UK Gov. Operated By Psychopaths: Effectively Declares Animal Emotion, Sentience & Pain is Irrelevant
Human relations with animals have, on the whole, never been enlightened on Earth. The epidemic of denial has hit animals particularly hard - with many humans choosing to shut down parts of themselves rather than realise the harm they are doing to life here on their (understandably temporary) 'home' in the cosmic reality. Today I learned something that just reinforces that barbarism is holding the space of what could be a real heart inside those who operate the UK Government.
At a time when some governments, including New Zealand, India and others are accurately declaring formally that animals are sentient beings and thus need to be respected in the legal system as such - the British government has made clear that it has no such care, wisdom or compassion and intends to REDUCE the respect given to non human animals in THEIR rule book.
Since Britain left the EU, the government has been busily redefining it's rules 'in it's own image'. That is to say that the decisions being made, as is generally the case in allegedly 'representative democracy', as usual do not represent many people except those in the parliament and whoever is bribing them. Part of that process includes redefining rules that affect animals and since most of the animal rights had previously been set by the EU, a large gap exists in Britain in that regard. Rather than using the opportunity to INCREASE respect for non human life forms, those involved have apparently chosen to decrease them dramatically, to the point that only serial killers would respect them - as far as serial killers can respect anything..
Apparently this isn't a sentient and conscious being:
To quote the British newspaper, The Standard:
MPs have voted to reject the inclusion of a clause that states animals can feel emotion and pain into the EU withdrawal bill.
Government ministers apparently wrongly stated during the debate that the issue of animal sentience and associated protection is covered by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 - however, that Act only covers domestic animals and doesn't even mention consciousness or sentience. To be clear, sentience is the ability to experience sense impressions of reality, including feeling/emotion. The idea that animals don't have sentience is so absurd that it would be difficult to find a child who could speak words and who interacts with animals that would agree to it. Adults, on the other hand, can often be found completely in denial of their emotional reality and that equates (often) to psychopathic, unreliable and heartless thoughts and actions. Humanity cannot afford to allow such beings to determine the future of life on Earth - the results will be difficult to recover from and we are already quite close to the point of no return.
'Positive thinkers' might like to think that one day our magical democracy powers will stop such evil, but I remind you that the Ivy League Historian, Carroll Quigley already made abundantly clear that after 2 years of unrestricted access to what is probably the world's largest and most secret 'secret society' -
'Representative Democracy Is A Con Game Designed By A Hidden Network of Oligarchs'.
Saner Spaces
New Zealand's Animal Welfare Ammendment Bill is now in effect in that region and goes some way to making clear that animals are to be protected in the legal system:
The Act stipulates that it is now necessary to 'recognise animals as sentient' and that owners must ‘attend properly to the welfare of those animals'.
"To say that animals are sentient is to state explicitly that they can experience both positive and negative emotions, including pain and distress," said Chair of the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee, Dr Virginia Williams
source: independent
It is well known that in India, the Hindu religion treats cows as sacred - allowing them to effectively be completely free and perhaps even more protected than some humans. Other regions also demonstrate an emotional awareness of reality that is not as psychopathic as the self defined 'civilised' British culture is being pushed towards.
REAL Civilisation?
We cannot claim to be advanced, evolved and civilised while simultaneously denying large aspects of reality. Denial always results in disaster and death - whether it takes a short time or a long time to manifest. By denying that animals experience pain, emotions, thoughts and have consciousness - just like we do - we open the door even further to a literal hell on Earth. I know from experience that those who are close to psychopathy themselves will 'reason' such half baked responses as 'animals are commodities' and ask such low IQ questions as 'Would you go to a restaurant with a cow?' - but frankly, I also know from expeirence that there are many animals that embody a higher intelligence level than these humans do and are simply stuck with forms that limit their ability to demonstrate it.
Anyone who wants to learn more about the REAL situation with animal consciousness would do well to learn from (and even go and study with) animal communicators such as Anna Breytenbach - this documentary is a must see - I would be VERY happy if it was shown in all schools:
And if you want to know just how psychopathic human treatment of animals ALREADY IS - I recommend watching the documentary 'Earthlings' which makes abundantly clear just how disgustingly evil the treatment of animals often is in the farms and factories on Earth. The reality is that there is NO way to 'humanely' kill a living creature that wants to live - the only possible way to go ahead and do such a thing is if you switch off your emotions and become effectively psychopathic - or at least on the spectrum of psychopathy (that I recognise but psychologists typically don't yet). By overpowering the feeling will of living creatures, you join the mission of evil intent - there is no way around that.
Surthrival
If humanity intends to survive at all, let alone thrive, we need now to evolve our understandings about life and what life is. We cannot expect to continue going on living while will-less-ly causing death and pain at every turn as if there is no responsibility to not do so and no repercussions from such action.
I'll leave you with the revised checklist for psychopathy as defined in the DSM (psychology manual) - how many of these are WELL KNOWN to be regularly found in politicians in 'the west' and beyond?
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Buy My T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.
