Oppositional-Deffiance

 

THE BULLSHITTER

Trump often talks shit, which is to say, he makes unflattering comments about a person. He's a prolific and colourful insulter (e.g., "loser," "low energy" [said of poor Jeb Bush, incessantly], "little Marco" [who now may bear the epithet for life])." No less important, and perhaps equally insulting, he also often talks shit, which is to say, his speech product is messy and unrefined. It isn't carefully crafted, with attentive (or any) concern for detail. It's the very opposite of speechcraft, as part of statecraft. In his words, Trump experiences a certain laxity.?

Trump is a particular sort of ass-clown showman. He's a major bullshitter, in the philosopher Harry Frankfurt's definition : someone who speaks without regard for the truth.

*$ What he says is sometimes true. When it isn't, he often cares not, since that wasn't the point of his speaking in the first place. He's not deliberately asserting what he knows to be false, hoping to get others to believe what he knows is not true.

He often just doesn't care, per se, about what is true and what is not. For the showman, all is pretence for entertainment rather than for deception, and, in the case of Trump, for elevating himself as the entertainer — and eventual Entertainer in Chief.

Being a bullshitter, or one who produces much bullshit, is essentially tied, in a speaker, with a certain state of mind. As philosopher G. A. Cohen explains, "The bull, conceptually speaking, wears the trousers : bullshit is bullshit because it was produced by a bullshitter, or, at any rate, by someone who was bullshitting at the time."

" So Frankfurt gives the example of a Fourth of July orator who goes on bombastically about "our great and blessed country, whose Founding Fathers under divine guidance created a new beginning for mankind." This is "humbug" and/or bullshit.

But the orator isn't lying about what he thinks is true. As Frankfurt explains, "What makes the Fourth of July oration humbug is not fundamentally that the speaker regards his statement as false. Rather..the orator intends these statements to convey a certain impression of himself. He's not trying to deceive anyone concerning American history."" 10

Men in the white working class tend to practice the "bull session," a gathering at which one or more of them hold forth about politics, the old days, or the failings of the president. As Frankfurt explains, "The participants try out various thoughts and attitudes in order to see how it feels to hear themselves saying such things and in order to discover how others respond, without it being assumed that they are committed to what they say." Here there's no pretense of truth telling. "The main point is to make possible a high level of candour and an experimental or adventuresome approach to the subjects under discussion."'' So each participant could walk away nodding, so as to compliment the performance, but needn't have agreed with all or any of it. Maybe they really did agree, or maybe not. The point was just to reassure everyone that the proper authority still has its voice.

This authority performance isn't completely different from the professor's impromptu mini-lecture. A professor (such as myself) holds forth on a topic for longer than the ordinary flow of conversation permits, which others (e.g., my loved ones) must then sit through ("Oh man, here he goes again"). The goal of speaking is some sort of authoritative pronouncement on whether Wittgenstein's so-called "pri-vate language argument" is, or is not, really an argument, or some such. This is irritating to those who did not sign up for a lecture. Yet the goal is truth telling and not bullshit. The professorial speaker is sincerely hoping to represent both the truth and what he or she really believes. "

Which is not to say there aren't real standards for a good or bad bull session performance. Merely spouting "hot air" won't cut it; you've got to say something good and authoritative sounding about the president or the legislature or the old days.

Trump is especially admirable in this respect (his fans proclaim, "I was just saying that same shit yesterday!"). He has an uncanny instinct for giving voice to the vox populi, or at least that of a sizable segment of the populus (at least leaving aside younger people). Indeed, the master bullshitter can be so good at bullshitting that, like the banker who invests in his own Ponzi scheme, he may well believe the shit he's saying, at least for the moment. He's so good that he eats it, with gusto and con-viction, for the sake of dramatic performance. Trump is a master ass-clown entertainer because he seems oblivious to the difference between talking shit and talking carefully, with steady regard for the truth.

As in the Jackass series, this is a courageous kind of performance, and, for many, it shows the kind of bravado we need in government. Those politicians, as some put it, they think their shit don't stink. But not Trump—he's right there in it, neck deep, but still rich, golden brown, and pink faced and therefore not too good for us. He's not a total bullshitter, because he really does think doing better "deals" would cure many of our problems. And if zero-sum bargaining mostly isn't the solution, because policy for the general good isn't much like real estate, he's at least sincerely mistaken.

