OP-
there is nothing more "magical" than discovering a cable/cord that brings your system to life! Happy Listening!
there is nothing more "magical" than discovering a cable/cord that brings your system to life! Happy Listening!
Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck
I recently chronicled in a review here, my experience with a very expensive interconnect. The cables cost nearly $7000 and are well beyond my reach. The issue is, the Pursit Dominus sound fantastic. Nothing in my stereo has ever sounded so good. I have been wondering during and since the review how much I would have to spend to get the same level of improvement. I'm sure I could double the value of my amp or switch to monoblocks of my own amps and not obtain this level of improvement.
So, in your opinion what is the better value, assuming the relative value of your componants being about equal? Is it cheaper to buy, great cables or great electronics? Then, which would provide the biggest improvement?
So, in your opinion what is the better value, assuming the relative value of your componants being about equal? Is it cheaper to buy, great cables or great electronics? Then, which would provide the biggest improvement?
286 responses Add your response
TWL has told me to change to tubes also! I know everyone like different things. It just seems like for some reason there are a lot of snipers gunning for Krell. Plenty of people take pot shots at them over this issue or that. In my opinion the FPB 200 amp sounds great. It is definately the best sounding amp I have ever owned. I have thought about doing a review. It is better than the Aragon I owned previously in every way concievable. Midrange treble and bass are all much improved. The soundstage is so much more defined. It's just better. I'm not sure what you mean about the cable. I have a little mix of cables. Mostly Purist and Cardas, with a little Monster thrown in. I will replace the Monster once I buy new speakers. Speakers are a bigger priority. |
Nrchy, how about the sound? Non-Krell audiophiles? Like who? Sure not me! Those guys don't know zap. Well, I don't know much, neither. :-) But it's all opinion! Ask Twl, he will tell you how wide the different opinions are?! Ask Asa? Well... No, don't ask Asa, or he will tell you to convert to TUBES. Unless you want to convert to TUBES. But for me, turn on the power switch is a troublesome. Beside I happy with my system now? I don't want to move/change anything; the house is too heavy to change; and don't even want to change me, neither. ;-) Oh, your cable, how is it sound? |
They are very heavy duty. The FPB 200 which is the smallest of the series weighs a fuzz over 100lbs. It is hard to get out of the box by yourself. Krell has come up with some design changes that have helped with the heat issues. Even when being driven at a good pace I can put my hand on top of the amp. It's hot, but not too hot to keep my hand on. Krell gets more heat from non-Krell audiophiles than it produces on it's own! |
I listed it in "my system" but I should have written it on the thread too. I bought a Krell FPB 200. From what I've heard so far deciding which sounds better is going to be a real struggle. It's been quite a while since I had the Purist Dominus in my system. The amp sounds much better than I expected. The dead black background and level of detail are just incredible. The sound, all across the listening range is beautiful. I only have five days on it right now. Thank goodness for the PAD burn-in disc. It really accelerates the break-in period. |
Nrchy, ok I give up? what new amp that you just bought, that is too close for comfort? Sound like something special! Please, do tell :-) But ya know... Look is first in my department, so I have to ask. It is good looking? ;-). On the other note, as Detlof said "don't "let yourself be sickenend by the mind's grey thoughts"". Although, sometime it's white, sometime it's black, sometime it's just it is to me, like ... stillness... Oops, sorry I kindna carry away. On the serious note, jumping from one train to another is not going to do any good, just different, bro. |
I don't know if anyone is still following this, but I bought a new amp. It is not a $7000 amp, but it was too darn close for comfort. After it is broken-in I will have to resolve in my own mind whether the improvement was greater with the Purist Dominus or with the new amp. Maybe I should give up on all of this a persue the study of philosophy! |
What thread have you been reading 6chac? There was all kinds of excitement, even though everyone was having fun. I sure did. Differences of opinions don't make anyone wrong. They are just opinions and lots of people got to share their opinion about a broad range of topics from history, philosophy, and cables. That's how it should be! |
