Sunday, November 30, 2014

Post unlikely to make it through the filter, somewhere on the internet. . .

Response to article by black man essentially saying that blacks are always (uniquely) being picked on, doubting that Brown was guilty, and we whites really just don't understand black people, mostly because we are stupid and don't listen. He starts and ends by calling all dissenters bigots.

It may come as a surprise to you, but when you reference the word “bigot” in both the opening and closing paragraphs, assume your points are made beyond any possibility of contention, and accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being “self-righteous”, some people take offense at that.

Not everyone who disagrees with you is racist, and in fact most whites I observe have reached a point where, after so many years of the absolutely unanchored, unrestrained, reflexive use of that word to demonize everyone and stifle rational discussion, that we consider it a species of attempted bullying.

You are not right because you are black any more than I am right (or wrong) because I am white.  It is racist, in the genuine sense of the word, the real sense of the word, to say otherwise, in my view.

Now, you are a psychologist.  As such, you have received scientific training.  You KNOW that a few anecdotes do not amount to a open and shut case.  Let me offer some statistics:

42% of arrest related deaths were among white people, and 32% among blacks.  The total number among all races was nearly 3,000 last year, making Michael Brown a drop in a bucket.  If I extrapolate, that is some 1,260 white people.

One thing that irks me is this seeming black contention that bad things ONLY happen to them.  Do think all of these deaths among whites were justified?  Do you think the mothers and fathers of these kids cried any less, felt less rage at the system?

And you avoid the question as far as single parenthood.  The simple reality is that poverty does not create single parenthood.  There have been strong families throughout human history living in much worse conditions that the average ghetto or country farm.  SINGLE PARENTHOOD CREATES POVERTY.

Black girls (and for that matter white girls) who graduate high school and who marry and stay married to the father of their first child rise out of poverty, even if that is where they started, very quickly.  To stay poor, you need intergenerational single mothers—preferably uneducated--and we both know—and I can demonstrate demographically—that this is much more common in black homes.

And the children of two parent families avoid nearly all the bad things associated with single parent homes.  They are less likely to be criminals, high school dropouts, to get someone pregnant or get pregnant, and to do drugs or abuse alcohol.  These things are well documented.

And on that note, I would offer my own anecdote: a friend I went to college with signed up with the LAPD and eventually worked several years in the South Central Los Angeles.  He said he saw the same stupid shit day after day after day after day.  It never let up.  He eventually left because it was making him cynical and racist.  He started detesting himself.

But it is a matter of clear, empirical fact that blacks commit nearly all crimes at rates 2-3 times that of white people (the multiplier is even higher with Asians).  For violent crimes it is as much as 10x higher:  (Riley is black, by the way).

Are you going to seriously contend that cops be so inhuman that they completely fail to learn from repeated experience?  Are you going to say that blacks bear NO RESPONSIBLITY for the experience cops have that they are much more likely than whites to commit virtually every crime that happens outside Wall Street?

Here is the thing: until the black family is reconstituted, the pattern of failure we have seen over the past 50 years will continue.  Poverty will continue, crime will continue.  Whites will continue to build themselves communities isolated in all but expressed verbal intent. Put another way: they won’t admit what they are doing, but they will do it anyway.  Ferguson is black because the whites moved out.  It’s illegal for Real Estate Agents to mention race, but do you seriously think they need to? 

And you can’t blame them.  Who wants to live in a high crime neighborhood?  I’ve done it.  I was scared every day I or my wife would be attacked.  I heard a guy get shot.  Another kid got shot a block from my apartment.  Another kid got shot outside the movie theater.  I had to hide all change and everything of value in my truck, and put a club on it, lest it get stolen.   In that area, that year, roughly 15 cars were stolen in roughly a 10x10 square block area a month.

No doubt your own work is useful, but can you seriously claim that you can affect more than perhaps a few hundred lives in the next five years?  The problem is nationwide, and affects many millions.  By and large the kids who are going to be trouble, are on that path by age 10 or so, in my own estimation.

I readily grant the conditions of our ghettos are appalling, as are the lives of many who live in them.  But this is not White America’s fault.  We have bent over backwards trying to help, and many of us are suffering severe compassion fatigue.

Race and injustice

One would think, reading accounts of "white privilege" that all you have to do to succeed in America is be white.  This ignores that most poor people in this country are white. It ignored the enormous amount of work and preparation it takes to succeed, work which is not done by the unsuccessful, in what I would hope is an obvious tautology.  Those who do not succeed did not do what it takes to succeed, however they define it.

One gets the impression that ONLY blacks have experiences with unfairness, with being judged prejudicially, with dealing with stupid, abusive people.  Only blacks have to deal with foreclosures and lost jobs, bad credit scores and banks that won't lend to them.  Only blacks have bosses who demand too much of them, or won't hire you because they don't like you.  Only blacks deal with poverty.  Only blacks get arrested and put in jail.  Only blacks get shot unnecessarily by cops.

This is bullshit.  Life is hard for nearly everyone, and it is often unfair.  We do not make it more fair in general by redistributing rights from one group to another.  To quote William Boetker, you cannot raise anyone up by tearing someone else down.  What blacks need to do is copy white (and Asian, even more so) cultural models to succeed.

They are not doing this.  Why is anyone's guess, but one thing is obvious is that a whole INDUSTRY--and by industry I mean a for-profit business enterprise--exists almost entirely to tell them that nothing is under their direct control, their personal decisions don't matter, and that whatever they do and say, it is OK.

This is a form of abuse.  It is a form of cruelty.  As I have said often, it is the mother who coddles her 600 pound son who finds it just too hard to get out of bed and function.

The idea of people going hungry and homeless is repugnant to me, but it needs to stated and emphasized that the FIRST LINE of defense against poverty is a JOB, and TWO PARENTS.  It is not the government.

Democrats more or less literally toss little candy treats from their election parade floats and claim that thereby they "support" black people, and that opposing them is opposing black progress, justice, and the American Way.  These floats start at one black tie cocktail party, and end at another.  They might stop in high end ghettos and drop their g's, and try to pretend to be "Barry on the Block", but they don't stay long.  No campaign donations there.

EVERYTHING they do makes jobs more scarce.  It makes them pay less, because in a down economy, there is downward pressure on wages, just as there is SUBSTANTIAL upward pressure in good times. [Minimum wages laws, obviously, when set above prevailing market wages, create downward pressure on employment outright.]

This would be true, of course, in conditions of fixed labor supply.  If you add 5 million people to the labor pool, it pushes yet farther out any possible improvement in at least low skilled jobs, and increases poverty.  It is no accident, or an unforeseeable outcome that black incomes have plunged under Obama.

It is significant and no accident that Democrat approval ratings have plunged among the working class, which is historically the people who voted Democrat, because they "looked out for the little guy".  I heard my grandfather say this often.  It may have been true at one time--particularly when people like FDR looked out for the WHITE "little guy", giving many contracts to unions who refused to hire blacks, but that has long ceased to be the case.  They merely appeal rhetorically to every constituency who might be counted on to vote for something free (to them, and apparently, since that is money that was diverted from alternative, structurally better uses.)

As one recent book title put it: Please stop helping us.

And I will add one more thing: no blacks alive today were victims of slavery.  No blacks endured/survived/transcended slavery.  By my reckoning we only have one large group that has, within living memory, endured slavery: the survivors of Nazi work camps.  We could add to that, I suppose, the many Vietnamese who survived Communist work camps.

The slavery meme is propaganda.  I had said that many people find in fear a grounding principle, but I could add to that many others find in rage and hate equally vivifying principles.

I see a MLK, Jr. movie is on the way, to reconnect people with struggles that were DONE almost entirely by 1970, some 44 years ago.  We just had "7 Years a Slave", and Django, and who knows what else.

ALL of this detracts from a core reality: black people are capable of doing work THEY ARE NOT DOING.  I see no point in beating around the bush.  I see no reason to assume less of them, to consider them inferior, or to give than an on-going pass from adult responsibility simply because as a group they HISTORICALLY perhaps endured more than most whites (life on the frontier was no joke, though).

What they endure now, the conditions in their neighborhoods, are their own.  Most poor people in this country are white.  Nobody sheds any tears over them, nor should they.  They make decisions consistent with poverty, in some places, generation after generation. That is their prerogative.  


I was watching Zombieland--doing my Movie Yoga, watching movies I would not normally watch, to see what comes out--and I just felt this terrible isolation and fear coming from the film.  The narrator of the film lost contact early on with his family.  He was alone before the zombies.

