Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Self Regulation through Other Regulation

"I demand that you treat me in a certain way, or else I'm really going to lose it."

This is not reasonable.  It is a type of blackmail, in which you imply negative consequences for people not allowing you to control their behavior.

And it is not mature.  Here is the thing: there is a world outside our ears, and a world between our ears.  Maturity is both dealing well with what flows from the world to us, and with what happens within us in that process.

Anyone who can only calm themselves in very narrow, carefully defined, defended, protected spaces--and one wonders if it happens even then, since no space can preclude anxiety--is weak.  They are helpless.  They are traversing the route back to the womb, or back to being immobile creatures entirely dependent on luck, like anemones.

The path to happiness is the path to self regulation, is the path to self mastery is the path to being able to remain calm cool and collected in increasingly various, difficult, and potentially stressful situations.

The path to happiness, in other words, is AWAY from ersatz wombs called "Safe Spaces".

Now as someone who has dealt with trauma all my life, I GET, I GROK, that there is a time and place for the sense of safety.  I understand personal pain.

But I have never asked the world to go out of its way to be nice to me.  I HAVE asked for emotional support.  I have asked for hugs.  I have solicited kind words on occasion.  I have valued people who were nice to me.  And I have yelled at people who, in my estimation, were assholes.

I get the sense, with all the special snowflakes nesting in our college campuses that one day I might be locked in a box for refusing to use the word "Cis", which I still don't know the meaning of, and do not intend to look up, because the pseuodo intellectual bullshit underlying will simply piss me off.

I didn't laugh at this video at all.  We are few short years away from this being reality, if we don't wake the fuck up:

Mental illness, emotional pain: these are problems to be solved, not badges of honor.  Everything the Left touches goes into regression.  We regress emotionally, intellectually, culturally, socially, economically and even physically. We are winding the clock back to times when raw violence, tribalism and bestial instincts ruled the world.

Here's a word for the snowflakes who want to tell us how to act: Wlbur: Whiny Little Bitch, you are.

Asking politely for reasonable amounts of courtesy has long been a thing.  Getting in people's faces because of their unfamiliarity with your increasingly bizarre and loony list of demands is not asking for courtesy.  It is demanding people kowtow to you and your infantile ego. It is demanding you be treated as a superior, because you are a victim.  It is the opposite of everything good humanity has built in the past millenia.


The argument made by Communists--and our universities are filled to this moment with people who, for all intents and purposes, fall under this rubric, although they may use words like "Open Society"--is that corporations, which we might view as the new synonym for "Capitalists" abuse people.  They take their labor and make money off it.  They do things unsafely.  They hurt the environment.  They are "greedy"  (versus, you know, all the countless billions who work hard every day for no reward at all).

In the 19th Century in America, and in present day China, there were clearly abuses.  People worked long hours for low pay in unsafe conditions, and many landscapes were destroyed.  This is clearly true.  What is equally true is that there are no more robber barons in America, and that the implementation of  Communism in China has not prevented their emergence there.  Both in 19th Century America and in present day China, the cooperation and protection of the government was necessary for these abuses.  Labor otherwise could and would have organized.  It is impossible to illustrate the foundational corruption of Communist ideology more simply than to point out they ban labor unions.

Here is my point: if we think of government not as an alternative to Capitalism/Corporationism, but as a larger equivalent, then the idiocy of putting all power into its hands should become obvious.  Communism is Megacorporationism.  It is where the Corporation is everywhere, and has the power of life and death over every employee, who is also a slave.  Everyone works for the same corporation, and nobody can protest, or find somewhere else to work, without risking death by fleeing.

The All, Every Operator

If one is determined to think as sloppily as possible, if incompetence is a primary goal, then one can scarcely do better than to assume homogeneity among heterogeneous groups, and at that to assume the wrong characteristics.

As one obvious example, anti-white bigots assume both that all whites have benefited somehow from oppressions of blacks that happened a hundred years ago and only in some parts of the country, AND that all whites, then and now, hated black people; that even if they thought they were not racist, that they WERE racist; that it was somehow in their DNA.

There is no justification for this belief, other than that it provides a simple solution to a complex problem.  Simplistic thinking meets emotional needs.  It meets the need for control.  It meets the need to alleviate the anxiety of uncertainty.  It can provide a pseudo-intellectual rationalization for the expression of fundamentally anti-social emotions, among people who want to retain a sense of their own goodness and moral rectitude.

I think one could think of the need for abstraction where people are concerned as in most cases nascent or explicit psychopathology of one sort or another.

Clearly, we are animals.  We need one another.  We need safety and security.  We need the feeling of meaning, which is likely tied to the feeling of belonging.

But the specifics, what people believe and why they think they believe it, are extraordinarily varied.  It is bigotry, pure and simple, to say things like "all whites are racist", much less "they, who did nothing to us, who took nothing from us, owe us".

Most people are simple minded children, and the abuses are worst among those whose "educational" attainments would, had their education actually been effective, have warranted trust in them on the part of the masses; as things stand, Buckley's comment that he would rather trust the leadership of the country to the first 100 people in the Boston phone book than to the faculty of Harvard is as true as ever.

Uneducated people guess and know they are guessing.  The allegedly erudite err with confidence, often, and never look back.

Tuesday, August 30, 2016


Freud posited that the sexual instinct underlies most human behavior.  Later in his career, he had to add a Death instinct too, since he survived World War 1.  His reasoning was simple: all animals are born with the instinctual drives to survive, and to reproduce.  They are little homing devices that first find food and shelter, then want to fuck everything they see, and poot out little thems that can carry their genetic material to the winds and seas.

