Can’t decide what of the free thinker Travis takes is more idiotic and entry level: Posting Belsinki paintings as evidence of a satanic coverup, claiming that the entertainment industry is satanic in its abuse of children, or bringing up the Malleus Maleficarum unironically
Starting off with the first claim, zdzisław beksiński was a polish painter well known for surrealist demonic imagery. There’s a few of his numerous paintings that evoke hellish imagery of mass death, something that can be easily paralleled in the images coming out of Astroworld
Yes it’s very easy to look at paintings of mass death and point to a mass death in the news, but this grossly ignores historical context, as Beksinski firsthand witnessed the nazi occupation of Poland and explicitly based a lot of what I see getting posted around on these events
Next up the entertainment industry being satanic. This one is laughable if you’ve ever done any research but if only listened to podcasts you’d come at that conclusion. However what most of these people ignore is the CIA and Hollywood’s close relationship to Catholicism.
the CIA and the Catholic Church had intimate relations during the height of the original satanic panic. While the Finders cult (a cia affiliated trafficking ring) in America was being swept under the banner of satanic panic, the CIA was working with the church as part of gladio
To overthrow and murder democratically elected leaders and student activists in Italy. Even outside of conspiracy theories, the church literally cannot put a dollar amount on their holdings. They are the single wealthiest landlord in world history, only rivaled by the crown.
Personally if you consider yourself a revolutionary communist you should oppose the institutionalized Catholic Church. There is nothing inherently wrong about their beliefs, but the Vatican is essentially the ultimate bourgeois state, and one that is entirely tax exempt.
That’s not to mention the numerous acts of molestation done and protected by even the highest members of clergy. Something that parallels and links with the entertainment industry. It has been alleged by Corey Feldman and others that Charlie Sheen was molested in
Both the church and in Hollywood, sheen in turn molested others including Corey Haim. This is substantiated by his divorce proceedings. Actor Martin Sheen also has a close friendship with president Bill Clinton, an Epstein associate.
Finally, it is laughable that people are tying this in to the classical depiction of witchcraft. There’s an excellent video on the history of witch panic on YouTube that goes into greater detail.
But to summarize, the creation of the witchcraft panics that still exist today is essentially the product of one man, Heinrich Kramer. Prior to his writing of The Hammer Of Witches, witchcraft was seen as benevolent by the church. It was entirely legal, and condoned.
Since ancient witchcraft could be seen as an early form of western herbal medicine, this had the added benefit of keeping early Christendom healthier as a lot of witchcraft was based around the use of plants and nature.
Prior to his book, there were almost no trials regarding witchcraft. The only forms of criminal witchcraft were poisonings or damage to property, people or livestock. The idea of the devil as a tempter of average men was hardly in the Bible, along with the idea of magic.
In fact it has been argued by biblical scholars that the only use of witch in the Bible is a possible mistranslation.
The guy behind the witchcraft panic was a small time clergyman. Prior to writing it, he attempted to charge a local woman with witchcraft. During the trial he exhibited perverse behavior that offended the local people, including asking the woman to describe sex with her husband.
After this failed, he wrote the Hammer Of Witches, filled with misogynist language saying all women had the potential for witchcraft because they loved to talk, and all women would love to lie with the devil. His coauthor, scholar Jacob Sprenger, was dead at the time of writing
And most refute that he even contributed to it, as he was not against witchcraft. Even after that, he still had to essentially con the pope into agreeing to reverse the papal rule on witchcraft, saying that without it people would grow to distrust the church.
The book became wildly popular off the popes new decree against witches and the rest is history, I hope you enjoyed.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