And I felt this isolation, this terror, this profound, unspeakable trepidation about the future of our very complex civilization, in the face of all the forces tearing us apart; I felt this is not just my particular malady.

Have we entered the realm of family as voluntary association?  In some respects this is an evolution of the concept of individualism, but it is also a reflection of the determined assaults by cultural nihilists upon all the non-coercive, non-violent, voluntary forces which bring us together, which keep us together.  Values like honor and loyalty and impartial kindness, and REASON.

Do sanity and connection not feel for many of us like increasingly endangered islands?  In that movie, they found a family of sorts, comradery, love.  But were they not unanchored, in constant danger and motion?

We feel zombies among us.  I see zombie parades all over the country.  Why do people want to be zombies?  What is the attraction?  Does it not allow them to greet and identify and engage with something in their lives that makes them feel unimportant, disengaged, separated?

Does it not allow them to contact forces of rage and violence which they cannot otherwise give voice to?  The need to "cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice."

Why not take "the poison, from the poisoned stream"?

I have, for many years.  It's so easy.  It's much easier than greeting head on horror, confusion, loneliness, doubt, and a sense of futility.

But I don't quit.  For the duration of my life I will offer my soul, sacrifice my being, shake like a leaf, watch horror flow through me like a black river, and work for something better that I can communicate and teach.

There is no other game in town.  Failure greets all of us at some time, on some level, but sometimes the task is simply keeping the torch lit, and carrying it as long as you can.


I was in a deep meditation yesterday, and realized that fear is a part of my identity.  I don't know how to be my "self" in a condition of deep relaxation.  I must invent that self, never having been it.

And one can easily psychologize my posts from yesterday. Without saying ANYTHING about the truth value of what I posted, one can ask why I sought all that out. It was there two days ago, and a week ago and a year ago.

And the answer lies in this vacillation I am increasingly feeling between relaxed well being, and the fear that the other shoe is getting ready to drop.  Back and forth, back and forth.  One can start with fear and then justify it.  There are plenty of ways to do this, from global warming/ecological devastation, to preoccupation with an Islamic Nuke/EMP.  It's all there for you to use, if you so choose.  All of them will allow you to direct your life along that path of that fear.  They can give meaning to you, if you choose to use it that way, but not deep meaning, as I would understand it.

What happens if you realize Global Warming is bullshit?  Or that Iran has no intention of sacrificing itself in its crusade for vengeance on the world?  What happens if sustained peace and prosperity break out?

On some level, to find peace one must accept death, daily death, a daily reckoning, a daily dance with life which you remember will never come again in exactly the same way, and accept. You accept the passing of what just was and will never be again. You accept in that act the value of the present moment.

Living well and dying well cannot be separated, in my view.  Mourning cannot be separated from joy, freedom from constraint.

I am not saying anything new, but I feel it perhaps more than I normally do.

Boston Bombing

Well, now I'm getting used to the idea of "crisis actors".  Why wouldn't this be next?  I couldn't stand it.

It only takes one blatant, inexplicable fact to destroy an entire narrative.

Here's another link:

What is happening?  There seems to be a rot deep within this nation.  It is not in the ordinary people, who have in many respects been made mediocre by an inferior educational system, which teaches conformity and not critical thinking, and fails to impart basic facts about finances, economics, political theory, and history.  Those people by and large are decent, just dumb.

Where it lies is in the failure of our elites, our alleged best, our supposed best, those who are supposed to be smart, to be the experts, for everyone else.

These people have been failing for a very long time, and their failures have directly supported these increasingly brazen false flag operations.

Edit: 3 people supposedly died in the bombing: Krystle Campbell, Martin William Richard, and Lingzi Lu.  If it was a hoax, what happened to them?  Did they ever exist?

That will have to wait.  I am screwing my sleep time up completely.

Well, this person has this to say:

Krystle Campbell:

Lingzi Lu, nothing found yet, but if she was a "foreign student" she would have had family to claim her.

One last link:

Edit: I'm not going to say definitively that this bombing did not happen.  The photos seem to show staging going on, and otherwise inexplicable behavior, but there are two layers to this: 1) it didn't happen; 2) it wasn't done by who we were told did it.  I am not the only one who found it profoundly weird that Dzoker got a throat wound between being caught and the time he wound up in jail.  It seems obvious to me that AT A MINIMUM more people were involved than we have been told.  There are a number of things that just don't add up.

And am I the only one who remembers that when this bombing--or whatever it was--happened North Korea was threatening us with nuclear war?

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Maybe there is a government conspiracy

This is a long speech by a former high level FBI officer (I assume his claim is true).  Here is his Wikipedia entry:

He apparently was considered to head the FBI as a whole. This guy is not a kook.

1) The first World Trade Center bombing was the result of a bomb provided to an informant by the FBI, named Emad Salem.  The FBI had, or should have had, foreknowledge.


2) The Oklahoma City bombing was also done by the government.  It used something called a barometric bomb.



3) 9/11 of course was also an inside job.  I have posted extensively on this, and am evolving to the conclusion that our government--parts of it, not all of it, or even most of it--were involved.

4) There seem to be cults operating in the US.  This case is much more circumstantial, but not absent either.

Here is a video he mentions I have not yet watched:

We need to remember that most people are good.  Most people object strongly to such evils.  We are not helpless, even if ALL this is true.

I feel I should add as well that it's 3 in the morning, and I"ve been  at this 4 hours.  I am perhaps missing some obvious objection, but it seems to me, logically, that people who are nuts do not rise to be considered to head organizations like the FBI.  There has to be a history of competence, analytical intelligence, organization, drive, and integrity.

This is the first time I've seen this allegation with regard to the first WTC bombing, but as I noted some months ago, the case is clear that Oklahoma City cannot be explained as ANFO bomb.

Here is a copy of a letter written by an Air Force Brigadier General with (according to him) considerable experience in bomb damage assessment saying it could not have been the result solely of the alleged sole source:

That's enough for tonight.

Edit: I got a shitty night's sleep, but am awake enough for now.   Gunderson says there are I think he said 60,000 human sacrifices a year in this country.  That sounds absurdly high.  If he said 100, I could see it.

I don't know what to believe.  I go in and out of this conspiracy theory.  9/11 my mind is 100% rock solid on, and once you take that trip down the rabbit hole, a whole lot more comes to seen possible.  I'm going to leave this alone for a while, though.  I served my cause of summoning fear, and distracting me from inner work I would otherwise have been doing, but that's not really a very good cause.

I will return, though.  I will return.

Friday, November 28, 2014


The perfection of mourning is the perfection of wisdom.  I think I would summarize my philosophy of life thus, at the moment.

Everything we see is always simultaneously being born and dying.  There is nothing in this world you can hold on to, but love.  Love necessarily implies an ability to die, to be reborn in every moment.  It is simultaneously a great joy and a terrible curse.  Reconciling these two aspects of it is the essence of wisdom.  There is something beyond both: peace.

Everything you love will die.  You will die.  But you always have the present moment, and the closer you stay to it, the more life you will have before your dying and rebirth elsewhere.  These are of course core Buddhist teachings.  It is my belief that we need something beyond Buddhism, though.  Something new, something for our time, and our places.

[I've added things, so the flow is not great.  I'm OK with that.]

As I slowly open up--and I've been doing a lot of work recently I have not discussed here--I realize, I feel, how much I lost growing up, how much could have been there, how much should have been there, the happiness I could have felt, the relationship I could have had with parents and brother.

Thawing emotionally is like thawing physically: it hurts.  Unpleasantness opens up, which you had hidden in emotional numbness and more or less conscious forgetting.

To begin anew, you have to mourn what was--and what could have been, but was not.

The other day I posted on recently, where I felt bursts of happiness, and relief from the constant attacks I feel in my psyche every day, I also felt considerable irritability. I think sometimes growth is learning to pay with the worst, so you can get access to the best.  They must be mixed, because they HAVE been mixed: all possible joys have been pounded with deep sorrows, twisted and enmeshed, and then frozen.

They have their own energies, their own pathways, but everything that is in there has to come out and you have no choice, no way forward, but to take the good with the bad, and accept all of it without complaint or resistance.  You must have stamina, and patience, curiosity, and perhaps even a sense of humor.

And it occurs to me there are types of humor.  We might perhaps speak of the humor of acceptance, and the humor of rejection.  Robin Williams practiced the latter.

