HOW TO FIGHT THE NEW AGE

There are a lot of valuable blogs and webpages out
there, which address what is wrong with the New Age.

And some people have been converted out of it into
Christianity, which is the ultimate good.

But we have to face the fact, that the whole world is
not going to be converted to Christianity, and that
even if it were, there are a lot of "flavors" of Christianity
that are New Age infiltrated.

So we have to look at mitigating damage where it affects
the secular scene as well as the church scene.

Because the New Age is not just meditation and occult
technologies and witchcraft. It is also political.

The New Age is a mix of the spiritual and the political.
Some into it don't care about politics just about personal
issues. Some in it only care about harnessing the personal
issues crowd to the service of the politics.

The politics are not simply socialist. they can incl. 
conservatives and libertarians, especially where there 
is a strong drive towards economic or military empire.

New Age manifests both as peacenik and warmongering.

Now, the purpose of this blog is to suggest and for posters
to share suggestions on how to do this counterstrike and
network to accomplish this.

New Age manifests lately in the Common Core disaster.
This is an education thing that doesn't normally incl.
the occult or the "spiritual" in its curriculum but probably
will at least the "spiritual" stuff to help you with grades.
The origin however is theosophical occultism channeled
information, from Robert Mueller and the Theosophical
Society, details here.
http://politicallyunclassifiable.blogspot.com/2013/11/my-other-blog-on-new-age.html

Whatever its origins, it is already drawing fire from
educators as legislators as incompetent organization of
study, and at least one state has apparently outlawed it.

This is the sort of thing where you need to target the
pragmatically problematic angle on it, and then throw in
as an afterthought that its origin is sloppy thinking pie in
the sky 1800s occultism the Theosophical Society, and
that such quackery being its origin it shouldn't be taken
seriously.

This in turn might open the issue of undesirability of
"spirituality" garbage for effective thinking. Sure, some
of our greatest inventors have been into something like
this, but it was their own original intellect that got them
there, not their "spiritual" sideline, their accomplishments
were in spite of that rather than because of it, because
otherwise with the plethora of  "spirituality" now you
would have a lot more development and along better
lines than the potentially dangerous nanotechnology and
weapons of mass destruction.

(Unless you want to posit evil spirit influences adding
to that, which you might want to save for a select few
after you have taken them step by step into facing that
possible reality. If you do bring it up in an open session,
come armed with shamanistic and occultist and indigenous
religion testimony as to the existence and dangers of such.
There is plenty of such documentation from the politically
correct indigenous religions scene. Incl. testimony about
spirits that can pretend to be nice but aren't, and of 
course the "trickster.")

That's all for now. comments encouraged. except those
that defend the New Age. Please post links to the anti
Common Core article on my other page all over the web.

In arguing, try to steer clear of conspiratorial sounding
stuff that can get you branded as a "conspiracy theorist."
Don't use that word yourself. Try the concept of people
on the wrong track due to group think, mass media
influence and bad judgement.

THE SECOND BIG THING TO TARGET IS AGENDA 21
aka sustainable growth, sustainable development, smart
growth. Generally anything called "sustainable" isn't,
unless you are talking about veggie gardens, and if the
smart growth people have their way you won't have any
of those.

Again, don't get into Georgia Guide Stones and depopulation
agenda until late in the day. Start off with the pragmatics
and health risks and psychological risks to people who can't
handle crowding and are claustrophobic, the dangers of a
fire in one unit of a dense housing building affecting all of
them, and pandemics exploiting close contact and so forth.
Don't let on you suspect this might be intended by someone
in the chain of pushing the idea, just point out it is a risk.

Also there is nothing inherently high carbon footprint about
detached houses with gardens and a pet or two. Alternative
ways of heating and cooling exist and zoning laws that
might interfere should be changed.

The long range plan of getting us off the land and into dense
city housing and the history of bad effects of similar high
rise housing projects (crime and what have you) in the past.

Not to mention the fraud involved, when eminent domain is
used to get land, then it goes in a roundabout way to developers,
who if it fails use it as a tax write off and you still have blight.