Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Burial plots

I was dreaming last night about where my ex-wife's father will be buried.  It's an odd thought, but very, very few Americans are buried in the town where they were born.  We move around too much.  Children leave their parents as a matter of course, and not infrequently parents leave their children.  We have little sense of place, which is something burial grounds have always more or less literally embodied.

In Israel, they have the Tomb of the Patriarchs.  This place is sacred because it is thought be where the ancient forebears of the Jews, Christians and Muslims were buried.  The bodies and the place are connected in a sacred way.

Here is, to me, an interesting thought: I think it is likely that nearly 100% of the people who have family burial plots they plan to be buried in eventually voted for Trump.  Rooted people voted for Trump.  People who feel a sense of place voted for Trump.

Put more broadly, conservatives might be seen as those who feel there is something in their lives worth conserving, worth protecting.  They don't think of "humanity", but their own little neck of the woods, their little lives, the people they know, the local coffee shop, their church, their favorite fishing hole.

This is vastly better than being a nihilist who claims to be capable of believing everything.  As a general rule, if your goal is to "save humanity", and your plan involves something other than bringing out the best in everyone, you are a narcissistic liar.

I might go on, might qualify, but you get the gist of it.  I will ignore my inner pedant for now.

Monday, September 17, 2018

This blog and my own conspiracy theory

Year Ten, and I still see little sign of response or life in reaction to anything I write.  I wonder why I spend the time. It's a question any more psychologically normal, less driven person would have answered long ago by quitting.

But I can't help feeling that SOMETHING happens when I write.  I don't know what it is, but I feel it.  Even if no one reads this, I am sending something out in the air, to be caught up, as with the famous experiments with mice and monkeys.

We have been conditioned to believe, we have had beaten into us by insidious and damnably sincere but brainwashed "experts", that life has no meaning.  Christianity is a fairy tale.  All religious are fairy tales.  We are machines made out of meat, matter is the primary things which exists, the ONLY thing which exists, and everything else simply a fancy sandcastle which has fallen together by infinite chance over infinite time, and which is destined to meet its high tide sooner than later.  Everything you love, everything you do: all of it is conditioned, like the behavior of birds feeding on worms, destined, since the beginning of time.  It never begins, because it is simply the continuation of the effect of one billiard ball hitting another billions of years ago, and the concussions of one billiard ball hitting another continue long after the temporary assembly of parts we call our "bodies" and "brains" fall prey to the inevitable effects of entropy.

You can believe this.  It is your choice.  But it is not required by science.  It is not required by intuition.  And it is not yet required by the political authorities, although they are trying hard to get us there.  For now, they just call dissenters to their religion crazies, "deniers", and "anti-scientific", even though THEY are the ones abusing the scientific method to support empirically weak and even indefensible beliefs.

I believe, because I have reason to believe, that the world is vastly bigger, more interesting, more miracle filled than most people who grow up watching sitcoms, watching porn, enduring idiotic movies and conversations can possibly grasp.

The morning after

Wow, I got jolted by some powerful dark energies last night.  I seem to have a particular problem with the direction north.  Some nights, I will literally get up and burn sage.  I don't know if I believe in sage, but I believe in belief, and having a physical connection to an emotional/spiritual intention cannot be a bad thing.  I read some thing about putting salt in a jar with water and vinegar, too.  I have no idea if it helps, but if it provides a tangible anchor for a believing thought, then likely yes.  It is not the thing: it is my interaction with, and elevation of the thing, through belief.

Let me put last nights thought this way: the idea that life has meaning and purpose is a conspiracy theory, in large measure.  Our dominant culture tells us our purpose in life is to work, have sex, buy and use and throw away lots of things, engage in superficial sentimentality--not infrequently through ridiculous political ideas and following actions--think as little as possible, and to die.  If this is dominant, if this is the latent and in many cases explicit message of our "leaders", then any alternative is by definition "conspiracy".  It is out of the mainstream.  It is "dangerous".  It is TRULY counter-cultural.

And on that last term, I would submit the goal is not to create an alternative culture, but to create new ideas and practices WITHIN our culture, to evolve.

A metaphor I used some time ago is that the hippies, and Beats before them (about whom some things later today) were like a pack of bikers in a long race who tried to get ahead of the pack to try and "win" the race of life.  To be better than the rest of us.  To live more useful, more meaningful, more exciting lives.  By and large, in my view, most of them failed terribly.  They lived selfish, narcissistic, futile, and ultimately somewhat pathetic if not outright contemptible lives.  To the extent they lived good lives, they returned to values which were already latent in our culture, like compassion. 

Ram Dass, to take one example, seems to not be the fuckup he once was.  In my curmudgeonly world, that is high praise, and sincere.  But he is not "counterculture" in my view.  He has learned to express the best that was already IN our culture.  In his work, he might appeal to Hindu ideals, but ideals of compassion are also very Christian. He would no doubt disagree, but in my view he could have reached his current station in life without going to India.  It may well be the case that all his drugs helped him.  Well, let's mainstream drugs.  Let's integrate them, so you don't have to leave our culture at all in order to experience induced transcendental states. Let's build public temples to them.  Maybe we can use city money to buy up all the Masonic lodges in every major city in America and convert them to Ayahuasca or mushroom temples. 

I think one of my jobs--I continue to think of myself roughly as an irritable senior NCO with a spear and a job--is to open up holes in GroupThink, in the collective hypnosis which lies over so much of humankind.  And "conspiracy theories" are the way.  It was a conspiracy theory in the Matrix that they were all living in pods.  But they were all living in pods.  My job is Red Pills.  Everyone else, the whole system by and large, is dishing out Blue Pills.  The Democrats as they exist today, cannot BUT consist entirely in people consuming and enjoying Blue Pills.  They have made Hitler of JFK, in public view, simply through constant repetition of the Big Lie. It's obscene.  It's unbelievable.

If you have been thinking about thinking, now is a good time.  If you are a Muslim, Christianity is a conspiracy theory. If you are a Christian, Buddhism is conspiracy theory.  If you are an atheist, any form of theism is conspiracy theory.  And if you are a socialist, the POSSIBILITY that conservatives are not evil is also conspiracy theory.

Sometimes, when you are in the darkness, the truth seems even darker.  This is because it seems impossible, unappealing.  But on the other side is the light.  And those who would keep you in darkness can be counted on pointing out that life is dimmer "over there", so even if you are miserable here, it MUST be much worse over there.  They themselves fear all of that.

The world we see is covered in varying degrees of shadow.  It is fascinating to contemplate.

"Darkness within darkness: the gateway to all mystery".  (Lao Tzu)

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Processing our childhood

I am working my way slowly through a book on "Psychosynthesis".  One exercise is imagination.  Imagine your hand signing your name slowly.  Imagine a set of digits, as large as you can hold, and hold it in your inner vision for two minutes.  Imagine the smell of peppermint, the sound of crackling paper, the entirety of sense, smell, taste, sound, sight of eating bowl of yogurt with oatmeal.  Etc.

I'm pretty good with smells.  I can imagine Juniper versus Cedar versus Pine, etc.  I use essential oils most days.

But this popped in my head: Imagine your parents, as carefully as you can, without judgement.  Watch how they hold themselves, how they walk, how they smell, how they eat.  And more importantly, what is/are the dominant affect(s) or sensation(s) which you feel?  What is the feeling of this relationship like?  Do not name it.  Do not reduce it.  Feel it exactly as it is in your mind, today, which may not be truly as it was, then.

This feeling, if you can capture it pristinely, will I think be also found in your personality.  If you want to change, to move away from the patterns of your home, then identifying who and how they are in you is an important starting point.

Conspiracy theorists are the sane ones

If you invert "never listen to 'conspiracy theorists' because they are crazy", what do you get?

Think about it.  What do you get?

You get TRUST THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA AND ITS APPOINTED EXPERTS ONLY.

