I can remember watching the Academy Awards on TV back about A.D. 1953 when Walt Disney won a slew of Oscars on the same night. I remember Bob Hope joking that Walt would need a pickup truck to haul all his Oscars home. I was cheering, I was hollering. That Academy Awards show was one of the happiest moments in my life.
In retrospect, it’s strange how clearly I remember that night. But Walt Disney–who gave me Peter Pan, Mickey Mouse Club, Donald Duck, Davy Crockett, Mike Fink, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, etc.–was pretty much my hero. Walt could do no wrong. In my opinion, the only mistake the Academy Awards made that year was failing to give all the Oscars to Disney.
So, when I received an email (below) from one of my readers, I was a little bit troubled by the link to an A.D. 1955 Disney cartoon entitled “You Are A Human Animal!”. That cartoon helped kids to understand that they were a “special breed” of “animal”–a “human animal”–because they could think, reason and read.
I’d never before seen that cartoon. If I had, from my childish point of view, the idea that I was a “special animal”–but still an “animal“–would’ve been delightful. After all, if I was an “animal,” I’d have that much more in common with one of my best friends: “Jeep”–my grandparents’s dog. All kids like animals. The idea that we and the animals are “one” is, from a child’s perspective, both natural and desirable. Animals weren’t something we owned or used. Animals were our best friends.
Besides, as a child, I had no idea that an early edition of Balantine’s Law Dictionary defined “human” to be a “monster”. In fact, I didn’t learn to be suspicious of the term “human” until I was in my 50s. So, as a child, I would probably have loved the “You are a human animal” cartoon.
But, as the Bible says, “When I was a child, I thought as a child; but now that I am become a man, I think as a man.” The Disney cartoon that would’ve delighted the child 55 years ago disturbs the man, today. Was the content of this cartoon merely an innocent mistake–or was that cartoon evidence of sinister “conditioning” intended to teach the young (including me) that we are “animals” rather than men and women “made in God’s image”?
Is it possible that the smiling, affable Walt Disney–my hero–had a dark side? Was he part of the system for gosh-sakes?! It’s almost amazing how hard it is for me to believe that smiling Walt might’ve been involved in conditioning kids to accept their status as animals or even slaves. In fact, I don’t believe it’s true. I almost can’t believe it. But I’m disturbed my recognition that I do believe it’s possible.
(This “thinking like a man” stuff isn’t all that much fun.)
• Here’s the email I received–it includes the link to the Disney cartoon:
• If you’ve followed this blog, you know that I’m fixated by the drug laws that define the people to be “animals” rather than men and women made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-28) and endowed by your Creator with certain unalienable Rights (“Declaration of Independence”). The people are defined to be animals by the phrase “man or other animals” (or sometimes, “animals other than man”).
For me, the “man or other animals” concept is huge insight of enormous importance. The war on drugs, much of the modern police state, much of the prison-industrial complex, billions of dollars of profits for pharmaceutical manufactures, the FDA’s restrictions on the use of vitamins, whole milk and organic gardens, ObamaCare and even the American medical industry are all ultimately based on just four words (“man or other animals”) that define the people to be animals.
That four-word phrase (and all of those institutions that depend on that phrase) can be defeated by a freedom of religion defense (or perhaps even offence) which simply says that the gov-co can’t define me to be an “animal” (not even a “special breed” and “human animal” as Disney suggested) without violating Genesis 1:26-28 that defines all of God’s children to be made in God’s image and given dominion over the animals. Thus, as a Christian or Jew, I can’t be an “animal” or be subject to any law that applies only to “animals”. Any law that degrades me to the status of “animal” violates my freedom of religion and/or imposes a state-based religion (paganism) upon the people in violation of the First Amendment. I’m convinced this is true because I’ve done it in a lawsuit where I was threatened by the Texas Attorney General with fines of $25,000 a day.
• As a result of that lawsuit, I know that the word “drug” is defined by federal law at 21 U.S.C.A. §321(g)(1) and by Texas law at Texas Health & Safety Code §431.002(14). Each of these definitions include two instances of the phrase “man or other animals” and thereby indicate that the drug laws only apply to “animals” not men and woman made in God’s image, etc..
I know that the earliest instance seen so far of law that defines the American people to be animals (rather than men and women) is found in Section 6 of the A.D. 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act–which defines both “food” and “drugs” in terms of “man or other animals”.
I know, as per item 3 (“dehumanization”) in “The Eight Stages of Genocide,” that declaring any race, religion, nation or people to be animals constitutes an act of Genocide. Thus, US government has, in fact, been committing acts of genocide against the American people for over a century.
• Given that government has defined us as animals since A.D. 1906, I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that even Walt Disney cartoons were sometimes intended to “condition” rather than amuse or educate. But it still troubles me to think that Walt may not have been hero that I’d supposed. (Next thing y’ know, somebody will be tellin’ me that Fess Parker–the guy who played Davy Crockett in the Disney series–was actually gay. Damn. Then I’ll have to go back into my childhood memories to revise the theme song to “Davy . . . Daaaaveee Crockett! Queen of the wild frontier!”)
It ain’t easy being an adult. As we get older all of our heroes–even our great loves–lose their “larger than life” quality. We find ourselves increasingly unable to believe in any mortal man, woman or earthly institution and therefore increasingly open to believing in God.
• But I’ll say this about Disney’s “You are a human animal” cartoon: If it was intended to condition and dehumanize us, it also revealed a fundamental truth. According to the cartoon, the government views us as “animals” alright–but also as a “special breed” of “human animals” because we can 1) think; 2) reason; and 3) read.
In fact, virtually all animals can think and show some rudimentary capacity to reason. But, so far as I know, there is no “other animal” that can read.
Can most “human animals” read? Yes–at least to the limit of reading limericks and telephone numbers scratched on walls of the men’s rooms in various saloons. But when it comes to real “reading” of, say, the law–how many of the “special breed” of “human animals” can truly “read”?
Most lawyers can’t even really read and understand the law.
So far as I know, the “man or other animals” definitions first appeared in the A.D. 1906 Pure Food & Drug Act. I’ll bet that 80% of today’s Congress and Senate have no idea that the drug laws they’ve passed (including ObamaCare) are based on the presumption that we are all just “animals”. So far as I know, I’m the first layman in over a century to read the modern definition of drugs and recognize the spiritual implications of the phrase “man or other animals”.
The “man or other animals” laws have laid openly on the books for over a century and almost no one has been able to read well enough to understand the meaning and implications of that phrase. If Disney’s cartoon truly reflects the values of the New World Order, those of us can’t read are deemed to be pure “animals” while only those who can read well will be deemed “special animals”.
I don’t accept that definition. But I nevertheless recognize that so long as the New World Order exists, your “freedom,” prosperity and even survival may primarily depend on your ability to read. Those who read well, beat the rap. Those who can’t read, go to prison.
What is the fundamental offense committed by most people in prison? Dealing drugs? Committing violent acts? Theft? Or illiteracy?
I’ve said it repeatedly: we are not enslaved by guns and clubs, but by words. If you would be free, you must learn to read. Only your ability to read can cut the chains of words by which you’ve been ensnared.