Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Net "Neutrality"

As I understand the matter, there are two and a half questions:

1) does the FCC have the power to simply declare the entirety of the internet to be under its jurisdiction?  The answer, clearly, is no.  Would it have gotten away with it under Hillary?  Of course.

1.5) Should it have this power?  No.  The Constitution clearly makes this sort of the thing the exclusive domain of Congress.

2) Would the public benefit from the government taking over the internet--or at least the internet as it is accessed in the United States--rather than allowing it to continue as is?

This is more complicated, but it still seems an obvious no.

AT&T, before breakup, was the natural result of the government controlling a public utility, here telecommunications.  Had Reagan not broken it up, we likely never would have had an internet age.

I see the claim made that without regulation, companies can decide--like cable providers--what internet sites you can access.  This may well be true, but who, where, is doing it?  I have never heard of this anywhere.  I have heard of Google altering search results, and YouTube censoring conservative videos (but not  demonic Left wing ones), but never an ISP turning off, say, Facebook.

But let us say this is a possibility, that the internet can be reduced by a private company to a list of allowed websites, with added websites only allowed at a premium,

The solution to this currently non-existent problem--at least in America--is to allow the government to TELL private companies what websites they have to provide access to.

But logically, would that same power not allow the government to tell them what websites NOT to provide access to?  Could, say, InfoWars, not get shut down as "fake news", despite the fact that it routinely outperforms the New York Times?

People have short memories.  The internet only came into being because of the competition that deregulation enabled.  To return, now, to the 1930's as regards telecommunications, would be to return to the 1930's politically as well, and the continual threat posed then of a fascist take-over of our national government.  Virtually no one remembers the open fascism back then, and how FDR nearly got control over all wages and prices in the country, and was only blocked by the Supreme Court.

As with all things Left, Net Neutrality is really just a Trojan Horse for Net Partisanship and political activism.

It's really a bit disgusting, honestly, that I can predict the opinions of so many people based on what they are reading today.  Yesterday they might not have even heard of net neutrality, but today they consider themselves enlightened gurus on the topic, and all dissenters ignorant.

The basis of this particular form of aggressive stupidity and ignorance is, as I have often said, a matter of emotional psychopathology, not informed reasoning, or the possibility of sustaining their views in an honest debate.

Roy Moore

I have not followed this whole thing too carefully, but my understanding is that all the allegations are from decades ago.

Here is the thing.  His Republican opponent in the primaries must have known of these allegations, and chose not to mention them.  Why?  I can't say, but it seems most likely to not damage Moore in the General Election.

Who was all too happy to trot them out?  Who waited until Moore had secured the nomination?  Who may well have contributed to Moore's campaign, in the hope they would get to throw all this trash at him? 

Who else?

My take is that nothing he is accused of is remotely as serious as what the Left was quite willing to excuse Bill Clinton for, and excuse Hillary (who laughed about getting a rapist acquitted by attacking his teenage victim) for, and if this causes Alabama to elect a Democrat, it is nothing but a reward for the very dirty tactics which have made EVERY FUCKING ELECTION such an ordeal and muckraking hell;  which have, by design, made substantive policy discussions and public rationality itself all but impossible.

If I were in Alabama, I would vote for Moore in a heartbeat.

And maybe with another vocal and unafraid conservative in Congress we can launch an honest investigation into Uranium One, and just what Clinton's connection with Jeffrey Epstein truly is.

I do believe in moral standards, but this election is not about moral standards.  The Left has made it very clear that nothing is inexcusable when done by their own.  That does not mean that we should stoop to their level, but it also does not mean the election needs to be about the distant past, when Moore has shown in the recent past a very solid conservative record and much-needed activism.


Sometimes there is no shelter from the vast sun, and sometimes the world looks like a desert waste.  But there is always endurance.  Endurance is a flower in the world, and a reliable companion.

Whoever you are, whatever you are feeling, smile for a moment.  Don't worry: your frown will be back soon enough.  Pay less of yourself in frivolous things, and cherish whatever remains, however small it seems.  You are alive, and that is 90% of the battle.  None of us can know where it all goes, but if you can remember the curiosity within you, it will all be quite interesting.

I spent ten minutes Monday watching a tree shed leaves the way some people drive.  It was in a hurry.  I don't know why.  Perhaps someday I will figure it out.

Tuesday, November 21, 2017

The question

is not "how can I find a companion in the darkness?", but "how do I find the light?".

Ponder this.

Monday, November 20, 2017

Addiction: another perspective

I was feeling the urge to get drunk the other day.  It was a perfect day for it, rainy and cold, and I had no responsibilities.  I think it was last Friday.

And it hit me that there is a sort of perfectionism in my desire to get drunk.  And that made no sense at all to me.  But some part of me was saying that what I was doing was enough.  Nothing more was needed.  I will always fall short, some part said, and that is OK.

And I pondered this feeling--which I am rendering very incompletely here--and what I felt was that my brain is wired for shame, which in turn is the equivalent to social disconnection.  Shame is exactly equal to the frontal cortex being off-line in some respect, which itself is a common outcome of trauma.

And I felt that all day long I feel like I don't belong, like I am a stranger in the midst of an otherwise complete, coherent world.  My very existence sometimes feels like a sin, like I have no natural right to be at all.

And within this context, drunkenness comes to be the equivalent of self imposed exile.  It is a perfection, because I am not polluting anything or anyone. I am perfectly free of the anxiety of being.  I am not asking anything of anyone.  I am willing a sort of mini-death, a mini-suicide, which actually brings me freedom from feelings which are otherwise extremely tiring.

I can't speak to the experience of all, of course, but I feel something like this dynamic is very, very common, particularly for the long term alcoholics/drug addicts who are suffering from undiagnosed developmental trauma.

Non-Binary Gender

I was on a college campus today, and they had an alphabet soup announcement--they keep adding letters, and I have no interest personally in getting past gay and bisexual--and it occurred to me that, as with most things on the Left, this whole thing is a reasonably centrally coordinated propaganda offensive.

And the POINT of the offensive is to force people to take sides.  It is always to force people to take sides, to take some issue where reasonable people can see value in diverse perspectives, and make it black and white, and to pounce mercilessly on anyone unwilling to toe your side of the thing immediately and fully.

This has two practical impacts.  One, it trains people to be submissive.  It trains them to the herd instinct.  If you want to belong, they are told, then you have to shout when we say shout, and cry when we say cry.

Secondly, though, by diluting the world into two poles, it allows you to get acceptance of many things which most people would otherwise reject completely.  Pedophilia is an obvious example.  How long do you think the Left, in general, will withhold judgement on those in their midst who are using the transgender offensive to push sex with children?  I think indefinitely.  Once you are on one side, you accept the entire omnibus political agenda, or you are an island of one, adrift alone on the ideological seas until a conservative comes along and rescues you, and reminds you you have your own fucking brain, and can and should form your own fucking opinions.

Thus there is an inherent incentive for the Left to continue inventing problems, which they can then use to push further polarization. 

To state the obvious, though, solving real problems is not and never has been their goal.  It is simply to burn the world down, and cry and shout with delight watching everything go up in flames.

As I have often enough, one can compare it to Satanism, and I am not sure that Satanism does not come off the worse in that comparison.  Satanists at least are able to state clearly, in the sanctum of their temples, what their real goals are.  Leftists NEVER, ever tell the truth about anything.  This is why adding Satanism to the creed in some respects improves it, because at least among themselves some honest words are spoken.

You cannot fix a problem you cannot recognize, and cannot correct behavior which is unconscious.


What creates rigidity in people?  Tension.

Logically, then, if one wants to recover the spontaneity of children, the ability to live in the moment, to be free, then the only path is to unlearn chronic patterns of tension.

I will say again that Tarthang Tulku's Kum Nye system is the smartest system of personal cultivation of which I am aware.  Some of the crazier of us will also need Neurofeedback, but I think the two together constitute a path back to a world most of us have given up on.

Sabina Spielrein

This is a sad but very interesting story:

I like this term "memoricide".  I have long had a passion for remembering and recollecting the forgotten. This is one of the reasons I regularly point out our victory in Vietnam, won at a high cost of lives, and life energy--not to mention American money--and then lost to frivolity, cynicism, and grotesque stupidity, not just then, but ever since, with Ken Burns merely being the most recent willing conspirator in this particular memoricide.

Be that as it may, Jung appears to have been a rapist and an intellectual thief.  The notion of archetypes and the Collective Unconscious is, from my perspective, one of his most interesting, and it is NOT HIS IDEA AT ALL.

What is one to make of these chauvinist pigs--Freud and his not-disinherited progeny also being nearly uniformly ugly, and Jung in her estimation a "psychopath"--parading around as the wizards of mental health, the knowers of the unknown, the able tinkerers with our innermost realities and failings?

I have said before, and will say again: in my view, the institution of "mental health" is actually one of the worst things to hit humanity in its long and sorry history.  Substantially all post-modernism, and therefore substantially all lunatic politics in the modern world, has a strong flavor of some version of psychoanalysis.