View My Witness Application Here
It's a verified fact that many (if not most) politician, businessmen,and salesmen are psychopaths. That is, they willfully engage in lies, deceit, and manipulation, for their own ends, with an utter disregard for any effect on those they are deceiving.
And they often do so with big smiles on their faces, which is just another form of their deceit, hiding their truly black hearts.
Yes, I agree. There are plenty of sales people and 'business' people who are quite sane too and who think they can operate in a good way and improve life - but eventually (usually quite quickly) they will encounter the more psychopathic entities involved and often these ones are 'higher up the food chain' and that's where the problems start for them. Since we lack a coherent and shared understanding of this problem as a whole, it can be overwhelming to know what to do in such a situation. It is important to expose this issue and use the internet while we can to evolve the situation.
Thanks for sharing this @ura-soul I too was sickened by this ruling and it's certainly gives an insight into how removed from reality these people really are. For me, our ability to show compassion and kindness to animals is the definition of our humanity and to view them as a commodity is a symptom of our fall from grace. For many our connection to the earth has been severed and this has led to a fracturing of our psyche. All acts of hatred, cruelty and anger are born out of this disconnection and we ignore it at our peril. I have many animals and I feel their love and spirit on a daily basis, I give them warmth, love and food but they give me far more than I could ever hope to define in mere words. Thanks again for highlighting this travesty @ura-soul
You are welcome! I know that many animal activists are preparing for appropriate responses to this and I can see that they are finding their numbers growing with new members daily.
I totally agree about humanity's fall from grace and it's connection to a loss of compassion - they are both facets of the missing wholeness and balance that's needed now. My only point of disagreement is in regards to the nature of anger - in that I know that anger has gotten a 'bum rap' from most of us. If you feel into (real) anger deeply you will find an essence of love that moves to protect that which is loved. Heartless anger and anger that is itself judged against can be destructive, but when the judgement is removed and acceptance is present for the feelings - we can learn the message anger has to give before problems arise.
It will help us greatly to focus on recalling past lives as many if not most of us will have had some as animals.
What an observant man you are @ura-soul and yes you're completely correct. In fact, I usually add the caveat of "unjust anger" to similar statements so big respect to you for noticing. I'm in complete agreement for anger can be used a force for much good, indeed we should be angry at many things and many people. It's how we channel the anger that's the important thing, for with the right voices and the right organisation anger can (and has) galvanise the world.
Indeed, yes - thanks! I give thanks to spirit/source/mother for teaching me much of what I now understand regarding emotions - without that help I would probably not have much more awareness of the intricacies than the majority of people. <3
I was just thinking you'd been rather quiet ura, and was finally going to check out your whistleblower work, when I noticed this, and indeed that I had been 'unfollowed' from you. Curious - gremlins in steemland?
Anyway, this piece is spot on, I agree with every word - beautifully written, well researched, hard to read - because the subject matter is so depressing... yet... by their actions we know them. This will not stand. They are exposing themselves, you are correct, and compared to when I first became aware of these issues - some 30-40 years ago now - this is a different world. They are not living in it, clearly, and therefore are heading for a very, very, rude awakening in a world that is increasingly yawning, stretching, and waking up. Db
Aloha! I don't know why you were unfollowed - maybe a Steem glitch or an accidental click on your part. Thanks for your support here. The operators of the gated estates guarded by mind controlled Ex-SAS 'workers' would do well to pay attention now, yes.
maybe because the authoritarian oligarchic class doesn't even see others humans as sentient being. And maybe they aren't wrong, seeing how easily&impunitly they abuse, plunder and rape us. great post, upvoted and followed
there is a huge gap on earth between beings who are stuck in their mental parts and literally everything else. the mental parts often effectively divorce themselves from reality and then declare themselves to be the smartest! Those who survive will be those who don't fall into this trap and who take steps to prevent the denial epidemic from destroying them and their environment!
thanks for the support! <3
That is very bad. We should treat animals well so they can treat us well too. We all need one another to survive in this world. Nature and Animal inclusive
Thankyou, yes - when we seek truth with courage and determination, we eventually learn that everything that exists is part of a singular oneness.. To disrepect any being is to disrespect self. <3
Looking at things 'in their own image'is something the so-called "elites of the world" have been doing for well over 500 years". When will they give sentient beings a break?
yes indeed, i don't think we can rely on them ever changing - the need is to shift the balance in favour of the earth and it's earthlings once and for all in an appropriately balanced way!
More the time passes and more I read these kind of news, more I hold the belief that humanity is mentally ill.
Wtf does it cost to implement / keep a law that respects animal rights? Whatever our beliefs, why not just simply follow the principle of precaution?
Not respecting the rights of sentient being is recognised like a crime, so if there is a doubt, a debate still going on, the principle of precaution should prevail. It's analogue to condemning someone to death without being sure he is a murderer.
For me, it is clear that animals are sentient. But I do respect the opinion of those that do not believe so, even though this belief doesn't make sense to me. My point is that as long as there is no consensus, animal rights should be respected fully. Not doing so is a crime, whatever the official laws says.