I'm sure I must have posted on this at some point, but I have this theory that most people exist consciously in perhaps 60-70 percent of their personalities, their experience, their psychologically important facts.  This is what they know.  This is what they think about and allow themselves to feel.  The remaining 30-40% is where Jungs Shadow lives.  I don't think all of it is negative, but I think much of it is.

Comedians who practice the humor of rejection, who live their lives avoiding their sorrows and rages by making people laugh, percolate the tensions that create the absurdities that make us laugh from their unseen self, via a visible, and perhaps outwardly vibrantly happy and alive self.

I would contrast this with the ability to laugh at ourselves, with love, with affection.  I think I've spoken of this before, but one of my proudest moments with my oldest was when she came in to the living room laughing and crying.  She had hit her head on a closet door in the bathroom, bounced off reactively, and managed to hit her head on the OTHER door.  She found this stupidity and clumsiness hilarious.  I thought "I must have done something right.  This is a resilient kid."  As indeed she is.

That's enough for now.

Thursday, November 27, 2014

Rebellion, Middle Age

From roughly 21 until this year, I avoided psychotherapists.  I found them, to the extent they had an effect, harmful.  They seemed to facilitate whininess in me, and helped describe my problems well, without being able to solve them.

When I went to see one this year, she noted that it is very common for people to wait until their 40's to begin processing deep emotional scars, because until then it is simply too much, your life is too chaotic.

We have this concept in our culture of a "mid life crisis".  It tends to be viewed as a crisis of realizing one has been living inauthentically, and our culture is blamed.  I would submit that deep wounds often simply take half a lifetime to emerge fully enough to be dealt with.  Alternatively, we take half a lifetime to develop sufficient emotional strength to deal with such things, which causes the part of us which tries to protect us from overload to keep secrets.

I felt happy the other day, several times, inexplicably.  For people unfamiliar with long term depression, happiness is an odd emotion.  You look at it with skepticism, like a bird that has landed for a moment on your windowsill, but which obviously is on its way somewhere else.

And I felt happy in the middle of a demanding, frustrating twelve hour day, which was followed by another one.

And it occurred to me that feeling happiness when you are supposed to be angry, or sad, or whatever, is a sort of rebellion.  We tend to assume that rebelling must be an act of anger, of overthrow, of attack.

But is not happiness an attack on sorrow?  Is it not overthrowing what was in favor of what could be?

Thus I would meander.  Yes thus.


For some reason this word came into my head.  I looked up animal imprinting, and this is the first thing that came up:

The gist is that certain things at very early ages can more or less get plugged into what we might term the "machine code" of our biological system, such that they are hard to undo (or impossible, if we accept the current state of knowledge as final.)

We are spiritual animals.  We are part machine, part pure freedom.  It seems to me our task, at this stage of our spiritual via biological evolution, is figuring out fully how the machine part of us works, so that we can CHOOSE to alter ourselves, or perhaps, allow energies we summon to guide us, and do the work necessary so we can follow more closely.

Wednesday, November 26, 2014


Please watch this link before reading further.  It takes five minutes, and is worth the time for most people, particularly the black folks this is addressed to.

I want to underscore something: I have met a lot of really smart, switched on, motivated black people in my time.  I have also met the opposite.

The issue with black people in this country, today, is CULTURE.  I have ZERO DOUBT that most people born black in this country are very much capable of much more than they are usually asked for.

Do you help people assuming the worst of them, or the best?  This guy, here, is assuming the best.  He is an optimist.

And he has reasons for optimism.  Blacks are not inherently stupid.  I don't believe this.  They are TAUGHT to be stupid, by people who benefit from taking advantage of the bad decisions that result.

I seen no reason, no reason, no reason, that blacks in this country cannot be well off, live in nearly crime free neighborhoods, go to excellent schools, and be considered the cultural equal of whites not because somebody penalized whites for speaking the truth that they see, but because that IS the truth that they see.

If you look at people like Frederick Douglas, they were clever, inventive, eloquent, and decent.  We can and should see much, much more of this.

I hate racists.  Racists are the people who say: "It's OK that you are inferior.", or "Of course you commit more crimes: that's just what blacks do.  We forgive you."

Can we not start accepting blacks into our generalized cultural dialogue in ways other than pretending that we aren't racist?

Can we stop versions of "isn't that cute?"

Here is my truth: I'm having trouble letting go of this Ferguson thing.  The whole thing makes me angry.  It never should have come to the mass destruction of (largely) minority owned businesses.  Black people were crying tears of rage and frustration as a result of the actions of OTHER black people, who claimed they opposed racism.  Bullshit.  So much stupidity.

Hell: I've had a few.  I will leave it at that for now.  I'll leave with a question: do YOU think you are helping black people?  How?  If you were doing the opposite, would you have the courage to admit it?

Tuesday, November 25, 2014


True compassion results in purposive work. It may begin in a sentiment--actually it SHOULD begin in a sentiment, that of feeling the pain of others, of life--but if it ends there it is nothing but a drug, and one at that with clearly destructive potential.

Let me ask: what people of color are helped by white guilt, actually? What is the specific value of moral posturing, superficiality, vanity, and false promises?

What people of color are being helped by making a kid into a martyr who was plainly on his way to jail or an early grave anyway?

And can we not safely assume a kid that size with severe anger issues bullied other black kids? There were probably kids he grew up with who were secretly glad he was killed.

This is of course speculation, but what is NOT speculation is that substantially ALL violent deaths of black people are a matter of complete indifference to the poseurs, the part time righteous people.

I think about this stuff daily, and have for years. What happens in our ghettoes is obscene, and I said this often .

But none of what The Usual Clowns suggest is going to help. It hasn't thus far, after a half century of trying.

Many things make me angry, but destructive self righteous hypocrisy is near the top of the list.

I'll say it.

It's time for black America to grow up.  To stop whining about past injustices, and using them to explain current failures that were and are very much within their control.  To stop believing some rescuer is on the way to make everything better with no effort on their part.  To stop excusing their children from studying hard and getting ahead.  To stop lounging around on porches complaining about the world (if you think this is a stereotype, drive around the projects in your town on an average day in any season but winter).

To take heart, to summon courage, to acknowledge its own role in its own failure.  They have access to free schools, to preferential treatment and scholarships at most colleges, to hiring.  They have access to free libraries, the internet, and to all the learning they could ever need.

All the tools any sovereign people, any sovereign individual, could ever need, have been laid out.  Not only that, but they have been implored to use them.  We white people have begged them to use them.  Many many white self identified "liberals" have made it their life's work getting black people to do things THEY DON'T WANT TO DO.

This is childish.  And it is not racist to say so.

We have reached a point where we have to choose between abdicating moral values entirely, or calling bullshit on this massive failure.  If we are to continue tolerance, continue hope that just ONE MORE program will make all the difference, then we must perforce cull from our minds any notion that it just could be their fault.

And if we grant that it IS, in the end, their fault NOW, then we must grant that one more program won't do a damn thing, at least in the old mold.

Charter Schools: these work.  Democrats oppose them.

Vouchers: these work.  Democrats oppose them.

I am tempted to say that absent the cynical Democrat abuse of black voters we would have an integrated black nation now, one with self respect, low crime rates, high levels of literacy, and high levels of economic achievement.

Only awful people would oppose that.  But if you like awful people, Hillary will be on the ballot soon enough.


Posted this on Facebook:

Michael Brown got shot--apparently on all accounts from people who were there, a number of whom were black themselves--because he was a thug. He did a strong arm robbery of some Indians, was walking, high, in the middle of the street with his buddy, gave the cop attitude who asked him to get out of the middle of the street, got arrested then went for a cops gun, got out and started to run away, then changed his mind and charged the cop, and then got killed. He was a thug, a fool, and someone who was going to either end up killing someone, or dying under someone elses gun. 

The lesson to learn here is that personal responsibility matters. The mother and father? They are to BLAME. At 18, a kid is just acting out what he was taught. If he was taught nothing by his parents, he is acting out what he learned from other kids whose parents ALSO did not teach them anything. The riots? They are crapping in their own neighborhood. They will be having trouble buying groceries and cigarettes in a few weeks. They are not showing anyone anything, other than that they are losers who are unwilling and unable to work within their own communities in a sustained and mature way to elevate the level of culture, to learn to value self restraint and educational achievement, to take responsibility for their children and themselves. 