This women had some fantastic ideas.  I really, really like this idea of a "death and rebirth" drive.  You have Eros, as the urge to create new life.  Then you have what we might call the Phoenix impulse--I think she would like that--which is the urge to create qualitative new life WITHIN ONE'S OWN SELF.  Two, twin, life instincts, one merely passing through "death" as the cost of metamorphosis.

And could we not posit the urge to war as in some respects the urge to a new form of life?  An urge to gallantry, sacrifice, endurance, patience, brotherhood, and the like?  To be born again, in the crucible of fire?  The mass dying is not the impulse: it is the desire for a new life, and the lack of a better means of finding it.

Sabina Spielrein: she is now on my radar.  I will do what little I can to help the world remember she lived, and survived a great deal of grief and turmoil, to deliver to the world highly interesting ideas, one of which was much better than the diluted version Freud dished out to the world.

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

The real problem

With the black community, so called, is not racism, but the BELIEF that racism is 1) the direct source of all their problems; 2) unavoidable; and 3) irremediable without complete and abject dependence on a political process largely controlled by white politicians who benefit from the status quo, and suffer no ill consequences from the long term maintenance of the status quo. Who, in other words, are happy to fail continually and over the long term because they STILL GET THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE THEY FAIL.

What all "oppressed" people need to hear, but particularly blacks

RESPECT IS EARNED.  It cannot be commanded.

You can, of course, create the "respect" of fear, by using race or something to shake people down. But if you are claiming you want to be seen as equal, there is no other way than to deserve it long enough for people views to change.

Asians have been in this nation for far less time than blacks, but we think of them, stereotypically, as smart and hard-working. Why? It's not due to relentless propaganda, or DEMANDS that they be treated equally. 

Big Hands Joe

You heard it here first. Probably.

Joe Biden

It's gotten to be every fucking day:

"Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the agent asserted that,  “We had to cancel the VP Christmas get together at the Vice President’s house because Biden would grope all of our wives and girlfriend’s asses.”The annual party was for agents and Navy personnel who were tasked with protecting the Biden family.
“He would mess with every single woman or teen. It was horrible,” the agent said.
According to the source, a Secret Service agent once got suspended for a week in 2009 for shoving Biden after he cupped his girlfriend’s breast while the couple was taking a photo with him. The situation got so heated, the source told Cassandra Fairbanks, that others had to step in to prevent the agent from hitting the then-Vice President.
Additionally, the agent claims that Biden would walk around the VP residence naked at night. “I mean, Stark naked… Weinstein level stuff,” he added."

What I personally find amusing about all this, is that the NEW YORK TIMES started it.  And the best explanation I have seen for why they outed Weinstein was that he was planning on making a pro-Jewish movie.

I think I can speak with confidence when I say they cannot have had ANY idea what a nerve they were touching, and how many cowards they were suddenly empowering to speak truths they should have spoken years ago.  We even just had a local outing of a man who presumably spoke of women's rights, and sought to be considered as sensitive, who seems on the basis of many accounts to be a serial rapist.

Grey Whore: you had no idea, did you, how much shit was hiding in your own closet?

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Emotional Awareness

You can only really understand in others what you can find and understand in yourself.  Self knowledge is a prerequisite, in my understanding, to empathy.  If you cannot feel compassion for yourself, there is no use trying to send it out into the world.  Whatever you are sending is generic, non-targeted, impersonal, and in most cases often wrong.

Now, it is obviously possible for people who know nothing about themselves to develop an understanding of the signs indicating different patterns in other people, which they can then manipulate, sometimes by simulating feelings in themselves they do not actually feel, like compassion and understanding.

Things I think I personally understand are why people are consciously cruel, why they kill themselves, why they pick unnecessary fights, why they cut themselves, why they self sabotage, why they feel depression, why they get confused, why they become addicts, and why they lie.  This is a short list.  I have found every vice imaginable in myself.

With regard to evil specifically, what I think happens is that the lack of love--and associated emotional pain and social disconnection--is so intense, that a sort of sub-personality takes over.  The role of this personality is to hide them from their pain.  They in turn CAUSE pain, so they can retain some relationship with it.

It can be and often is useless reasoning with people in this state, since the entire PURPOSE of this way of being is to tell themselves important lies about who they truly are: helpless children, feeling spit on and hated by the world.  To ask such a person to truly understand themselves is to open up a world of pain those who have not felt it can scarcely imagine.

For myself, I think I have been to the brink of what is endurable.  Much more pain than I have felt is certainly possible, but not, I don't think, without pushing someone over into this other world.  We all have built in circuit breakers, where beyond a certain point, that emotion simply disappears into a hidden folder, beyond our conscious awareness.  It doesn't disappear, but the immediate sensation of hell diminishes.  This, in turn, conditions people to avoid this place.  To do otherwise is to walk back into the flames, and very few are willing to do that.

The reason I have done it is I can feel the pain of internal division. I can feel my separation from the world, and have long been willing to pay any price to find my way home.  Not back home, but to a new one, which I am both finding and building.

Monday, November 13, 2017


I would be a terrible foot soldier, and worse tactical leader. I can remain in touch with obvious common sense realities, sometimes, for long periods of time. But sometimes, I am just in my own world. What everyone else sees clearly is invisible to me, and what I see is invisible to everyone else. This can be great for theoreticians, but would likely be deadly where accurate, fast, and consistently good assessments need to be made.

Pondering, though, I do think I would be a good advisor to someone with their feet on the ground, but capable of looking up.

And it occurs to me, thinking through my Sun Tzu, that the greatest victories are the least glorious. An effective strategy demand little heroism, little death, little fighting. If you attack your enemies plans, no blows are dealt ( speaking abstractly, although this might involve strategic attacks on provisions, money, supply routes, or physical violence aimed at morale), but you might still win.

The North Vietnamese lost every major battle they fought with America, some--like the first Tet--grievously.  But their intent was merely to remain apparently viable until they could get the Jane Fonda's and John Kerry's of our world to help them win the propaganda war. Once they did that, the tank led march into the South was relatively easy. The South knew it had been abandoned by its closest ally, and felt little taste for sustained battle. So I recall the history, although I have not studied the last phase of the war: our ignominious and disastrous retreat after having secured military victory.

What can Trump do to attack Kim Jung IL's will to fight? I dont know, but it is a great question.

Sunday, November 12, 2017


I keep having demons visit me in my sleep.  They are tangled, twisted bundles of nervous energy, utterly unable to relax even for a moment.  They enter when I am in my room, but a dream version of my room.  They prowl around, hover over me, wait at the head of my bed.

Writing this, I get a shiver down my spine, but within the dreams I am getting used to it.  I don't like it, but it does not terrify me any more.  I can look directly at them--they are invisible, but the energy is unmistakably clear, consisting in malice, nervous tension, and continual rage--and speak to them.  This would have been impossible in the past.

Now, I am psychoanalytically astute enough to consider these may be manifestations of a complex or even latent psychosis.  As I calm, I see how much I have missed.  As I have split seconds of truly being in the present, I feel how frightening it is to let go of EVERYTHING.  My tension, itself, has been my constant companion for many years.  It was always there, so I could make some predictions about the future: this, at least, I knew, would be there, no matter what I did or where I went.

In a waking state, it seems to me that both ideas are most likely true.  I do believe in demons and angels.  I also believe I have had much of the demonic in me all my life.  When you cannot calm yourself, that is their feeding ground.  No one taught me to calm myself, and all my life I have been prone to fits of rage, subtle cruelties I would only notice after I had already hurt someone, and relentless disquiet.

In speaking of true resilience, which is the ability not just to keep going, but to process the experience and expand in the process, it seems to me that it is VERY important that, just once in their life, and of course ideally often, a child experience an adult presence which comforts and calms them.  My particular malady--and there are many like me--is that my mother terrified me more than anyone else in the world.

To put it mildly, this has created problems

But I am healing, slowly.  It frightens me.  I don't know what to expect.  Pain which had been frozen comes gushing in at me.

But I do believe this is what I signed up for.  This all has a purpose, and it seems most likely that purpose is, as I have said before, fully experiencing hell, and finding a way out in spite of it all.  I have the tools.  I have the balls.  And I have the intention.  It will all be fine in the end.

Friday, November 10, 2017

Other direction

Look at this:

On first pass, I thought that, for me, the benefits of social media outweigh any potential risks of addiction.  I do check Facebook more than I should, but usually because I am bored or procrastinating, and because I find all kinds of interesting stuff posted.  I enjoy it.

But as I ponder it a bit more, what he is describing, without using the words, is perhaps the most powerful system ever fashioned for turning young minds into Other Directed personalities, the sort most fit for fascistic political governance.

Think about it: from the earliest age, kids are trained to solicit social rewards, and to tie their sense of self to continual external reinforcement, in a place completely disconnected from parental authority.

