Many people claim to be spiritual rather than religious. They accept that a higher power exists and works in their lives but they don’t go to Church or connect themselves with a particular religion or religious denomination. This has become a standard refrain of modern people in the West as established institutions, ideologies and traditional values decline in relevance. It sounds like a nice contrast from atheism or pure materialistic beliefs.

The problem with this idea is that it leaves out, for many people using the term, the fact that not all spiritual forces are benevolent. Spirit can be both positive and negative just as human desire can be both positive and negative. When people suggest that they are spiritual or connected to spirit, rather than religious, they forget that demons are also spiritual beings, no less than angels. So-called spiritual people could be embracing demonic influences without even knowing it.

But wait – are demons real?

Why shouldn’t they be? It is hard to argue that negative forces are not at work in the world. And it is hard to argue that many people who commit negative actions believe they are doing good work. Hitler and his closest advisers all considered themselves spiritual and thought they were doing God’s will. Leaders of murderous cults throughout history believed they were acting on the side of angels. Members of the Islamic State believe they are following the will of God and not just being demented psychopaths (although to be fair they consider themselves “religious” rather than “Spiritual”).

When you make a choice to adopt a spiritual life, be sure to check what SPIRIT is encouraging you to do. The reason Christians talk about a HOLY SPIRIT is because many other spirits exist and many of them seek to influence people. How do you know if your spirituality is positive rather than negative? Negative spirits proclaim that reality is completely subjective, nothing is true and all things are permissible. There is no right path and everyone’s judgement is equal. This might sound pleasing to people but what is pleasing to humans isn’t necessarily best thing for them.

The Master Jesus said this:

“Enter through the narrow gate. The gate that leads to destruction is wide and broad and many enter through it. But the gate that leads to life is small and narrow, and only a few find it.

“Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them…Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

“Not everyone who calls Me Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, we prophesied in Your name and we cast out demons in Your name and performed many miracles.’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness.’”

(Matthew 7:13 – 23)

Ultimately, each of us must decide for ourselves what spiritual path to follow – we must understand, however, that different paths do exist and choose our own path wisely.

How can you decide? First you have to wake up – wake up anyway you can – wake yourself up and then wake up everyone else. You can only make good choices when your eyes are open.

Hollywood is known as a hotbed of Socialist and Globalist sentiments. But this wasn’t always the case. When Russia was known as the Soviet Union and posed an actual rather than an imaginary threat to democracy, talented artists tried to show what the world would be like under a Globalist regime. True artists know that Globalism is a threat to creativity, freedom and individuality.

The following 12 films expressed fears of Globalism as dystopian sci-fi fantasies. Even in the old days one couldn’t be too obvious in one’s anti-globalist sentiments – the socialist infiltration of the universities and bureaucracies had begun as early as the end of WW1. The movies had to be imaginative, even cartoonish, or people might get upset.

If you haven’t seen these movies here is a spoiler – very often the Globalists win and the hero is crushed or marginalized. That’s the real scary thing about the movies – not the monsters, robots, and nightmare imagery – the scary part is that the individual, the free thinker, the champion is most often defeated and the Globalist world prevails.

Another thing about these movies – many were made by Liberals – smart liberals who understood that Socialism, though a nice fantasy, doesn’t work in the real world.

Here are the movies in no particular order. I’ve linked them to Wikipedia.

Metropolis 1927

(the downtrodden poor toil in misery while the elite party)

Soylent Green 1973

(when everyone is totally dependent on the State, how does the State provide for them?)

Idiocracy 2006

(Socialists implement dumb ideas like replacing all water with “Brawndo” (Gatorade) since it has electrolytes)

They Live 1988

(the aliens are actually the Globalist elite hiding in plain sight among us)

1984 1984

(this is about the evils of Socialism – Big Brother is pretty much a stronger Bernie Sanders)

Fahrenheit 451 1966

(the State provides all knowledge and entertainment – so why would you need books?)

Harrison Bergeron 1995

(to make everyone equal, it’s easier to beat down the strong than to elevate the weak)

Rollerball 1975

(the only important people are those approved of by the State – everyone else is expendable)

The Time Machine 1960

(the Globalist monsters hidden underground raise beautiful people as food)

Videodrome 1983

(people who watch a lot of mediocre State sanctioned TV are easier to control)

The Trial 1962

(to Globalists, everyone is guilty until they prove their innocence – even if they don’t know the crime)

Brazil 1985

(Socialist bureaucracy run rampant)

I recently got a phone call from a 1-888 number. Of course I didn’t take it. Who would? On a private line, I want to know who I am talking to. If no identification shows up or I don’t know / care about the entity identified I’m not taking the call. That’s what voice mail is for. Leave me a message and I’ll get back to you.

I don’t think I’m very different from most people in this regard. Who takes phone calls from unknown callers? If you’re in some sort of business, I can understand it – otherwise? Who’s taking these calls?

There was a message or partial message on my voice mail – Angus Reid press 1 for English or something. It was a polling company. Who takes polls and surveys? Who provides information for all these – as far as I’m concerned – erroneous polls?

This is not the 50’s or 60’s when every phone call was perceived of as important and voice mail did not exist. This is the age of portable computers with a small phone attachment for emergencies. E-mail, texting and social media have replaced most person to person contact. I can’t believe, in this century, that people who answer every call when they don’t have to represent a rational majority of people. And if you’re forced to answer each call for business reasons, who can waste 20 minutes taking a survey?

You’re left with lonely people, people with too much time on their hands or people desperate to have their opinion known. These segments of the population simply do not represent the view of the masses no matter how loudly they express themselves. They certainly don’t represent my views. Polling of these groups will always be skewed in weird ways. Just look at the 2016 U.S. presidential race – the polls had Hillary Clinton with a 98% chance of winning right up to the day before the election. So wrong!

Maybe I should participate in polls and surveys  so that my views are represented – but I can’t work with the current polling systems. Polling companies have to come up with some other way of getting information or settle for a completely inaccurate world view. The majority opinion simply cannot be represented using phone polling. Just as it can no longer be represented by people who agree to a door-to-door interview. Counting social media likes and re-posts is probably a more accurate system although this also has its flaws. It is the preferred system for advertisers – where accuracy leads to financial rewards. Pollsters have to come up with better ways of determining the mood and focus of a nation or risk another debacle like the 2016 presidential election that was wrong, wrong, wrong on so many levels.

I’ve written about zombies before but I thought the fad had faded. Apparently not. Recently a herd of zombies went through the streets of Hamburg, Germany during the G20 meeting.

This was labelled a protest action – and while I am all in favor of protesting Globalists, I initially thought this action was inappropriate. The goal of the Globalists is to turn everyone into zombies so this zombie march seemed more of an affirmation than a protest. However, I came to learn that there was actually some depth to the action. The zombies were covered in clay when they began the march and then peeled off the clay to reveal their still intact humanity.

This action made sense and I hope I understand the protestors’ purpose correctly. The Globalists strive to turn us into mindless, cooperative zombies and they appear to be succeeding but there is still a spark of humanity within us that can be revealed and made to shine. We don’t have to submit to the Globalist agenda – we can rise up and push away the evil intention.

I don’t know if the Globalists took note of this assertion. I hope they did and I hope it made them fearful. There are still some of us who resist the Globalist trend. Despite the pressures imposed by George Soros, Angela Merkel, Barack Obama, Justin Trudeau and too many others to name, some of us still strive to retain our freedom and humanity, some of us will still fight to preserve the legacy of the human spirit.

We can’t fight with the weapons and tactics of the elite. Money and political power is in their hands. But we can put forth a spirit of defiance, we can stand strong and embrace our heritage of life and liberty. To do so we have to wake up. Each of us must make the effort to awaken to our true identity and destiny. We must wake up. Wake ourselves up any way we can. Wake ourselves up and then wake up everybody else. This is our only true defense against the zombifying agenda of the Globalists.

A lot of people are living to be over 100 years old these days so I thought I’d take a look at what might have been happening around 1917 (100 years ago) – what conditions existed at the time of their births that might have contributed to their longevity? And what does it mean for people born after that time – will we also live to a ripe old age?

The first thing to note is that the world was at war – and it was a pretty devastating global conflict. Austerity measures were a lot more severe than those experienced today. Food, medicine and basic security was in short supply. Young men everywhere were dying in the millions. About 20 million people were killed and another 20 million wounded between 1914 and 1918. Being an orphan must have been common place – certainly single parent homes were the norm.

In addition to World War I, diseases such as the Spanish Flu resulted in between 50 million and 100 million additional deaths worldwide between 1918 and 1920. For those that lived to see the year 1930, there was the experience of the Great Depression that plunged the world further into poverty. If war, disease, poverty and other deprivations didn’t kill the person, then by the time they reached early adulthood, say about 1940, the world was once again engulfed in a global war. Between 1939 and 1945, some 80 million people were killed and about the same number wounded.

It’s clear that any non-rich person born around 1915 who lived to see 1950 would have been incredibly strong, resilient, resistant to disease, and very, very lucky. Adding to their inherent biological strengths, there was far less pollution in this time frame – not a lot of cars, planes and smoke stacks. People worked outdoors mostly and ACTUALLY did physical labor. Sugar was in short supply and there were no GMOs (yes globalists, GMOs are bad for you).

There was no TV, no cell phones, no personal computers, and people interacted with others more directly. Being self-sufficient and energetic were positive traits – no “snowflakes” in these years, at least none anyone took seriously. People got up, went to work wherever they could, fought for what they wanted and didn’t expect a free lunch from the government.  Hence, they lived a long time and most often remained productive into their 90’s.

What about people born after 1950? Will we be so lucky? Will we live to 100?

Based on current events and news reports, it seems the general population today is pretty weak and insecure compared to previous generations. Indolence and whining are common place with the youth, especially in the western world. I don’t have a lot of faith in the core strength of my generation and none in the so-called “millennials.” Unless there is some medical or technological breakthrough – a breakthrough that is accessible to the middle class – I don’t see the common person living a long and healthy life. But if we can learn something from the past and emulate at least the attitudes of our grandparents, we might see some improvement. Nothing really stops us from living to be 100 except for the weakness of our own feeble will.