This is not unreasonable, but I don't think it unreasonable to add another instinct: the social instinct.  The desire to be with ones own kind, to connect with them, to synchronize with them, to be with them.  From what I read, the need for social connection is hard wired.  There are sections of the brain dedicated to it.  We suffer, inherently, when we are separated for too long from our own kind.  Damage to this part of the brain is the most important, most damaging, part of trauma.  The capacity for connection, for sending and receiving social transmissions, is impaired or eradicated.

And the other instinct he failed to name was that involved in self regulation, which I might summarize as the capacity for calming oneself.  I am tempted to assert that the most important thing you could ever know about a person is how they calm themselves when they perceive the world as hostile. Not superficial calming: the real deal.  This is who they really are.

Sex, of course, is calming for most people, but what I would assert with some confidence is that it is a poor substitute for the drive for connection.  People MOST want social membership, to be understood, to be ensconced in a safe order of other human beings.  Sex can be a means for two people to open up to one another, but it can also be a means of generating distance and alienation.  Either way, it is neither necessary nor sufficient for anything approaching happiness worthy of the name.

I'll leave it there for now.  This was worth saying, but I will likely expand on it at some point.  My life is large streams of feeling coursing through me, that I can sometimes understand.

Men versus Women: a Macroargument

I found this an interesting read, and I think most men would benefit from reading it.

The comment I would make is that what she fails to understand is that men really are much stupider than women when it comes to social cues, empathy, overall awareness. It really is like there are two qualities of perception, two completely different worlds.

Imagine an intricate canvas by Bosch.  Many have created intricate canvases, but fuck his is the first name that came to me of something really busy.  Imagine the colors in the canvas expanded, and the images expanded.  That is a woman's perception.

Imagine the whole thing mostly covered in grey, with spots of bright red or green here and there, completely denuded of context.  That is an average man's perception.

What they argue about is what the painting shows.  She tries relentlessly, using every word she knows, to describe the intricate imagery, but he just doesn't see it.  So she gives up and accepts he is an imbecile.  Or she moves on to another man, likely one with a similar handicap.  Or she stays single, or she dates women.  Those are her options.

In reading this piece, I obviously can't say she is wrong.  She is obviously right.  Her perceptions are accurate.  What I would add though, is that she is perhaps failing to account for how fucking stupid men are.  She is thinking they intend wrong, that they are hostile.  Some of them plainly do, but most of them are just idiots.  That does not excuse it, but they really don't intend to be creating hostile environments.

She cites as an example grown men oogling 13 year old girls boobs.  In my mind there are actually three, perhaps four, possibilities.  1) He doesn't even know he's doing it.  He is that stupid and unaware.  2) He is doing it on purpose, but he is too stupid to realize she sees it.  3) He is a creep, knows what he's doing, and knows she knows. 4) Any of the above, but he thinks she's older than she actually is.

I doubt there are any men on this planet who have been in long term relationships where their woman felt safe enough to tell the truth, who have not been told: YOU'RE A FUCKING IMBECILE.  WASN'T THIS OBVIOUS?  You know, how I felt, where this was going, what you should have said, that a much bigger bouquet of flowers was needed, that you needed to wash the dishes, that I needed help with the kids, that I needed emotional support, etc.

We do have two classes of citizens where social awareness is concerned.  This is clearly true.  And men are clearly the dumber ones where this sort of thing is concerned.  We are stupid.  There can be no doubt.  And sometimes we are aggressive, violent, ugly and awful.  This is clearly true too.

This is the macrotruth.  To this, though, I will add that women by themselves are very often petty, backstabbing, vindictive, and score keepers.  I have two daughters, and both of them very much prefer male friends for this reason.  They know where they stand with boys. If they don't like them, they say, in effect, "I don't like you".  There are no games.  There is little or no guessing.  Men, being simple, are what they appear to be, most of the time.

Doris Lessing dealt with this issue in what to me was an interesting way in her book "The Marriages between Zones 3, 4, and 5", or something close to that.  She portrayed women as superior, but lacking something that men alone, being men, provided.

Can we dream of a world where imagination is important, and various interesting possibilities for the improvement and evolution of human kind are often and openly discussed?  This is my own dream.  I dream a lot, and I suffer a lot, but 1) it's my job; and 2) my God, how could I live any other way?  My life is beautiful.

Predator instinct

The fight or flight exists in the limbic system, according to my still very rudimentary neuroanatomical knowledge.  The freeze is in the brain stem, as is the shit your pants and go out of body.  I think that is right, although freeze may be limbic too.

But all of these are REACTIONS to violence and danger.  What is going through the head of the mountain lion stalking an unaware goat?  There is likely something like adrenaline,but it is focused, clear.  Their figurative hands are steady, their focus intense, but whatever fear there may be is channeled into awareness and attention.

I think I read somewhere that predators don't get the shakes like prey do.  They don't get the animal equivalent of PTSD which they then have to literally shake off.

Is there a predator instinct, which combines elements of all three levels of the human brain, and which is exemplified by people with "killer instincts"?


Somebody needs to make s list of all the people who will leave the country if Trump gets elected so he can use it in his campaign literature and advertising.

Monday, August 29, 2016

You are worthless Alex Baldwin

For no particular reason. It's of course interesting to me to speculate on the mental health of Trey Parker particularly, and Matt Stone as an accomplice, but fuck it.  They have made me laugh many times, and these issues are complicated.  They are clearly not stupid, and I will admit I sometimes feel like John Malkovitch in "Burn after Reading".

This life is interesting.  It becomes less interesting when everything has to be in a box.

And Alec Baldwin really is worthless.  


It is worth noting that slavery was only ever seriously practiced. in the South, and only from, I'm guessing, 1700 or so until 1865.  We have 50 States.  Slavery was legal in KY, TN, TX, NC, SC, GA, AL, MS, TX, MO, MD, DE, VA.  I may have missed one or two, but that is 13 States.

So even in the time of the Civil War, most of the country did not "benefit" from slavery (which was never a particularly good economic system).

And within the slave owning States, it was the 1% who owned most of the slaves.  At least 90% of EVERYONE in all those States never owned ONE slave, much less many.

And a great many people who now live in the United States have ancestors who immigrated within the past 150 years, which is to say after the Civil War.  That is my own case.

I was accused today of using blacks to get ahead, then denying them my "privilege".  This is absurd.  My ancestors immigrated to the North, after the Civil War.  Blacks have fucking jackshit to do with anything where I personally am concerned.  They did not help me or my ancestors, or hurt them.  They were completely irrelevant.

We need to understand that overeducated lunatics are accusing ALL white Americans not only of crimes NONE of them committed, but of crimes not even their ancestors committed.

I reiterate: no psychologically healthy person with intact boundaries and reality testing can accept this guilt.  It is inappropriate, masochistic, and most importantly: IT DOESN'T HELP ANYONE.

Half this fucking country belongs in a looney bin.

Chant and response

Who is the enemy? 


How do we identify them? 


What is to be done with them? 


Who are we? 


Why are we better? 


A real question, for a real world, if we lived in one.

If it is racist to criticize Obama, is it also racist to criticize Allen West?


Self evidently, this is a perceptual exercise.  These are not my views.

I don't like black people.  They are stupid and ugly and violent and they hate me and everyone who is not like them.  I don't have to talk to them to understand what they are.  You can't talk to them because they are too stupid to understand anything you say.  The best thing is to keep them out of the public sphere, not to give them playing time on the airwaves or TV, and hope they just crawl back in a hole where we can all ignore them.

I don't like conservatives.  They are stupid and ugly and violent and they hate me and everyone who is not like them.  I don't have to talk to them to understand what they are.  You can't talk to them because they are too stupid to understand anything you say.  The best thing is to keep them out of the public sphere, not to give them playing time on the airwaves or TV, and hope they just crawl back in a hole where we can all ignore them..

I don't like the Alt Right.  They are stupid and ugly and violent and they hate me and everyone who is not like them.  I don't have to talk to them to understand what they are.  You can't talk to them because they are too stupid to understand anything you say.  The best thing is to keep them out of the public sphere, not to give them playing time on the airwaves or TV, and hope they just crawl back in a hole where we can all ignore them.


Not sure how long this term has been around, or where it started, but I like where their head is at.

For many decades, calling someone "far right" implied extreme xenophobia and bigotry.  It was tantamount to saying they were Nazis, and wanted basement torture chambers.  These things are, of course, creatures mainly of the Left, even if Franco and Pinochet could plausibly be called rightists.

But Alt-Right is hipsters and normal people who are horrified by the increasing censorship of reasonable opinions, who are scared of the increasingly strident hate speech emanating from the Left, who are fine with homosexuals and weed AND guns, and who do not necessarily oppose social safety nets of some sort, but fear the Federal Leviathan--the wars on Poverty, Drugs, and "Terror", with the last clearly having served as a Trojan Horse to get in place ubiquitous surveillance endorsed by the public only because of pervasive fear.

Alt-Right is Trump, is people who do not fit molds, who have not been part of the problem, and who are sincerely interested in actual solutions to real problems.  That does not describe mainstream Republicans, and the Democrats of course break everything they touch, at least in recent decades.

HuffPo freaks out fellow Democrat with Stalinist censorship

This guy is a Democrat, somebody who had been a welcome poster/contributor on Huffington Post, and they flushed his articles on Hillary's health down the Memory Hole, and banned him from posting any more.  He has, he says, filed hundreds of stories, but has never had a story yanked like this.  He says "this is happening in the United States, in 2016, and it is really scary."  He says he is "spooked out", and that he is neither clumsy nor suicidal.  He says he has never seen anything like this before, what he calls "non stop propaganda".

Sunday, August 28, 2016

PBS censors the Green Candidate

In case you thought censorship was only of the Right.

There is an agenda, one coordinated through the Democrat Party, and seemingly a playbook for Republicans as far as what they can and can't talk about, and everyone, including most of Fox, pushes it, on the major networks, most of the time.

There is a lot of money at stake, so behind all this is Big Money.  It is wrong, of course, to demonize all corporations, but some of them ARE demonic, just as some people.  In the same sense we do not view all people as criminals because some are criminals, it is not right to view all corporations as bad because some are.

People work for a living.  They do things in the expectation of gain.  They work, in other words, out of "greed", which is one framing, and necessity, in another, and in the expectation of achieving some measure of physical safety and security and comfort in another.

Corporations are no different.  If they do not turn a profit, they don't exist.  If they don't exist, that work doesn't get done, and that work doesn't get done, you get Cuba or Venezuela.

Laws exist to rein in the bad corporations, and specifically, the bad, greedy psychopaths who run them.  So too do market forces, which can and should punish bad corporate behavior.

What the Trans-Pacific Partnership seemingly exists to do is provide powerful corporate counters both to legal control, and to free market forces.  It exists to weaken the power we Americans have to limit bad behavior.

Stein and Trump, for these reasons, oppose it.  Hillary supports it, because buying and selling people and influence is her stock and trade.  The TPP was made for her, and she for it.

The Fed

It's funny how they always use opaque language, even in journals which are not targeted at professionals, but rather the general public. It is like this stuff is only meant for those who know the code words, and can be relied on to support and be a part of the system.

But I will note that they have admitted, in as clear a language as is possible for these tools, that my plan for the Fed to buy up ALL debt, public and private, in the United States is completely doable.  There are no limits on the Fed.  It can print an infinite amount of money, and do so instantly.  People do not grasp this, because it is a BIG idea, because something large is hiding more or less in plain sight, and until they grow balls and imagination, until they learn to ignore their training and conditioning, they cannot see it.

They see clothes on the Emperor.  They are not pretending at all: that is what they see, to the extent they think about it, and very few people think about fractional reserve banking and the Federal Reserve at all.

Saturday, August 27, 2016

Dealing with illegal immigration

Since it's in the news, I thought I might add my two cents.

There are four issues:

1) People living in this country who came here without permission, are staying here without our knowledge, and who do not pay taxes, but who do quite often consume community resources.

2) People living here illegally who are criminals.

3) People who want to come here illegally.

4) Government enforcement of our laws, and/or its abrogation and flouting of our laws.

We need to be clear with regard to issue 1, we can and should treat differing communities of illegals differently.  They are not a monolithic group.  They share a common culture, but they differ widely in their impact on different areas.  In assessing how to treat people already here, it is quite possible to focus on differing areas differently.  Personally, I think anyone living in a Sanctuary City should be an immediate focus.  These cities are in blatant violation of Federal law, and they should be punished for it.

Migrant workers seem not to affect much at all.

And workers in differing industries will affect the local economies differently in differing States and cities.  We think of this group of 11 million people or whatever as one group, but they are really many groups, with many different impacts locally.

It would be quite possible to develop a many year strategy to understand who is where, and decide perhaps to legalize some, and deport others, depending on a number of factors, including how long they have been here, their community involvement, etc.  I personally would make their ability to speak English in that equation.  If they have been here a long time, and have not learned English, they are not trying to blend in, and should be deported.

The issue of illegal criminals is easy: deport them all.  Obama has been releasing them, to prevent their deportation, and there is no moral or legal justification for any of this. It is wrong, and it is illegal.

As far as the wall, it might again be useful to speak of "walls".  In certain areas, walls will need to be high and thick.  In other areas, roving drones and ground sensors and ready ICE folks will suffice.  We do not need a 2,000 mile wall.  It may be sufficient to build a couple hundred miles worth of walls, in key place.

Most importantly, we must have the WILL--really, even the desire, or the integrity, or professionalism--to enforce our laws.  Obama is not just not enforcing them, but is openly helping and supporting and encouraging illegal immigration.  Hillary will do the same.

If Trump does nothing but do the job already assigned to him on the books, he will be marked success.  But I think he will be ready and willing to take border control to the next logical level, to deport people who are victimizing both Americans and other illegals, to deport people who are negatively affecting American standards of living and comfort, to deport people we just don't want for any reason at all, and to change the mentality of Mexicans to legal immigration, rather than the free for all we have right now, which punishes those who attempt to follow the law, and rewards, for now, those who impatiently break it.

Friday, August 26, 2016

Alex Jones

What I think Jimmy Kimmel doesn't get, is that as crazy as Alex Jones is, people KNOW they are being lied to, and he is directly driving traffic to , because people have a hunger for SOMEONE, anyone, who is not speaking off a script.

And I do think Kimmel opened the jar.  She is weak, and he couldn't risk her failing.  Pickle jars do pop when you open them.  And there IS a short hard turn, before it happens. Jones is not wrong, even if calling it a pickle can is not a great phrase for him.

I will be the first to admit I have a hard time watching him, but I am glad he is out there, and saying what needs to be said. I doubt anyone else picked up the firing of Dr. Drew immediately after he publicly said responsible things as a doctor about Hillary's physical health, based on what she herself has released.

I see it spun here, on the link Drudge provided:

Ponder what is being said silently with this:

Pinsky made headlines last week when he announced on his radio show he is “gravely concerned” about Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s health and the health care she is receiving. It played nicely into Donald Trump’s position that Clinton is not healthy enough to serve as POTUS.

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Trump and the KKK

This is a REALLY risky strategy.  I get the feeling I used to get watching Family Feud when someone said something really stupid, but everybody cheered anyone, hoping against hope.  This was the best they could come up with a a meeting on how to beat Trump, while running an old, run down, sick career criminal with zero personality and enough scandals to occupy most of a spreadsheet.

It reminds me too of the epic FAG response Alex Baldwin gave at the end of Team America, after the rousing Dicks, Pussies and Assholes speech: "Uh, Global Warming!!!"  Pulling out the race card, again--really, leaving it out, but pointing out that it is still there, is hackneyed, obvious, and wrong.

Donald Trump is not a racist and there is not, and never has been, any evidence for it. If he were a racist--you know, pal-ing around with people like Robert Byrd--it would have come out on the last 3 decades.

And anyone who is not a mouth breathing imbecile will grasp this before election day.  Trump is getting on message, and there will be a number of debates.  Once they grasp that Hillary is grasping at straws and telling horrible lies about Trump, we will see a lot of people pull away from her, and enter the Trump camp.  These attacks can't be continued for months.  They can't be sustained, because they are offensive and wrong.

All of these tactics are the sorts of things you might do just before the election, after all the debates are done, but not NOW.  You might get a short term spike, but that is why you save your ammunition.  For his part, Trump is saving his heavy guns for closer to election day.  We have September and October.  We have Julian Assange waiting in the wings.  We have a very high risk of complete burnout on the 24/7 attacks on Trump.  CNN may well help him get elected, their best efforts to the contrary notwithstanding.

These people are panicking.  Trump is not a flash in the pan.  He is not a lightweight, and he is not stupid.  And he is saying things which have needed saying for a long time.  He is showing himself to be a leader.  We have needed someone with the balls to stand up to the crass ineptitude and corruption of our Parties and media elites for a long, long time.

Edit: I have a feeling that there is this wave of pent up energy just over the horizon, and I have the feeling that the professional Left and elites can feel it too.  They are pushing against it with every tool at their disposal, with all their energy, but the harder they push, the larger its potential energy becomes.  I think a day will come when Trump is up by double digits, everywhere that is in play, and that he will bring States into play the Democrats thought were safe.  There is that much anger.

Reading social media, it is easy to forget a whole lot of people who vote are not discussing politics on the internet, but they KNOW they are being called fools, and looked down on by left wing elites.  I see this daily when I interact with college indoctrinated lefties.  Nobody likes being called a fool and laughed at, and my best guess is that a LOT of people who stayed home in years past will be voting enthusiastically in November.


I got drunk last night, while watching the movie "La Femme Nikita". I don't remember how it ended, because I passed out.  But it was very triggering for me.  I get her anger.  I get her pain. I am extraordinarily empathetic, and it destroys me sometimes.

And I woke up, and realized I have been in pain every waking moment of my conscious life.  Every moment: everywhere I looked, everyone I saw, everything I have done.

And this is major progress.  The unconscious only grants what we can handle.  You cannot resolve your pain until you can feel it. Most people you see most of every day have pain they will never see, or so it feels to me.  I honestly don't know what it is like to have had a normal childhood.

And now I can live with this pain, and ease it. I can take care of myself, honor my feelings, go up and down.

The pain is ending.  This is good.  I have been locked in a cage all my life, but now the door is open.

I post these things because I feel it may do some good.  I know I am not the only one.  Whoever you are: carry on.  There are many ships on the ocean, and the sun will always rise and set in new ways.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Head injuries

Wacky article on Hillary's concussion and brain injury from 2014:

According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, traumatic brain injury, or TBI, “occurs when a sudden trauma causes damage to the brain.”
Clinton reportedly “fainted, fell and banged her head,” as The Daily Beast put it, suffering a subdural hematoma, or a hemorrhage between her brain and skull.
While surgery is sometimes needed in such cases, Clinton was “treated with blood thinners on Monday at a New York hospital to help dissolve a blood clot in her head,” CNN reported.
What is the prognosis after TBI?
“Disabilities resulting from a TBI depend upon the severity of the injury, the location of the injury, and the age and general health of the individual,” says the NINDS.
And following TBI, “common disabilities include problems with cognition (thinking, memory, and reasoning), sensory processing (sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell), communication (expression and understanding).”
In other words, Rove raises legitimate concerns: Such disabilities would be of great concern in a potential commander in chief.
Rove didn’t have it quite right on Clinton’s eyeglasses: She has Fresnel prism glasses, used to correct double vision, but not only for TBI cases.
Still, according to the Neuro-Optometric Rehabilitation Association, “It is not uncommon for a visual field loss to occur as a result of a CVA or traumatic brain injury.”

Conspiracy and the Alex Jones Election

I read today that Hillary calls questions about her health "wacky conspiracy theories".  Well, we know major, credible doctors, reading her symptomology and course of treatment are saying WFT publicly.  We know she a concussion in 2012 that caused enough brain damage that she had to use coke bottle glasses to function.  We know she is on Coumadin, a powerful--and according to Dr. Drew outdated--blood thinner.  We have seen her do weird ass shit on camera, in what medical friends of mine said looked like Parkinsonian seizures.

We can assume she focus group tested the words "wacky" and "conspiracy theory".  They work in most cases, on most topics.  The usual suspects undergo the usual brain fade when the usual handlers tell them "there is nothing to see here.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".  And they don't.  They were told not to.  The way they roll is they don't.  They are inert matter, to be acted on by outside forces, solely.

But here is the thing: you can push this idea much too far.  Once someone has one time decided a conspiracy theory isn't, then every other conspiracy theory on the table gets a second look.  And if we can infer anything from the continual presence of tabloids at supermarket counters everywhere, it is that people love gossip, and a conspiracy theory is just a form of gossip.  They are often hearsay, unverifiable.

But sometimes they were true.  Bill Clinton was fucking Gennifer Flowers.  Gary Hart couldn't keep his dick in his pants for six months, or whatever it was.

And Hillary is sick.  She is hiding some major health problems that dwarf the issues of FDR, Kennedy, and even Wilson.  Things that impair her judgement on a day to day basis, and which pose serious risks of killing her, not least because the quack taking care of her has as his main virtue discretion and personal loyalty.

And Julian Assange is likely to be in a position to know who his informants are and were.  It could well turn out that the staffer killed in DC was one of his sources. What then?  A robbery that wasn't doesn't take much to turn into a hit.  This sort of thing happens.  We all know it.  I suspect a significant number of Americans don't believe the official JFK story.

It seems very likely the Report from Iron Mountain is what it seems to be: the long term result of a sustained process of collaborative work conducted over a much longer period of work than would be needed for satire, and as humor would in any event need to be counted a massive failure.

It is quite easy to place 9/11 within the context of an abhorrence of peace, and the political need for enemies.

Here is my point: we are at the point of a massive tipping point, in which large segments of the American population simply detaches from traditional narratives, and starts getting its news from people like Alex Jones.  They don't diminish their consumption of traditional news media: they stop.  They realize in large numbers they are being lied to, and they take to the streets if efforts are made to stifle political dissent and pluralism.

Hillary is much weaker than Michael Dukakis, and he was ahead by about as much at this point as Hillary was last week.  That lead seems to have disappeared.

Trump, in my view, is the likely winner, and my hope is that we reenter an era where truth is told.

Self Deception

As should be obvious, I am perhaps more committed to truth-telling in my life than virtually anyone you will ever meet.  But I am realizing that to a great extent it is lies which have kept me alive, and I would like to simply say that it is a measure of God's mercy, too, that we can lie to ourselves, and believe our lies long enough to get through situations which would otherwise be unmanageable.

Multiculturalism defined

Unconscious intrusions

One of the most common effects of classic PTSD is unwanted and uncontrollable intrusions: a smell, a sound, a picture will spontaneously appear, and retrigger the same affects which were present when the traumatic layering happened.

What I realized yesterday is that Developmental Trauma Disorder ALSO has intrusions, but they are unconscious.  You are going one way, then suddenly find yourself going another way, and you don't know why.  I don't know why.

It seems that the social part of us never really shuts down. It keeps trying to reactivate.  It hits start, and send, and the ping goes out, and that ping bounces off the protective elements in the nervous system, which immediately prohibit that part from coming on-line.  It is too dangerous.  It is like the government telling you where you can't go, when they really have no idea if it is safe or not.  They don't want to chance it, and don't want you to chance it either.

This blocking is a sort of intrusion, one you can't see.  The memories come up, without coming up, and they have an effect, but you do not realize they have an effect.  You just find yourself often numb, often unable to focus, and unable to plan.

And this goes on for a while, then this center hits temporary nervous exhaustion.  This is where addiction comes in.  This is where the desire to check out becomes overwhelming.  This is where you--I--need to hit the reset button, which is what drug and alcohol use does.

And it is interesting to speculate that perhaps in some senses standard, recognized addictions like those to drugs and alcohol might in some respects be healthier than addictions to work and sex and gambling, because there is a cycle of connection, and a cycle of disconnection.  An addiction to work is more or less continual shut down.  Most boozers have times when they are emotionally available.  They just can't sustain it.  Heroin and opium addicts have written great works of music and literature.  They are there, and then they are gone, then they come back, and so a lifetime is spent.

And let me add one more addiction to the pantheon: the addiction to moralizing. If judgement is a cognitive reframing of the primal emotion of fear, then it is a logical concomitant of what I am calling unconscious intrusions.

I am usually most productive idea-wise in the morning.  This is not just because I can connect to the dreams of the previous night; rather, my fear of the day leads to continual ideas and dissociation.

In a Freudian sense--and I tend not to use Freuds language because he was more than a bit slimy--much of what I write is reaction formation.

And to be clear, the same idea can be presented in the same way, using the same words, but come from many different places emotionally.  It is not bad to theorize and ponder, and fight for understanding.  I am simply speaking to myself, in a public sphere.

Monday, August 22, 2016


A synonym for forgiveness might be "reinclusion".  Practically, the sense of being loved and being forgiven are the same.  You are loved where you belong, and belong where you are loved.


To become someone else, you must first become who you are; and frequently this is practically the same thing.


I was contemplating forgiveness just now. I often wake up feeling the need to ask for forgiveness.  It is impulsive.  It arises and comes out.  I do often sleep in, but that is not the root problem: my destiny is to do something connected with this sort of work in the long run, once I get my own shit figured out.

From what does the need to ask forgiveness come from?  It comes from social disconnection.  A rupture has occurred, and needs to be repaired.  Some rule has been violated, some feeling of tenderness or propriety crossed.  There was connection, now there is not.

Childhood trauma, of course, will generate the continual sense of shame, of alienation, and the futile asking for, but never receiving, forgiveness. I myself compensate with arrogance.  It is a shield of sorts, or has been.  It is an interesting thing to contemplate that somewhere in the hardest human beings there is the capacity for tenderness and softness which they have forgotten.

And being me, I started contemplating the dynamics of asking forgiveness from GOD.  We cannot see God.  Is asking for forgiveness the same as asking for connection?

And being me, I started thinking about T'shuvah, repentance, which at one time consisted in offering animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem.  What is this dynamic?  I will need to feel about this for a while longer.

But the point I wanted to make here is that it is quite possible, and in my view desirable, to treat religion BOTH as a cultural artifact intended to enable social cohesion and the maintenance of meaning, AND as a set of objective claims about the physical universe which can be investigated in a scientific manner. A study can be made as to what works and why culturally, and as to what is true empirically.

As I've no doubt mentioned repeatedly, Religion (Religions, if you want to be more politically conformist) was my own academic field of interest, and sacrifice--"acts of the sacred"--my main interest there.  But the question "is this true?" was not an important question.  I think it should be.

Touching absence

The process of growing is making contact with what I visualize--and feel--as tight balls of energy, and allowing them to rise up and expand, and melt into the universe.  Some are prickly and painful.  Some ache.  Some bleed.  At some point I expect them to be pleasant and connecting.  That is the energy behind it all.

I will often lay in bed in the mornings and just feel.  I will interocept--I just made it a verb--and see where I am guided.

I have been lonely all my life.  Part of my problem, of course, is that few people can understand me at the level where I like to operate.  To a great extent, uniqueness and loneliness go together.

But as I've come to know, and as I've described here, I seem "have"--I'm not sure what the best word is--Developmental Trauma Disorder.

And I went this morning to a primal place, that of being a small child, looking into my mothers eyes, and feeling the terror and confusion of not seeing her looking back.  She could only see herself.

I touched this feeling.  It is oceanic, overwhelming.  But I have developed enough skill in this sort of thing--in pendulation, in titration--that I was able to work with this high voltage safely.  It is painful, of course, but my day will go on.

And I realize that is feeling myself, I am making up for that primitive lack. I am my own mirror.  And I feel that to SEE this is narcissism, but to feel it is healing. It matters how one does it.  Narcissists only see themselves, but they do not see that they only see themselves.  Narcissism is simply how the world is for them.  It, too, is the result of a primitive trauma.

And I feel this not being seen is what makes the world go mad.  It explains wars and cruelty and obsessions.  It is invisible for nearly everyone.

And I was pondering child rearing in this country, especially in light of a question a Democrat asked me in a bar.  We were talking politics and I said I was a conservative, and his first question was "what do we do with the old people?"  I first asked him "what did we do with old people before?"--to which he really had no response, being a bit drunk--and then I pointed out that in countries with socialized medicine they keep old people alive far less aggressively, and several leaders--such as in Japan--have openly wished for the old to die, as they were "unproductive" members of society.  In an allegedly morally superior social order, the old are seen solely in terms of their economic utility.  There is a huge push to get people on government run medical plans, then resentment at the cost.  The whole thing is ludicrous and contradictory.

But here is the relevant point: in the old days, aging parents lived with their children.  Grandmothers were there for their grandbabies.  In the old days, numerous women were around in an extended family, such that the babies looked in many eyes, had many opportunities for connection and union.  And because this was the norm, the parents themselves would have been more commonly available to their children emotionally.  There would have been much less Developmental Trauma Disorder.

And the old days continue in much of the world.  It is likely that the average child in an African village feels more love from its mother than the average child in America, even when the mother is playing Mozart and making sure there are lots of colors and shapes for the child to interact with.  Her mother is in California  Her sister is in Idaho.  The fathers mother is in New York.  They all come to visit, of course, but are not in and out of the home daily, as happens in more traditional communities with tighter family ties.

Healthy children become healthy adults, and they are not mass produced.  There are not techniques for thriving, other than those of connection, and providing a good continuum of both safety and opportunity to explore.  They need to feel safe, and they need to be allowed to express their natural curiosity, and to fail sometimes.  Failure is not death: it is, on the contrary, the essence of life.  Fail better, fail harder, fail forward.

Sunday, August 21, 2016

Left, right and moderation

Historical Fascism and Communism both rely on Utopian fantasies, of building a world which has never been but which may be.  The locus of power is the government, the locus of power in the government is a Party, and the locus of power in the Party is either one person, or a very small oligarchy.

True Liberalism accepts the world as it is.  It understands growth is possible, but is skeptical of all projects which require the surrender of individual freedom.  The locus of power is, in theory and in ideal, if not always in reality, the individual, as expressed in a representative government, and legal protections both against governmental abuse, and the abuse of his or her fellow citizens.

True Liberalism is capable of expressing itself in the abstract, but it depends in practice on countless concrete relations among sovereign individuals, each pursuing their own interest, and who collectively create and protect freedom, wealth, social harmony, and peace.

True Rightism, or Reactionism, is typically--I would actually argue paradigmatically--some form of Monarchism or Theism.  Power rests in tradition and religious belief, which invest the monarch and the nobility with one class of rights, typically the priests with another, and other citizens with varying grades of rights, depending on their birth status, and to some extent their talent and ability.

This pattern is based on custom, on what has always been done, and depends upon few questions being asked, and is thus typically authoritarian to the extent needed to protect the privileges of the elites.

It is an astonishing fact of the modern world that decent human beings have been seduced in large numbers to Fascist beliefs, all in the name of "progress".  There are important parallels between Monarchism and Fascism: both are intolerant, both reject freedom, both empower elites, both use police as political weapons.

The meliorating grace of Monarchism or Theism is that both grant to the suffering poor some redemption in the afterlife (typically).  Fascists refuse to do even that.  Their power is absolute, and exists solely to be exercised.  Again: Cultural Sadeism.

I dream of a day when people in large numbers start waking from this Collectivist delusion, start seeing the stars again, start caring about actual human beings, and realize what fools they have been.

Fascism is at our door

We have a major candidate for President openly talking about the coercive shut down of political opposition. This is categorically anti-American, categorically a blatant example of the sort of authoritarianism our Constitution was explicitly written to prevent.

Who are the lunatics who make this sort of thing possible?  Who are the imbeciles and lunatics who support them?  Where is the decency in this world?  It is surrounding us, I suppose: most people are good, but my God it continues to astonish me how craven, how intellectually corrupt, how STUPID even the graduates of our best colleges and universities are.

Leftist policies cannot be defended.  They cannot be defended on moral, practical, or any grounds whatever.  They corrupt culture, alienate people from one another, breed poverty and resentment, and place in power psychopaths who eventually generate misery directly.  There is nothing good in any of this.

In October I am going to join a Trump phone bank.  I would encourage any readers I may have to do likewise.  If Hillary wins, our democracy is cooked.  We will be fortunate Barack Obama is so lazy, stupid, and cowardly, and that he spent so much time golfing.  Hillary will get right down to work ending everything good in this country, and promoting cronies, crooks and thieves.

I actually don't think this is hyperbole.  Propagandistic control of the media, and public gullability, indifference, and out right stupidity, have reached a point where she can commit crimes in the light of day, crimes which cannot be denied, and GET AWAY WITH THEM.  If she is President, she will attack journalistic pluralism--the few remaining honest human beings in the profession--immediately, and then we will have NO IDEA what is actually happening.

Jesus Christ people: wake the fuck up.

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Feeling numb

It is possible to feel numb.  I did it tonight.  I felt it tonight.

Here is the thing most people don't think about: if you can't feel something, it doesn't feel NUMB: it doesn't feel at all.  There is no sensation there.  The sensation is that there is no sensation, and if you're not expecting a sensation, there is no way to know it is missing.

And I felt tonight a thousand possibilities, like every pore in me COULD open, could participate in life, but is currently choosing not to.  This is a negotiation which will need to happen with my body.

But in the same sense that you cannot see censorship, politically, emotionally you cannot feel what you are not feeling.  You cannot know what is missing until it becomes possible, and what happens at that moment is you feel a lack which was not present before; you create a hole--perhaps "pregnable, or "open space" might work better--into which the new might possibly enter.

Ignorance is invisible.  This is an important point.  It takes LEARNING to see ignorance.  You must be searching, and seeing what should be there, but isn't.  This is task undertaken by very few.  Those who do, do so out of pain they cannot avoid.  That is certainly my own case.

Eventually, I hope that this process will become playful, fun, entertaining, the only worthy game in town.