It was bad enough when the dilution of our money forced mothers into the workplace, and turned TV's into ersatz parents.  Now, they are socialized in a world completely disconnected with the physical circumstances of their lives.  It is a virtual world, with virtual rules.

Our would-be rulers--and Mark Zuckerberg, among others, seems to see himself in this role--could not ask for a more effective means of making their propaganda more targeted and effective.

On a somewhat related note, I saw the new Thor movie yesterday, and, among other thoughts, some of which I may share tomorrow, it occurred to me that reality, by contrast with the movies we immerse ourselves in, must come to seem banal and uninteresting.  People--kids most notably--can be addicted to continual spectacle.  We have the bread, and are coming to need the circuses.

It is impossible to be optimistic about our future when, in the midst of unprecedented plenty, our best minds are preoccupied with sophomoric sophistries, petty emotional grudges, and a complete lack of vision for anything but turning the keys to the engine over to anyone who happens to present themselves.

At the same time, for me, struggle is my destiny.  It is what I was put on this planet to do.  There is always hope until you are dead, and in my version of things, death is just a time to rethink and retool, then go again.

I am making rapid progress in my own inner work.  I have connected with, and made contingent within my present, all the longings, pains, confusions, and ass whippings I endured as a child.

Humanity has no problems which cannot be solved using reason, intelligence, and flexible and accurate perception.

Our largest problem is that so many have given up.  They see no path forward, so they are working hard towards our collective collapse into mules, the dead, and the elite, who will truly have nothing to celebrate.

One final note: it occurs to me that evil, in the end, is nothing more, and nothing less, than the absence of love.  Where love is truly present, there is goodness.  Where it is absent, there is harm, no matter the words, no matter the creed, no matter the alleged intention.

No one who does not know themselves can do good, in the end.  This is my firm view.

Thursday, November 9, 2017

Communism is the ultimate manifestation of the "White Man's Burden" Syndrome

Think about it: this creed, created by white Europeans, has been sold as a solution to white imperialism.  What it substitutes is abusive authority vastly worse than that of white imperialism, since it runs on ideology, not simple greed.  It has no limits.  What the British East India Company did in a two hundred year period, Mao exceeded in a decade ten-fold.

But is the surface rhetoric not salvational?  Is it not oriented around the words "justice", "peace", and "equality"?  Is the promise of this religion not heaven on Earth?

It is no different from any other white imperialism, other than that it is vastly worse, and incapable of self correction from a moral perspective.  It breeds and consumes human beings like a vast cancer, and exists to exist.  Survival is its only real aim.  It is like a demonic spirit with countless hosts.

Wednesday, November 8, 2017


If you think about it, Das Kapital was ALSO the work of a dead white male.  Soviet Russia was run by white males.  And it played a decisive role in fashioning autocratic, abusive rule in many brown skinned countries, just like "Capitalism", so called, supposedly did.

There are no ideas--or very few--ideas floating around universities, including that of dead white males, which were not originated by dead white males, with some dead white females. Self revulsion is certainly not a new thing, but intelligent people making a virtue of it--perhaps I should call it a religious fetish ( or sexual fetish, even, for some)--can scarcely be called a practice consistent with mental health and wellness.


The sum of the wisdom of the man who on most accounts founded Western philosophy was that he knew nothing. This is a useful statement IF YOU ACT ON IT. What is extraordinarily stupid is to use the mans own method to reach different conclusions. Think about it. Was Socrates stupid? Should it be seen as surprising that the intellectual superstructure of the Western cultural project has collapsed, and that our modern "philosophers" are again saying " we know nothing"?

A fundamental distinction needs to be made between a communicable science of objects--Techne--which we have excelled at to a miraculous degree; and the path of people, of souls.

No one can truly speak who they are, at the deepest level, and trying to do so is to denigrate, diminish, and to kill.

The Sophia we speak of is rationalistic, and reached by endless sputtering, and consists, at the bottom of the mine, in a flagstone saying "Seek elsewhere."

Here, I give you a word for valuing deep experience for its own sake. Call it mysticism if you like.

I am about to go into my Kum Nye practice. Who knows what will emerge? Wherever it comes from, it is what is real. Words can build peace ( and war), but they cannot build direct understanding of what is most important in human life.

I will add, my initial impulse was to seek " love of awareness" or "love of consciousness", but don't have time to do the research.

Tuesday, November 7, 2017


The best condiments are tranquility and gratitude.

I wanted to call this a bon mot, but I can't see how I haven't seen this expressed somewhere in many forms.  Because it is true.

Pausing to give thanks, pausing to calm down and focus on the task of eating, digesting, and putting the nutrients to good use? Solid, and largely forgotten wisdom.

I eat like a wolf, too often. Food, of course, has always been one form of self medication for me. As I calm, though, I am seeing better ways of interacting with it. Thanking it, and God, and fate and chance, all more or less literally, seems like a great idea to me.

Monday, November 6, 2017


Communist governments ALONE caused some 100 million unnatural deaths in the 20th century. Being a 1 with six zeroes this number represents 10,000 x 10,000. This means it would take some thirty years, killing 10,000 people a day, to equal this number. At the height of the Holodomor, some 20,000 people were dying a day, which is more than 4 times the ENTIRE number of blacks lynched by the KKK in its 100+ year history.

These numbers don't count Hitler, Suharto, Pinochet, Franco and others.  GOVERNMENTS, more than anything, are what do most killing. We need to fear our government more than each other.

The gun in Texas was bought illegally or stolen. A crime had already been commuted when he took possession of the gun. We have 275 million guns in this country, a large percentage unregistered, and which would not BE registered if those who want to grant the government a monopoly on the effective use of force ever get their legislation passed and enforced.

The true issue is one of mental health. Why did this guy think dying as a mass murderer was the best, or only, path for him?  Well meaning people need to ask the question: how can we better build and protect social inclusion and coherent culture?



This is clinically accurate. Our country has been "slouching", not really towards Gomorrah, but fascism. Trump opposes this. Those who voted for him oppose this. And this, in turn, has created a precipitation of latent madness.

On a marginally related note, I see no reason Jeff Sessions should not be fired. He helped and supported Trump. He had a good record in Alabama. Trump did, I think, the right thing in giving him a second and third chance. But his second in command is an Obama-ite, clearly dedicated to making Trumps Presidency difficult and as close to a failure as he can manage. Sessions turning Uranium One over to Rosenstein should be the last straw. He can no longer claim to be doing the right thing: he is simply avoiding responsibility for potentially explosive investigations of precisely the sort we ELECTED Trump to do, to help restore faith in our process, in our judiciary, in the FBI, and in our democracy itself.

Sunday, November 5, 2017

Qui bono

With respect to my last post, who benefits from the idea that the sole path to black empowerment lies in voting Democrat?  Do I need to answer that question?

Who benefits from attacks on the notion of truth?  Liars.

Who benefits from attacks on rationality?  The confused but proud.

As I have said many times, it is astonishing that so many people have fallen under the thrall of bad ideas, particularly in the midst of economic and political plenty, made possible only by the long term application of the ideas they oppose.

Sociopsychologically, this can only be explained by the sociopathology fed by the fact that only useless, emotionally damaged or limited people choose to pursue study in the Humanities, by and large.  They are the ones nobody liked, or who always felt inferior for some reason or other.  They get their revenge by inflicting damaging ideas on the world as a whole.

They may yet submerge us all in a flood of fire or water.  I personally cannot fathom how so much ugliness can be finally admitted by people who need it.


How can anyone feel empowered who does not believe that some significant portion of their destiny is within their control?  And to be clear, for most of human history, most people were not free.  For this reason people learned to control their experience by learning to manage their thoughts, actions, and feelings, and this equates, itself, to empowerment.

There is nothing more disempowering than to believe that your destiny--all of it--is out of your hands, particularly when tied to the idea that the world is in general hostile to you.

I seek clarity of thought daily, because I see so little of it out in our public domain.

Individuating from your children

It is, to me, a psychological, psychodevelopmental truism that children need to individuate from their parents.  They need, in our culture at least, and I would stipulate this as universally desirable, to become their own people.

But in the same sense that Freud mistook the often very real sexual interest abusive adults took in children for their own fantasies--a politically driven but largely conscious error that still haunts us--I would assert that many parents have great difficulty in relinquishing the role of parent.

I was reading about the incoming class at Harvard a couple years ago, and most of these kids talked to one or both parents daily.  They never truly left home in some respects, not least because the parents did not want to let them go.

I would submit this is a two way street.  It is sad to see your kids go, but they are like an evolving work of art at loose in the world, taking continual new shapes and sizes and directions, which you cannot and should not try to control.  Build a strong foundation.  Instill common sense, pain tolerance, resilience, and curiosity.  These become their guides, not you.  Shit will happen, and shit should happen.  If they survive, they get better, hopefully, or at least different.

There is so much about life on this earth we do not know, but that it is about discovery, learning, and growth is to my mind an absolute fact.  Why should any parent keep their children from the game because they themselves never learned how to play?

I do think a certain amount of healthy selfishness is an absolute necessity for anything even approximating genuine liberality and generosity.  If you do not have a life of your own, you necessarily have to take it from someone else.  Their problems have to become your problems, because you have nothing else.

There is, in this sense, a fundamental homology between all-too-common helicopter parenting, and the leftist political orientation which underlies it.  They go together.

Put another way, the Democrats--even the ones who truly believe they are well-meaning--cannot let go of the blacks.  They cannot renounce their racist paternalism.  They cannot say "without us, they will still be absolutely fine."

Life is about letting go.  Hold on to what is truly your own--your way, your truth, your path--and allow everyone else to do the same.

Malcolm X was the last honest black leader

Watch this:

He argues that Republicans are openly predatory.  He doesn't come out and say it, but I'm sure in his mind he considers this something they can deal with.  Blacks can organize, get smart, fight back, punish people for trying to take advantage of them.

He argues, though, too, that Democrats are actually worse, because even though they too are predatory, they pretend for a time to be the friend of the black man and woman.

What do they want, the interviewer asks, the Democrats?  They aren't getting rich.

Votes.  He says, although of course any member of Congress who gets through a term or two always seems to manage to be vastly more well off financially when they leave than when they got there, even though they are only "serving the people."  It really is great work, if you can get it.

And how do you get it?  By promising the sun, moon and stars.

And when you fail--and this is very much the case after 8 years of Obama, the first two years of which included Democrat majorities in Congress--what do you do?  Do you take responsibility?  To take stock, and ask if what you are doing is working?  FUCK NO.  What you do is blame facts and reason themselves as racist.  You make it so you cannot be held to account on any standard whatsoever other than lack of popularity, which you ensure through relentless propaganda campaigns.

I have asked before, and will ask again: where are the black leaders who are not just using the plight of blacks to line their own pockets?

Malcolm X was not shot by racist whites, like Martin Luther King Jr.  No, he was shot by blacks.  In my view--and the full back story has to my knowledge never been told--his crime was his honesty.  He was calling the corrupt corrupt.  He was calling liars liars.  He was calling fake leaders fake leaders.

If I myself were black, there is no doubt in my mind, the way I am wired, that I would be a huge Malcolm X fan.  He was the only one telling it like it was, not just to white America--which MLK Jr. also did--but to black America too, telling them to wake the fuck up, and stop entrusting the hen house to one fox after another.

And I will underscore his point that all the other black leaders he know had the support of white Democrats.  An honest black leader does not, thus, just undermine corrupt blacks, but the whites who use them for their own elections and reelections, and to satisfy their own lust for money and power.

Metaphysical parenting

It seems psychologically obvious that much of the affection millenials feel for the notion of Socialism is quite literally a desire for lifelong paternalism: they want to leave their actual parents house at some point, but never lose that feeling of being continually protected and sheltered by other people.  They never want to grow up, in other words.  They never want to risk and lose, and hurt, and cry, and learn from it.

I won't dilate too much on all this, but I did want to offer one idea which has helped me, personally.  All their lives I have taught my kids to take calculated risks: not stupid ones, but ones where it is not certain things will go their way.  One of them has taken it farther than I am comfortable with.  I tell them to take risks, but I am terrified every time they do.  Going rock climbing scares me, even when it is introductory, and they are not leading, which is where most accidents happen.

My personal belief is that we choose the broad arc of our lives.  I believe in life after death, life within death, and logically this means that my children's lives, like mine, are their own.  If they chose terrible fates, that was their choice.  They don't belong to me.  Their lives do not belong to me.  I can offer them shelter when they request it, but both are relatively fearless, and while we enjoy seeing each other, they don't come crying home, ever.  If life deals them a blow, they just deal with it.

My oldest was a bit upset the other day about a bad grade on a quiz, and I was dishing out the usual platitudes "life always has a path.  Failure doesn't define you, etc."  And she got MAD at me, because I was helping her accept a B in that class, and she wasn't prepared for that.  She wanted to fight HARD to get the A, in spite of her fuck up.

I was proud.  She had no time for me helping her accept failure at any level.  One of her parents, at least, did something right, but part of that she was born with.  It's not me, it's not her mother: it's her.

I can actually honestly say that as a parent my proudest accomplishment is giving both my children the space to become exactly who they are, and who they were meant to be, and watching them slowly become absolutely unique.  I--and their mother, too, although we each have different relationships with them--presented all the support they needed, and no barriers to leaving and growing far beyond the walls of the home they grew up in.

Saturday, November 4, 2017

The Legacy of Barack Obama

What did Black America get for electing America's first ethnically African-American President?  Poverty rates in the black community were as high or higher in 2016 as they were in 2008.  Crimes rates seem to have gotten worse.  Dependency on government went up.  Unemployment remains horrible, although it may have been marginally worse in 2008 in the immediate aftermath of all that screwing up by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Here is his legacy: he changed our public discourse, by making Alinskyan methods of demonization, insult, and misdirection common, and practiced daily from on high.

Before Barack Obama, you would not get called a racist for no other reason than disagreeing with a Democrat preaching bad ideas which were known as such 50 years ago.  Now, it is the first recourse, followed by as many other non sequiturs as needed to halt the attempted dialogue from a position of assumed moral superiority.

No black people are helped by this.  On the contrary, this system of propaganda makes ACTUAL solutions to real problems impossible.  We substitute football players taking knees for substantive discussions and the intelligent, outcome-focused policy such discussions make possible.

The entirety of his intent, and his concrete success, as seen from the Luciferian perspective Alinsky so proudly embraced, has been to make dialogue less common, more coarse, and to mainstream violent and dehumanizing rhetoric.  Put another way, to push all genuine liberals out of the public space if they don't want to be attacked.

What Obama built was language.  What he provided was language, a manner of speaking.  And this was what the talkers who put him in office wanted and expected.  He delivered.  But is it not ODD that nobody really tried to figure out how he actually benefited the group--blacks--one might most reasonably have expected would be his focus?  After all, what other difference could having a black President make?

This is the vital point: for people who confuse language with reality, no facts are ever needed, nor can they be, at the level of principle, which is why it is perfectly consistent of the complicit media to ask for no reckoning.  What they wanted, they got, clearly.

Just as Marx never left his library to do the muddy business of talking with workers, today's media employees--I won't use the word journalist, since it may still be possible to redeem that word someday--have all they need reading speeches, tweets, and public proclamations.  Their work is managing the dialogue, not learning about the real world, or real people, much less helping them in any way.

Friday, November 3, 2017


If you have to ask how hot 5 is at a Thai restaurant, it is too hot.

If you feel the need to compete with random strangers at the gym, you have already lost.

There is a benefit to combining stretching with the notion of Hygge.  As I mentioned a week or something ago, I've pulled out my old Bob Anderson, and resurrected for my own purposes the concept of stretching as pleasurable, as something to look forward to.  This is in marked contradistinction to the notion of "don't go in the pain cave".  I have his book too, and do do rolling which is quite painful sometimes, but I have decided to do random Bob Anderson routines a couple times a day, gentle to the point where I am almost just THINKING of the stretch.

Stretching is a bit like dealing with people.  You push too far, they contract, and everything gets harder.

Monday, October 30, 2017

They never learn

It is both sad and amazing how deeply in denial the Left is with regard to Trump. Yahoo has been running daily hit pieces, describing "plummeting" poll ratings, this problem or the other, and always there seems to be the sense that if they just shout, if they just hold their breath, if they just publish ONE MORE negative article, some miracle will happen.

This is of course ridiculous. Trump is going to be President for four years. There is nothing wrong with his mental health. The Republican House is not going to impeach him for crimes he hasn't committed, and trying to maintain a daily hope he is going to disappear and not be replaced immediately by Mike Pence is the stuff of childish fantasy.

The Left needs to grow up. But of course if they did that, they would no longer be the Left. Mental illness, and the gross hypocrisy and delusion needed to champion barbaric and barren ideas go together.


What is interesting about this is that Mueller went ahead with the indictment, despite the fact that he himself appears to have been complicit in hiding evidence of Russian bribery and fraud to win access to a uranium contract.  The FBI UNDER HIM hid all the dirty laundry, while Billary and their charity front company pocketed millions.

CNN will want to put this on loop, obviously, but it will definitely be a buzzkill for them if every single soundbite coming from Manafort's attorneys references Mueller's own complicity, his own guilt, and his manifest failure of integrity in not recusing himself, despite ALSO being a personal friend of James Comey,

This is a risky, risky game he is playing.  He still has a lot of swamp to depend on, but Trump is increasingly showing he is tired of their shit, and at the end of the day, he is the top dog.

How about a Special Prosecutor to investigate Mueller and Comey, and their role both in Uranium One and the Steele dossier?

Saturday, October 28, 2017

The Las Vegas Shooting

I think it would be interesting to have some of the psychics--are there are a good number of them around the world--who have demonstrated the ability to solve or provide clues to crimes, to take a look at the Las Vegas event.

Whatever happened, the official version makes no sense to me.  It does not make sense that he would commit suicide long before the SWAT cops got there.  It does not make sense he would stockpile so many guns when he only needed one, two, or perhaps three.

And it does not make sense that he would crack the way he did. 

Perhaps everything we are being told is accurate, but I very much doubt it.  


I was "debating" a Communist on Facebook, and reflecting on this particular psychopathology.  What emerged that was new for me is that they don't care who rules them.  This is perhaps the salient distinction from fascism.  A Hitler, or Mussolini, or Franco is not so very different from a king or emperor of another era.  People look to a face, and want that face to lead them.

A similar dynamic was perhaps in play in Russia and China, with the difference was that the rulers emerged AFTER the Party was victorious, and an effort was made to create popular support.  That is likely an over-simplification, but the point as concerns current Communists remains.

They simply know they want to be ruled.  They simply know they want their Party in charge.  Psychologically, I cannot see any meaningful way in which they do not want to be subordinated, in effect, to a machine, to an apparatus of control, to nameless faces, far away.

Ponder that.

And rhetorically, it occurs to me that Communists win many debates because they simply trot out the atrocities of America, and American backed rulers, and the idiots they are speaking to have no ability to frame these actions in a historical context.  They simply know that "we" committed crimes, and the people doing the talking have no desire or intent of doing an actual moral comparison with the actions of Communists, even though they are essential to forming anything approximating a balanced picture.

I look at these peoples, and picture them in boats.  They throw reason--which is the balanced consideration of all factors, which are then integrated into a framework of principle--overboard.  They throw compassion--which is the ability to empathize with ALL human suffering--overboard.  The first is the rudder, the second is the oars or sails.  What is left is adrift.  Such people have no history, they have no people, they have no law.  They have only what they are told, and what they do.  It is very hard building bridges to people lost at sea.

Friday, October 27, 2017

The Meaning of life

You only think about the meaning of life when the feeling of meaning and purpose has slipped through your fingers, just as you only think about love when it is gone.

The true problem of philosophy--one it is singularly ill-equipped to solve--is how to create the feeling of tribal membership for all humanity, without the conflicts that have always attended, and perhaps even supported and facilitated, tribalisms.

Thursday, October 26, 2017

Aspiring bullies

Why not drop the labels fascist, communist, authoritarian and totalitarian, and simply call the disciples and apostles of these anti-humanisms what they are: aspiring bullies?

These Antifa kids are the ones who were likely bullied in school, and now, finally, they can have retributive wet dreams, score settling fantasies, not with the present, but with the past. Politics is merely a thin and bad pretext.

To state the obvious, ALL bullies were bullied, and all bullies in their own mind are just fucking with the world before it can fuck with them, or because it fucked with them.

Our political world at the moment is characterized by mental illness, and the reactions to it.


I was driving up a ramp in a parking garage, running a tad late for a deadline that in any event only existed in my mind, and this word popped in my head. Then henarchy.

To double check I understood the prefix heno, I did a Google search and found this:

I think I have slightly misunderstood heno-. I thought it meant alternating, or something close to that. It means in reality, one but not exclusive, more or less. It might in fact be equated with religious pluralism of the sort that prevented most sectarian conflict in India until the Muslims and their radical monotheism.

But ponder the idea of polyarchy--rule of many sorts. What if absolute monarchs were elected to five year terms? What if some cities used rule by oligarchs (explicitly, in any event)? What if we resurrected literal popular votes held in city squares?

What if we made the concept of "best form of government" an open question?

As I ponder, I then wonder why we need ANY government, if we could more or less get along. War. War is the usual answer. It is why Israel first created a kingship. It is why our Founders wanted a strong Presidency. It is how many nations are formed: to get big enough to fight off some invading force.

In conditions of peace, though:why?

What about a king who is basically paid to sit around and occasionally unruffle some feathers? Who has a boring job, but occasionally proves useful?

Or, in a form I think the Vikings and others adopted, popular assemblies convened only when needed?

This is my brain. I find new words both lead new places, and permit new perspectives on the old.

Bon mot

Greed which is naked has limits.  Greed which is cloaked in the garb of humanitarianism has no limits.

Wednesday, October 25, 2017


Life hacking is currently a popular concept. This is what the smart people are doing, we are told by people selling both the ideas, and the idea of being smart.

It occurs to me that liberty is a necessary precondition for continual innovation and counter-paradigmatic thinking.

At a conceptual level, ideational freedom combined with relative freedom of action and complete freedom of expression, is a meta-hack: it is how you get smarter about getting smarter.

And necessarily, the LACK of ideational and speech freedoms on college campuses can ONLY work to make people stupider. In my view, no other outcome is possible.

If I might state the obvious, if you want innovation, you need to allow it.

Tuesday, October 24, 2017

Earned cynicism

I have learned not to trust people who are too nice, and companies which make an ostentatious show of how much "fun" they are.  If there are caricatures on the wall, or goofy posters, add 10%.

Monday, October 23, 2017


Contemplate the phrase and image of an Endless Square.

This might resonate with someone.  It just came to me.  I can explain it, but I won't.

Spirituality as comprehensive well-being

I pulled out my old Bob Anderson stretching book, the one that has Jim Fixx--are you old enough to remember him?--as a reference, and actually followed his instructions.  He talks about the stretch reflex in there.  And I did it so gently it was more like the idea of a stretch, and a means for focusing on that part of my body, of becoming aware of it, of letting it release its knowledge, which is a very Kum Nye approach.

And lo and behold old feelings and the memories associated with those feelings started coming out. I have repressed--held back, hidden--so much, out of necessity.  It is odd, making contact with my 6 year old self, what I was feeling.  I stopped asking myself what I was feeling around then, and was not old enough to do it any earlier, although I am sure I expressed myself, as young kids do.

And it hit me that this sort of healing activity is the MAIN activity of spirituality.  I was reading my Kum Nye reading earlier, and it is all about relaxation and well being.  A spiritual person feels everything anyone else feels.  They react the same way in the same situations.  But having taught themselves to process emotions, the recover vastly more quickly.  They get back to a high baseline, where many people start bogged down in unprocessed emotion, then stay there, and in some cases get dragged down further by circumstances, or perhaps more accurately, their understanding of the circumstances which their unprocessed emotions compel on them without their awareness.

And then it hit me that much of the Big Three (as seen from the chair I am sitting in) is focused on sin and an invisible God, on rules, obeying the rules, breaking the rules, and an invisible hereafter.  It is not at all about feeling good, and in fact, all three to some greater or lesser extent want people to feel ashamed, unworthy, and generally like shit because of sins someone else committed, or because of their inability to fully repress healthy instincts like sex, a desire for a comfortable life, and for objects of beauty.

This is absurd.  Goodness--real Goodness--flows from a sense of abundance.  Generosity of self is the natural consequence of feeling good, just as material generosity is a natural outcome of abundance.  It requires no special virtue, no special compulsion.

Here is the thing: if you seek goodness directly, you cannot find it.  It is, as Chuang Tzu said over 2,000 years ago, crooked.  It is not found in a straight line.  It is not found in a simple prescription like "be nice".  It is not found, in my view, in any religious frameworks oriented around ritual behavior.  It is found by valuing one's self, one's own well being.  At some point, perceptive people find that helping others be happy makes them happy, but this point is not reached in a condition of personal emptiness.  You can dedicate your life to helping others, and die empty, if you do it from the wrong place.  This is my opinion.  Some measure of selfishness is required of all honest spirituality.  To say otherwise is to adopt a spirit of compulsion in my view.

And I will share two other posts here for my own convenience. 

Compulsion is equating 90% with 0%.  A healthy person sees 90% as 90%.  It is not 100%, but it is not nothing either.  Partial measures are always better than no measures, and not everything in life is worth 100%.  Most things are not.  You save the 100% for the things that are.  If you try to treat everything as a matter of life and death, you wind up shutting down much of the world out of necessity.  If you have to give 100% everywhere, you have to shrink your world.  There is no other choice.  You have to shrink your domain of action and thought.

If, conversely, it is acceptable to give 10% to some things, then many more things emerge from the darkness for your consideration.

The other point I wanted to make is that frequently lesser goodness is greater goodness.  I have, in my own life, often made things worse for people in the process of trying to make them better.  As one example, I see people's pain when they do not, and have at times spoken of it.  Almost always, this is a mistake.  They hide their pain from themselves for a reason.  Bringing it out increases their suffering.  It does not decrease it.  They have to find their pain, and process their pain, in their own time.

I think most of the time--and this is a provisional hypothesis, since I don't have this figured out--it is best simply to mirror what people give you voluntarily.  Show them that you hear them, nothing more.  Sometimes this is a small consolation in the midst of a vast suffering, but something is better than nothing, and trying to be greedy with your "goodness" can undo everything.

I would actually, to complete the circle, equate trying to do too much with stretching too hard.  You activate their impulse towards contraction, and they wind up smaller because they met you.  This is incompetence, period.

Don't be incompetent.  This is not a bad rule.  And if you figure it out completely, feel free to comment.  I'm still looking for ideas.

We are all fools in our own ways.  The best we can hope is that we live long lives in which we become a little less stupid each day, which is perhaps close to the Taoist idea of doing more by doing less.  Remove what is unnecessary, and the path becomes brighter and simpler.

Sunday, October 22, 2017


No one can drink water for anyone else.

Friday, October 20, 2017

Bon mots

I have this notion I have articulated from time to time of perceptual breathing, of a global perceptual In-Breath, and a global perceptual Out-Breath. Large to small to large to small.

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. Sometimes you need the thousand words, and more.
Sometimes pith is the essence of wit, sometimes wisdom speaks long and carefully.

Be all that as it may:

Addiction is not the problem: it is the RESPONSE to the problem.

Love is when you feel completely safe with someone without using denial.

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Excuse making

No sane person will deny that life is often hard.  Whether it SHOULD be hard or not is a philosophical question, but that it is for many people is clear.

We are all born where we are born, to parents who may or may not want us, who may or may not teach us useful lessons, who may in fact inflict pain on us, and denigrate us.

Where you are is where you are.  Nothing can change this.  Given this, if you stipulate, through excuses, that you are helpless, then you have taken your own destiny out of your hands.  You have given in to helplessness, and this in turn makes whatever pain may be present worse.

I think most people make excuses.  Certainly I do.  My feeling is that my excuses are often reasons--which may or may not be true, although if I'm honest it likely isn't true--but they are reason on a path to personal accountability.  I take frequent breaks climbing the mountain, but I look at the summit often, and when I am done resting, I continue climbing.

It is perfectly acceptable to ask for help, but it is never consistent with a healthy sense of self, of healthy self empowerment, to demand of others that they do for you things you can do for yourself.

This is an axiom of genuinely Liberal culture.  This is an axiom of good people. 

The alternative is people USING other people for their own selfish and unhealthy ends.  Some people need to infantilize other people, so they can remain perennial parents.  Not because they are good parents, or care-givers, but because it gives them a sense of power when others depend on them, which is easily rationalizable as morality.

This is the root dynamic of race relations in this country.  The political Left tells blacks that it will care for them, and far too many blacks are content to take them at their word.

Again: this is spoken from a place impatient with the low self esteem implied by the complicity of ordinary blacks in this system.  Black people are capable of vastly more than they are showing as a cultural group at the moment.  They are capable of genius.  They just need to believe it.

We all make excuses, and in my view, there is no warrant for judging people for it.  At the same time, it is perfectly reasonable to hope for other people what they fear to hope for themselves.

Principle of Personal Protection

As I have noted often, many people--most, perhaps all--have many "parts", which can and do send contradictory signals.  I would like to assert that in the presence of combined passive aggression and apparent courtesy, the most damaging signal should be treated as the primary one, even if it is subtle and intermittent.

Particularly when you try hard to consciously focus on the most obvious, most socially acceptable one, the second one becomes vastly more damaging, because it becomes  a virtual hypnotic suggestion that you deserve such treatment.  To combat it effectively, you have to ignore the socially acceptable parts of the communication, and focus on the damaging signal, because in reality it IS the primary one.  It comes from the root of that person's consciousness.

To the extent all these notions of unconscious racism have validity, this is the source.  At the same time, you do not change how people REALLY think by forcing them to avoid certain words, or to avoid expressing certain thoughts.  The feelings remain, and will always find an out.  As with feminism as well, the best offense is generalized success.  If blacks want to eliminate racism, they need to start graduating from high school at the same rate as the kids in the suburbs, working as hard as those kids, and taking responsibility for their families.  They need to stop blaming the world, and need to stop looking to leaders who encourage them to do so. 

These are not things you are supposed to say, but it is the truth.  It may be that vigorously policing peoples expressed ideas eliminates or reduces psychological discomfort among blacks--I'm sure it does--but it does not raise the standard of living, make the streets safer, make the schools better, or increase the number of good quality jobs.  It doesn't.

Returning to my main theme, I would in fact suggest that there is a covert hostility--or at least actual racism--inherent in the ideas that whites need to "look out for" blacks, that they depend in inherent ways on the political system, and that they need to be guided through life like little children.  These ideas--particularly since they are not expressed in clear language--weaken them.  If the Irish, Jews or Italians had had friends like the modern Democrats, they too would still be impoverished in disproportionate numbers.

And in dealing with narcissists, the double communication is the main source of damage.  In order to delay the realization that they are radically alone and incapable of honest human contact, the narcissist--particularly in "romantic" relationships--will often offer to the other the same esteem in which they hold themselves.  This appears to be generosity, but it is simply a cloaking device, a concealment, a trick they don't even mean to play.  With most, I don't even think it is conscious.  It is simply who they are.  They have a behavioral soundtrack that they play through, then reset at the beginning with the next one.

Grandiosity, though, betrays an inner lack.  Conversely, GENUINE humility--which is rare--indicates an inner fullness and richness of experience.  You don't need to always be right, because the world is a fascinating, large place, and there is much you don't know.

All of this, of course, is personally relevant to me.  My work continues, as does success.

Monday, October 16, 2017

Gun control

All human action begins in the body, is processed by the brain--some brain--and expressed symbolically if communication is desired, most commonly through language. Language, in turn, both expresses ideas AND creates them. Images we form are often in response to words. This primitive feelings can go through many forms, themselves constantly changing and evolving.

The deliberate abuse of language is a deliberate abuse of ones fellow humans.  Conversely, consciously accurate use of language is a form of compassion and even love.

Hence: gun control is the effort to reduce illegal gun use by reducing legal gun use.

Corollary: gun control is the effort to reduce the number of illegal guns by reducing the number of legal guns.

I would stipulate John Lotts phrase should have a word added: more LEGAL guns, less crime. This is a highly defensible statement. It may be that low crime areas exist without guns--this is certainly true-/but I very much doubt there are any high crime areas outside war zones where legal gun ownership is common. Witness much of South and Central America.

Saturday, October 14, 2017

King of Hollywood

This song is from 1979:

There are others.

What is interesting about this whole Hollywood thing is that the open secret has become simply open, or is in the process of doing so.

In every other business, sexual harassment has been punished quickly and severely for decades now.  The question is why it has been allowed to continue in Hollywood, with both men and women coming out now in large numbers.

I was reading an op/ed citing a rabbi who claimed that the Times piece on Weinstein was the result of his plan to make a philo-Semitic movie about the Warsaw Ghetto, and they found that politically unacceptable.  I suspect, though, that they had no idea how many rats would come fleeing out as well.

It seems likely left-wing culture itself made the sexual harassment possible.  It both stipulates that all sex is meaningless, that one should pursue pleasure at all times and all costs, and that the cause is always more important than any individual sacrifices.  Weinstein was a staunch leftist, so hurting him was hurting Democrats was hurting whoever it is that person thought they actually helped.  The little people, lets say, or oppressed minorities who would otherwise be completely helpless.

Weinstein knew everybody, and they seem to have known him.  We might call this the "Bill Clinton" principle, that all sins are forgiven if you are on the right side, because, again, the cause exceeds any sacrifice.  Paula Jones and the rest of them were just the price of progress, so called.

It will be interesting to see if the naked and undeniable double standard being displayed everywhere at the moment will open any eyes.

For his part, Trump seems to have been quite astute at picking willing women.  Weinstein was pretty much a "I'll fuck anything that moves, bring me meat", but Trump has always seemed to me to truly enjoy feminine beauty for its own sake, and the company of intelligent, individuated women.  He may have grabbed pussies, but if so, those woman likely consented at some point, and slept with him because they wanted to. 

Trump has been sued over 4,000 times, but not ONCE for sexual harassment.  Ponder the odds of that: a multi-billionaire playboy not sued once.  And I have never seen one allegation of hush money, which have trailed Bill Clinton and Weinstein (and others) all their careers.

Here is the thing: I think Weinstein and Clinton HATE women.  Sex becomes a means of punishing them, of asserting power and dominance over them.  This is the real turn-on, which makes it so the target doesn't matter at all.  They are all--perhaps, if I might indulge myself in some psycho-dynamic oversimplification--their mothers.

I think of Fellini's City of Women, which presumably echoed Freudian themes, but I do not think Freud was fully wrong about everything.  He always got to the right intersection, then made the wrong turn.

Monday, October 9, 2017

On the Shortness of Life

Despite being only 12 pages, and free, I found myself skimming this after a close reading of the first 5 or so. He goes on and on about the importance of time--which is a useful topic--but fails to tell us what it is we should be doing.  He merely conveys the regrets of many, and the failures of the few who lived as he counsels.