Trust the Man.  Trust the system.  Trust that you are being told the whole truth by everyone in power, and that no one is lying to you.  Trust that no one would abuse the system, and that if they did, they would be caught and prosecuted, because our system ALWAYS works. 

Do you think this is a reasonable thing to request, much less demand? 

And if you really think about it, every Christian church is engaging in "conspiracy theory".  They believe in an invisible God, and an absolute Hell and absolute Heaven which ALL OF US go to.  There is a whole world, an entire order, beyond what we can see, and it is vastly more important than what we CAN see.  Is this not a conspiracy theory?  Is this not called lunacy by the mainstream "experts" who are willing to speak the truth as they see it?

And you multiple conspiracies with the Pope. First you have to believe all the Christian stuff about heaven and hell and the resurrection of Christ, then that God really did appoint the Pope his vicar, then that he is telling the truth about the men in his immediate circle who have been clearly and without much doubt implicated in horrible sexual crimes against children.

That's a whole lot of believing.

I think intelligent people, watching even their immediate circle, even the people at work, quickly come to realize that the whole truth is not only not always told, it is rare when it is.  Most of the time, somebody is lying about something, withholding information, misleading people, for a variety of reasons.

Conspiracies to conceal truths are not rare: they are continuous.  They can be small and they can be enormous.

And psychologically, I think all of us NATURALLY gravitate to the belief there is some deeper order we cannot see.  It's something you have to fight. 

And of course the "rationalists" say we MUST fight this tendency.  But I would ask: if we lack sufficient information to form a final conclusion, as is nearly always the case, what is the benefit to jettisoning the POSSIBILITY that something really weird, really underhanded, or even really evil is in play?  Saying it is possible is not the same as saying it is happening, and intelligent people always formulate as many hypotheses as possible so as to best match the evidence as it emerges.

I think all thinking, feeling people have seen in the attacks on "conspiracy theory" a concerted propagandistic attack on unwanted truths.  Obama wanted to make his complicity in the preventable murders of Americans in Benghazi disappear by calling anyone questioning him about it a nut.  But the facts have emerged, and with the exception of Hillary Clinton, no one person shares more blame for the death of Ambassador Stephens and others than Barack Hussein Obama, who lied in the beginning, lied in the middle, and is trying to lie through distraction even now.

Ponder a population so docile, so imbecilic, that it trusts its leaders when they promise they will never lie or mislead them.

Saturday, September 15, 2018

This video

I just came across this video today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q__bSi5rBlw

It was posted by a conservative friend, and my initial read was it was black humor in keeping with the rage many of us feel at the violence, duplicity, continual attack, and continual interference Trump and his supporters have had to deal with for many months now.

But I thought about it, and realized that this is much too well funded for home bloggers, and, more importantly, that nobody--certainly not Trump--is calling for the deportation of people here legally, which is what a green card means.

It is creative and clever, but ultimately intended to demean Trump through humor, and to insinuate manifestly wrong ideas--again, such as the idea that he opposes either legal immigration, or people who are here legally--into people's consciousnesses.

But then I kept thinking about it, and it hit me that anger IS an appropriate response to what the Mexicans have done to us.  Let us say it is 10 million people here illegally.  Is it not perfectly reasonable for ordinary Americans to find this infuriating, the same way we would find it infuriating if we woke up one morning and a stranger, having broken in in the night, were sleeping on our couch? 

We have become so used to being attacked and demeaned for ordinary, healthy, reasonable reactions to provocations that  many of us have become emotionally numb, and been rendered helpless to respond according to righteous and reasonable instincts.

We are not only supposed to feel no anger that our hospitality has been so abused, but to welcome a nearly unlimited amount of it, which is what the No Borders crowd are calling for.  This is insanity.

As I keep saying, JFK could have been, and in large measure WAS, elected on the platform Trump ran on.  From this, we get accusations of being "literally Hitler". 

And my GOD, if you want to talk abuse of women, Trump does not hold a candle to Kennedy.

How is it so many people are so fucking insane? 

It's our TV culture, where people consume opinions, internalize them, own them, then flaunt them as their own. 

It's mass society, where belonging trumps thinking, and conforming trumps trusting your own instincts. 

Its conditioned herd responses.

It is a failed educational system, which breeds inbreds as a matter of policy, fails to teach any form of adult responsibility and accountability, and encourages infantile rage, fatuous thinking when combined with strong emotion, and places the kids in charge of the madhouse.

Ideal

Forget what is unimportant, and forget that you have forgotten it.

Remember what IS important, and remember to remember it.

Your mind is your tool.  But it will only build beautiful things if you use it with skill, and with intent.

Friday, September 14, 2018

Smear the Queer

When I was in 2nd and 3rd grade, we had recess on an asphalt playground, which had a merry go round we used to try and knock each other off of, see saws we also used to try and knock each other off of (the boys, self evidently), monkey bars, swings we jumped off of, and other things I have forgotten because I didn't use them.

Our favorite game, though, was Smear the Queer, which was giving a football to someone, then everyone else--6-10 of us--trying to tackle the person with the football.  Once they were down, they released it, and the game repeated.  I had strong legs even then, and they called me "Big Bad", which is quite comical considering I was 8 or so. I have always been physically stubborn in some circumstances though.  There are time I will not quit.  Over the long haul, bet on me quitting.  Over the short haul, my pain tolerance is staggering.

But I wanted to comment on the obvious facts that, by now, 1) this game is no longer allowed on most playgrounds, even among the schools which have them; 2) most schools no longer have staff nurses, as we did, for the mostly boys who would get injured just about every day at recess; 3) The NAME for this is verboten.  I have heard this game called Bag the Fag too.

Now, at that age, in that world, I did not have the slightest idea what a homosexual was.  At that time, where I grew up, I would sometimes read in the newspaper about them busting a "bathhouse" and arresting people--sometimes cops, sometimes local government officials, all a scandal.  But this whole in-door, out-door thing was a mystery for me for a very long time.

The point I would like to make here on this topic is that OF COURSE it is a good thing that kids no longer call that game by that name.  I think it is bad, if it is true, that they no longer play something like it, but that we have stopped equating gay with bad is good.  This IS progress.  That gay sex is no longer illegal, such that bathhouses are raided and everyone caught naked in the shower arrested for "sodomy", is good.

In my less angry moments, in my less defensive moments, I have to concede progress has indeed been made.  So called "Progressives" have engendered progress, real progress.

But what I have to insist on is that emotionally, I never feel that helping actual, real human beings is the goal.  Because whenever they win one victory, they go for another.  Whenever they have undermined one bad underpinning assumption of our society they go for another, one which might well be good.  Witness, as an example, the ruckus over the claim that "bourgeois"values have some merit.

Here is the thing: we need to be able to adjust our outrage, temper it proportionately.  Be mildly angry at mild insults, and greatly angry at great insults.  But given how craven and beaten most people are in most segments of society, very few dare great insults, so the people who NEED rage to justify their existences visit rage on them anyway.

In such an atmosphere, no rational proportionality is possible.  No reconciliation and negotiation of opposing or at least differing views is possible.

The all or nothing tactics and viewpoints of the Left make emotional intelligence impossible.  They make understanding impossible. They make it impossible to be meek when needed, and tough when needed. 

Conservatives--Liberals, to be clear, who retain some fondness for rational discourse, civic mindedness, principle, and civility--are forced into pitched battles or silence.  Silence has largely failed, so they show up at the "discussion" armed for bear, and quite prepared to deal out the same viciousness they expect will be the opening parley by the Left.

All of this is stupid.  Preventing this outcome should be the POINT of a college education, even a high school education, even a grade school education.

It is good that we no longer tolerate open bashing of homosexuals.  It is not good that questioning, say, the appropriateness of Christians being forced, at the point of bankruptcy, to bake cakes for gays who simply want to make them squirm, has become something which itself carries vast social penalties.

I want freedom.  My feeling is that if somebody is not bothering you, then you have no right to bother them.  If gays want to have huge orgies in bath houses, how is that your problem?  If someone wants to cross dress, how is that your problem, unless and until they want to use the women's bathroom?  Etc.

Stating a Randian principle roughly, because I am not one of her cult members: if someone uses no force against you, you have no right to use force against them.  Period.  Full Stop.  This is a truly Liberal politics, as I see it.

We can all get along.  This is absolutely true.  Ask yourself, then: Cui bono when we argue?

Then look around.  Then look at me.  Then decide who the real criminals are.

Acceptance and commitment therapy


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

"While Western psychology has typically operated under the "healthy normality" assumption which states that by their nature, humans are psychologically healthy, ACT assumes, rather, that psychological processes of a normal human mind are often destructive.[9] The core conception of ACT is that psychological suffering is usually caused by experiential avoidance, cognitive entanglement, and resulting psychological rigidity that leads to a failure to take needed behavioral steps in accord with core values. As a simple way to summarize the model, ACT views the core of many problems to be due to the concepts represented in the acronym, FEAR:[citation needed]
  • Fusion with your thoughts
  • Evaluation of experience
  • Avoidance of your experience
  • Reason-giving for your behavior
And the healthy alternative is to ACT:
  • Accept your reactions and be present
  • Choose a valued direction
  • Take action
Core principles[edit]ACT commonly employs six core principles to help clients develop psychological flexibility:[9]
  1. Cognitive defusion: Learning methods to reduce the tendency to reify thoughts, images, emotions, and memories.
  1. Acceptance: Allowing unwanted private experiences (thoughts, feelings and urges) to come and go without struggling with them.
  1. Contact with the present moment: Awareness of the here and now, experienced with openness, interest, and receptiveness. (e.g., mindfulness)
  1. The observing self: Accessing a transcendent sense of self, a continuity of consciousness which is unchanging.
  1. Values: Discovering what is most important to oneself.[10]
  1. Committed action: Setting goals according to values and carrying them out responsibly, in the service of a meaningful life."

Universal love

Loving, concretely, usefully, more than a handful of people is in my view completely impossible.  None of us have the emotional energy to be fully present for more than 5-10 people.  I really believe this.

You can TRY, and you can convince yourself that you are successful, but in my considered view the only way to do this is to become more superficial.

Here is the thing, here is the difference between "everything flows from the center", and "everything exists in local webs which are interconnected in interesting ways": if every person on the planet made a conscious effort to love 5 people, no one would go missing.

This is something, I think, most of us can do.  To claim otherwise is, as I see it, for most of us, a lie.

Wishing others well in the abstract is certainly possible, and rejoicing in others success is certainly possible.

But I can't help but think those who want to try and love everyone in truth love no one.  They don't even know what they are lacking.

Better to aim small and succeed than to aim high and fail because you were never serious in the first place.

I really like this

https://upliftconnect.com/spiritual-bypassing/

Some quotes, then commentary:

Aspects of spiritual bypassing include exaggerated
 detachment, emotional numbing and repression, overemphasis on the positive, 
anger-phobia, blind or overly tolerant compassion, weak or too porous 
boundaries, lopsided development (cognitive intelligence often being far ahead
 of emotional and moral intelligence), debilitating judgment about one’s
 negativity or shadow side, devaluation of the personal relative to the
 spiritual, and delusions of having arrived at a higher level of being. . .
Part of the reason for [spiritual bypassing] is that we
 tend not to have very much tolerance, either personally or collectively, for 
facing, entering, and working through our pain, strongly preferring 
pain-numbing “solutions,” regardless of how much suffering such “remedies” may 
catalyze. Because this preference has so deeply and thoroughly infiltrated our
 culture that it has become all but normalized, spiritual bypassing fits almost
 seamlessly into our collective habit of turning away from what is painful, as a 
kind of higher analgesic with seemingly minimal side effects. It is a 
spiritualized strategy not only for avoiding pain but also for legitimizing
 such avoidance, in ways ranging from the blatantly obvious to the extremely 
subtle. .  .
Although the defense looks a lot prettier than other defenses, it serves the same purpose. Spiritual bypass shields us from truth, it disconnects us from our feelings, and helps us avoid the big picture. It is more about checking out than checking in — and the difference is so subtle that we usually don’t even know we are doing it. 

Actually, I'm going to avoid extended commentary, other than to say that I think this basic mindset underlies what I call Sybaritic Leftism.  And given that an equilibrium has been reached with such people in a very precarious position of self delusion coupled with vast waters of dark rage and fear, it tips easily, quickly, and naturally into violence of emotion, violence of thought, and grotesquely exaggerated defensiveness, tribalism, and radical intolerance.

These people were there.  Trump set them off.  Watch MSNBC to see the result.

Such people had made peace with a conception of the world where everything is perfect.  Anything less than perfection--any REALITY, to be clear--turns them upside down.  They pout, they shout, they try to muffle others, and in general they panic and vibrate at the level of frightened mice. 

All of this is ugly.  And there is nothing at all spiritual about it.  Give me an honest asshole any day over someone who chants mantras obsessively.  The asshole has nothing to hide.  The inward-sucking introvert has everything to hide.

Even better: a bon mot

Difficulty is multiplied by complexity.

I am cognizant that it is certainly possible that some of my best phrases might be something I read years ago.  So be it.  If I can't remember where or when, fuck it.  I don't make money on this blog.

I have to say, I think this is pretty good.

Variation on a theme

All difficult things are made worse by being made complex.  In difficulty, simplicity is your friend.

Conversely, it might be stipulated that people who are fond of complexity lead in many if not most cases physically, socially, and emotionally relatively easy lives.  Complexity becomes something they pursue in lieu of effective effort, which is often difficult.

Where I myself fall in all this, I can't say.  I get enough done to survive, but not enough to call myself effective.  I am in the nature of my occupation solving concrete, real problems regularly, so that counts, I suppose, for something.

I might add that if everything is easier said than done, we must recognize the soothing, calming quality of words, which act as shelters from the storm, but also that they are most often vain, misleading, and substitutes for needed work.

The inarticulate can be wise, and no wisdom can be inferred from beautiful words.  After all, nothing important has not yet been said, so all an erudite person need do is repeat.  Nearly everything you read is derivative.

And I will self comment here that I rarely reference the words of others.  I do, certainly, where warranted, but to the extent of my ability I am discovering or rediscovering things on my own, in my own way.

We all have to walk our own paths.  The door I walk through is barred to you, and vice versa.  You cannot follow in my footsteps.  At best I can perhaps sound a drum in the darkness, reminding you to march, march, march.

This universe is filled with countless golden threads.  You are one of them.  Perhaps we will meet one day, and remember we have always known each other.

Thursday, September 13, 2018

Alors: my newest metaphor

Quite often, crying is like opening the windows to a stuffy soul.

Hobgoblins and little minds

I reserve the right to proactively contradict my future self today.

Surprise

Logically, if we follow Information Theory in asserting that the information value of a given statement or behavior is proportional to to its unexpectedness, we (me, to be clear, but We sounds so much better) might directly that surprise is the most important path or engine of learning.

If nothing in your life is unexpected, you learn nothing.

Curiosity, in turn, might reasonably be summarized as a taste for and pleasure in surprise. "Oh, I didn't know that. How fascinating!!"

The alternative, of course, and a distressingly common one, is a virtual mania with maintaining the sense that one knows most everything worth knowing. This is usually accompanied by an obsessive need to cram the unexpected into any available box of the expected. To killing surprise. To throttling it in the crib, if it can be born at all.

Einstein--who was certainly in the camp of the curious--invoked this line of thought when he opined that "There are two ways to live life. One is as if nothing is a miracle. The other is as if everything is."

I feel I slightly misquoted him, but that was close.

This means that true openness means you have NO IDEA what is about to happen, because you allowing it, and you are allowing it because you like and profit from surprises.

I sometimes wish I were more disciplined, but I have so much fun, and see so much, going I know not where, and doing I know not what.

Popery

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/09/13/liberals-conservatives-clash-vatican-over-catholic-church-direction/1272808002/

Presumably bears still shit in the woods but,  2018 being what it is, it's  unclear if the Pope identifies as a Catholic.

When everything is political nothing is personal. And when nothing is personal, nobody can truly be said to believe anything.

They cooperate, that is all, and for the engines of power, that is sufficient.

The Global Warming "What do we have to lose" argument

If your doctor said to you it was vitally necessary for you to eat 20 apples a day for the rest of your life, or you would get cancer, would you simply take him at his word?  Would you dutifully buy 40 apples every other day, and each two an hour for ten hours each day, day in, day out, forever?

Maybe you would.  If so, I hope you don't vote.

Most of us, though, would start doing some reading.  We would start soliciting alternative opinions.  We would ask what the data is supporting the 20 apple idea.

And what if we came across an alleged consensus of doctors who all said that 20 apples a day was absolutely necessary, but found out that their salaries were 100% paid by the apple industry?  What if you found out they would all be unemployed tomorrow, if the apple growers stopped getting out of them what they needed, if their usefulness were gone?

What if, digging deeper, you started finding all sorts of methodological problems, such as hiding primary data sets or, worse, manifestly MANIPULATING data sets?  What if the supposed consensus turned out to be conscious ploy to create an illusion of agreement that simply was not there?

On the one hand, you have a very arduous, inconvenient, and possibly damaging regime in its own right.  On the other, you have unclear science being sold as certainty, and the cost of doing nothing nearly infinite, since it will cause your death in short order.

Would you still buy into this?

All I am doing is making concrete what is latent.  Most Warmists don't really GET how vast, how dramatic, the changes would need to be to even attempt to address global warming, and this only in developed nations.  China and India are unlikely to do anything, not until they get their economies on better footing relative to us.  In the United States and Europe, we have gotten vastly better at fuel efficiency, which is an inherently desirable economic goal.  We emit far less CO2 than China and India do.

And what if, in buying off on the apple idea, you were also told that the doctor reserved the right to control EVERYTHING you ate, and whatever other facts of your life he or she thought might be relevant?

The picture gets worse, does it not?

The accuracy of the science is highly relevant.  If it were accurate, I would be the first to support strong measures to address.  But for reasons I have articulated at length on numerous occasions, including my first post on this blog, I think the science is not just bad, but really a FUCK YOU to all people of any sense at all who possess the least bit of accurate information on the topic.  It is not even a good fraud.  It is merely a well funded, well supported, well managed fraud, or at least was until recently.

Thank God Trump is President, for many, many reasons, this being just one more.

And ponder if you will how eager the Left is for Florence to be an absolute fucking disaster, filled with human misery, prolonged misery, endless destruction, and the sorts of delays that accompany ALL major disasters.

They want people dead, hungry and diseased, so they can blame Trump.  Ask yourself how patriotic, how decent, how humane, how moral that is.

Edit: I will add, this rough process is more or less exactly what happened with the "Low Fat" movement.  Complex science was patently OVERsimplified, politicized, generalized, implemented, and failed.  The whole nation got fatter.  Because they were WRONG. 

There is always something to lose.  This is not a complicated proposition, and you need to pay particular attention if the people who say "we have nothing to lose" either stand to GAIN, or at a minimum, to not lose anything THEMSELVES, as for example elites will not suffer from policies designed to bring cheap energy production to a halt the way most of humanity will.

Hippies

Old School: "He can't even run his own life.  I'll be damned if he'll run mine."

Now: Dude, I do drugs.  Hey, let's look at the Daily Cause.  I wonder what I will believe today.

Susan Sarandon

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/bradley-whitford-calls-susan-sarandon-saying-hillary-clinton-trump-incapable-admitting-wrong-165520977.html

Self evidently, I don't agree with Sarandon, but at least she has escaped the hive mind.  This tweet, of course, is very, very safe Virtue Signalling, which is synonymous with a public abdication of the responsibility to think independently.  It is staying in synch with a school of fish swinging aimlessly in the ocean.

To be clear, when I say Alan Alda is dead, what I mean is that people who used to call themselves Liberals have now become daily able to mute or remodel their views in congruence with that days propaganda broadcasts.  They can no longer be differentiated from the herd.  They have no individual voices any more.  They are not allowed to: dissidence and non-conformity are punished severely, instantly, and publicly, and no rehabilitation is possible.

The Left is using and displaying Soviet style mind control, in this country, in an alleged Information Age.  It is unbelievable.  But it must be believed, because it is manifestly happening.

Priorities

I dreamed last night that extraterrestrials offered that cabal of imbeciles who claim to be able to speak for "the People" of Earth 3 choices:

1) Military technology sufficiently advanced to allow for an easy conquest of Earth and the implementation of a stable global government.

2) Endlessly renewable energy, such as Zero Point energy, such that all of our energy problems are solved forever, with of course clean fuel.

3) Emotional "technology" such that we could all learn quickly to live in peace and harmony.

Which would you choose?  To my mind, 3 is so self evidently the superior that there can be no serious debate.  We can solve all our problems of consumption culturally.  We face no existential threats which could not rapidly be eliminated through simple cooperation, civic mindedness, and emotional intelligence.

As a general rule, though, I think people who lack emotional intelligence do not value it, so I think whatever Council may exist--and I think this dream is certainly something which is possible, which I find hard to believe, but which seems to logically extend from claims made by people I would otherwise believe on nearly any topic, like Edgar Mitchell--would find itself debating endless between options 1 and 2. 

Option 1, they would believe, offers "intelligence" to the human race, control.  It allows the superior people to speak directly for inferior people who would otherwise plant and reap the seeds of their own destruction, on many levels, in many ways.

Option 2, of course, speaks to global warming directly, wars for oil indirectly, and would represent a huge advance.  It would not solve the core problems of human overconsumption of the Earth's resources, but it would also not be quite so violent and draconian.  The sensitive among them would likely favor this option.

To my mind, a core problem we face is that elites really don't like rubbing elbows with commoners.  They don't like how we look, how we smell, how we think, how we act.  They need us in order to invoke Noblesse Oblige, itself a thin rationalization for really quite pedestrian ambitions of greed and power.  But they don't value us, or understand us.

What I would assert, though, is the extent even ordinary people have for calculation, for calibration.  Ponder some terrible event, like 9/11: ordinary people are capable of the extraordinary, at least in this country.  We can self organize.  We can and do form complex orders.

What we need is a new Revelation, a new dispensation, a new organizing order outside of mind numbing, soul dimming Consumerism.

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

Aphorism

The wreckage of one is always the wreckage of at least two.

Life in 2018 America

Any enemy of the "People" is a friend of mine.

And, if I might channel Mike Myers feeling verklempt, please discuss amongst yourselves:  the People's Republic of China is not run by or for the people, is not a republic, and is no longer culturally Chinese.

Life and the World

The default for all of us, I feel, absent considerable inner work, is to assume "life" and "the world" are roughly equal to the dominant patterns and emotional temperature of our childhood homes.  This is, I suppose, a truism, but I think one worth pointing out nonetheless.

And when today's kids speak of Socialism, what they intend is a world where "the world" gives them stuff like their parents did, where "the world" demands little of them, like their parents, and where "life" encourages them to be selfish and self absorbed little shits.

For me, "life" is a place where everything I have is always about to be taken from me, where people cannot be trusted, and which always feels confusing, like a mountain shrouded in fog, from which gravity has been removed.  I don't know which way is up.

I will add, that quite often, people describing the most grotesque emotional experiences, if they are truly participating in the description, are often healing them.  Talk therapy is not useless, even if substantially everything Freud ever wrote might most benefit the world by being burned.

I state that as a theoretical, obviously: no book should ever been burned, because we need to remember and learn from mistakes.  We need to REMEMBER how bad things start. 

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Pyroclastic clouds

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/dust.html

So I did a tad bit of research, here.

I watched a documentary on 9/11 called "105 minutes that changed America".  It ended, roughly, with the collapse of the second tower.

Those clouds of dust you see, the ones that followed the collapse of Tower 1 and Tower 2: they are the result, most likely, of explosives.

The multi ton metal facades being ejected hundreds of feet from the towers: explosives.

And I might note, although it is superfluous both for believers and idiots, that the special I watched made no mention of Tower 7, other than a brief visit there where they claimed it was fully evacuated.

In my own mind, there can be no doubt of the scope. depth, and profound evil of the conspiracy.

I myself had a very vivid dream I have no doubt mentioned the night before, where I saw an enormous person controlling the slaughter of pigs.  He was a pig farmer.  He was Bin Laden.  This dream was very vivid, and unique.

So on that basis I do think bin Laden played a role. But I think so too did Dick Cheney.  This is the most reasonable conclusion.

It is a shitty conclusion, a bad conclusion, a scary conclusion, a conclusion that no reasonable person would admit to publicly. 

Indeed.

A parable

Lost in the desert, 3 bearded men sat in the night and debated the nature of sand.  One argued its nature was grains, was little bits, all separated.  And 27 being the perfect number, there no doubt some multiple of 27 grains in the expanse where they found themselves.

The second argued that the nature of sand was hard and soft.  If you hit it, it resists you.  If you stroke it carefully, if you scoop it carefully, it is infinitely malleable.

The third argued that its nature was dryness and moistness.  Hold it when it is dry, and it falls apart.  Moisten it with water, and it becomes like mud.

Two days later the first man said the nature of sand was dry little rocks, all piled together

The second man said that the nature of sand was hard, because it was pitiless.

The third man said he could not remember a sand which was wet, and so dryness must be its essential nature.

Two days later, the first man said the nature of sand is death.

The second man agreed.

The third man agreed.

And they all died.

What they could not see, because they did not look, was that there was a spring on the other side of the hill, with date palms.  The moon saw all this, and was not overly concerned, for it knew these men would see sand again, would see the desert again, and would again be offered water and food, for the cost of wandering just a little more.

It pondered, as it wandered off to make way for the sun, that perhaps life is little but water and date palms, and when those are absent, it does not last very long.

Moral: REMEMBER.  You know how, but you have forgotten.  So have I.  I do think, though, that I have remembered that I have forgotten something, and that is a start.

Oh, and if you can explain what I just wrote to me, it would be greatly appreciated. I am not drinking.  It is something else.

Actually, since I am being a bit cryptic, I will add that I could parse this story several ways.  I can parse/interpret/pull A lesson out of, nearly anything.  It's a skill in itself.   The beauty of parables is they make you alert.  They can be read multiple ways, and all the ways are true, if they facilitate new insight in you.

For whatever reason I've been feeling kinship with the Sufis the past few days.  If I might add a nod to Omar Khayyam, I AM drinking wine.

A modest little poem

I walked into the Razor again
today

It cut me, like it does

Blood fell everywhere, as rose petals

In severing me in two, it
doubled me

No thousand Kalis could hope to
lick up all my itinerant blood

Which rises to the sky, and falls
in yellow petals
and blue

A purple rainbow crosses to demand we know
it is an end to the end,

the death of death.

I reach the bottom of the pit
of despair, and find in the crack
at the bottom

a high peak, and the Sun.

Life is much more than gathering acorns
and piling them one on one on one.

It is much more than screaming at the night
Or watching willing women elevate the soul
of my body and then squeeze it out.

We must see that there is kindness in the knife
Everything is our friend.  There is no outside
there are no enemies: all is friend.

Walk in this.

Monday, September 10, 2018

Obama

I read today Obama called "Benghazi" a "crazy conspiracy theory".

Now, I get, I think, how this happens. You call something a crazy conspiracy and you change the subject by making the people doing the talking the target and subject of the discussion, rather than the content--the factuality--of what they are saying. You PERSONALIZE everything. This is a core and explicit Alinskyan Rule for Radicals.  It is easy to drive a discussion off the rails quickly, and make yourself seem superior to the fray in the process, all while ACTUALLY driving the discussion into the gutter. Obama is good at this.  Alinsky was his hero and model, and he was acknowledged by all as a worthy and effective practitioner of the Method.

But what I think he has failed to grasp is that "hope and change" is no longer in the future. It is no longer a glittering possibility. There is no more question about all the marvelous things that will happen if we elect then reelect him. We KNOW what happens. We know he is a habitual liar, a con artist, a charlatan, a carefully scripted phony who was most likely CREATED for the express purpose of furthering the agenda of people who always viewed Valerie Jarrett as the real President, who called her first.

So he can't expect to get, now, what he got then. Yes, of course he has residual fans and admirers, perhaps many of them. But I think a lot of people also feel cheated. He made a lot of explicit and implicit promises he made NO effort to keep. I had an insurance plan I liked. I lost it. And he KNEW this would happen. It was in the fucking bill, as we found out when we read it.

I think putting a spotlight on Obama is an act of desperation. I don't see how it could work, especially when he remains as arrogant and pissy as ever.

Visions

I had a dream last night that the British upper class, where men are concerned, is psychologically defined by the practice of pederasty in its Public Schools.  This is a long term fact, known to all members of this elite club, and spoken of by none, because doing so would mean instant rejection from the class.

And it felt like they VALUED it, perhaps the way the Spartans valued their own such practices, and felt that British SOCIETY, as a whole--the pubs and bobbies and tea time--depended on it.

But British society is collapsing, is it not?  "Britain"--England, in any event--is dying.  It is on a respirator in a poorly maintained hospital, calling for nurses, who are indignant about being bothered, indifferent to the plight of the patient, and eager for him to die.

They used to sing "Rule Brittania".  Now "Brittania" can't even rule itself at home.

If I am right, it is past time for the truth to be told.  A new start must be made on a new foundation.

Sunday, September 9, 2018

Voter ID

There are lists floating around of all the things you need ID for.  They include driving, cashing a check, boarding a plane, buying guns, cigarettes and alcohol, opening a bank account, getting married, adopting a pet, renting a hotel room, gambling at a casino, etc.

Now, America, to my knowledge, is the only major developed nation which does not require valid ID nationally to vote.  Mexico, to take but one example, requires valid ID to vote.  Iraq, in their first election, placed red ink on the hand of people who voted, to ensure they only voted once.  That is my recollection.

We are told requiring ID is "racist".  I want to do a simple exercise to unpack the latent and really quite horrifying racism inherent in that claim, to the (likely small) extent it is made sincerely, and not in simply support of voting fraud (likely large, and certainly largely unexamined in Blue States, which refused to cooperate with Pence).

Here we go.  Simply apply the logic consistently.  This yields the following formulation: Black people are too fucking stupid to be expected to drive legally, cash a check, board a plane, buy a gun legally, buy alcohol, open a bank account, rent a hotel room and a whole lot else.  In fact, without Democrats in office, they would be completely helpless like small children.  They have to be guided and led by their superiors.

Do you see the problem?  I am not exaggerating at all.  This is not hyperbole.  This IS the claim being made, by senior Democrats everywhere.  Self evidently, they are not using these words, but everything I just said is implied and absolutely present in principle.

Since I am on the topic of voter fraud, it is inconceivable to me that no Federal regulations prevent open violations of voting laws.  It is perhaps the case that individual States can enact their own laws, but it is ABSOLUTELY the prerogative of the Federal government to insist minimum standards be met for any representative of any State to be seated in the national assembly, in the Senate or the House.  Anything that reaches nationally, and by definition Federal legislation does just that, should be subject to the control of Federal law.

So when San Francisco openly signs up people who are not legally allowed to vote, there should be consequences.  Those people, obviously, are not going to be the deciding factor in whether or not the imbecile Nancy Pelosi wins reelection.  That is a given.  But there is a Statewide Senate race in which a few thousand votes might make a difference.

We have to restore the integrity of our voting system.  We have to make paper ballots and voter ID mandatory in all States.  We have to punish severely individuals and States caught cheating, encouraging cheating, or supporting it.  People need to go to jail.

Nike as barometer

https://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/nike-polling-results-are-in.171316/

The problem of living in an echo chamber, is that the walls doing the reflecting also keep out alternative voices.

The Democrats really seem to believe that if they just shout long enough and hard enough that they will get their way.  They literally seem to want to pout and fit their way back into national dominance.  Something has been taken from them, they don't get it, they don't understand it--CAN'T understand it within their own paradigm--and emotional spasms are all they have.  It's all they got.

Again, to me the Nike error is fascinating.  Anyone with a shred of common sense could have predicted this.  The moment I saw Kaepernick on the ad I knew this campaign would backfire badly.  It took me a tenth of a second.

But this campaign was months in the planning, perhaps even years.  Negotiations and discussions likely started happening not long after the whole kneeling thing started, I guess the season before last, so perhaps up to two years ago.

Highly paid professionals sat in well appointed meeting rooms, drank excellent coffee, perhaps sometimes worked late into the night, all in support of this big initiative, this bold move which they likely framed as "risky" when they wanted to seem like brave souls out fighting the Good Fight, but which they must have been sure would succeed on balance, and perhaps all the more if it offended, you know, the white supremacists who seem to lurk in Small Town America, but which Nike never needed to succeed.

Here is the thing, though: Trump won the election, and did so after similar miscalculations by the Democrats at a national level.  The egregiousness of the error, the complete failure of the polling data, is one reason why many of the more rabid lunatic ones continue to believe the Russians "stole" the election, even when nobody anywhere is claiming that.  The DoJ merely said they tried a little bit, and failed a whole lot.

But in all honesty, I thought Nike's ad might at least appeal to blacks or to Democrats.  But it seems to have failed across the board.  They lost Republicans almost entirely, but even millenials, even Gen X, even blacks, even Democrats now seemingly few Nike less favorably.

I don't think it is overstating the case to call this a bellwether for the election.  Kaepernick stands for a certain brand of politics, a certain political stance.  The sheer extent of his patent unpopularity can plausibly be viewed as that brand of politics, too--the OBAMA brand of politics--similarly dropping like a rock in water.

There is a sea change in the air.  I feel it.  It may or may not happen, but the stage is plainly set.  It is plainly possible.  As I said a few months ago, it might be possible for the political Left to lose in 50 days 50 years of work.  The whole world could just turns its back on them and their lunatic, cruel ideas.

Why our monetary system should bother you

I don't remember writing this, but it popped up in my Facebook this morning.  It is solid logic.  I did try an email campaign a while back.  I sent emails to all the professors of economics at all the major universities in the country and a few in the UK and Ireland.  I sent out some 250-300 in all.  I only got one reply--from Ireland, actually, University of Dublin if memory serves--and he misunderstood me.

This is very much a forest for the trees thing.  Economists grow up with certain core unexamined assumptions.  They don't think about how money creation subverts all creative efforts, dilutes the value of work, transfers wealth with no truly useful activity delivered in return, and overall enables the continuation of poverty in nations which should not experience it, at all, anywhere.  We should not have ghettos.  We should not have homeless.  We should not have any trouble paying for top quality medical care.  All our problems should have been solved. 

I see all this clearly.  Why so many professionals are so fucking stupid, is one of those things that in my worse moments makes me hate humanity.

1. Given a non-zero velocity, all new money introduced into an economy dilutes the value of existing money.
2. Given the theoretical possibility of price stability at any given quantity of money, the sum purchasing power of all money in existence does not thereby diminish.
3. This means that those who create money take value--purchasing power--from those who previously had it.
4. Money has no inherent economic value.
Conclusion: the process of creating money is parasitical.
If you know any economists, please send it to them, and solicit feedback. Or tell me their names and I will send it to them.

Saturday, September 8, 2018

Capitalism

 When you reify complex economic processes you reduce them.  In reducing them, you lose large swathes of important information.  And in using that incomplete picture as a means of FURTHER reductions, you gradually twist out everything of importance, and leave only what you were trying to create in the first place.

It is true to state that most societies have elites.  It is equally true to say that MUCH--certainly not all--of the wealth amassed in the 19th century concentrated itself in the hands of industrialists.

But this was an era of real money.  It has since concentrated itself in the hands of banks, who are in the business not of making money, but MANUFACTURING it.  I have dealt with this many times.  Just look at how much M1 has increased since 1970 or so, when we dropped the last vestige of restraint on the creation of new money.

The amount of money in existence has roughly quadrupled since 2000 alone.  Do you recall the so-called Quantitative Easing program of the Fed, which it practiced for most of Obama's two terms?  They gave $50 billion a month to Wall Street banks--which also run the Fed, to be clear, who also sit at both tables, to be clear--for something like 80 months straight.  That would itself account for the M1 increase from 2008 to present.

But the point I wanted to make is that systems are always run by people, and people always have the same motives: power, greed, and sex.  This was true when the Babylonian kings ruled, it was true when the French monarchy ruled, and it was true when the French Revolution replaced it.  Something different, but always the same.

Capitalism is CERTAINLY not the enemy: it is an unmitigated boon, which raises all boats--some more than others, but that is to be expected in a fair system, in which you are rewarded in proportion to your contribution.

Our system is not Capitalism, though.  I have struggled what to call our system.  Perhaps Plutocracy is as close as anything, with the qualifier that it is not just the rich who rule, but those with the power to create money at will.

But the core point is that the enemies of God, of Goodness, of shared power, of generalized prosperity, of freedom and justice worthy of the name, are always the same.  They find a variety of words, use a variety of systems, take and wield power in a variety of ways, but their core crimes, and their core deficiencies as human beings do not vary all that much.

The enemy of "the people", of the ordinary, are people who are incapable of valuing Beauty for its own sake, who are incapable of breathing honest breaths, and truly inhabiting their bodies.  Who are incapable of true friendship, true kindness, and true warmth.

Virtuous people do not create monolithic power structures, and people who create such structures are not good people.

But everything comes down to morality, to Goodness, to either feasting on the sumptuous banquet of life directly, or being forced to settle for power and continual, unsatisfied and unsatisfiable hunger.

I am rambling.  Perhaps you get what I am saying.  People always want cartoon enemies, but in reality our enemies are always relatively dull, scheming, plodding, perceptually unoriginal people who seek power in lieu of life.  There is no one simple "them" when the true enemy is dullness itself.


Socialism and Communism as tools of the rich

As a general rule, ONLY the very wealthy, ONLY the 1%, benefit significantly from the government controlling everything, and trying--or claiming to try--to provide everything.

The language used to get such regimes in place has to do with eliminating "income inequality", of getting rid of the Haves/Have nots, but the reality of such systems is a radical INCREASE in such inequality.  This makes socialism a HIGHLY congenial form of government for elites, for people far, far, far above the middle class.

Do you think Obamacare affected Warren Buffet in any way?  Bill Gates?  George Soros?  Would an economic collapse?  It's most likely that within a broad range, a collapse would HELP them.  Those with money, in times when money is scarce, find everything and everyone is for sale and on sale for cheap.

Cuba is a two-tiered society, with a radical separation between the Party cadre--which has its own medical system, and probably its own educational system, and first claims on everything--and everyone else.