At issue is a simple question: are black people INTRINSICALLY inferior? If so, then perhaps the efforts of the left wing to paint them as helpless, childish, victims is accurate. I choose not to believe this. I believe that they are the equals of whites, but have been fed a pack of lies by awful people for 50 years, telling them the world owes them something, and that it is being racist whenever it doesn't put out the red carpet. 

This is bullshit. It turns them into helpless children, who have no choice but to throw temper tantrums, as here, when they don't get their way. These riots will accomplish NOTHING. The agitators and journalists who did so much to create and enable them, will leave. And the fools who listened to them will have to live with the consequences of what they did last night for many, many years. No one will invest in Ferguson. Jobs will be even more scarce. The police will stop policing, making it more violent. 

All of these are obvious truths nobody seemingly any more has the courage to state openly and clearly. Political correctness does not elevate or protect anyone: it is a cloak for evil, for the rejection of true Liberalism, for the rejection of true morality.

Monday, November 24, 2014

Walking Dead

I'm trying to watch more TV.  Shocking, I know.

Well, I can't go and spring for cable, but I do have Netflix, so I watched the first two episodes of The Walking Dead.

My first thought: this is a deconstruction of the American Dream.  When we see monsters in cinema, they represent realities we are unable or unwilling to acknowledge.

The essence of all apocalyptic visions is failure: a failure of the dream.

Historically, Americans believed in our ideals.  They were taught genuine Liberalism, which depends on mutual trust, hard work, common decency, and in no small measure dreams about how the world should be.

We want peace.  We want prosperity.  We want true, deep, social harmony, connection, and love.

All of these things are achievable, but NOT ON THE PATH WE ARE ON.  We know this.  It is in every gut, even when the brains overrule them.

We have lost the faith, lost the ability to believe in notions like Good and Evil, right and wrong.

And I want to be clear that I don't want to be the one to say what is right and wrong; nor do I want to relinquish that role to anyone else.  What I want to say is that we all judge OF NECESSITY, and that failing to judge means to fail to form as a person, as a character; extended, it means failure to form communities, tribes, thriving social webs which nurture and support and instruct.

As I have said often enough, proper moral judgments are local, imperfect, and necessary.

It seems so easy to embrace visions in which all confusions of our present sort fall away in the exigencies of survival.  It seems simpler, at least watching it from a comfortable couch in a comfortable home in a safe neighborhood.

That's all for now.  I'm rambling.

Immigration "reform"

As I think about it, the best strategy for Republicans is to keep pounding on the many scandals, and to the extent possible to refuse Leftists the opportunities they need to create their talking point propagandas.  The electorate is plainly pissed off.  And even SNL is skewering Obama.  He has lost nearly everyone.

And what I think needs to be said again, is that all Obama did was issue work visas to people who were here.  He did not grant them citizenship, and even though the move may be popular among Hispanic voters, it did NOT create a new voting block of 5 million new Americans, and given that the Republicans told him point blank that taking this action would make a negotiated agreement impossible, it is unlikely they will have ANY shot at citizenship en masse until 2017 and a new President.  We can and should make the case that he never negotiated in good faith, and for that reason set their cause BACK. He did not move it forward.

And this is/was a hugely unpopular move, because it doesn't take professional economists to see Mexicans who don't even speak English doing jobs that used to be done by middle class Americans, and realize that they are coming here illegally, and depressing wages.  I have personally heard this story from 3-4 people.  Remember, I'm on construction sites constantly, and talk with both the white guys and the Mexicans.  I'm always gathering data.  It's what I do.  I am curious.  And this is first hand data.  I don't blame the Mexicans.  I would do the same thing in their shoes.

But at the same time, anyone who has the first inkling of a sense of loyalty has to grant that our job is to protect Americans FIRST, particularly when our economy was already in the crapper.  Democrats, with this move, have signaled more or less overtly that their primary sympathies are with the world, and not ordinary--or even exceptional--Americans.  Hillary seems to think it would be great if America became a massive refugee camp.  After all: she won't have to live with the consequences.  She lives on the mountaintop, and always will.

So Obama doesn't get a massive voting block, angers many people even more, is driving a wedge between Democrat moderates and the radical wing that he answers to, and overall is sinking with no way back up.

Let time take its toll.  Nobody is expecting miracles out of a Republican Congress, but they certainly do not want more of the same.

Keep pounding daily on Obamacare (and I do think pushing a repeal through the House and Senate is worth doing, so Obama has to veto the bill to protect what has become a very unpopular policy), IRS targeting (someone should go to jail), the targeting we just found out about of Sharyl Attkisson (someone else should go to jail), Fast and Furious (jail), NSA snooping (massive retasking, which they are quite capable of), the undeclared war with ISIS, and the near certain role Obama's policies played in placing Stinger anti-aircraft missiles in the hands of the Taliban.  And whatever else I'm forgetting.  The list is too long to keep track of without notes.

A sea change appears to be happening gradually, in which more and more people are waking up to the dangers of unaccountable, unregulated, law-breaking government.  This shift is happening across the spectrum, and cross-aisle alliances will be shaky for some time, but I think Obama has made clear that putting unrepentant radicals in charge has consequences.  Prior to Obama, I don't think most people believed the Democrats could possibly have veered that far to the Left.  Democrats owned messaging.  Republicans were constantly on the defensive.

But now, we can speak our truths, and increasingly reach audiences willing to listen.  That has not been true for 50 years or more.  It took Carter to create Reagan, and even then Democrats controlled Congress from roughly 1960 to 1994. And we are getting better at messaging, better at pounding home the moral superiority of allowing people the freedom and the economic wherewithal to create their own lives and own destinies.

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Dream Big, start small

Just popped in my head.  I like it.

Saturday, November 22, 2014


I like to think I have a "sense of things".  I use my brain, of course, but I often invite and listen to my gut, and to certain intangible intuitions that are simply there.

As I think I have argued, thought systems can be boiled down to their basics.  They can be understood practically with the same precision with which mathematical formulas can be understood.

However, thought systems are deployed by human individuals, and of course this means that thought systems in REALITY never look exactly like they ought to in theory.  Chaos enters.  And this is fun.  It makes things entertaining, and life. . . lively.

I have, for example, argued that the only good Muslims are bad Muslims.  By this, I mean Muslims who ignore the many verses inciting them to kill and terrorize (terrorism is already in the Koran: how many people openly admit this?), and who instead rely upon what I would regard as GOD given instincts about what is decent and what is profane.  And if someone wants to argue this is the overwhelming bulk of Muslims, I have no argument with this.  Most people want peace, want harmony, want prosperity, and detest violence and hate.

Scandinavia: I spent a number of formative years in the frozen North, surrounded by many blonde kids with names ending in -son, or -sen.  I know what it is like to stand at a bus stop when it is 20 degrees below zero and the bus is late, and you wore tennis shoes because the misery of feeling like your toes will freeze is less than the misery of the mockery of wearing snow boots like a grade school kid.

As it happens, being the macho man that I am, I am listening to Abba at the moment.  And in point of fact, I just watched Bergman's Island a few days ago, where he talks candidly about his many "neuroses" (I am conflicted about that word.  I will likely post on this at some point; I have been contemplating how I would describe my own emotional dysfunctions, and "neurotic" seems as good as anything, even though I felt like kicking Woody Allen even before I knew he married the adopted (and much, much younger) daughter of his ex-wife.)

Shit: I'm channeling Arlo Guthrie: "But that's not what I came to tell you about. . .", or something like that.  I played Alice's Restaurant at a bar once, but you couldn't understand a damn thing.

Suffice it to say that "sunshine in a bottle" may be in play, but I always get to the point eventually.

Read this article:

Lots of interesting content.  I want to focus on Sweden.

"Swedes seem not to 'feel as strongly' as certain other people", Daun writes in his excellent book, Swedish Mentality. "Swedish women try to moan as little as possible during childbirth and they often ask, when it is all over, whether they screamed very much. They are very pleased to be told they did not." Apparently, crying at funerals is frowned upon and "remembered long afterwards". The Swedes are, he says, "highly adept at insulating themselves from each other". They will do anything to avoid sharing a lift with a stranger, as I found out during a day-long experiment behaving as un-Swedishly as possible in Stockholm.

Effectively a one-party state – albeit supported by a couple of shadowy industrialist families – for much of the 20th century, "neutral" Sweden (one of the world largest arms exporters) continues to thrive economically thanks to its distinctive brand of totalitarian modernism, which curbs freedoms, suppresses dissent in the name of consensus, and seems hell-bent on severing the bonds between wife and husband, children and parents, and elderly on their children. Think of it as the China of the north.

