
ed newman
14.7K posts

ed newman
@ennyman3
Writer, artist... He who controls the narrative controls the people. https://t.co/aZt5291qIU My Dylan Art: https://t.co/SAC4bFU2Ij https://t.co/z2G2q6WBrB


Umberto Eco, who owned 50,000 books, had this to say about home libraries: "It is foolish to think that you have to read all the books you buy, as it is foolish to criticize those who buy more books than they will ever be able to read. It would be like saying that you should use all the cutlery or glasses or screwdrivers or drill bits you bought before buying new ones. There are things in life that we need to always have plenty of supplies, even if we will only use a small portion. If, for example, we consider books as medicine, we understand that it is good to have many at home rather than a few: when you want to feel better, then you go to the 'medicine closet' and choose a book. Not a random one, but the right book for that moment. That's why you should always have a nutrition choice! Those who buy only one book, read only that one and then get rid of it. They simply apply the consumer mentality to books, that is, they consider them a consumer product, a good. Those who love books know that a book is anything but a commodity."

The moment the West decided evidence no longer mattered — if it got in the way of utopia. Melanie Phillips (former Guardian journalist): “Objective evidence was cast aside because it was too inconvenient. The very idea of reason and rationality was dismissed. All these ideologies — multiculturalism, lifestyle choice, deep green environmentalism, moral relativism — were utopian. They promised perfection. Anyone who brought facts against them wasn’t just wrong… they were evil.” Result? - Evidence became “right-wing” - Dissenters were bullied, ostracized, fired, threatened - The Guardian itself became the heart of this ideological machine… until she fell foul of it. When ideology is sacrosanct and the world must be perfected, facts become the enemy — and truth-tellers become heretics. Have you watched this shift in real time — where inconvenient evidence gets labeled “hate” or “misinformation”? Which sacred ideology do you think has done the most damage to open debate? Your honest take 👇



























