid (which is what oxymoronic means). Thus, yes, indeed. Thinking without passion is oxymoronic. No passion, no thinking.

      Thus, thinking is always controversial.

      Thanks for the thread, BTW, I put it on my twitter feed…


  4. pshakkottai Says:

    Dear Patrice, India is a largely vegetarian country with milk and pulses for protein. And no soy. I wonder if this has made the country more passive. Historically its thinkers had the plutocracy well in view and ate the banksters, so to speak!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Partha: I got a volume of private correspondence from a top oncologist-chief of service at one the world’s top universities on soy. With my usual light touch, I had sort of accused him, equally in private of child abuse for feeding his children massive soy. He sent me meta-analyses, and what not. But meta-analyses prove nothing, whatsoever, in the general case. The fact is getting enough soy for protein means estrogenization.

      When I go to an Indian restaurant in the USA, it’s NOT vegetarian at all. Also vegans exclude milk (= cheese, paneer). Milk provides very high quality protein (although it does not provide L carnitin, hemoglobin, etc.). As a pretty intense athlete and climber, I was for years, de facto, vegetarian (with massive milk). However, I developed an L Carnitin deficiency (taking that as a supplement had spectacular effect).

      India seemed to be to have been full of plutocracies, before the Brits imposed their own…

      Force workers in the 19C Europe were scientifically found to need several pounds of meat a day. From what I have seen in sport, lots of people practicing impact sports, like trail running, need large quantities of calcium and cartilage building material (otherwise they have to grow some in a lab, from their own cells, and then it’s grafted back to them!!!!!)

      In Europe, the peasants were largely vegetarian. One chicken in one pot a week was Henri IV of France great economic idea.
      The rulers, the aristocracy, was massively carnivorous, and obstinately so, as they got lots of gout from it, something they knew very well. So they were big, strong, and aggressive. From my point of view, it was directly related to their monstrous aggressivity. Hence a different moral system. Weirdly, Nietzsche, who knew of the importance of the stomach, did not mention this.


      • pshakkottai Says:

        Dear Patrice, The reason I said Indian civilization was against plutocracy was, the caste system made sure one person did not have all of knowledge, weaponry, wealth and land. Brahmins were allowed only knowledge and policy making and teaching strategy to the second caste, the warriors and kings who were allowed war but not policy.the merchant class dabbled in trade, amass wealth but not the functions of policy and administration. The Next class owned land and agriculture and wealth but not the functions of the other three classes. the first class were naked philosophers as the Greeks referred to them, generally poor but intellectual. This system did not support the formation of plutocracy.


        • brodix Says:

          And as Patrice mentioned, India has multitudes of Gods.


          • Hazxan Says:

            And the vegetarian Hindus in the south are reputed to have the shortest life expectancy in the world.

            High carb diets are good for plutocrats profit, bad for health of the people.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Yes, the gluten madness is proof enough. Paradoxically I nearly died of an illness induced Celiac disease from Africa, decades ago, and I have to watch my diet: I get sick in days if I eat some foods, including the sort of diet Americans are on.
            In particular corn syrup everywhere, etc. I can only eat corn occasionally, as a delicacy (!!!). I make my own bread… Normal USA bread makes me sick… But then the gluten free foods out there are horrible, full of sugars (and would make me sick if I ate them, as they are full of contents I have to avoid!!!)


  5. brodix Says:

    Thinking sometimes appears too objective to be passionate, while all passion is an expression of conscious intent, it tends to lack the nuance that presumably characterizes thinking.
    For instance, as you say, nature and civilization have been genetically modifying from the beginning and this was not controversial, until various seed/fertilizer/chemical companies started modifying plants to be herbicide and insecticide resistant. Which while it might not be an issue in itself, is implicit in large quantities of toxins being put on fields and not only does this have potential health effects on the products, nature does not function as the monoculture industrial farming would like to treat it as. Think bees.
    So then in their passion, the environmental movement declares all genetic modification to be bad.
    This then goes to the nature of consciousness, as well as its emotional base state, being dynamic, while thought, as organizational structure, tends to be static.
    Thus emotion is a singular act, while thinking is a structure of multiple pieces.
    Consequently emotional acts can be controversial to those examining the many parts. While thinking can seem immobilizing to those seeking action.