Nrchy, I think the more refined and complex a system gets, every single part of it plays an important role and in the end the whole is certainly more than all its parts. In a system tweaked to the utmost, every little change matters and can be heard and therefore, yes, in my opinion, everything is a component, in its old Latin sense of the word. And in this complex interrelationship of electronics, plugs, wires and transducers, to me, wires have become as important as any other component and this goes down to any part of which I have learnt, that it can make a difference to the sound as I percieve it. Cheers, |
Thank you, 6ch. Courage. I do not mind being reminded. You may keep doing that. People telling me I'm a windbag is not a bad thing to hear now and then, especially because its true (I am working on it...). Actually, I have enjoyed your non-dual "pointing" in the past. Just thought this went a little over the line. Like I said to you, though, I have gone off myself sometimes, so it happens. Its forgotten as far as I'm concerned. To audiogon: people make mistakes, all of us. It takes courage to say sorry. 6ch said that he may not be posting anymore. That was not my intent, and although I realize that this is your decision, as the one who cited it, I don't think it rises to a level where 6ch should be barred. I never felt that strongly, just wanted to hold up a mirror. Again, it takes courage to look into that mirror. That should mean something. 6ch, say somthing, not say something, people learn and grow from both. And, I don't mind being stuck with you, really. Be well. |
Ladies and Gentlemen, 1) First thing first, I like to take this opportunity to apologize to Mark (Asa) and the rest of you if I offended you, intensional or un-intensional(?). Especially Asa, Detlof, Unsound, Nrchy, Sean (yes, you too), Sugarbrie, Z man, Twl and Clueless(?)(man, I am starting to sound like you). I think my 3 cents (collect from everyone that read my posts) really belong to Asa for he swallow my remarks. And believe me, it is not easy! I've used to be in his shoes, except it's my choice. Asa, don't spare me when you use that bamboo stick. 2) Gregm, you beat me to it. Your post is really beautiful, Sir. 3) Asa, regarding your e-mail. Thank you, I really proud of you. I have been waiting...You really earn my respect as a gentleman. Anyway, I speak for myself if you know what I mean ;-). The other thing is just probing. ;-). Asa, I was thinking of calling you, last night but my cheap side kick in for it is a long distance call. But I am opened for communication...by e-mail, please. I need time to swallow your English! Anyway Asa, I don't think you will get much from me, as I've said in the beginning, I really have nothing to say. I might bug you more than you think I would. My friend you are stuck with me. LOL 4) Audiogon, please let this one goes, through. 5) I have not think about it, yet....LOL 6) Ten Bulls anyone? NO? :-) 7) Now, I really, really, really quit this thread. OK?, please don't call me. Hahaha... |
Light inside of you too Gregm!! I see it, and have seen it before here. Thank you for reminding me of darkness; we are all each others' teachers and as long as that is done authentically, it is ok. Like detlof and many others, you have always been truthful with me. Detlof, as I said awhile back, has me pegged: it all about meeting. That is part of my faith. Thank you again. |
Asa than you for throwing an intimate light. Of course, I put forth the proposition that darkness is a personal affair -- but we (I) may sometimes try to pull others into our (my) perceived darkness... (we'll cook/hang together). A more positive approach would be the other way 'round, look up toward the light. My darkness in inside me -- outside the sun is shining! |
6ch: I don't go through my old threads often, but couldn't find one that I've talked on recently, so went to "my page" and noticed in the list that you and Muralman seemed to have the last word on a lot of my old threads, but, somehow, your responses are recent and there's a big gap between my response all the way last year and yours within the last two weeks. I see multiple times around 10-12-02, right when Muralman was perhaps mining through my old threads looking for the drunken accusation, where you also appear. I know you and Muralman were "tag teaming" me at the time on this thread, and Muralman was more rev'ed up and resented my mentioning his private demeanor, but seeing you there doing this caught me by surprise, especially given how you've presented yourself here. Were you going through my old responses? You said that you are only here to find out what I "know", as you put it, so why would you do that? Is it a coincidence that you and Muralman seem to have done this at the same time? Please explain. I'm open to a reasonable explanation, particularly given that we seemed to have come to a calm place here. Notwithstanding, if this is the case, you need to tell me why. |
Gregm: on normality, waves rise, waves fall into troughs; challenge of assumptions rises, challenge subsides. Could this "normality" - the calm trough we are now in, closer in understanding - have existed without the rising? 6ch is right, there are many ways to cut a chicken, and although it would not be my chosen metaphor, both ways are part of the rising; as I said to clueless, we are all part of the wave, both up and down. Do I get caught up in darkness? Yes, I still do. Each wave of a person's "development" involves rises and troughs. Each trough, so to speak, has its own pathologies, its own uncovered dark seed of karma, ever darker as you proceed into your own past and the collective past of all within all. People think, or like to imagine, that its a continuous blissful ascendancy, and yes there is bliss, but when the attachment to wherevever you are - and there are attachments all along the way - is seen as an illusion there is then the next desert before the next arisement. There are many deserts and during those times (and for me, this time is one of them) the darkness can catch me, pull me in before I see it, see that it is only me forgetting where I am. I am not at a "place" that is beyond levels; that is the non-dual ground of all levels. Not in a stable way. OK? We have learned here, all of us, and sometimes there is tension with that. But I think we all meet here because we share an appreciation for a certain reflection of beauty we call "music". That coming-together is always stronger than the pulling-apart; the rising is never apart from the falling. |
I am glad that a new normality has returned. Clueless remains (clueless -- not adieu), Asa: are the waters are dark because I made them so & you believed me? Detlof: I have not yet grasped knowledge allowing me to append a comment -- however frivolous. I believe that Nrchy & 6 would agree with -- only would have put it better than I. |
Important News Flash! Price breakthrough on synchronicity (And I said I wouldn't be back.) Given the depth and intensity of the discussion here I felt none of you would want to miss out on this one of kind deal on a Jungian Synchronicity Machine. The instructions clearly provide at Usage e: "Leave your Wishing Machine running. In a few days or weeks you should start seeing synchronicities coming into your life." Synchronicity Central Holy Psychotronic Psionics Psionic!!!! All this on 3 AAA batteries! I'm wondering what if I use a dedicated power supply with some of those Pursit Dominus cables Narchy talks about? I can have my life together in no time! Maybe I can get a group deal on some treated ones! Detlof, even with the upgrades I think the price is cheaper than the therapy you suggested for me. Lets not get in a bidding war eh! Asa. Contrary to popular belief I do leave my computer once in while. I have to see the branch before I can grab it. I had the chance to see David Liebman blow his sax last night w/ very small crowd (35) totally acoustic. Kept me out late. very nice. Peace. I remain |
6ch: I guess I don't understand how you can respond to me with a smiley face, and then, once you've had a day to let your mind go over it, come back with a response that's not so smiley. Who needs the mirror? An enlightened being not interested in what others say (all thought presented in dialogue is "opinion", but need not be judgement) and taking a day to work himself up just to say he's not going to say anything. Hmmm. 6ch, you want to be the "Zen Master" you've read so much about. If you can't be that, then you quit. Its your mirror. Thank you all, you too 6ch. Clueless, sorry that you couldn't respond to my olive branch. Try not to save that feeling for the next thread. Closed. |
Dear friends, having always felt a bit uneasy in using this space about discussions on Jung, I want to thank Nrchy and of course also Arnie for lending us their space. I've enjoyed the discussion immensely, learnt from it and felt in excellent company, but now I want to call it closed. Please contact me personally if more questions arise. I want to open a thread about a question which has bugged me for decades, namely what is the essence of musicality and why is it, that music does to us, what it does. In fact, what does it and why. The question became even more burning, as I pondered the reason, why Carl Jung obviously so had to shy away from this experience. I sincerely hope, you will join me in this thread and give me food for thought. Bless Ya All and thanks! Detlof |