Sure, he also bullshits like crazy, but it is his bullshit, and we all know this and so don't feel we're being had. Ultimately, he's both courageous and relatable, and in his own way glamorous, at center stage of his own carnival. And so he gets richer (it's his brand) while distinguishing himself as one of our great showmen.

*13 Even Kanye

West, another enormous ass-clown/asshole entertainer, isn't quite as good at it. 14

This can look like lying, as though Trump is the con man who shades the truth and then "gaslights" when called out. As journalist Nicole Hemmer explains,

Trump is a toxic blend of Barnum and bully. If you're a good mark, he's your best friend. But if you catch on to the con, then he starts to gaslight. Ask him a question and he'll lie without batting an eye. Call him a liar and he'll declare himself "truthful to a fault." Confront him with contradictory evidence and he'll shrug and repeat the fib. Maybe he'll change the subject. But he'll never change the lie."15

She nails the asshole tactics, which work by inducing self-doubt. Call him out, and he'll double down on a false assertion or switch and deny he ever said differently, all with supreme confidence that weakens the cooperative person's sense of credibility.

Did I perhaps not hear correctly? Could he have meant something different? Maybe he'll snap back quickly, upping the intensity, in order to intimidate with bluster. Yet the liar or con man knows what he's saying isn't true. Trump often isn't that careful.

The bullshitter doesn't necessarily care about truth, about tracking it carefully. "16 Trump isn't necessarily good with facts (see: conspiracy theories, Obama's place of birth, "celebrating" Muslims in Jersey City). To Bill O'Reilly, when asked about plainly false figures concerning blacks and homicides, he replied, "Bill, am I going to check every statistic?" And he plainly stated to Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, "All I know is what's on the Internet." Yet even there he latches on to the bad information.

For his driving concern is not responding to reality but winning, in a winning perfor-mance.

THE WINNER

Vladimir Putin, another master of multiple self-presentation,"' reportedly said, "T'm sure corruption in Chechnya is minimal." When he announced this, I'm sure those in the room nodded and said, "Da, I guess the corruption in Chechnya is minimal." Everyone in the room would thereafter avow this as true, with confident nodding, knowing that everyone else in the room would avow it as true, even if no one in fact believed it. There's thus such a thing as collective bullshitting (a.k.a. ideology). 18

At a bad comedy show, a heckler will sometimes feel the need to yell "You suck!" so as to disrupt the pretense that the jokes are of acceptable quality. Let it be known that we are NOT going to act as if we all think this might be funny when it just isn't.

The heckler might do this for love of comedy.

In the GOP collective bull session, Trump disrupted the party by being a truth tell-er. It was refreshing to hear truths stated plainly-about Iraq, progressive taxation, the problems of money corruption- despite "conservative" political correctness and groupthink, which won't allow you to say things such as: "George W. Bush was president during 9/11." For, if that were true, it would also be true that he did not "keep us safe" from terrorism. And, as they might say, "That's not what we should be saying," for reasons of power, quite aside from the truth of the matter.

Such a flagrant disregard for truth displays contempt for the citizenry of a republican democracy. But, as Putin suggests, it works nicely for power's purposes. The impulse to destroy what displays contempt, to throw caution to the wind, explains why so many wish to take their chances on breaking up the Republican political establishment. To his supporters, Trump offers hope of either taking over the GOP or blowing it up for something better.

Not that Trump appears to care deeply about truth or love democracy. He merely took over the bull session and won the contest. Now he runs it, having proven his dominance.

This is the tough guy who skipped the war in Vietnam because of an alleged bone spur in his foot-the same ailment that didn't stop Joe DiMaggio from playing a pretty good game of baseball. For a time, the GOP establishment really was scared of him, and it came late to challenge him for fear of his usual scathing Twitter retalia-tion, splashed through the media the next morning, probably with some colorful insult, which millions would be repeating with a chuckle. For Trump is an insult ace, no doubt about it. The quick, disproportional comeback, vague enough not to be easily answered ("low energy") but nevertheless funny ("low energy"). But why do insults that stick count as a win with the GOP audience? How are he and his audi ence simpatico in their scorekeeping? According to linguist George Lakoff, the contest primes the "strict father model" of morality.""' In a world governed by personal responsibility and discipline, those who win deserve to win. But electoral competition is a contest. So "insults that stick are seen as victories-deserved victories." "In strict conservative eyes, that makes him a formidable winning candidate who deserves to be a winning candidate." Winners win—and so Donald Trump is a political winner.

SPOILING THE PARTY

An ass-clown at a mellow party would not be seen as an asshole for changing the tone by staging an amusing performance, e.g., by dancing on a table with his pants on his head. This could be a perfectly good contribution to a party (unlike the asshole who picks a loud fight or urinates on the sofa).

The asshole/ass-clown uses his ass-clown powers for asshole purposes. He soils or sours or degrades the party for reasons of his own entitlement (e.g., being entitled to the absolute center of attention, on account of being rich, or beautiful-in case there's a difference). He stages an entertaining spectacle, dancing on a table with his pants on his head, and then urinates on the carpet when people aren't paying enough attention to him.

Although Trump's party behavior is surely more decorous, he can be just as oblivi-ous, a quality shared by both the mere ass-clown and the asshole. So he's not a cyni-cal, scheming manipulator (as Cruz is, albeit with religious rationalization). But Trump is still trying to win in politics for reasons of self-aggrandizement. Apparently Trump's bid for the presidency began with his ribbing at the White House Correspondents' Association's dinner in April 2011, at which President Obama lampooned his taste in gaudy décor, his obsession with false rumors, and his reality TV show. He quipped that Trump was flirting with his own presidential bid (the joke being that we all know he couldn't swing it). Trump, badly stung, began a furious quest to gain stature in the political world and, amazingly, finally did. "A lot of people have laughed at me over the years," he later explained in a speech. "Now, they're not laughing so much." 20

Never has a man had a more raging case of what Rousseau called "inflamed amour-propre," which is to say, a concern for how one appears in the eyes of others and, in particular, a relentless need to be seen as superior. (He's a flaming asshole, an asshole on fire, if you will.)2' If this sounds simplistic, one shouldn't underestimate its power to motivate a person. For Rousseau, and for Freud, it is nothing less than the ultimate source of human unhappiness, the ills of civilization, and the ruin of politics. And if civilization was supposed to contain and mitigate these sorts of feel-ings, no one, no matter how sophisticated, no matter how sane and judicious, knows quite how to manage Trump effectively. (Historically, where civilization fails, war is the management strategy.)

Captain Bollocks

Red Dwarf - Captain Bollocks

[Starbug approaches a derelict]  

Lister :

What kind of space station 

is it, Kryts? Any idea?

Kryten : 

I don't recognize it, sir. But I must confess 

I did delete some files off my hard drive 

this morning to create more memory.

Lister : 

Really? Is that safe?

Kryten : 

Oh, have no fear, sir. I only deleted information 

I considered frivolous and idiotic.

Rimmer : 

Without checking with me first?

Kryten : 

And you are?

Rimmer : 

Go into your trash folder, you metal moron 

and undelete the "Rimmer" file. You must've 

dumped me in there by mistake.

Kryten : 

That's highly unlikely whoever 

you are, but I'll check anyway.

[searching] 

Kryten : 

Oh! There's a folder in here 

marked "Captain BOLLOCKS." 

Could that be you?

Why We Go to The Movies

Geraldo Rivera :

"That's the most shocking thing 

I have ever seen in The Movies --"

-- on the occasion of the first ever televised 

broadcast of The Zapruder Film.

And he is talking about the gore, 

not the implications of the gore,

which he can't even begin to deal with.

Why We Go to the Movies | Dennis Quaid

"Jim Garrison, who really put forward "The" JFK "Conspiracy Theory" -- 

he had this principle which he called 'Time and Propinquity';

What that really means is [that] you'll never find out 

what the real power are doing because it would be too hidden 

you'll never find the true narrative because they always hide it;

What you have to look for, he said are patterns on the surface, 

little links and coincidences that are like telltale shoots 

coming up showing you the the the hidden power underneath and 

I think in a way, he was sort of one of the ideologists of our time 

because if you look at the internet now, that's what everyone does 

they spend their days and their nights scrolling through the internet 

looking for patterns, links coincidences -- and funnily enough, 

that's exactly how artificial intelligence works."

In February, 1967, Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney, wrote a five-page memo called “Time and Propinquity: Factors in Phase I,” which revealed some of the spurious connections he was making in his attempt to outline what he believed was the true nature of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. 

Garrison believed that the best way to uncover well-hidden conspiracies was by noticing seeming coincidences — when two people happened to live a few blocks from each other or when someone ran a bar around the corner from where a cache of heroin was seized — and assembling a pattern from the resulting swamp of names, addresses, and dates. 

A few years ago, the British Filmmaker Adam Curtis came across Garrison’s memo in “The Prankster and the Conspiracy,” a book by the zine writer and self- described crackpot historian Adam Gorightly. 

At the time, Curtis was trying to make sense of the political fracturing and rampant disinformation that accompanied the election of Donald Trump and, in his own country, the Brexit vote. 

“Normally, I hate conspiracy theories. I find them boring,” Curtis told me recently. 

“Then I stumbled on ‘Time and Propinquity’ and I just thought, Yes. . . . Fragments. That’s how people think now. They make associations, and there’s no Meaning. That’s The World we live in.” 

 "This theory was going to have a very powerful effect in the future because it would lead to a profound shift in how many people understood The World,” he says. 

“Because what it said was that, in a dark world of hidden power, you couldn’t expect everything to make sense, that it was pointless to try and understand the Meaning of why something happened, because that would always be concealed. 

What you looked for were the patterns.”

Time and Propinquity

In February, 1967, Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney, wrote a five-page memo called “Time and Propinquity: Factors in Phase I,” which revealed some of the spurious connections he was making in his attempt to outline what he believed was the true nature of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. 

Garrison believed that the best way to uncover well-hidden conspiracies was by noticing seeming coincidences — when two people happened to live a few blocks from each other or when someone ran a bar around the corner from where a cache of heroin was seized — and assembling a pattern from the resulting swamp of names, addresses, and dates. 

A few years ago, the British Filmmaker Adam Curtis came across Garrison’s memo in “The Prankster and the Conspiracy,” a book by the zine writer and self- described crackpot historian Adam Gorightly. 

At the time, Curtis was trying to make sense of the political fracturing and rampant disinformation that accompanied the election of Donald Trump and, in his own country, the Brexit vote. 

“Normally, I hate conspiracy theories. I find them boring,” Curtis told me recently. 

“Then I stumbled on ‘Time and Propinquity’ and I just thought, Yes. . . . Fragments. That’s how people think now. They make associations, and there’s no Meaning. That’s The World we live in.” 

 "This theory was going to have a very powerful effect in the future because it would lead to a profound shift in how many people understood The World,” he says. 

“Because what it said was that, in a dark world of hidden power, you couldn’t expect everything to make sense, that it was pointless to try and understand the Meaning of why something happened, because that would always be concealed. 

What you looked for were the patterns.”

The Grind

Julia, Mother of 

The Possessed :

Oh, my God…..

[CRYING] [SHUSHING] 

What do we do? 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

Coffee. Uh, the demons, they 

grow more strong in the night. 

I'm going to need my energy. 

But you should try to get some rest. 

[PRAYING IN LATIN] Amen. 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

How long will this take? 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

That is hard to say. 

Hours. Days, maybe. 

This Demon is very strong. 

The Boy won't last long. 

What we need to do is to find out 

its name in order to exorcise it. 

That is the only way 

we can save The Boy. 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

How do we do that? 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

With prayer. 

Constant prayer. 

The Demons, they 

are self-preserving. 

They do not understand suffering. 

Eventually, He will give himself up because 

he cannot stand the pain of the prayer. 

You understand me? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Yes. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

Good. Good. Now, you must 

confess your sins. 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Now? 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

The Demon can smell your sins 

if they are not absolved. Come. 

[SPEAKS ITALIAN] We begin. 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

[SIGHS] Forgive me, Father, 

for I have sinned. 

It has been, uh... eight months 

since my last confession... 

[IN SPANISH] 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

Did you just say eight months 

since your last confession? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Yes. I... 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

Okay, we just have to get this done. 

Y-You are a Man of God, 

simple enough. Si? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Yes. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

And you are very, very sorry 

for all of your sins. Si? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Yes. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

Okay. May Almighty God have mercy 

on you and having forgiven your sins, 

lead you to eternal peace. Amen.

[CLAPS HANDS TOGETHER] 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

What rites of 

The Exorcism 

do you know? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Uh... none. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

None? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

It has never come up….

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

What prayer do you know that you could 

say over and over, even under pressure? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

The Hail Mary. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

[Mutters in ITALIAN] 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

But if it is under pressure, 

I would prefer to say it 

in Spanish. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

That's fine. Your Job is to pray. 

Do not engage with The Demon. 

Do not respond to anything it says or does. 

Your job is to be implacable. 

Relentless. Okay? [PATS ARM] 

Good boy. [CHUCKLES] 

Do you know any jokes? 

Fr. Tomas Esquibel, 

Parish Priest :

Uh, no. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth, 

Exorcist-General :

You should learn some. 

The Devil does not like jokes. 

[AMORTH CHUCKLES] 

Bring The Box. 

[IN ITALIAN] 

DEMON: 

I see you've brought your friend. 

He looks a little scared, Gabe. 

Mind if I call you Gabe, Gabe? 

Readying for Battle? 

You ran out on me last time, 

like The Coward you are, Soldier-boy. 

Not very becoming of The Chief Exorcist. 

Fr. Gabriel Amorth,

Exorcist-General :

So, who do you want to 

be vanquished by, today :

Jesus or His Mother?

Give me The Daggers :

Give me The Daggers : 

The Sleeping and The Dead

Are but as pictures : 'tis the eye of childhood

That fears a painted devil. If he do bleed,

I'll gild the faces of the grooms withal;

For it must seem their guilt.

Jordan Peterson - The Truth About Auschwitz Prison Guards

Minister of Defence :

Two dead, two in hospital, and 

Koskov probably back in Moscow, if not dead. 

We're the laughing stock of The Intelligence Community. 

Our first major coup in years, snatched 

from right under our noses 

by the KGB only hours after he defected!

No trace of him?

M :

Nothing. Then there's 

this Pushkin matter.

Minister of Defence :

Well, I must be off. Meeting 

with the PM this afternoon. 

We have to nip "Smiert Spionom" in the bud. 

Pushkin should be in Tangiers in two days' time. 

A termination warrant has been issued for him. 

007 :

This plot to kill agents sounds 

rather far-fetched, sir.

I know General Pushkin.

M :

Do you think I don't? 

007 :

I've dealt with him on several occasions! 

Our paths have crossed over the years. 

He's tough and resourceful, but...

I can't believe he's a psychotic.

M :

Neither did I until today. 

This arrived from Gibraltar. 

It was found near 009's body. 

Your name was on 

Pushkin's List, too, 007. 

007 :

There are a few things I'd like 

to check out first, sir. 

That sniper, for instance. 

M :

Yes. I've read Saunders' report --

You jeopardised The Mission, to 

avoid shooting a beautiful girl.

007 :

I had to make a split-second 

decision. It was instinct.

M : (nods)

I'll recall 004 from Hong Kong. 

He can do it. He doesn't know Pushkin. 

He follows orders, not instincts. - 

You can take a fortnight's leave.

007 :

No! Sir. If it "has" to be done, 

I'd rather do it.

"....back when I was 20, something like that -- 20....

I started studying atrocity, right? 

And so, I've always been interested in The Holocaust, in particular, but it's a very particular interest, like -- 

Evil Nazi Germany Auschwitz Prison-guard -- 

Prison-guard who enjoyed his work, right..? 

Because My Question was, 'How could you be 

an Auschwitz Prison-guard who enjoyed his work....?' 

Now,  one answer is, "Well, You're just like a Demon from another planet who's so unlike Me, that I don't even have to worry about it.", and that's a very convenient answer, but it's not True -- many, many many many of the people not all many of the people who were involved in the Nazi atrocities were perfectly Ordinary People they were just like you and you think no I wouldn't do that it's like that's not what the evidence suggests the evidence suggests that the vast majority of people in Nazi Germany went along with it now not all of them were dragged into The Abyss-itself but plenty were and if you think you wouldn't have been one of them that just means it's highly likely that you would have because you have no idea what you're capable of there's a great book about that terrifying book called Ordinary Men and it's about the initiation of a police Battalion from Germany who went to Poland after the Germans marched into Poland now these were ordinary men they were policemen middle-aged who had grown up before the Nazi propaganda Mill got going okay so they weren't indoctrinated Nazis from like the time they were four they're just ordinary middle- class guys plus their Commander told them in Poland when they were starting to do military work even though they were civilian policemen that they could go home that they didn't have to do this job and that there would be no repercussions and in in fact out of the Battalion a number of men right at the beginning said I'm not doing this and they went home Mo the vast majority went along now why okay so now these policemen are in Poland and they've been told a story which is that you know German at War and the reason for that is that evil Jews have conspired up a you know a conspiracy and they've United the Western World against us and they're a fifth column within the country and your patriotic duty is to root them out now that we're in Poland and you're saving the Fatherland and there's going to be Dirty Work associated with it and do you really want to leave all that to your compatriots you know your companions your your guys cuz like if you and I are together and someone that we're working for presents us with a dirty job and I say well I'm not doing that well then I leave it to you so there's a kind of betrayal that's built into that now the guys that left thought I don't care I'm not doing this but most people didn't and part of the reason they didn't do it is because they were loyal to their to their peers by the end of this which took months these guys were taking n naked pregnant women out into the middle of fields and shooting them in the back of the head like and be becoming violently ill because of doing so and tearing themselves into shreds internally like sick sick at heart but doing it and that's a it's a terrible thing to look at and I started looking at that like it's 40 years ago now you know was shocking and so what did I discover well I discover a lot of things I discovered that the ro road to totalitarian hell and atrocity is paved with lies like lies are the pathway to Hell really like practically and metaphysically

An Additional Donation of $5 Dollars.

 

GIBSONTON MUSEUM OF CURIOSITIES

3:14 PM

(Scully walks into the old cabin. The bell rings as the door opens. There is a sign next to a pot that says "Freaks Free; Others Please Leave Donation." Scully walks over to it, puts a bill in, and starts looking around. She looks at a picture of siamese twins. Passing various strange things in jars, she picks up another picture of the siamese twins. They are named Chang and Eng. The Curator walks out behind her. His face is disfigured and is reflected in a small mirror.)

CURATOR: Welcome to my museum. May I put to rest any questions you may have conjured?

SCULLY: I was just reading about the fascinating life of Chang and Eng and wondering if their death was just as fascinating.

CURATOR: Oh, very much so. 

On a cold January eve in 1874, Eng awoke to find his brother had passed away during the course of the night. 

A few hours later, Eng himself departed from this world. 

Now, these facts themselves may be less than fascinating but imagine... imagine being Eng and lying there.

(He puts his disfigured hand on her shoulder.)

Knowing that essentially half your body was now dead... 

that the rest must inevitably follow... 

and being able to do about it absolutely nothing. 

At the autopsy, it was officially concluded that Chang died of a cerebral hemorrhage.

SCULLY: And what was the official cause of Eng's death?

CURATOR: Fright.

(He smiles and starts to walk away.)

SCULLY: Do you have any information on blockhead or geek acts?

(They walk into another room.)

CURATOR: This is a historical collection of human curiosities. Blockheads are skilled performers.

SCULLY: Like magicians?

CURATOR: Like sword swallowers, who really do swallow swords. And geeks are neither skilled nor curiosities. 

They're merely unseemly... not even attaining the level of "gaffs."

SCULLY: "Gaffs?"

(The curator takes a picture of two siamese twins who look very different.)

CURATOR: Observe closely the dissimilarity of the facial features. Conjoined twins are always identical. These twins are phonies... gaffs.

SCULLY: Sort of like the Feejee Mermaid?

(He laughs and puts the picture down.)

CURATOR: You're investigating the Alligator Man's murder, yes? I have something I believe you might find of some interest.

(He hands her a picture of "Jim-Jim, the Dog-Faced Boy.")

SCULLY: What does this have to do with the Glazebrook murder?

CURATOR: I've recently come into possession of an authentic P.T. Barnum exhibit. 

Now, I don't show this display to all my customers... only those with the intellectual curiosity to appreciate it.

(He walks over to a door behind Scully.)

Barnum billed it as "the great unknown."

(He opens the door. Scully is about to enter, but he stops her.)

I must first ask of you two favors. 

Tell no soul what you witness in here.

SCULLY: And the second favour?

CURATOR: An additional donation of five dollars.

(She hands him five dollars and steps inside the dark room. 

He locks the door behind her. 

She walks over to the only object in the room, 

a trunk cast in a spotlight. 

She tentatively opens the trunk to find... nothing. 

A door swings open to her left with an "Exit" sign above it. 

A buzzer goes off and she looks down at the trunk, 

smiling slightly at having been duped.)

-- and An Assistant.

 

"Hypothesis:

To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Thesis:

The universe, as we know it, is held in delicate balance by forces which we do not yet fully understand. We know, in the broadest terms, that the planets hold their course relative to the galaxy, that the galaxy holds its course relative to…? Discussion as to the force binding the galaxy in its equilibrium is a matter of constant speculation. Following investigation of elementary particles, gravity is the least likely force. Electromagnetic is the next most likely. Nuclear, or ‘Strong Interaction’, is the most significant force, though this is tempered by the fourth force ‘Weak Interaction’, (responsible for a number of phenomena of which the best known is Beta Radioactivity). This last force is that which is undergoing the most strenuous research. (REF: Plank, Einstein, Millikan on Photons, European Organisation for Nuclear Research, Geneva, on Elementary Particles.)

There exists the distinct possibility that the Fourth Force will discredit Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and lend credence to Minkowski’s extension of ordinary geometry – that of the fourth dimension, Space/Time.

Thus the state of all matter is held in balance by four forces, of which the weakest, most insignificant, is the unexplained arbiter.

Gravity can be controlled, to a certain extent. Electromagnetism can be controlled, to a certain extent. Nuclear Interaction can be controlled, to a certain extent. But the Fourth Force…?

The Time Lords have a degree of control over this Fourth Force, by which they regulate the balance, in so far as they can, of their Cluster. (A collection of Galaxies.)

In the normal course of events, this control suffices. But Time Lords, like human mortals, effect control when and where they like, and to whatever ends they desire, either committed or ambivalent.

Control cannot be allowed to rest in the hands of so capricious a people. A further, and greater, degree of control must vest in a higher, and more responsible faculty.

Eternity and infinity, as concepts, do not, by their very nature, allow for an absolute Authority – the Pyramidical Hierarchy stretches through Time and Space and can have no apex. But the next step is logical…

The balance must be kept by someone , or something, which enjoys a greater sense of responsibility, and a greater sense of objectivity. A sense of right against a sense of wrong. A force for right against a force for wrong. If a force for good were to govern the balance there would be no balance. Therefore the force of evil must have an equal control. Must responsibility and objectivity lie solely in the hands of the good influence? Demonstrably not so. Of our recent history there is no account nor any evidence that Hitler believed in his principles less sincerely than Churchill did in his. Where were Nuremburg, had Hitler won?

Where would we stand if evil were the norm and good … abominated? If the balance were to shift, then this could, should, would become the case.

Hypothesis :

All civilizations abhor the idea of authority without responsibility. Therefore the Time Lords, with their immense authority, must be responsible, as civilized beings, to a yet higher authority. Even if they are unaware of that authority’s existence… or have yet to admit to it…

The President of the High Council of Time Lords, upon his ratification, is made aware of such a higher authority. He is made aware that, awesome as the power of the Time Lords is to humans, or indeed to other beings, it is only as awesome as the power held over the Time Lords.

There exists in our section of the universe, our section of the Cosmos, , our section of the Cluster, two Guardians. One is for ‘Good’, one is for ‘Evil’. One for ‘Construction’, one for ‘Destruction’. One for…the opposites are infinite, as they must be.

‘Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite them. And little fleas have smaller fleas, and so ad infinitum…’

There is no evidence stronger to our earthly eyes than the difference between pure black and pure white.  So, without any pre-judgement, let us call our two Guardians Black and White.