    Plutocracy is like a crust forming on the surface and the consequence is that in order for the larger organism to continue to grow, it has to be shed, like old bark or skin.
    Now those who are part of this crust, see it as protecting and defining the larger organism, but also have to consequently contain and define it, thus limiting its growth.
    Now those further inside this organism mostly want the freedom to grow and see that outer surface as both an expression of their own desires and as well as oppression of their desires. Thus fascination with the powerful, along with resentment for them.
    The problem is that what is most effective at overthrowing an old order, are the forces it creates to maintain that order and which are under the most internal pressure. So it is often the military and or despotic/politically dynamic people.
    If the civil order breaks down completely, then the situation becomes more volatile and prone to explosions.
    People, emotions, consciousness, society, pushes out. Civil order, thought, culture, push in. We exist in that boundary.
    The reason banks and the financial structure are metastasizing is because all people treat money as quantified hope and so want as much as possible. Which makes those manufacturing these increasingly nebulous promises very powerful. Until this bubble pops and the polarity of social control reverses, to fear and then the military is giving orders.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I have written hundreds (?) of essays about the fact that thinking is a mix of the emotional and logical system (logical in the sense of the logos).

      Plutocracy can become the essence, for millennia. Although the French and American revolutions shook off plutocracy for a few years, it quickly reasserted control (Napoleon in France; so-called Founding Fathers in the USA, who were not the real founders…). Basically, ever since Athens Direct Democracy died from Macedonian fascism, plutocratic principle have been in command.

      The reason high finance rules does not have to do with “quantified hope” as much as the repelling of the FDR Banking Act by the repulsive Bill Clinton, and the colossal lowering of taxes on the rich under Reagan.


      • brodix Says:


        I wonder if that this shortly preceded and possibly encouraged Greece to go from a pantheistic form of religion, where the various Gods balanced each other, like a family squabbling among itself, to a monotheistic religion, where there is only one supreme deity, with much lower order minions, in angels and saints, that only carry out the directives of this supreme being, was what cemented top down authoritarian rule, as the default political structure?

        The reason FDR tried to rein in banking in the first place, was its power over the people and their medium of economic exchange. Government might be the central nervous system of the community, but finance is its circulation system and when you control the heart, the arteries and all the vessels, the head will follow. Clinton was just an infection.


  6. EugenR Says:

    The worst diet of all is the MacDonalds, Coca-Cola diet. It causes obesity, it is addictive due to gluten and the “secret formula” used in Coca-Cola, and its environmental impact due to methane the meat factories (cattle) flatulence . And there is more to it. Do we have moral right to kill and eat other living mammals, just for pleasing ourselves, while we could create a perfect artificial substitute, not constituted of soybean or corn?
    As to LBTGs and veggies, i agree with you. It can’t be right.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Advanced artificial foods are coming, I am all for them. Labs are elaborating them.

      I am all for transgender and their ilk. I do think that: anti-sexism = transgender.

      Just I despise, and view as deeply misleading, those who obsess about that, while forgetting preparing for the great banksters hunt we need to engage in. Or generally plutocrat hunt.

      American diet is abominable. But they replacing diet colas (bad; although I do drink them occasionally), by way worse (crammed with sugars). Original coke had real coke inside (BTW, I had coke tea in Bolivia, and I am ALL for it; nothing wrong with it)…


      • EugenR Says:

        You are the prime hunter. I see you everywhere. How you manage all this and still live your life??? Are you a superhuman?


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Everywhere? Really? Hmmm… That would mean my little plan is working… I hope I am infuriating a number of people, including my good friend Obama, while he drones away (although he hit the right criminals recently, which is better than doing in weddings; I guess he is finally learning to be more careful)…

          Well, it’s hard. I don’t even have the time to go read sites like yours, I want to read systematically. BTW, I was climbing this morning with a friend of mine who is 100% Jewish for as many generations as she can trace, on both sides, and we were talking about my ways to handle Nazis on the site… She was a public defender for a while and is an officer of the court. Anyway, although skeptical that these people can learn anything, she agrees with me…


          • EugenR Says:

            Thanks for sharing with me your friends thoughts. I feel the same, and accept your point of view too. Just it is not easy to see these people around again.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            It’s not really “people”. Paradoxically quite a few of the real hard core Nazis changed their views on Jews. And… reciprocally. As Isaac Berlin (not a Nazi!), said, speaking of the founders of Israel: “They did not listen to us. They listened to Hitler.” Well, right. Carefully listening to Hitler would have prevented the Shoah.

            Goodness without weapons and the determination, and ability, to use them, gets devoured alive.

            So where does anti-Judaism come from? It’s mainly a red herring brandished by the European plutocracy, to divert attention from itself, since ever… (Look at the Jews! It’s THEM! They did it all! Not us… We are like snow white, and will prove it by helping you exterminate Jews and other goblins…) And also a consequence of tribal exterminationism disguised as religious fanaticism…


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: