Menace to My Freedoms?

It so happens, I get worried about what certain people around where I have my luggage could be up to, when it comes to my freedoms. Note the plural, I believe in freedoms that should not be taken away without due process or cause, not in "Freedom" to be applied any way a certain administration sees fit.

Look at this, recalling it could be applied to other conditions than Alzheimer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogeweyk

The doctors, nurses and carers aim to make the experience as real as possible to the residents. Residents shop at the supermarket and assist with preparing and cooking as they would at home.[3] The carers wear normal daytime clothing rather than clinical clothing and fit into a role that the people living with dementia are likely to be comfortable with; in the working class households the carers are seen to be neighbours or friends, while in the aristocratic/upper class setting, the nurses act akin to servants.

While this would obviously be less evil than being shut up in a mental hospital and forced to take medications, it would still be underhanded, I haven't agreed to such a thing, and the underhandedness would make it hard to file complaints. Hope some or even many of those in Hogeweyk actually did agree and feel better about it.

Now, why do I even suspect such a thing?

Papers related to my study loan debt arrived late. I tried to contact the huissier judicial, one letter to them, one care-copy of a letter to TFP, and the first letter to them resent this morning. I haven't received an answer.

I think managing one's own debts is part of what comes with adult life, and if someone pretends I wasn't capable of it, that may be because that someone doesn't fully regard me as an adult. I would not want such a person to intrude into my affairs and leaving me unable to protest.

Now, to be fair, I have not been earning an income to pay the debt. However, as a writer, I have each day worked in a way (very few days off) that could bring me incomes once things unlock. Which brings me to another thing. If any cabale is treating me as unable to care for my affairs, they probably don't agree with my plan, and would probably do what they can to stop it from coming to fruition. Meaning, their bias about my person is proportional to their bias against what I write, whichever of it comes first in any given case.

I have been showered with tips about how to self publish. The one that seems it would be a good idea if I had an apartment would be to print 200 copies and store them in my home until sold, and try to ask for the right of selling in a market or as a "manifestation" from a table. As long as I have no apartment, this is not feasible, storing books with me would be to invite thieves or people who would infest my things with parasites. You can't sell books if there are lice in them.

But self publish on Amazon! What's taking you so long?

First, their standard is e-book first. Why would I want to sell things on kindle which people could look up for free and with added context on my blogs? It's the paper version I should be earning money from. The one you can read in the bus even if you have no internet connection or if your cell phone doesn't allow you sufficient ease at scrolling. Or in the wood. Or on a beach. Or at home if you never access internet from home (which is my case). Or even if you are allergic to internet overall (which is not my case).

Second, here are some stories that show Amazon in a pretty bad light:

These are the sneaky ways thieves try to STEAL YOUR BOOK
Bookfox | 28 May 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFMkz36MNFQ

Also, sending a word document to an editor is not safe. As long as it isn't published, it isn't copyrighted. People have pretended I've done the most stupid thing putting my writing up on the internet, but it is copyrighted under French law as soon as I have published it. And as long as it's up, anyone who wanted to steal would have to deal with a publisher being able to access my blogs and see I wrote it first. Plus, here is a piece of advice from John Fox, from that video:

just remember that 6:49 your fear of having your book stolen can 6:52 end up harming your writing career much 6:54 more than a thief actually stealing your 6:56 book if fear of having your book stolen 6:58 prevents you from sending your book out 6:59 to beta readers or sending it out to 7:01 agents you're doing your writing career 7:03 so much more damage than any Thief ever 7:06 could

How much more unfair if someone who wasn't me pretended to be worried on my part and stopped me from being read over a fake worry.

Third, another video, promoting Amazon, straight up admits that Amazon will do more marketting if you pay for it, less or basically none if you don't. That would mean paying online, and I don't have any online payment account. I know for a fact that Pope Michael I tried to copyright and republish a book by a priest who listed, I think 9, Papal indictments of Heliocentrism, a book with imprimatur to imprimi potest in the pre-Vatican II era. One reason he gave for discouraging me was, he didn't sell many copies. Guess where he did his self publishing? On Amazon.

Fourth, my conditions are such that anyone who wants can publish an edition of any portion he likes. This would be contrary to the conditions that Amazon doesn't negotiate, but presumes before every button click for publishing a manuscript. Just as John Fox mentioned that the best thing an author can do if a file gets downloaded illegally is to make it easy to buy legally, since most readers actually would, so also this condition of mine makes it easy for anyone outside my immediate surroundings to start a publication without going through the hazzle of consulting me in person. Such things can be hazzles, I recall when Lizzie Reezay was in Paris with her then fiancé, they are now married, and I invited her to see me, could have been a breakthrough to be on her channel, and I recall one moment when I was reclining on a lawn, and Lizzie and her fiancé, or at least credible lookalikes were standing on the edge of the lawn, to far away for me to hear or be heard. A security guard told them to leave, even if it was a public space, I could do nothing about it, and they believed whatever his story was. He was black, by the way. If some black people either from listening to liars or from exacerbated sensibility to vibes* have concluded I'm racist, it makes sense if they were to sabotage me.