The source of power for both these Guardians resides in neutral territory – the Centre of Time.  It is called the Key to Time and is in the form of six interlocking unequal segments, each of which, joined with the others, forms a perfect cube in the ratio of 6 x 6 x 6 units. This cube, this Key, is stolen by an agent of Black and scattered throughout space and time. Unless this key can be recovered in a finite time, measured, naturally, not in minutes, hours, months or years, then the balance will be destroyed. It is easier to destroy than create; it is easier to kill than give birth; it is easier to demolish than build. The Apocalypse will not be instantaneous – there would be no joy for Black in that. But for millennia worlds and their inhabitants would suffer… famine, war, pestilence, despair, until finally they would be destroyed, or better still, destroy themselves. And for all we know, that is what is happening now.

Prognosis :

The above is simply the background, or rather framework, in which we shall explore the Doctor’s attempts to recover, as an agent of White, the Key to Time. Over 26 episodes, telling six individual stories, he will recover the Sections which form the Key to Time.

The time limit in which he has to work will be clearly defined by ‘a candle’ – a bright orb, so bright in its normal state that to look upon it by the uninitiated would be blinding, but now already diminished. As it fades, so do the hopes of all civilisations.

The Doctor will be seen to have six independent ventures, each linked by the common theme. He will, on occasion, have to decide whether to subordinate the individual problem to the overall plan. He will, on occasion lose a battle to win the war. But each venture in itself must be self explanatory. He may meet old adversaries or encounter new. They will remain, as they always have been, the agents of ‘Black’. Those who wish to join him in episode one and follow him through to episode twenty-six will gain the momentum and bonus of following the story through. Those who choose to watch only one venture will enjoy it for its own sake – the scope in each venture is as wide and as free-ranging as ever – but should be encouraged as far as possible to see what happens next. But what does happen next?

Perhaps the Guardians are Time Lords advanced to a higher degree along their own paths. Perhaps this is a test as to whether the Doctor is to qualify for advancement. Perhaps this is a gigantic fraud. Does the good guy always wear the white hat? Whatever the outcome, either individually or overall, the Doctor will arrive at his own conclusions and decisions in his own fashion. As always."

NASTHALTHIA LUTHOR :

Ooh. Can we have a show trial before we put 

these traitors to death? Are you okay?

SUPER- LUTHOR :

Better than okay. 

I can see the entire electromagnetic spectrum... 

and those must be atoms, little clouds of possibility. 

Einstein couldn't connect the gravitational force to 

the other three... but if he could have seen this... 

It's so obvious. 

 NASTHALTHIA LUTHOR :

Uncle Lex? 

SUPER-LUTHOR :

The fundamental forces are yoked by Consciousness. 

Everything's connected. Everyone. 

And this is how he sees things 

all the time. 

Every day. 

 NASTHALTHIA LUTHOR :

I don't know if I should be worried or mortified. 

SUPER-LUTHOR :

It's a cruel joke —

The mechanistic clockwork of Reality,

hinging on a precious impossible 

Defiance of Entropy, on Life. 

And The Clockwork doesn't care. 

It's like... Like it's all just us, in here together. 

We're all we've got. 

 NASTHALTHIA LUTHOR :

You are embarrassing me beyond therapy. 

SUPERMAN : 

You'll have to forgive him, Nasthalthia. 

He just figured out How Everything Works.

Leverage

The Walking Dead: Rick - I'm gonna kill you Broken vs Confident Rick

Amanda Waller: 

These are The Crown Jewels here, Mr. Wayne. 

And you do understand my legal exposure. 

If anyone knew what I procured for you...

Bruce Wayne: 

Listen... I can keep A Secret, 

okay? What do you want?

Amanda Waller: 

People are asking questions about Midway City. 

The kind of people who can get The Answers. 

And if They can get those Answers, 

My Head will be on a pike.

Bruce Wayne: 

Consider yourself under 

My Protection. If You Deliver.

Amanda Waller: 

[hands him several files 

regarding metahumans] 

Why, Mr. Wayne?

Bruce Wayne: 

Just like to make friends.

Amanda Waller: 

There's The Difference between Us. 

You Believe in Friendship, 

I Believe in Leverage.

Bruce Wayne: 

Good night.

Amanda Waller: 

You look tired -- You should 

stop working nights.

Bruce Wayne: 

You should shut it down, or 

My Friends and I 

will do it for you.