Asa, since you said that "I am being disingenuous", and the reason I said "beneath is not", because I am not interested-in your thinking, nor opinions. What am looking for is what you see, or know. Maybe I am shooting in the dark. I am not trying to be a teacher; I am not the one who wrote three pages of texts. Yes that's what it is, text. You are right! Maybe I should explain when I said, "beneath is not". Here is how I see the language is limitless. This heaven is so vast no messages stain it. Pure and simple, if you give me that, I quit the thread. Or even if you don't give me that, I still quit the thread. Have fun. |
Detlof: thank you for sharing your knowledge on Jung. I've enjoyed it very very much. I don't know that much about him, but thought if I kept at it long enough something would get going; or, form from that karmic energy. Very happy; learned much!! Heard smart people talk about meaning, hey, that makes me feel good. Pretty basic, really. And, yes, clueless, the ideas aren't important, but the comaraderie is. Detlof pegs me good. I only challenge, never attack, inauthenticity. Dislodge it, so to speak. That said, I never thought you were being inauthentic in what you said just now. The opposite actually. So even though we may disagree now and again in ideas, its "good" nonetheless. Clueless, you are a part of that/this karmic energy. Don't you know, that's why we are all here? |
Clueless!! I'm sorry, really, I should have put a smiley face with it because that was how I meant it; the "uh's" weren't meant to be patronizing. I enjoyed your post VERY much. I've needled you in the past, I forgot, and should have clarified my tone better, somehow. Actually, we look at things the same pretty much, historically speaking. My only point was that the experiment in democracy, much less secularized democracy, has hardly been done at all. I don't see that we are living in a democracy, not the way we define it. We live in a nation-state effectively controlled by a transitory corporate aristocracy. I don't think a true democracy would ever operate as its primary assumption infinite greed. I'm not saying you believe this strong, but thought I was teeing one up for you. On Newtonian. Yea, I agree, and probably only 10% of the population gets it this way. Unfortunately, that is not where the center of gravity, so to speak, of western culture exists - how it behaves and the assumptions thatunderly that behavior - both historically and evolutionarily. Yes, Einstein, Heisenberg, etc. showed us different ways to see the world of matter and energy, but the meaning of those views have not seeped very far into the collective mind, at least not yet. Scientific materialism - with its power to change matter and give ever-changing products - is in an integral dynamic with capitalism, each supporting the other, each supporting the assumptions of the other, notwithstanding Einstein's discoveries that there are other ways to look at reality beyond Galileo's machine, or Descartes method. Capitalism is just fine with Newtonian abilities to produce technology; it doesn't need Einsteinian space/time paradoxes or quantum energy theories (so far...) to get its people to want the next product-thing. We were probably talking about different levels of seeing this; one whether Einstein's ideas mean the eventual "overturning" of Cartesianism, and the other saying that that hasn't happened yet for the collective western mind. BTW, I don't think it will be "overturned", but eventually, integrated. What is overturned is not the knowledge itself, but people's desire to not see more - which is something I talked about eatlier. Again, my apologies for not being more clear. I really enjoyed what you had to say. |
Clueless!! I'm sorry, I should have put a smiley face with it because that was how I meant it; the "uh's" weren't meant to be patronizing. I enjoyed your post VERY much. I've needled you in the past, I forgot, and should have clarified my tone better, somehow. Actually, we look at things the same pretty much, historically speaking. My only point was that the experiment in democracy, much less secularized democracy, has hardly been done at all. I don't see that we are living in a democracy, not the way we define it. We live in a nation-state effectively controlled by a transitory corporate aristocracy. I don't think a true democracy would ever operate as its primary assumption infinite greed. I'm not saying you believe this strong, but thought I was teeing one up for you. On Newtonian. Yea, I agree, and probably only 10% of the population gets it this way. Unfortunately, that is not where the center of gravity, so to speak, of western culture exists - how it behaves and the assumptions thatunderly that behavior - both historically and evolutionarily. Yes, Einstein, Heisenberg, etc. showed us different ways to see the world of matter and energy, but the meaning of those views have not seeped very far into the collective