This is a paradox of our own time.  We have, relative to at least our recent past, much leisure.  It is possible, for example, for someone to make a best seller of a book titled "The Four Hour Work Week".  But we don't know what to do with it.  That same author seems to find himself now working 60 hour weeks, not just because of money, but because he doesn't seem to know what to do with himself.  He "meditates" daily for 20 minutes or so, because it "sharpens his mind".  It is a best practice of high achievers.

I read many billionaires are now micro-dosing with LSD to make them more "creative".  Creative to what purpose?  Amassing another billion?  A fifth billion?  Becoming the wealthiest man in the world?  Why?  What does this get, if not leisure?  I get that making money is a game to them, that it is autotelic, but on a deep level is such play an important part of life?  They could get the same satisfaction surfing, without needing to be cuthroat, as so many are.  There is not just a play element, but a power element, and the thirst for power is inherently sick.

Such people cannot be role models.  They have no idea what to do with life.  Whatever they are focused on, it is not learning how to love and be loved, how to relax deeply, and how to get at the deep and rich spirit of each and every day, which to my mind and heart are the points of life, and which I, in my own way, pursue each day.  I still ache everywhere, and I still have much work to do, but I am on the path much more than any billionaire, or even most millionaires you might read about.

What to do with time?  That it can be wasted is clear, but what constitutes the best and highest use is made no more clear by the current passion among many for the Stoics.

Socrates, for his part, considered "philosophy"--the love of Truth--the highest use of time.  And he ended his life only able to say he knew nothing.  Is this really the Summum Bonum upon which to base the edifice of our civilization?  That, or the deconstruction of the notion of truth, and a following obsession with material well being, or lunatic schemes of social engineering, in which men become at best herd animals?

The answer is in your body.  It is not in your mind, unless by mind we intend the integrated heart and mind conjured by such words as the Hindi "Mun".

I continue to see stupid people.  It is my curse.  Perhaps I am stupid, too.  I am willing to consider that.  But my body tells me I am on the right, if difficult, path.


You can only see the future through the lens of the present.  Anything else is a lie.

Corollary: if you cannot see the present, you have no business speaking of the future.

Obviously, both of these are large problems at the moment, and have been for a long time.

Friday, October 6, 2017

What I see

I was looking out of the windows of an office building yesterday, pondering the mass murder in Las Vegas. It was raining, and there was mist everywhere, and what I saw was birds eating worms and bugs. Large birds eating smaller birds and rodents. Fish eating bugs, and large fish eating smaller fish. I saw animals dying of hunger and cold. I saw them fucking obsessively in the spring.

What I might assert as the Luciferian Principle argued that if God doesn't care, why should we? CLEARLY, He does not prevent evil, does not prevent pain, does not obviously shelter and guide us.

What is remarkable is not that violence happens, but that we have evolved ways to make it less common.

Paddock clearly suffered from PTSD. He would lay in bed and moan and scream. I can relate.

Here is the point I want to make here, and I could say much more, but I lack time: at this moment in human history, given all the shelters and frameworks we have created, violence is almost intrinsically the result of trauma. If we, as human beings, want to evolve to the next phase of our cultural evolution, we MUST put trauma front row and center, and deploy ample resources so that where it is present, it can reliably be diminished.

My vision is a new cultural form I have been calling a "church". I have spoken of this before, but I am approaching a point where I think I can take effective action. I have always been a bigger talker than doer, but what I have in mind is quite small. That is my source of relative confidence.

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Who we are

I think across a lifetime who we become is directly dependent on what we think is possible. For this reason I tend to think the best way of "defining" someone is by the sum total of what they think is possible, even if they are never able to manifest everything they see (I am of course speaking somewhat autobiographically there).

Most or all of us expand to the point beyond which we think "more" is impossible, at which point our lives become recursive.

Me, I see a massive fog, and I make no claim to know how far back it goes, but it speaks to me regularly. That is what this blog is.

I felt disgust with this blog the other day, and thought about discontinuing it. I am putting myself out there, to little seeming purpose. I have no followers, and few readers. But then it hit me that I ENJOY having ideas pass through me, and if the fog cannot plausibly see me as a conduit, then the ideas will stop, and I too will become a circle, or in any event more circular. Posting to no one is the price I pay to be me, and as fucking awful as it sometimes is to be me, I like being me. I would not change lives with anyone on this planet. This is my path, my choice, my destiny. This is beautiful.

All moments matter but no moments matter

Hete is a purpose of life: the spontaneous expression of complex order generated through regular moments of contact with the Transcendant.

I have spoken of Henomoralism, but what Henoreligiosity? What if one were to determine to take up a different religion, diligently, every decade of ones life?

Henotelearchy--differing organizing values and purposes at different times. Perhaps sometimes we should treat time as the ultimate object of value, as counseled by Seneca in "On the Shortness of Life". (I'm only a third of the way through, so I may be missing his ultimate point).

But perhaps sometimes we need big fat gaps of time. Ponder the fact that "work", and a productive life generally, consists mainly in meditation in the Buddhist tradition. Many monks scarcely leave their monasteries in long lifetimes, and never marry.

Life is a large ocean, and we are floating in it. Land emerged from time to time, for reasons we don't understand. The sun, moon and stars are our constant companions, and the whole interface between here and there, between a small present and an infinite one, is fascinating.

I have no idea what I am saying, by the way. Maybe you can tell me how this makes any sense.

Wednesday, October 4, 2017

Operative hypothesis

Like many, I am waiting eagerly for news on the Vegas shooter. Since I don't personally deal well with recognized large gaps in my understanding, I am going to offer a provisional hypothesis I will amend or discard as new facts-/which may or may not be forthcoming--emerge.

I read Paddock had far more weapons than he could have hoped to use himself. I read they found Antifa (which I will henceforth refer to as Fascist) literature in his room. I read there is a police account and a different account as to when he checked in. I read he apparently had a guest

Put all this together, along with low simmering unresolved emotional trauma, and relentless left wing propaganda calling for violent  resistance to the expressed will of the American people, and a relatively high IQ, and what I get is this guy conceiving an excellent scheme for the mass murder of likely Trimp supporters. I see him inviting many people to join him, at least one of whom actually visited his room. I see him sharing Fascist literature with him or her, and showing off his gun collections, and all the windows looking down on the spot where the country show was going to be.

I see cops reaching this conclusion early and going on a hunt for people who knew of his plans to due to direct invitation, and who chose not to join him on his suicide mission, which was the part they objected to, not the murder part, for which they applauded him, as some leftists have had the audacity and cruelty to do publicly.

So a hunt begins, with little information to go on. Perhaps he effectively wiped all his devices. Perhaps he left few clues. Perhaps there were no cameras in his hall, leaving them to guess who, among tens of thousands of visitors--many of whom were not guests--might have come to see him. This would be a MASSIVE undertaking and until they can get a confession--unlikely even if they find someone who knew--they have nothing.

His girlfriend has a practiced alibi and nobody can prove she knew anything g.

So in the end, after tens of thousands of hours of work, they have to propose a possibly radicalized lone shooter as their best guess, not wanting the public to know their real best guess is that up to dozens of people may have gotten away with complicity to mass murder.

The Parallax View

Does anyone remember this movie? It changed my world in some ways. Things are not always what they seem.

Something is screwy in this whole Paddock thing but he is dead, and we may never know who else to question.

Tuesday, October 3, 2017


What functional difference could there be between the Communist rejection of "bourgeois morality"  and Aleister Crowley dictum "Do what thou will"?

On the note of Communism, Paul Johnson makes the interesting argument that the obsession with the money-obsessed Capitalist by Marx is really just a metastasized anti-Semitism, and the abuse of groups of people based on collective crimes by Lenin and those who followed him--such as efforts to destroy Kulaks, and the bourgeoisie generally--were morphologically pogroms in a classic Russian sense. People were pulled from their homes, beaten, jailed and/or killed, and their possessions confiscated.

It is an interesting thesis.

Hate makes hate. Marx apparently asked Heine, with whom he was acquainted, "Why so much love, and not more of the lash?"  Heine, for his part, lamented the grotesque violence he saw in the future of socialism, even if he was in many respects sympathetic.

Why 23 guns?

Why 2 windows shot out?

Could it be that many people were invited or even expected to show up? Could it be there were multiple shooters , who returned their guns to Paddocks room before the cops got there?

I can't know. But one or two or three guns with plenty of ammo is all one needs for mass murder.

It would seem an obvious step to find and question everyone who rented a room on that side of the building. Maybe some chickened out.

Monday, October 2, 2017

It's beautiful, Man!!!

Does anyone else remember Tom Cruise, before Tom Cruise was Tom Cruise, shooting a machine gun out a window in Taps?  As I recall, when Timothy Hutton confronted him, he said "It's beautiful, man!!!" just before both of them were wiped out in a volley of automatic fire.