Oh yes, it is clear to me that the majority of humanity that we call 'normal' are to some extent mentally ill. Just like how many people can be nudged into ill health just by a cold day due to underlying weaknesses - so too do most of us hold mental/emotional injury/dysfunction that can be felt and noticed in the right conditions.
There are many 'vested interests' that are both sick and also predatorial who will do whatever they can to switch 'respect for life' back through to 'support for death'. The 'positive thinking' approach has allowed this to continue for a long time because many simply refuse to accept that such heartlessness can exist.
The film with Anna Breytenbach is both beautiful and magical.
I have never seen that level of cross species communication before. I wonder if there are many people around the world that have the same 'powers' as Anna?
As you say it would be so good for young people to be shown this film at school. It wouldn't do any harm for older people to see it too !
Yes, it is for me one of the best videos ever made!
I have experienced the same kind of communication that she demonstrates - first with a horse and then with a cow. She is much more tuned in than I am though, my experiences of these things tend to be a bit unpredicted and short lived - but they are definitely real. We need to stay 'locked in' to the right frequency and state of being to be able to live with the connections consciously and our modern habits don't make that easy.
Thank you for covering this important issue.
@originalworks
you are welcome!
As any dog owner will tell you, of course animals feel emotions.
What we are witnessing is perhaps not so much psychopathy (though that may be a component) but more a path of least resistance. Expediency and convenience.
What do I mean? Well, humans have tools and the ability to make factories and machines. We communicate using various technologies. Animals do not have most of these skills. Opposable thumbs & larger than average brains were/are largely a key to our being the dominant species on this planet, dolphins & mice notwithstanding.
What this all means is that we have the ability to inflict great suffering in the name of food, medical research, and other areas where animals are used. Is it right to do so? There can be some reasoned debate here, though I would say we should not intentionally cause any unnecessary suffering, and aggressively look for solutions with less collateral damage such as using computer simulations, lab grown tissues for medical testing and so on.
Perhaps with time, we will grow to become a more empathetic species. But for now, short-term thinking and pragmatic (if cold) decision making are likely to continue.
To quote myself - 'convenience kills' - if we are not seeing psychopathy then the best it can be called is heartless stupidity. The idea that 'dominant' means 'best' is one that originates from the same psychopathic (un)consciousness that creates the disconnection from empathy and actual reality that we are describing here.
There is no healing that requires animal testing and no human nutritional needs that require the death of animals, despite claims to the contrary.
I cannot go along with this shendai – the fact this is seen as a ‘path of least resistance’ is precisely what reveals it as psychopathic. Q - What is it that resists psychopathy, in those who are not psychopathic? A – natural empathy, the intrinsic, undeniable recognition of the fundamental oneness of life. For those with natural empathy (i.e. non-psychopathic), there is huge resistance to reducing animals to ‘expediency, convenience’. The fact this tendency is so ubiquitous is a strong clue to the prevalence of the problem of psychopathy. You suggest that there is the possibility of reasoned debate regarding whether suffering can be inflicted ‘in the name of food, medical research…’ – well, we can reason and debate about pretty much anything, but all-too-often the detachment of reason, arbitrarily bracketed from the utterly legitimate data input of natural empathy, is precisely what reinforces the psychopathic mindset in the first place. Huge caution is needed here, and I’m yet to read a ‘reasoned’ justification of such behaviours that didn’t strike me as crude, question-begging, and fundamentally juvenile and self-serving. So I disagree, I don’t believe for one moment that we will, one day, grow to become a more empathetic species. Putting it off to a vague future time is yet more reasoned ‘convenience’; ours is a quite different challenge, an ‘empathetic species’ is precisely our fundamental nature, the challenge is to wake up to who we are right now. Db
Interesting point.
There's great value in working to live in better harmony with all creation. But I think there's a tremendous difference between a person who - for example - takes life because it gives them some sort of twisted satisfaction (true psychopathy) and a hungry man who kills a deer to feed himself and his family.
As long as there is hunger and suffering among people on a large scale, pragmatic decisions will be made. Note - I'm not attempting to say this is necessarily right or wrong, only that this is the reality we have to address. If you ask a hungry coastal village to stop eating fish, do you think for a moment that will work? If, on the other hand, you develop tools and technologies to help them feed themselves as effectively and make them available, now you have a viable alternative. None of those hypothetical villagers, by the way, are being cruel or psychotic for eating fish. They are simply trying to survive, which is the first instinct of every living thing.
This is of course true. If I were living a life like those you describe here I would be exactly the same, and it is not psychopathic. But we are discussing the modern, post-industrial age, where some people seem to believe that chicken grows pre-wrapped. This dodges the point. The 'distance' in our age from the consequences of our actions is used to justify choices that would never be made if direct contact with our natural resources was present. This 'distancing' is in itself quite comparable to the 'empathic' distancing of the psychopathic mind, and the consequences are identical. This is not about 'first instincts', it is about ethics, and your point strikes me as unintended sophistry. If you need to exploit sentient life to live, you must do it - there is no choice involved in that basic fact, and so ethics doesn't come into it. The moment you have choices (like in our actual lives here in the developed world), you have ethics, and ethics are driven by empathy. Db