mind, at least not yet. Scientific materialism - with its power to change matter and give ever-changing products - is in an integral dynamic with capitalism, each supporting the other, each supporting the assumptions of the other, notwithstanding Einstein's discoveries that there are other ways to look at reality beyond Galileo's machine, or Descartes method. Capitalism is just fine with Newtonian abilities to produce technology; it doesn't need Einsteinian space/time paradoxes or quantum energy theories (so far...) to get its people to want the next product-thing. We were probably talking about different levels of seeing this; one whether Einstein's ideas mean the eventual "overturning" of Cartesianism, and the other saying that that hasn't happened yet for the collective western mind. BTW, I don't think it will be "overturned", but eventually, integrated. What is overturned is not the knowledge itself, but people's desire to not see more - which is something I talked about eatlier. Again, my apologies for not being more clear. I really enjoyed what you had to say. |
Asa, as to Jung and music. I don't know. He probably needed words and concepts, structures to battle with the other side. Words to him were perhaps like the stones and earth and rubble, they use in Holland to capture back land from the ocean. He tried to put in the language of Western science of his time, what the East had known for centuries. He was not afraid to step into the realm of the "mothers" to paraphrase Goethe's Faust, he could let go completely, but that what he brought from beyond he hammered and forged into words and concepts. He was a Westerner and he refused to be anything else, although he was wide open for, an highly knowlegeable about the East. At the same time, he was not an intellectual. You cannot say that he did not practice what he preached. What he drew as knowlege came from his very life, it was not bland thought..Foucoult comes to mind here, brilliant as it may be.... Music silences words, especially if it strikes deep. He was wide open, so he needed his mind, not to predate, but in this case to protect and hold safe. Perhaps it was a simple as that. Food for thought, not more. |
True Asa, the karmic energy is still here. Jung was one of us and he saw more than the most of us and he failed like all of us, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty he stood his ground like only few of us. True Clueless, I find little fault with your synopsis. You are knowlegeable and place your accents well. Two points only: It is, thanks to Jung, that much which was called occult, nowadays has become common knowlege about the psyche-mind. Occult is a silly term to my mind and just as sterile as the mainstream of knowlege, which by naming it thus, ostracises it and by doing this, hides its inability to understand and deal with it. I don't like the term, because it places barriers within the mind. I find my own stupidity barrier enough and I don't need more, thankyou. Alchemy is only occult to the beholder who does not see beyond the veil. Case in point, perhaps. Jung was fascinated by the Alchemists, because he saw parallels between their imagery and symbolism and that of his patients. The Alchemists, not knowing in terms of modern science what was going on within their bulbs and ovens, saw that their prime matter, they were working on, was transforming in appearance and substance and described this in a symbolism which can find its exact counterpart in dreams, visions, phanstasies of modern man, when he is undergoing change, is growing, transforming. Why thus: The anwser is very simple. To the Alchemists, the matter in their retorts was like a Rorschach test and they "projected". What they projected were transformative symbols, which to Jung lie dormant in our psyche and which come to life during our spiritual, intellectual and biological growing pains,when we should develop but yet do not quite know how. Jung went on to show, that quite a number of alchemists started to realise, that they projected. That it was they who underwent change and the symbolism, which popped up in their minds, concerned them just as much as the matter, they were observing. Sort of a Heisenbergian forerunner no?! Well there are a few Alchemists like Maier, or Lampspring, who in their language and symbolism in the 17th century described exact stages of the individuation process with a detailed knowlege about its steps and implications, which yet have to be reached by the mainstream of modern psychology.It was they, who realised, that the transformation, which took place, was in them as well as in the matter , they were observing. Fascinating,no?! It was Jung who gave us a key to its understanding and if you are, like me, familiar with the dreams and phantasies of modern man, you'd be amazed