Can any serious human being really argue that continual--and continually increasing--violence in our media has no effect?  To my mind, it has the dual effect of making people more afraid and thus more emotionally restrained and superficial, and the following effect of making them feel more  lonely, since they have shut down the pathways to the outside.

Take this basic alienation, and the ability to nurse a grievance--real, or much more often perceived--and you get this sort of violence.

How is it people who appear continually in violent movies can tout gun control?  They are complicit in making violence seem to be an answer to many of life's problems.  Do not many American men idolize as badasses men like Vito Corleone and Tony Montana?

This madman may or may not have bought his weapons legally, but even if we ban them, the possibility of such shootings does not disappear.  Whoever controls a monopoly on the effective use of force has accumulated power, and accumulated power is sooner or later always abused.  I wonder how the referendum in Catalonia would have played out if guns were allowed in Spain?  More violence, certainly, but also perhaps more circumspection in the use of force by the authoritarian regime in Madrid.  I read some 800 people were injured.  If that is not a species of fascism--and I will recall for you that Spain was formally Fascist until the mid-70's--then I don't know what would count.

Orchestra Rehearsal

Federico Fellini made a movie doing some combination of satirizing and lamenting the Italian political world, although I'm sure he knew it extended farther, in a movie called Orchestra Rehearsal.  To play beautiful music, self evidently, all the sections need to get along.  When they fail to do so--if the winds are fighting with the brass, for example--it becomes impossible.

Other than that thousands of tons of supplies are piling up on the dock in San Juan, and that only 20% of the drivers who should be distributing it have showed up for work, no firm statements can be made, but it does appear the local Teamsters have chosen this time for a de facto sit-down/slow-down strike.  A video in Spanish which, it is claimed, supports this is making the rounds.

What makes America special--the reason we outperform so many nations economically and in actual social justice--is that we tend to be able to put aside our petty differences in countless ways, and work together for common aims.  This, despite our cultural and racial diversity, which the Japanese, as one example, do not deal with at all.

When Houston became a vast lake, Americans of all stripes and backgrounds pulled together to help out.  People were not worried about getting paid, or whether or not they were getting a fair shake.  Work needed to be done, and it got done, and is getting done.

Puerto Rico, on the other hand, now, is showing exactly why it was in terrible trouble before the literal storm hit.  Selfishness, laziness, resentment, and an unquenchable desire to shift blame all seem to be on prominent display.  I want mine and fuck you seems to be a common sentiment.

Now, I'm not there, and I'm sure there is a lot of sharing going on.  I'm also sure there is a lot of stealing and score settling going on too.  This is why they are who they are, and why we--and yes, culturally we are a different nation, clearly--who we are.

Success is not an accident.  This is claimed by people who know nothing about hard work and long term planning, for whom stealing equals the only growth they will ever know.  But it is not the American way.  We have thieves, but nearly everyone who gains wealth did it in one way, and one way only.

Latest atrocity Trump's fault!!!

Media still working on why, and what his motive was.

Seriously: in what sane world does being hated become reason for hate?  One could as easily say--as many have throughout history--that Jews should be hated because everyone hates them.

I continue to be astonished by the emotional and intellectual superficiality on display everywhere.  I continue to wonder when and if the media and those who constitute and run it will awaken from their spell.  Yes, I get that the people at the top are completely cynical and believe in nothing but power, and power alliances, and Trump does not get them those things.  But the rank and file: how fucking stupid, for how long, can you be?

As far as this latest tragedy--oh, I hate to read the news sometimes--we will see what explanation we get, but the story seems to be two pissed off local hispanics--the term used by a woman who spoke with them, even if the term the media has latched onto was "Asian" for the woman, which in NewSpeak usually means Muslim--attacking a country music concert attended largely by white rednecks.

Can we not suppose anti-Trump hatred--for which he bears no responsibility--is in play?  Can we not, in fact, blame the media for relentless, white-hot Agitation Propaganda?

This is simply a guess, and particularly if I am right, we may never know it, but I think it is close to the mark.  You cannot run the equivalent of a Nazi campaign of structural anti-Semitism and not expect less-hinged people to take it literally and start killing people.

The hate needs to stop.  It won't--the Left is far too emotionally gone for self reflection--but in a sane world it would.  I don't know what the solution is.  In my small world, in my small way, I continue to work for local antidotes, and am making progress.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

A gathering of intellectuals

Is a gathering of ideas, and perhaps personalities, but not people.

Is there not an inherent anti-humanism in the idea that ideas are what matter most?

Corrolary: you can dedicate yourself to humanity, or to the IDEA of humanity, but you cannot do both.

Intellectualism and Communitarianism

I feel, as someone who could reasonably call himself "intellectual", that what a lifelong obsession with abstraction--at least with regards the abstraction of "life"-- really bespeaks is an unquenched emotional thirst for a sense of existence.  It is a rebellion against, and a shelter from, tides which seek to devour me.  Existentialism was itself, paradoxically, an unanswered pursuit of the sense of existence.  This is what I feel.  And I feel that being devoured, there is another side.  It is not madness: it is health.

I think what all intellectuals crave is a simple existence where they belong.  I think in this psychological dynamic we can find the unrelenting obsession with community, itself expressed politically as left wing activism, as a community in the future, as a community for other people.

Utopia becomes an emotional ideal, where one belongs without psychological risk.  We are, obviously, all surrounded by an expanse of people.  Community is always there, in possibility.  Where not present, it can be formed, concretely.  But it requires risk, and losing a taste for risk, true risk, is a defining feature of most people who live lives apart from the mass of humanity, who rarely or never come down, who are always at a distance, even when physically or virtually present, even when frothing out clouds of words.

My work continues to bear fruit in ways I am increasingly less inclined to discuss here.

Friday, September 29, 2017

Thin Yellow Line

This is an interesting story, if true:

It seems very obvious to me that there cannot be uniformity of opinion among NFL players. It seems most likely a few very vocal but dim witted people are yelling a lot in the locker room and cowing people into supporting them.

Like police, like military, sports teams need each other. They need to be able to depend on one another. And this Oakland story, if true, shows what can happen if individuals go their own way.

So even there is no unity at all, a front of unity is being presented.

If the Russians---or any other group or interest, like George Soros--truly do aim to undermine American faith in our institutions, getting idiotic and morally incoherent politics introduced into what should be a non-political arena would be a great way to do it.

Now, we clearly idolize sports and sports heroes much too much in any event, so this cannot be called a major cultural loss, but it will be interesting to see how things play out. Net good may come of it, albeit not for the NFL.

Friendship Cafes

What if there were restaurants where they provided a dining companion to people who were dining alone? If they wanted them, of course.

I would like to suggest as well that men use bars and strangers in much the same way that women use their support networks. Men who hate to broach certain subjects even with their friends will often do so with strangers after a few beers.  I have seen this often.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Mark of the Beast

Perhaps the Mark of the Beast is having no personally distinguishing characteristics or beliefs whatsoever.  You are marked by belonging to an undifferentiated herd.

There is no diversity in 666 either, is there?

A world gone crazy

No one can deny Donald Trump is a bit of a clown.  His hair, his bad spray on tan, and his serial marriages, among other things, count against him.

But his undeniable, categorical, CLEAR virtue is a willingness to speak obvious truths, knowing in advance that he will be pilloried by most of the media, who are SHOCKED, OUTRAGED, that anyone would defend common sense patriotism.

What do we have left, if we do not believe in the promise of our nation?  We have always believed in progress, but progress within the system.  Trump would be called courageous, if so many people were not trying to make him into a gargantuan, Godzilla-like monster.  He is speaking obvious truths, when speaking the truth makes him an outlaw, an outsider, since the world otherwise is filled with lies, half truths, and misdirection.

I really feel that Communism is really nothing more, and nothing less, than the final failure of an individual to find a personal purpose in their lives.  It is the final expression of despair and pessimism.  It is reaching the bottom of life, finding nothing, then grasping at the only straw left to grasp.  It is willing a superior power--the State--to create law for you, so that you can be free from freedom, so that you no longer need to control your own life, so that someone forces you into something like life.  It is willing oneself to be a robot.  It is taking a potion which makes you a zombie, because you have nothing else.

This really is a critically important question: how do you psychologically normal people become Communists?  Answer: they don't.  You have to already be fucked up in the head, and then it is a salve, a balm, a sunny day in a cold winter.  It is warmth, intoxicating.  And it is so SIMPLE.  Just give your freedom away, and you find peace.  That it is cultish is obvious.  That some people need cults is equally obvious.

Culturally, everything which breeds a taste for ugliness, which damages the sacred, which nurtures moral and existential pessimism, anger, and depression, works to support the Communist ethos, which is concrete blocks, hunger, colorful banners, and hidden torture and execution chambers.  It is also psychological torture camps they call " re-education" camps, where people are taught to all think the same things, say the same things, and reject FULLY any pretension to individual moral thought, to any personal destiny, to anything like a loving God, and to hope in any form. 

It is, in other words, a massive coffin, the land of the undead, and a vampires paradise.