OK: what the hell is my point?   This: the miracle of the North seems predicated on being as INhuman as possible.  It works to eradicate the Male, and the Female.  It attacks families.  It works to mechanize humanity--where Socialism is merely a rationalization of applying industrial ideals to social engineering--without the least thought about what it means to be human in the first place.

What is the point of life?  Can we not ask this question?  And can we not query the Swedes as to the generalized answer their One Party State has created?  And what is that answer?

In my view: nothing matters.  Nothing matters absolutely.  If you KNOW that Islamic immigrants rape Swedish women at five or more times the rate of indigenous men, why care?  That is unpleasant knowledge.  It could lead to judgmentalism. It could lead to unpleasantness, perhaps even--fucking hell and horrors--spontaneous EMOTION.

Here is the deal.  I watched Bergman's "Cries and Whispers" perhaps two weeks ago.  It affected me.  As my kids were mocking me for, movies tend to take weeks for me to process.  I cried during Toy Story 3, when all the toys were in the incinerator, making common cause, connecting, facing death together, with bravery.

I make no apology.  I think it is a great thing, and a wonderful privilege, to be fucked up by something you see on screen, and to have the capacity to wander through a myriad of feelings, and walk out a bit wiser and more organized emotionally.  This is what the fuck life is about, god-damn-it.

Cries and Whispers is a powerful movie.  Bergman himself was locked up in a morgue as a youngish child, perhaps 8, and says a dead women on a table watched him with her eyes.  This seemingly left a permanent impression on him, which he perhaps processed in part with this movie.

But the point about the movie is the extreme emotional restraint.  I remember, from my own life, how extreme cold can push you into yourself.  It turns you into an introvert.  As Garrison Keillor--who I don't like in most respects, but who is UNQUESTIONABLY a great story teller puts it: extroverted SWEDES (I inserted that) are the one who look at YOUR shoes.

Remember the English are Vikings who studied Latin.  The Angles.  The Saxons?  Boats, hard men.  1066?  Normans/Norsemen.  And that was the second such invasion in quick succession.  I forget the king who lost, but shit he was a Norseman too, and he won the first go-round.

Where am I going?  Beside the freezer for booze and ice?

Oh, hell.

In that movie, I actually felt for the older sister.  She has massive unprocessed trauma, but lived in a world where weakness was not allowed, even for an instant.  Therefore, she lived in hell.

The younger sister: she felt compassion.   She cheated on her husband precisely because she idealized love, and found it in the Doctor, at least for a time.

But she was vain, weak, self centered.  She tried to comfort her sister, in THAT scene, but failed.  She tried to be there for her other sister, briefly, but was unable to forget the abuse that got visited on her, by a sister who desperately needed connection, but who also wanted to hate and attack as a matter of principle everyone she could.

Fast forward: OH, we are all crazy.  In my own small world, in my own small perceptual domain, I watch people.  I watch vanity, error, stupidity.

This of course does not mean I look at myself as exempt, but it does mean I  put myself in a slightly different place.

That place has no walls, but exists in a land with rivers, and no obvious mountains.

Truth: I am having to edit this, since I am not sufficiently drunk.  Truth: I like people when I am drinking, and even when I'm not I value family connections.

In the Bergman movie, the maid has the worst work, but she is also the most real.  She does the hard work that the elites around her are frightened of.

She is nobility, in my own iteration.  She is what we should all strive for, even thought most of us are cowards.

She lost her child, as we discover early on.  She is pious, and still capable of love.


I'll leave it at that.  Too much complexity.

YOU, though: chances are good I feel your confusion and anger, too.

Postscript, the day after: I'm going to leave this mess as is.  Clearly, alcohol does not make anyone smarter, but in my own case it has often allowed me to process emotions that needed processing.  It is an anesthetic I use for emotional surgery, or have used.  I am in the process, again--but this time feels different--of giving up drunkenness.  That was my first bout in two weeks, which is good for me.

I think the surest sign that alcoholic is not the best word for me is that I retain, sober, an affection for what it has done for me.  It has not cost me any relationships, any jobs, any major loss of self respect.  It has on the contrary helped me manage otherwise unmanageable emotions, acted as a balm when I needed it, and all with no visible affects on my health or overall well being, other than a few extra pounds in my belly.

Thursday, November 20, 2014


Republicans are imbeciles when it comes to messaging.  Perhaps they think too much of people; perhaps they think too much of themselves.

Regardless, the situation is simple.  Obama's talking point--and Democrats evolve these things with care, which is why you always see them talking about talking points, one of which is that Republicans use talking points, but that they implicitly don't, which itself is a good talking point--is that "If Congress doesn't act, I have to."

The response, the obvious response, is that "The President doesn't get to tell Congress what to do."  Period.

Expansion: if Congress decides NEVER to forgive people who came here illegally, if it chooses to treat them the way MEXICO treats illegal immigrants, that is their prerogative.  The Presidents JOB, REMAINS, enforcing existing laws, which he is plainly not only not doing, but not doing FLAGRANTLY.  He does not get to decide which laws he likes and which he doesn't.  Period.  Anything else is incompetence or law breaking.

Added thought: Obama cannot naturalize these people even within his grossly inflated sense of Executive entitlement.  This move, therefore, will NOT create legal voters, and will piss off roughly 90% of the American electorate, which is the percentage I see opposing this action.

As I understand it, what he wants to do is simply make official his de facto policy of not enforcing our immigration laws.  This does not put people on welfare rolls, legally at least.   And it certainly does not make them citizens.

And to the extent Congress takes this as a poke in the eye, it extends, perhaps forever, the amount of time before these people actually get American citizenship.  Hispanic activists, therefore, should not only not take this as a victory--since practically little is changing--but quite possibly as a major strategic defeat.  Republicans are on sound polling ground in opposing this, and that is not likely to change any time soon.

I have in the past overlooked these elements, and am assuming--perhaps mistakenly--that I have understood the situation now.

As I say from time to time, I screw up.  I am not a full time media consumer, and no doubt channel some ideational version of Emily Litella on occasion.

Wednesday, November 19, 2014


It seems obvious that Obama has reached the conclusion that he can use the power of the office he has won to pander to a new prospective electoral base: Mexicans who have fled the conflicts and economic devastation of Mexico and come here illegally.

But I don't want to discuss that here.  What I do want to do is submit a couple points/ideas I find relevant and interesting.

First, most Mexicans, by my straw poll talking with them--including people here with  green cards--would rather live in Mexico.  They speak the language, understand the customs, and generally feel more at home because that IS their home.  The United States is not.

An intelligent long term strategy for dealing with illegal immigration would be to strengthen the Mexican economy and return the rule of law such that they don't WANT to come here, except in small, easily manageable numbers.  Then you don't need a fence, at least to deal with this issue (national security is another issue).

I read 93% of crimes in Mexico are either not reported or not investigated.  In both cases, the legal system has failed.  This is a statistic consistent with a failed nation state.

The problem seems to be that the sheer volume of drug money coming in makes it easy to buy up all the cops, all the military, and most of the politicians.  The ones who can't be bought can be killed by someone who is paid to do so.

So step one logically is shrinking this pool of money.  Since 70% of the revenue is from marijuana, we should legalize it nationally.  I personally would like to see the DEA disbanded entirely.

Doing this would instantly shrink revenues by nearly 3/4ths.  I would then like to see us legalize cocaine, if prescribed by a doctor.  I think most people would be able to handle taking some coke on weekends at parties, and behaving during the week.  Peoples use could be tracked, and obvious patterns identified if strongly negative.

Adding this to marijuana legalization would eviscerate the cartels.

Then we institute a program like Kiva, where people make loans directly to Mexicans to start businesses.  The government kicks in 50% of the money (yes, taxpayer money is used, but it is being used now for ICE, jails, welfare, and God knows what else), and mounts a campaign to interest ordinary Americans.

We negotiate with the Mexican government for economic liberalization.  My understanding is that like all Latin American nations they have repeatedly experimented with the idea that there is in fact such a thing as a free lunch for everyone (aka Socialism), and not yet learned from their mistakes.

They need to learn from their mistakes.

We also require them to pass an equivalent of the 2nd Amendment.  Mexico has to legalize individual gun ownership across the board to all law abiding citizens.  This will be the final death knell for the cartels.

Within 10-15 years, Mexico could become a decent place to live, perhaps again, perhaps for the first time ever for the bulk of its populace.