how to the point and knowledgeable those "occultists" were. To cut a long story short: What we call irrational probably only shows the boundaries of our rationality and unveils us as shortsighted and stupid. I feel, since Jung and his occupation with the "occult", we have the chance to be a little less stupid about our ture reality. The East has been always and since centuries far more knowledgeabe about this. As far as the knowlege of ourselves is concerend, here, we in the West are underdeveloped country and in need of aid. Our pszchology basically is ridiculous in its blindness for our transcendent needs and in its obsession with measurements. What we manage to measure and statistically prove generally boils down to what every child knows anyway. Jung has closed the gap for us quite considerably by using the modalities of western thought. He is one of us, not an imported Guru. Quite an achievement, in the light of which his failings don't really interest me much. rather, like Clueless, I like him more for it. |
said above> Clueless, our "experiment in secular democracy". Uh, I didn't know we'd had one yet... Uh .I was answering Narchys post where he said the Nazi movement was more religion than politics. My point was that they are not separate and that, to the extent they are, it is a fragile experiment. The dates would be 1776-89. If you see no significance that is up to you. said above> The "overturning" of the "Newtonian Mechanistic world". Uh, when did that happen? Uh Anyone remotely familiar with physics would place it at least by 1905 to 1916 (approx) at the latest. Einsteins two papers on relativity. Uh...I am really tired of the hostility here and sign off. Uh...There are better things to do. Uh...Good luck to all. Uh...Adieu, |
oh 6ch, and here I thought you got it: whack!! The sound of one hand clapping across with bamboo. :o) 3 cents, 500 posts, 123, 555678, 54.32? What is your Face? :0) 3 :0) 500 :0) 123....... On the Jung guys, the historical stuff, really enjoying it and learning some things too. Thanks for your efforts. Clueless, our "experiement in secular democracy". Uh, I didn't know we'd had one yet...The "overturning" of the "Newtonian Mechanistic world". Uh, when did that happen? Yes, Jung confronted his "darkness" in many ways, and many ways not. What we need to see about Jung is that he saw deep into his own mind and, conversely, the collective. As you go deeper, the "darkeness" of, what Tibetans call, "difilements" increases. You have more "centered" consciousness in which to encounter that darkness (instinctual self) as it becomes darker. In this way, the "what is" - being so accommodating as it were - enables just enough center to handle each new way of darkness, Some waves Jung stood before, some he turned away from. When he stood - letting the darkness blow through him like wind - he saw things to tell us about; when he turned away, he rejoined the world of other-against-other. Like the existentialists, he looked "below" (ok, 6ch?) the thinking mind, seeing that he/we are something more, saw the archetypes, but did not see below them. Intuited his "ground", but ultimately defaulted to light/dark. This is the Path we all take, whether we know it or not. Jung injected into the collective mind a catalyst of thought based upon his visions - that karmic energy is still here in this moving thread.... |
Said above > As you know the Nazi party was more of a religious movement than a political movement. All politics is religion . or at least it has been up until now. Hitler relied, after all, on what were (and still are) primarily Christian prejudices and symbols (even as he disavowed them). The separation of church and state has been fought for here in the states for a short two centuries but anyone who follows this administration (Ashcroft) certainly understands that the two are still closely tied together. One nation under God .ect. The oh so easy separation of the two realms would have made Jung smile. (The one denied is the one in control.) In most of the rest of the world it is even more so. Our experiment with secular democracy is so short and fragile. >Is Jung influenced by the occult ? Of course!! Read his take on alchemy. It is not that he is right or wrong. (Mark will surely lecture on the mistaken assumptions underlying the duality of such an approach.) It is simply so amazing and fantastic a production! IMHO there are few easy answers with Jung. I am going to say difficult things in very little space so you experts (Detlof) please excuse my laymans simplifications and over generalizations. He wrote his dissertation for his medical degree, On the Psychology and Pathology of So-called Occult Phenomena, about his 15 year old cousin, Helene Prieswerk, who claimed to be a medium. She claimed to be controlled by a