Here is the thing:  if all boats are rising, then the system is not Socialist.  And if the system is Socialist, not all boats are rising.   Winners win because they are connected, not because of the quality of their work, or caliber of their intelligence.  Losers lose because they don't know how to play the Socialist game, or because they refuse to on principle.

When you are dealing with these truly horrible ideas, they are only made palatable through lies, through continual lies, through directed, conscious, carefully crafted lies, in which they say they oppose everything they support, and where they claim to support everything they in fact oppose.

They claim to get rid of the power of "corporations", for which we might substitute "unelected elites", but in fact they make unelected elites the only people who matter.  They take them from relative influence to direct and absolute control.

Let us all pray we survive this time with our freedom and dignity intact.  We are under assault by intelligent, well funded, determined people.  They do not mean the rank and file among us any good at all.  We are Untermenschen to them, irrelevant, to be used as and when needed, and then discarded.

The culture industry

Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer talk about what they call a "Culture Industry".

I will likely have more to say later, but for now I want to point to the mindset inherent in the commodification of objects, the mass production of identical objects.  You can go to Walmart and get this t-shirt or that t-shirt, but you can't get one that is custom.  If you want something truly unique, go to a Flea Market and get one airbrushed on the spot.  Go to an individual.

I think there is this latent idea bred into Americans from birth that ideas can and should be like manufactured objects.  You pick this one or that one, but you never fashion your own.  You take what is out there, and make it your own.  You buy it.  You buy into it.  You consume it, make it a part of your ideational furniture.

In order, therefore, to make everyone a fucking idiot, all you have to do is create Pattern 1 and Pattern 2, and tell people they have to choose.  You can have any kind of politics you want, as long as it is either Democrat--as expressed by what Democrat leaders are saying--or Republican, as expressed by what Republican Party leaders are saying.  Anything else is ridiculous.  Those products do not exist.  They will not be made for you.  You have to make your own.

Trump is unique.  He is his own creation.  And he does not fit either pattern at all.  His danger to the System is precisely that his very possibility--that someone outside the System could come to exist inside the System--calls into question what were very tidy lines, what was an easily manipulable system.

Do you really think the Power Elite CARE who is in power, between owned Republicans and owned Democrats?  If they put one of the Republicans in power, like George W. Bush, they get credibility for "national security", and thus are able to push through a program of Orwellian surveillance, which is what happened.

If they get a Barack Obama, they get to expand drastically the power of the government, and teach people to depend on the State.  Either way they win.  If they fight wars against foreign enemies, they own the arms companies.  If they fight "poverty" or "racism" or "injustice", they own the companies that get the contracts.

You can't pick a "Pret a porter" idea off the shelf and credibly present yourself as someone who is doing any thinking at all.  And this applies to esoteric or off-beat, or uncommon ideas like Anarchism or Communism.  This is just going to a boutique store which sells hard to fine items.  You are still buying off the shelf.  You are still buying, and buying into, someone else's ideas.

This idea, that you should be discouraged, functionally, practically, from thinking for yourself, is the root idea of totalitarianism.  This idea has entered our cultural world through Consumerism, through the replication of the consumer ethos in all parts of our lives.

Brown University, I think it was, recently conducted then suppressed a study seeming to show that many kids nowadays who decide they are "trans" were in reality manipulated by social media.  They weren't "born that way".  They were not even bred into it.  They saw something on the shelf they decided to try on for a time, perhaps to buy, and certainly to rent, prepackaged.

I can see how transgenderism could easily be seen as bucking the conformity all around us.  But it, too, is conformity, merely to different ideas.  Punks dressed like punks.  They were readily recognizable as such.  "Rebels" dress like rebels.

It is very hard to think for yourself.  It is hard to think at all.

But it is made exponentially harder when you operate from a subliminal suggestion that all the important ideas, all the best ideas, all the accurate perceptions, will be arrayed on a shelf for you, in a line for you, like so many willing prostitutes at a brothel, and that your only job is to choose from among them.

None of us being God, there is always something even our best minds have missed.  Always remember this.

A middle way

So I finished watching Rent.  I cried when Tom was singing his song at Angel's funeral, and again when we thought Mimi died.

I am often angry and intolerant.  But I am not heartless.  My feeling hurts me, and so I dial it down.

But I feel that there is a middle way between complete emotional dissolution--one based on a fetishized "creativity" which, when it fails, as it usually does for all but the most talented, and even for them often (Hemingway killed himself when he ran out of ideas), turns to destruction--and a robotic existence hemmed in by clocks, tedium, and emotional vacuity and superficiality.  There is a way between the bohemian and the Organization Man.

More life is possible, which is not seeding at every moment its own failure and cessation.  Seeds can be planted which sprout and yield more seeds.  Life is a pasture which can be cultivated, a garden which can be grown, all within limits.   This is my own work.

And as I have said before, the paradigmatic creative act is perception.  It is not the paint you put on a canvas, but the vision you have of something you have not seen before.  This vision is a perception, and crystallization of something which you now see was always possible.

And craftsmanship is an act of creation too.  Woodworking is creative, because it requires an on-going perfection of technique, of detail, of a deep understanding of how things work and how they go together.


The next day

I was drinking last night, but as I reread what I wrote last night, it rings true.  Where ARE the people who could rightfully called Liberal?  Where did they go?  What happened to them?

I've been talking about this slippery slope from what I might call intellectual sloppiness to political dogmatism for some time, but for some reason, now that the extent of what these tech companies are capable of is really hitting me because it is HAPPENING--Alex Jones, self evidently, is nothing more or less than the canary in the coalmine, as I believe he has described himself--I am wondering again how seemingly good people could be led down this evil path.

I sat down to post on something else, but I'm not feeling it at the moment.

We are at a crossroads.  Our culture has been bifurcated between those who value reason and principle, and those who have either forgotten what those words mean, or--ironically enough--rejected them AT the level of principle, for reasons they can't really articulate because they don't exist at the level of logic.

They are animals seeking shelter from the storm, nothing more.  What was human, advanced, noble in them: they no longer want.  They want crumbs from heaven, and the relative warmth of caves.  Give them that, and they will follow anywhere, do anything, believe anything, permit anything.  There are no "No's" left in them.  Their "Yes's" they are given, and those same "Yes's" can be and are taken away at the turn of a hat, and pushed in some completely other direction.  They can be made to love anything, or hate anything, based simply on the headlines they read that day.

Daily Cause indeed.  Perhaps there needs to be a publication called the "Nihilistic Prophet".

Friday, September 7, 2018

ChiComm Apple bans InfoWars app

https://www.infowars.com/breaking-apple-quietly-removes-infowars-official-app/

You have to ask: what is the game here?

Was there not a time when authentic Liberals yearned for press freedom everywhere?  Was there not a time when restricting it HERE would have been considered heretical, unprincipled, insane?

I remember this time.  I remember people like Norman Lear saying "I may not agree with you but this is America goddammit, so do whatever stupid shit you want and I will defend your right to do it, all while calling you a dumbass."

But Norman Lear is gone, like Joe DiMaggio in the "Mrs. Robinson".  I turn my lonely eyes to him.  He let me down.  I was never his ilk of Liberal, but he stood for something, for a time.  And the time passed, then he seemingly stood, stands, for nothing.

Apple stands for nothing.  Google Stands for nothing.  All these people: money, power, politics: all trump principle.  Worse: principle is not even a factor in the equation--perception is, with self perception leading the pack.  Who do they think they can be if they act in ways likely to draw cheers from preselected people and groups?  This is what is in play.  More or less literally, Apple execs, and Google execs, and Twitter and the rest of them are asking: what filter do I need to put on my personality to get more likes for my selfies?

This is what I feel.

Where did all the good people go? Where the fuck did Normal Lear go?  Where did the people who value freedom--right to assemble, right to free speech, right to religion, right to fair elections, right to fair trial, etc.--go?  We exist in a day and time where the dividing line is not between differing conceptions of freedom and justice, but between differing conceptions of the VALUE of freedom and justice, as defined conventionally.  The good people are gone.  The Liberals are gone.  Norman Lear is dead.  Meathead is dead.  Alan Alda is dead.