This would work, but of course many entrenched interests could be counted on to work hard against it.


I took a turn for some Toltec mounds somewhere.  I drove 10 miles, saw nothing, and figured it was one of these things where they lead you on, and you wind up driving 40 miles out of your way, so I went back.

Somehow I got to thinking about Indians, though.  By and large, in my understanding, none of the many tribes inhabiting what became America had written languages.  This meant that myth and ceremony had to be passed down orally, and through initiation and participation.

And I got to thinking about kids asking tribal elders deep questions, like: what happens when we die, exactly?

And it seemed to me that in such a system, it is at least possible that the elder, rather than reflexively mouthing something he or she has heard, or going to consult a recondite text found in a library somewhere, as would happen in places with long written traditions, would on the contrary find HIS OWN answer through reflection, through solitude, perhaps through some sort of "accelerant" like peyote.  And that person would then answer from personal knowledge.

It seems to me that religion, to be alive, has to be constantly reinvented, and in some respects having a written tradition makes this harder.  You have words you can appeal to, and then repeat.  You can FEEL like you have answered a question, when in reality, as far as your connection with the answer, as far as your sense of personal knowledge of the answer, you may as well be reiterating a Latin phrase as a non-Latin speaker.


If guns are banned, only the government and criminals will have them.   If the two combine, you have tyranny.  This is what has happened in Mexico, and in my understanding Jamaica, both of which have very strict gun control laws.

I think the PHILOSOPHICAL importance of an armed populace for a truly Liberal nation cannot be overstated.  I personally would allow the purchase of rocket launchers, grenades, mines, and other such ordnance to people who pass background checks.

The simple fact is that per capita American civilians are by far the most heavily armed in the world, and that in the places where we have the most guns, there is almost no crime.  I don't know how widely known this is, but in a number of states you can buy and shoot fully automatic weapons.  Kentucky has an annual machine gun shoot where people even bring miniguns.

Only when you get to Democrat bastions do the guns revert to the sole domain of cops and criminals, and only there do you see widespread gun violence.

None of this is complicated.  The  psychology is not complicated, and the epidemiological data is not complicated.

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Covering Fire

Most politicians, to survive, have to be sensitive to the winds.  In particular, our nation--and all nations which have had the leftist infection inflicted on them--is one in which all people proposing conservative ideas have to count on withering attacks on their persons every time they say something that contradicts Leftist propaganda.  Something as simple as "we can't borrow 40% of our money forever" brings out the choruses of pushing Granny over a cliff, even though it is true, and even though Granny will fare far better with intelligent planning that long term denial and hasty reactions to what will then be intractable problems.  Think about it: if you care about Granny, is it the part of compassion to ignore the future, or think about it?

What conservative Republicans need is what amounts to counter-battery fire.  They need lots and lots of voicing stating coherent view in support both of the specific policies, and the wisdom and MORALITY of those policies.

Who, anywhere, who still claims to value reason, rejects planning for the future?  And yet that is exactly what this Administration is doing.  A credible claim can even be made that they are bankrupting our country ON PURPOSE.  Who, anywhere, who still claims to value reason, can argue for economic ruin as a tool for bettering the lives of Americans or serving the cause of enlightment or moral improvement?  No one can, and yet they continue to get away with it with large segments of the zombified, propagandized populace.

We need to understand why and how our ideas work better, and argue them consistently and constantly, anywhere we can, until--and I think this would be a good bellweather--most academics admit our decision to fail in Vietnam--and abandon Southeast Asia generally--opened up a chamber of horrors, ultimately causing unimaginable misery, and millions of horrific deaths; and that the New Deal not only didn't work, but that it prolonged the Great Depression.

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

The Trauma Tract

I was thinking about my mouth today.  I often find myself with tight lips and a tense jaw.  I sometimes feel like biting people.

Then I watched myself eat.  I tend to "wolf" down food.  Think about that word for a moment.

And I watched World War Z the other night, where humans became like rabid animals, and bit one another.

We are animals.  We are animals not so very different than the dogs and cats we keep in our homes.  And I think all of us retain atavistic instincts.

In my case, I have discovered a great deal of residual tension in my gut, from unprocessed trauma.  And I think the tension can go all the way from the mouth to the anus.

I think many people clench their jaws because they are biting back anger, and an unrecognized primal reaction to danger, that of biting.

We watch primal humans in that movie, and they pull their lips back like dogs, and for the same reason: they are protecting themselves and projecting aggression.

And I got to thinking about territoriality.  Humans likely retain some instinctual need for home and tribe.  We need to belong somewhere, and within some group.  Modern rejections of xenophobia mean that we are all the In group, at least in theory, but our guts may be telling us something else.

Part of the Us/Them dynamic is that you have to feel you belong, intrinsically belong, somewhere.  You feel at peace with you and yours, and whatever aggressions you may have are reserved for the Others.

But what if you never belong anywhere?  Is it possible that leads to chronic low level activation of our territorial instincts?  Could this be behind some of the obsession with zombies?  Could the zombies represent some unexpressed part of a more primitive part of our nervous systems?  I think there is some merit in this idea.

And I got to thinking about dining, one of life's great pleasures.  In dining, you merge, you blend these nervous systems.  You combine the appetitive, visceral part, with the modern social part of your brain.  It seems to me that pleasant, relaxed meals with other people with whom you feel connected is an important part of mental health.

That many families no longer eat together could also feed this disconnect between gut and sociality.

Peter Levine has an exercise in his book.   Actually, he has a number.  Looking this one up, I found some more I had marked but didn't try.  Here is Exercise 4:

The jaw is one of the places that most people carry considerable tension.  There are reasons for this.  The following exercise may serve to illuminate both reasons for this typical "holding pattern" and what may lie on the other side of it, as it dissolves.

At your next meal, or with a crisp apple in hand, take a good "aggressive" bite into a food that you desire.  Really, take a good bite out of it and then begin chewing deliberately.  Continue chewing, slowly, mindfully, until the food turns to liquid.  As you do this, become aware of other sensations and reactions in your body. If you feel the urge to swallow, try to restrain it--to "play the edge" of feeling the urge to swallow, when it arises, and continue to focus on gently chewing.  This may be difficult or uncomfortable, so be patient. Note any impulses you might have such as the urge to swallow, tear, vomit, or associations to things going on in your life--present or past. If reactions such as nausea or anxiety become too strong, please don't push yourself.  Make written notes of your reactions. Page 302

I tried this tonight, or what I remembered of it, and was able to develop a sort of conversation between my gut and the rest of my senses, and realized it is left out of most of what I do.  It is a burden I carry, but don't integrate, or haven 't yet.

And I got to thinking about anorexics. I could easily see trauma embedding in the gut and becoming a sort of alter ego, a Wolf self, a vicious self, and I could easily see a person as unconsciously wanting to attack and starve that wolf self as violent, angry, and vicious.

If this notion is correct, then the way to treat anorexics would be to have them make somatic contact with their guts.  What would pop out would a lot of horrible shit--I use that word deliberately--but there would be an end.

A key problem with severe trauma is knowing where to start, how to start.   There is no pleasant, easy way to deal with horror.

We have two brains.  This is something that needs to be integrated into mainstream psychology.

This is a bit meandering, but fuck it. I think there are some good ideas here, possibly some REALLY good ideas, inspired by Levine's excellent work. 

Government money

There was a skit I saw some years ago in which Clark Kent would take off his glasses, and the person speaking to him would suddenly realize he was Superman, then he would put them back on and they would wonder where Superman went.  I'm sure in the very first issue people were wondering how it could be than no one put two and two together.

I think the notion that the government has money is very much like this.  If I ask you to pay for your own healthcare (and as you feel necessary, insurance to protect you from catastrophic costs), that is a burden.  But if I ask you to pay taxes and the government will pay for it, then you're happy (if you're stupid, which plainly many people are).

This is a shell game, a trick.  It only tricks people who don't get this process of sending a check to the government, which goes to pay for a government employee to cash checks and check tax returns, then a government bureaucrat to administer the payments to healthcare providers, and then to the doctors.

The government does what insurance companies do, but it does it worse, because it has no competition.  There is no impediment to bloat, and no inherent need for quality and speed.  It is a monopoly, at least in Single Payer systems.

What I think people fail to grasp about our free market system is that it has inherent quality control elements.  You can't stay in business if you don't provide something people want at a price they are willing and able to pay.  You have on the one hand the value of success, which leftists love to moan about; but you have also the cost of failure, which can also be quite high, and which leftists ignore, as if all businesses were foreordained for success.  The only such businesses are one underwritten by the government. The rest have to perform or perish.

Bureaucracies merely need to continue getting funding from people whose reelection campaigns they support, with taxpayer money.

Monday, November 10, 2014


I was reading the comments on a post about PTSD and somebody said his therapist said the three things that relieve it are social connections, a sense of mastery, and pleasure.

And it occurred to me that THAT is why I like arguing on the internet so much: I am really, really good at it.  It's my go-to when I'm feeling intimidated or down.  And THAT is why I always seem to make things into a pissing contest.  To be sure, most conservatives in left wing places are insulted vigorously and constantly (and usually childishly), but my ideas are developed.  I can't sell them if I'm inflicting them.  I think of Dale Carnegie and Two Gun Crowley.

This is a human perspective, which of course fails to take into account the inhuman nature of dehumanizing, predatory propaganda.

Still, I have not thought of this quite that way.  My task is to master more things, rather than play the same old tune the same old way.

Sunday, November 9, 2014


I can't stand it.

The thing about sailing is you leave no tracks, and you live suspended by something practically infinite and in continuous motion.

Ponder that as a life metaphor. 

Call me Ishmael

Call me Ishmael. Some years ago - never mind how long precisely - having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world. It is a way I have of driving off the spleen and regulating the circulation. Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people's hats off - then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can. This is my substitute for pistol and ball. With a philosophical flourish Cato throws himself upon his sword; I quietly take to the ship. There is nothing surprising in this. If they but knew it, almost all men in their degree, some time or other, cherish very nearly the same feelings towards the ocean with me.

I was tempted to add my two cents, but reading it, no.

China riots

Did you know China spends more on its suppression of popular protests than it does on its military, which by size is the biggest in the world?

They have some 180,000 protests a year, many of which escalate to riots, most of them concerning Communist Party official corruption.

In Tibet, in some cities, they have extensive early warning systems--and large number of police/military on constant stand-by--so that when Tibetan monks set themselves on fire, they can be doused and hurriedly removed from the public space within 3 minutes or so.

Howard Zinn

It occurs to me that Zinn's signature "accomplishment" is telling the Soviet version of the American story--the story which ostensibly justified all their violence, tyranny and cruelty--AS an American, and an American veteran at that. 

Since he deals only with the history of America, ostensibly, he is under no pressure to tell the truth about Communism, or all the cruelties it inflicted.

It can be argued that his book has facilitated more deception and leftist regression than any other single book written in the last 50 years.  I read that it is often the only book on American history even many college students read, and as more or less intentional agit-prop, it no doubt has made Leftist recruiting much easier.

I will submit that a much better book for anyone wanting to learn American history from someone who self identifies as a historian first and foremost (and not propagandist) would be Paul Johnson's excellent "History of the American People."  All of Johnson's books are good.  "Intellectuals" is another one I think all people aspiring to a life of the mind should read, as warning.

Those two books really started my journey into being a conservative.  Some more good ones are Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics", Friedrich Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit", and "Economics in One lesson", by Henry Hazlitt.

What I want to underscore is that the conservative arguments cannot, in my view, be refuted on their merits.  I have exposed all these ideas to continual criticism for many years, including my own.

If you are a decent person, and want decent lives for the people around you, you MUST subscribe to some form of conservatism.  That is my honest view.

We have lost the messaging war precisely because we want to be nice.  We want to give people equal time.  But those people DO NOT want to us equal time for a very simple reason: looked at systematically, both in principle and their history of implementation, NOTHING the sorts of people running the Democrat Party today want can be justified.  The only ideas they hold worth holding are in general held by Republicans too.

If you want to help women or minorities, vote Republican.  If you want to help the environment, vote Republican.  If you want peace, join those of us calling for an end to foreign involvements, understand that current Democrats are no friends of peace either, and vote for some Republicans.  Vote John McCain and his ilk out.

We have allowed the shrill voices of the mentally unhinged to pervert and corrupt our national dialogue for too long.  We have many problems facing us, but we also have many untapped solutions, but ONLY if we return to the objective use of reason, to a firm commitment in ALL cases to the protection of human decency, to a foundational respect for ALL human beings.

Saturday, November 8, 2014

The hobble of the curmudgeon

I once described myself as an aspiring curmudgeon.  Well, as my kids point out from time to time--with justice--I seem long since to have tapped my inner Walter Matthau, and even if I like kids, I do like sometimes yelling at adults.  And I continue quibbling on the internet.

[although I will say that it is becoming increasingly emotionally clear to me how traumatized many segments of the right have been by the relentless lying and bullying that has been the Left's most successful method.  I'm not putting up with it any more.  Truth attacks: I am going to still call that acceptable.]

I wanted to say "dance of the curmudgeon", but they don't dance.  We don't have wings.  We throw stones at low flying pigeons.

OK, I exaggerate a bit.  A bit.

Here is what I wanted to write, a nice quote from Peter Levine's "In an Unspoken Voice."

In a situation of inescapable and mortal threat, the brain stem, or reptilian brain, sends intense signals to the viscera, causing some of them to go into hyperdrive (as with the gastrointestinal system) and others to constrict and close down, as with the bronchioles of the lungs or the beating of the heart. In the first instance (hyperdrive), we get symptoms like butterflies, knots in the gut or rumbling, uncontrollable diarrhea.  With the lungs, we have feelings of tightness and suffocation, which, when chronic, can lead to symptoms of asthma.  Likewise, the effect of the primitive vagus on the heart is to decrease the beat to a level so low that it can actually lead to (voodoo) death.  Because these sensations feel so dreadful, they themselves become a source of threat [and you suppress them from consciousness]. So rather than coming from outside, the threat now emanates from deep within one's bowels, lungs, heart, and other organs and can cause the exact same effect upon the viscera that the original threat evoked.  This situation is the unfortunate setup for a positive feedback loop with disastrous negative consequences.  In addition, because traumatized individuals are experiencing (intense) threat signals, the PROJECT this inner turmoil outward, and thus perceive the world as being responsible for their inner distress--and so remove themselves from both the real source of the problem and its potential solution [again, they dissociate and fail to recognize that they even have these feelings]. This dynamic also wreaks havoc not only on the body but also on relationships.

If I can paraphrase this, it seems to be literally the case that small sensations in your viscera, that remain unconscious to you, can cause you to view the world as a dangerous place, and to be constantly on your guard, which is one of the symptoms of PTSD.

Conversely, as I have tried to copy Levine in saying, when your viscera are not normally worked up, and you are allowing the free flow of feeling, the so-called "gut instinct" actually works quite well.  That is what it is intended for: all our senses are antennas scanning for feedback.

Hopefully this makes some sense.

Oh, and I was thinking about being grumpy, because I am grumpy.  If it was my birthday, I would take my piece of cake and go eat it in the bathroom.  Bah humbug.

This too shall pass, but I am allowing it while it does.  I need to get it out/get through it. 

The gut and healing

I have twice now had odd dreams, in which the intelligences in my gut--which feel to me like symbiotic, but separate animals (and I am talking the nervous system, not the bacteria)--were showing me they were reorganizing.  Implicitly, something has been off in that system. My relationship with food, and the way I interact with the world through food, has been deranged.  This is not a hormonal thing, or problem with allergies, or any of the foods I've been eating.  It is the WAY I have been eating, a way out of connection--of intrinsic, sympathetic connection--with my gut, with my instincts, with that part of me that when working well works as a superlative early warning system and bullshit detector, and general systemic monitor.

It manifests in my solar plexus, but the whole thing is involved.  I am trying to be gentle and to listen openly to the messages I am receiving.  This is "information", formatted somatically, that I need.

Being me, let me go off to something completely different, but related.

So I was reading that Newtown was a Satanist hub, and decided to Google it, since when I am in this particular mood, I look at EVERYTHING, however far fetched, and came up with this:

Now, I noticed a long time ago that BDSM afficionados are quite good at verbalizing and rationalizing what they do.  There is a very good reason for this: trauma detaches you from body, forcing intellectualization.  This, in turn, is an unnatural situation, which means you need to return to the body, but in a contorted, unnatural way.  That is what BDSM does, and in my view Satanism is an ideological form, an intellectual form. of self and other abuse.

Self evidently, any creed which takes as its patron the Prince of Lies cannot be relied on to tell the truth about anything, but what he writes here looks reasonably honest, if only about the outside of what they do.