variety of spirits. He attributed it to dissociation-multiple personalities. He was not so easily taken in. Somewhat ironically, one of the more far fetched ideas (to modern western ears), synchronicity (you know.. the Sting Album the idea that cause and effect are not so obvious and events are related in not so common sense ways), which sounds mystical-occultist to modern ears, was based on his collaboration with Wolfgang Pauli, a physicist. Many of his ideas came together during the second decade of this century. The first and second decades were very productive in completely overturning the rather mechanistic Newtonian view of the physical world. In a way the common-sense understanding of reality became non-sense at the cutting edge of hard science. I think Jung was influenced by this and believed that psychology would follow a similar path. At least he was certainly not afraid to think about and explore such things. He was deeply interested in what we term the occult because he believed that western thought had overvalued thinking and undervalued its emotional/unconscious roots. In a simplified sense he believed certain aspects of thought became habitual and dominant and that without some balance troubles would follow. To almost any western reader he is going to seem to leave the known-plotted-intellectualized world far behind. Again, the second decade of the 20th century saw a war by civilized-scientific western Europe that, to say the least, showed the underbelly of the dreams of reason. He, in fact, believed he envisioned the war. Like him or not, his writing for about a half dozen years after 1913 , after his break with Freud as Detlof points out, and in a state of mind that would have put most of us in an asylum is, as they say, stranger than fiction . and richer too. This is not to excuse his obvious shortcomings. He was a man. His insights were great and his mistakes were great too. Hindsight is 20-20. Thomas Jefferson banged his negress slave half step-sister. The reverend M.L. King was rather prolific too. Is this cause for concern? Well yes. Does it completely undermine their insight and lifes work? I dont think so (another thread?). One of Jungs better known ideas is that of the shadow and he certainly had his own .but to expect too much from those who walk here is adolescent folly. To expect nothing is fatalistic. But where to draw the line? Least we forget as we judge Jung. The topic of this thread is a set of cables costing more than the annual gross family income of about half the folks on the planet who are hungry (slowly starving) as we speak. Of course, we have a political/economic ideology that justifies our excesses. Actually, it makes a Virtue of them (from necessity of course). I wonder what they will think of us 100 years from now. Please understand that I include myself in the last comment. I am not aiming it at anyone else... least of all you Narchy. I spend enough on vinyl to feed a small village. If Jung failed somehow maybe I like him more for it. Compared to most of us he did not take the easy way. He struggled with it and for that I like him. Sincerely I remain, |
Nate, the Thule Society, Madame Blavatsky, and the Theosophical Society, among others had great influence on Hitler in his early days. The swastika symbol was suggested by Hitler's dentist, who was a Thule Society member and was derived from a Tibetan symbol representing "order in the universe". The reversal of this symbol into the Nazi swastika symbolized "the bringing of chaos". It is interesting that on Madame Blavatsky's crest, known as the Blavatsky Brooch, there is both the Nazi swastika, and the star of David appearing on the same crest. As well as a serpent, and a kings crown. This occultic crest and its owner were present in the mid to late 1800's, and were the founders of the Theosophical Society, and other occultic offshoots, claiming to know the "hidden knowledge" that intrigued Hitler. This is even alluded to in the "Indiana Jones" movie, where they were searching for the arc of the Covenant, and other ancient power relics. The Theosophists continued with Alistair Crowley, and Rudolf Steiner, et al, who started occultic movements based on Mme. Blavatsky's work which continue to this day. The genocide and "cleansing" ideas which later marked the Nazi regime, were introduced by some of these occultists. This is why I mention the interesting point that the Nazi swastika AND the Star of David appeared together on the Blavatsky Brooch. Blavatsky died in the 1880's. But the Theosophical Society continued. All of this happening long before Hitler ever came to power. Many feel that Hitler was funded by these groups and they controlled him. He may have been a puppet for some shadowy groups which still exist, and may still be highly influential today. |