And its fucking Nazis, with their propaganda Luftwaffe bombing the shit out of everyone.  This is a sad, sad development, one even my cynical fucking self did not expect, a betrayal even for someone used to betrayals. 

Fuck you people.  I don't know what the fuck happened, but I hope all die painfully tomorrow, and that your kids and grandkids have some iota of decency, human feeling, and the capacity for rational thought.

American Bohemia

I'm working my way slowly and painfully through "Rent".  I don't like it. I don't like the people.  I'm not getting their groove, although of course I have met and known many people like them.  I did go to Berkeley after all, and for a long time I thought the misfits were cool.

But I'm with the "sell-out": there is no virtue in piss on every doorstep, and the creation of a Calcutta in a prosperous city in a prosperous nation.  That is more or less literally what Paris and San Francisco--two Bohemian paradises--have devolved into.

I just watched this bit.  Read the lyrics and compare in sentiment to Ginsberg's Howl. [ Here follows a train wreck of getting off topic, but venting some observations I had been intending to share].  I count at least two references in there to pedophilia ("who bit detectives in the neck and shrieked with delight in policecars for committing no crime but their own wild cooking pederasty and intoxication"; and "who retired to Mexico to cultivate a [drug] habit, or Rocky Mount to tender Buddha or Tangiers to boys. . ."), and of course many more to his homosexuality, and did not miss his reference to Neil Cassady ("NC secret hero of these poems", plus the references to Denver), who was nearly certainly a sociopath, more certainly Ginsbergs lover for a time, and the man to whom the poem is most dedicated.  Cassady was, to put it bluntly, a narcissistic asshole who left human wreckage everywhere he want.  And he was central to the work of both Kerouac and Ginsberg.

I am working my way through Kaddish at the moment too.  I will have more to say.

But for now, read this: http://www.metrolyrics.com/la-vie-boheme-lyrics-rent.html 

Here is one selection:
To days of inspiration
Playing hookey, making
Something out of nothing
The need to express-
To communicate,
To going against the grain,
Going insane, going mad
To loving tension, no pension
To more than one dimension,
To starving for attention,
Hating convention, hating pretension
Not to mention of course,
Hating dear old Mom and Dad
To riding your bike,
Midday past the three-piece suits
To fruits - to no absolutes-
To Absolute - to choice-
To the Village Voice-
To any passing fad
To being an us for once ... instead of a them!!

And: "To Uta. To Buddha, and to Pablo Neruda too".

Why do they always have to bring the Buddha in?  Because the Buddha seems foreign, weird, and vaguely subversive, even if they have understood NOTHING of the dharma, nor tried to, nor even cultivated the capacity to try to.


Here is the thing: it is well and good to oppose a given order, to want to do your own thing.  But with these people, as with the psychotic narcissists running San Francisco, Paris, Sweden, Germany and elsewhere, there is no alternative.

You cannot claim to believe in a Liberal political order, for example, if you routinely tolerate illiberal behavior, such as child marriage, wife beating, gay bashing, rape, and rioting. The principle of accepting everything means, truly, in the end, tolerating NOTHING, because you have no capacity to judge. Toleration is not the right word.  It is the renunciation of power, of the ability to choose your own destiny, to want one thing for yourself and your people versus another, because you cannot have all things for all people, even if stupid people want to try to.

Much of the West, as it exists today, may as well have been taken over by these Bohemians.  This is a lifestyle not meant for ruling, not meant for stability, not meant for cohesion, not meant for MEANING over the long haul.  I have no idea how this movie/play will end, but even if they and pretend there is a happily ever after, I call bullshit.  None of these people REALLY feel deep loyalty to anything but their own feelings.  None of them are reliable, with the possible and ironic exception of the cross dressing homosexual, who is perhaps the most likable of them all, even if I find the whole thing weird.

That will have to do for now.  I have places to go.

I might note, too, that in my understanding the Village Voice is in serious trouble, if not outright bankruptcy.  Ah, closure: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/business/media/the-village-voice-closes.html

You can keep a fire going if you tend it carefully.  If all you care about is how bright it is, sooner or later you will fail it, and it will fail you.  This is a life lesson I am giving you here kids.

Alex Jones

Jones has now been banned from Twitter, at a time when grotesque racism, the organizing of violence, and abusiveness are routinely permitted. The double standard--the personalization and persecution of this violence through censorship--is categorically undeniable and obvious.

Here is the thing: Jones' core contention, the one he has been making since the 1980's, is that the world is run by organized Satanists, who ritually engage in all sorts of awful things, including child trafficking and pedophilia.

His other claims, the ones which arise from a standpoint of Constitutionalism and limiting government, and the like, are made in many other places.  Ron Paul makes them daily.  So too do many others.

Jones is unique is his focus on pedophilia and child trafficking by elites, and in his self funding.  These ideas have seemed crazy for many years, so he likely never really had the option of attracting mainstream advertising dollars.  So he sells supplements.

I will say that, after leaving it on the shelf for a "rainy day", a true need, a period of focused intellectual work, I have started using his Brain Force, and I really do think I have more ideas, and of better quality.

Having said that, I want to focus on the original point: it is POSSIBLE that he is completely correct.  I have run into several people over the years who were pimped as children, both in very wealthy households.  One woman was sold eventually outright to an illegal brothel.  People came to her house, and took her away on a gurney.  Her parents told her to go, then abandoned her. The brothel was, if I recall correctly, in rural Pennsylvania somewhere, and frequented by very wealthy people.  One eventually took pity on her and helped her get out.  I heard this story firsthand.  She was so dissociated she told the story in the third person.  When she meant herself, she said "she".

It is worth asking: why is Alex Jones such a target?  Yes, he has a lot of subscribers, but they only increase the subscriptions by banning him.  The only logical long term game is disappearing him from the internet outright.

Logically, if they can disappear him completely, they can disappear anyone.  Any story can be suppressed.  You could film government violence on your cell phone, watch people being dragged away by armed thugs for political dissidence, and POOF, not only can you not post the footage--that is one level of censorship, "we're sorry your account has been blocked for 'hate speech'"--it is gone outright, from your phone, which would be a second level of censorship.  This is all technologically quite easy.  It's been possible for some years.

And Apple and Google are a part of all this, clearly.  They are more on the side of the Chinese fascist model than the American liberal model, as evidenced by their behavior, such as making it easier for the secret police to find people, and supporting the fascist government in their censorship  (and I am being precise, by the way: the system was Communist for a time.  It was a complete fucking disaster, so they implemented something much more like what Hitler and Mussolini did, where they tolerate large corporations, as long as everyone working for them is a wage slave, as long as the owners support them, and as long as the government controls everything in principle, even if they leave many day to day decisions up to the owners).

So it seems obvious to me that the outer level of Jones being targeted is simply that he is in some respects an unlikeable person.  He yells, he froths, he goes off on tangents, he interrupts people, he says things which most people view as crazy.  This makes him an easy target.  But it also makes him an easy test case.  As I say, whatever they do to him, they can do to anyone, including President Trump.

But I can't help but feel that once you peel back the tech companies, and the Fortune 500, there is old money underlying many of the decisions made in this world, and I can't help but feel that there is something to Jones' ideas. I can't help but feel some of these people exist.  We are being driven in an evil, totalitarian direction.  People capable of that are capable of anything, and evil is nothing more or less than sadism practiced consciously and with no conscience.  I feel Sade in all this. Cultural Sadeism was an intuitive impulse, but one based on HISTORY and observable mass psychology.

I can only hope that genuinely decent people who have been furthering all this wake the hell up soon.  Evil triumphs in the face of the STUPIDITY of good people, too.