Here is the point that occurred to me: Satanism exists in the world of shit, literally.  In my own experience, the energies I get from my gut are trauma, fear, pain, horror.  These feelings reside, in my view, BOTH in the physical nervous system as artifacts of traumatic experiences that both stayed and never left, and which also get regularly retriggered by certain stimuli, and which are often not noticed by the person, particularly if they have been a neural firewall to keep those energies out; AND (yes, not the most felicitous sentence) within the subtle energy body described by the Chinese and others.

Freud talked about being anal, about either crapping all over other people--as in the Anal Expulsive--or more commonly being repressed, being Anal Retentive.

Now, he often was very right while being very wrong.  He often seems to have intuited important truths, then allowed his brain to take him on the wrong path entirely.

I would submit that these conditions, to the extent they exist, exist not just in relation to the anus itself, but to the whole system.  The anus, after all, is not the only thing which keeps shit from falling out.  The whole thing is involved.

And this system is VERY suited for receiving and holding all forms of tension and trauma.  We would not think it, but why would it not be sensitive to the environment, when the digestive tract, ultimately, is what converts food to continued life for us?

This is a bit out there, but if you're used to this blog, you're used to me speculating wildly.

As far as Newtown, who the hell knows?  Satanism is a cult, so it would seem that if there were one active member, there were likely more.  They only list two addresses, with the other being San Francisco.

I have met therapists who have worked with the victims of Satanic cults, and they are quite real.  Sadistic and horrific rites are in fact performed in this nation, allegedly in the service of and worship of Satan.

Here is a link that seems reasonably impartial, on the Satanisms we know of:

Friday, November 7, 2014

Sandy Hook

My interest in this was reawakened this week when it was revealed that according to official FBI statistics, no murders were committed in Newtown in 2012.

Digging in to it, it appears the consensus among those who think it was a conspiracy was that Adam Lanza did not exist, that his picture was photoshopped, that the mother had multiple aliases and is not only still alive, but gave an interview on camera, and that NO children were killed, and that whole thing was staged using actors and police and emergency personnel in on the "joke".  The goal, self evidently, was creating an operative pretext to call all opponents of allowing a government monopoly on the effective use of force "baby killers."  One can see the logic of this, cynical and absolutely awful as it is.

I have looked at a lot of videos, which I don't like, since I prefer to read.  I can do it ten times faster, and filter for actually useful information.  I will save you the many links that were supposedly posted the day before, which seem to show preknowledge.  Here is one that is still active: 

Note the date.  The Sandy Hook shooting supposedly took place on the 14th.  Why that has not been corrected, I do not know.  This being the internet, maybe a conspiracy theorist copied something.  The claim, which I don't care to investigate further, has been made that MANY people did this.

The claim is now being made that Sandy Hook Elementary was not even OPEN when the shooting allegedly took place.  One person claims there was no internet use.  Another claims that if you look at hard copy public bulletins all references to Sandy Hook disappear about 2008, even though all the other schools in the area continue to post things like school plays, PTA meetings and the like.

I am tired of researching, so I am going to give you three points to evaluate, which I think in tandem are damning for those willing to see with fresh eyes.

One: watch the first ten minutes of this video (or however much you want, until what is not happening becomes obvious):

Let me reiterate a few facts: the school supposedly had over 600 children.  The claim was made that some people were wounded and not killed, both children and adults.

Where are the ambulances?  They are at the Fire House.  There was no shooting at the fire house.

Where are the children?  Even the helicopter reporter asks this.  They have at that point not been evacuated, but there are no buses.  No one ever films them leaving, throughout the REST of the day.  We have a PICTURE of kids that got circulated, but one which could quite easily have been taken months earlier during a fire drill, and it is perhaps a dozen out of the 600.  Where is MedEvac?  MedEvac was apparently never even CALLED, according to another one of these videos.  They were never put on stand-by.

And most telling, just watch the demeanor of the cops.  They are loitering. They don't give a fuck.  There is  no urgency.  You know what it looks like?  Another fucking boring drill.  And that is what it looks like to me too.

Now watch this video of alleged father Robbie Parker, and alleged aunt something:

I want you to watch the video through three lens.  Watch it multiple times, if need be.  Imagine these people are serious, and just lost a dear child.

Then when that doesn't work (I don't think it will),  look at them as emotionally detached, pathologically unemotional people.

Then watch it as bad acting.  Robbie Parker particularly.  It is OBVIOUS that he is smiling, then getting into his role.

Imagine this scenario: he has just been in the back with a bunch of fellow actors, hashing out his statement, working out the details of their story so there are no inconsistencies.  Imagine he sees himself as in the middle of what he sees as a massive practical joke, a massive--thus far successful--fraud of a scale rarely attempted in American history.  Does that smile not make sense?  Does his failure to start with an appropriate demeanor not square perfectly with the mental mediocrity needed to be complicit in a lie this crass and abominable?

Now, every day is Halloween on the internet, and if I were desperate or unprincipled enough, I could have any credentials I wanted to tomorrow, make any claim, and some people would believe me.  Thus, I think it wise to doubt much of what one reads.

However, this website claims not just to have identified Parker as an actor, but to have found out his actual name: Samual Travis Delaney.  Profession?  Among other things, actor.

Now watch as many minutes as you like of this video:

The coroner is odd, but what I want you do to is watch the two cops on the right side of the screen, to his left.  I have done a bit of work in microexpression recognition--Paul Ekman created a training program that I've spent perhaps two hours with--and it seems OBVIOUS to me that both of them are suppressing smirks.  The one with the mustache in particular seems to break out into an actual grin a couple of times.  Pause it at 1:48.  Look at the guy at the left at 2:44.  There are a number of occasions where he seems to be suppressing laughter.  The woman smiles too, behind him, about 2:58, then immediately tries to suppress it.

Watch the guy with the mustache at 3:04 again, after being asked about the nature of the wounds.  He has to look down, and both the other cops have a grin barely being suppressed, like kids getting away with something.  He comes back up with a grin about 3:10, and sneaks a conspiratorial glance at the cop on the left.

I suspect I could go on, but if you can't see it by now, you're not going to see it.

This video footage could easily run by somebody skilled in lie detection and microexpression analysis, and it is not going to be consistent with grief.

Simple question: does this make sense if they have just seen a tragedy they are greatly affected by?  No, of course not.

Does it make sense if they KNOW everything this guy is saying is complete bullshit, and that everybody is eating it up?  Fuck yes it does.

We can certainly question the Republican Party as to its commitment to fiscal sanity and the principle of limited government.  In general, though, it has been a STRONG supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and the balance of power between the people and their government it was intended to facilitate, and that alone is worth a lot.  An armed populace is much harder to deal with than an unarmed one, and Obama alone has put tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of firearms into circulation.

Even though a great lie--and I would argue a great evil--seems to have been committed here, there is reason for cautious optimism because the people who put this show on seem to view it as vital to disarm Americans--something  they failed horribly in, creating in fact a massive surge in gun and ammo buying--and that current political weather is strongly in their faces.

It is important to tell the truth.  I would like to see an actual investigation done, with actual interviews with alleged parents and confirmation of their identities, to the extent possible.  I would like some sort of investigator appointed who could operate outside the normal demands of politics.  I don't know what options we have.  Perhaps an Independent Prosecutor, if we can find an honest one.

A recurring theme among people who claimed to be knowledgeable in this field is that this was not only a hoax, but that it wasn't even a very good one.

But this lie reaches throughout Connecticut Police.  It reaches the Federal level.  In my view, it reaches the Oval Office, and those voices which intrude in on it that wish no Americans well.

We need to start facing as a nation the truth that at least some segments of our government have set the gross curtailment of our liberty as a vital goal, and have in fact acted on it, and perhaps even committed actual acts of murder.

I'm at this point willing to consider many possibilities.  I had seen the claim made prior to the war in Afghanistan that it was really about an oil or gas pipeline.  I had never read or seen anything about this, the leftists blamed everything on Big Oil anyway, so I saw that as something made up by the cynical for the stupid.

But lo and behold:

This fucking thing actually exists.  It was started in 1995, stopped in 1998 due to Taliban opposition, and started again in 2002 after our invasion.  Whether getting this thing done was a principle secret goal of the war or not, our war clearly enabled it to happen, and it otherwise likely would not have.  It opens next year.

We need to start asking bold and large questions about the last 30 years.  Now is the time.