If the guard was a Muslim, and I think he was African, not Afro-American, this is even more probable.

This brings me to the kind of people who would want to sabotage for me, especially as a writer of what I have so far written.

• Muslims, Jews, Freemasons and some more Anti-Catholic Protestants could harbour hard feelings over my being pretty very staunchly Catholic.
• Some Novus Ordo Catholics, and more surprising to me, some Trads, have not taken it gracefully that I was a Young Earth Creationist and Geocentric even twhen arriving in Paris and since then have come to accept Pope Michael I, now his successor Michael II as the true Pope. A gringophobe Mexican at St. Nicolas du Chardonnet complained about Michael I being a cowboy, I haven't seen him since accepting Michael II who is a Filipino. Or since his Pope is a US citizen.
• Diverse people on what I could call a "Commie spectrum" (involving on issues like this one also Parti Socialiste) apart from resenting my support for Franco and thus also for Connor Estelle.** They equally are mistrustful to adverse against Young Earth Creationism and Geocentrism (do Catholics of certain types have it from them, or they from the Catholics? I think the former, if only via intermediates less obviously Left Leaning). They equally would object to my litterary genre, "essay writer" as is evident from the disdain some show to Jordan Peterson for confidently speaking up on subjects he is no expert on. That's pretty much the definition of a man who approaches certain subjects as an essayist and not an accredited expert. They might be waiting for me to realise how detestable that is to them. I already know it is. I tend to avoid people whom I suspect of detesting the position of essayist. If any one of them straight forward were to tell me he or she despises what I am doing, I'd reply basically "fine, if so you despise me, get out of my life!" and I would make very few exceptions.

To people of this kind of attitude, it would be a godsent to be able to treat me as mentally impaired, needing the responsibilities of other people and then they can provide the responsibility in ways that push down my social standing in the neighbourhood to the point of making it impossible to find young people involved in book studies (which actually is pretty well represented around the neighbourhood, one school of "métiers du livre" one syndicate of publishers ...) who would be interested in helping both me and themselves to a start of a career.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Octave of Ascension
22.VIII.2025

Octava Assumptionis beatae Mariae Virginis. Festum Immaculati Cordis ejusdem beatae Virginis Mariae.

* Like my interest in Anglo-Saxon, my Trad Catholicism, my admission without shame I had in earlier years been pro-South, not by approval of slavery, but by approving the conditions of industrial workers in 19th C. Chicago even less than slavery, my insistance that Kenosha was not built on slavery, so BLM basically had no business to even a peaceful protest over there, let alone a riot ... to some sensibilities that makes me a racist.

** In an interview for Catholic Herald he denies being a Fascist, since his political theory is not founded in Giovanni Gentile, but in Catholicism, and since his support for Franco is founded in respecting a man who accepted and obeyed Catholic social teaching. By that metric, I'm not a Fascist either. But I arguably am in the lingo of people who count Franco as a Fascist. I would not totally agree with his assessment on the Caudillo, "He disciplined guilty parties who had actively tried to engage in acts of terror." I find that partly true, but partly, he basically forgot he had declared peace on April 1st of 1939. Some who resent the Épuration in France (the wiki doesn't mention lynchings, which occurred) and who resent de Gaulle for persecuting former Collabos, including some who actually were in the Résistance, remarked that whenever de Gaulle pronounced a death sentence, he was encouraging Franco to do the same. I don't think Connor Estelle is disingenious, probably more a bit naïve. Franco did defend the Catholic Church, he did ban Freemasonry, he kept abortion banned ... all of them reasons for a sentiment in which one is less likely to look into his faults. To a Catholic, that is. Oh, wait, the article on Épuration does mention the lynchings:

Immediately following Liberation France was swept by a wave of executions, public humiliations, assaults and detentions of suspected collaborators, known as the épuration sauvage (wild purge) or épurations extrajudiciaires (extrajudiciary purges).[2] This period succeeded the German occupational administration but preceded the authority of the French Provisional Government, and consequently lacked any form of institutional justice.[2] Reliable statistics of the death toll do not exist.

Rivarol would put the count, I think, at 40,000. My point is, I would have liked Franco better if nothing like that had happened in Spain after his victory, but unfortunately it did, apparently.