Does a lion feel a pang of conscience when it kills and eats a gazelle?  It doesn't seem likely.  It sees the gazelle, feels hunger, and acts instinctively.  This is how is survives, reproduces, and how the lion species continues.

Lions may fight over mates, but they do not see each other as food.  This is genetic, inherent.

Within each of us, if we look deeply enough, there is also this primitive drive towards satiation, which does not make moral distinctions.  We do not attack our own tribe, but even humans far enough away from us biologically may become targets.

I think in what I will call my amoral dream I contacted this energy.  It is primal, and I contacted it at the root, and before it ran through any filter, the filters of justification and restraint.

At root, this is the sadistic impulse--which I have in me too--which regresses to the animal, to the pre-moral, where morality is not a term possible or comprehensible on any level.  This is what Sade wanted: freedom from the possibility of being human.  Living as he did in a cage of traumatic experience, he could not connect to human kind, and the mere possibility drove him mad.  It tortured him.  So he tortured back, in his mind, in his soul.

This is the root of evil.

Goodness, genuine goodness, is clarity.  It is having opened all these channels, understood them, accepted what is useful in them, and dedicated oneself to cultivating connection, empathy, union.  It is, ideally, vision everywhere and blindness nowhere.

It is not necessary to reject or hate a latent possibility.  It is in fact even possible to welcome it as having a possible role to play in some situations, like survival.

Alimentation and morality: food for thought.

Good and evil

Have you ever had the vivid feeling of being viewed as the Bad Guy/Gal by someone else?  We grow up with these simple--simplistic--narratives of good and evil, and it is supposed to be obvious which is which.  We are us, and they, if they oppose us, are bad.

It is the simplest thing in the world to teach a naive child who has found themselves physiologically mature enough to be in college, that America has killed innocent people, and this makes us bad.  We are the bad guys.  And what have you done?  You have simply switched one simplistic narrative for another.  Instead of being perfect and all-knowing, we are uniformly evil, and the very pit of darkness.

And while it is true in theory that growth would consist in greater nuance, and a redoubled effort at dispassionate understanding, which is then compared to moral ideals in an honest way, the reality of what passes for "nuance" in our Academies, and "non-reductive" research is in the main destroying traditional narratives of what constitutes the morally ideal, in favor of very specific propagandas which demonize one party--us--and angelicize--if I may be permitted the term--all Others.

A logical and honest question might be "what do we want, and what did we get?"  The actual question asked is "how did we fuck up, and why are they so wonderful?"

Through this very disingenuous exercise, massive crimes can be excused, and minute crimes expanded to Himalayan proportions.  Everyone knows Lieutenant Calley.  But have you heard of Dak Son?  Let me quote a pamphlet circulated in Congress before we decided to abandon Southeast Asia to mass death, torture, and soul searing pain which constituted a hell on Earth for tens of millions of innocent people (all so the fucking hippies and Leftist assassins could be self satisfied in their moral superiority):

Organized terror--of a ruthlessness and on a scale that defies civilized comprehension--has been a cardinal aspect of Communist policy from the very first days of the Vietcong insurgency.  By and large the Western world only knows of a few of the more massive and gruesome terrorist incidents--like the massacre that took place in the Montagnard village of Dak Son in December 1967, when the Vietcong, attacking with flame throwers, moved from hut to hut, incinerating alive more than 250 villagers, two thirds of them women and children.  In addition 200 Dak Son villagers were kidnapped, never to be heard of again.  But the thousands of small incidents of terror--equally merciless, equally gruesome, and which account for far more victims than the big incidents--with exceedingly rare exceptions, go unreported. 
It did not make the press, for example, when on October 27, 1969, the  Communists booby-trapped the body of a People's Self Defense Force member whom they had killed--so that when relatives came to retrieve the body, four of them were killed in the explosion.  Nor did it make the press in May 1967, when Dr. Tran Van Lu-y told the World Health Organization in Geneva that over the previous 10 years Communist terrorists had destroyed 174 dispensaries, maternity homes and hospitals; had mined or machine gunned 40 ambulances; and had killed or kidnapped 211 members of his staff. 
If the Free World knew little or nothing of this day-to-day terror despite the presence of hundreds of correspondents in South Vietnam, what chance is there that the Free World would know anything at all about the bloodletting that would inevitably take place in South Vietnam if the Communists came to power, expelled the Western press corps, and then proceeded to deal with their enemies!

How many of you know that Nixon negotiated a comprehensive cease-fire and peace treaty with North Vietnam?  How many?  We had peace.  Then Nixon was more or less pushed out of office, and Communist radicals masquerading as liberal Democrats cut off aid to the region, North Vietnam violated the peace treaty, tentatively at first, then decisively as they realized we would not respond.  It was a tank led invasion. of the sort we have always excelled at countering.  The cuts to Cambodia also led in short order to fall of Phnom Pen and the atrocities that happened under the never-punished Pol Pot.

The root of this post is a dream I had last night.  I was a comic book character, but I found myself killing Captain America. I found myself fighting an Avengers-like group, with a partner.  And I woke up wondering if I was the Bad Guy.  You're not supposed to sympathize with the Bad Guy, are you?

And I reflected on the dreams I had following watching the Suicide Squad.  They were pleasant, even peaceful. (although they clearly should have killed that evil psychopathic black woman, who had murdered her own people for no good reason--really, to protect herself and her illicit project--and escaped), and it hit me that we all have an inner Joker or Harley Quinn.  That part is there.  We don't let it out, don't allow it consciousness, because we are afraid it will take over.

But I will submit that until you can own your connection to evil, can sympathize with it, you cannot KNOW when you are operating under its influence.  Evil people always find reasons to do what they do.  They may call themselves evil, consciously, but what they do makes psychological sense to them.  Only when you can feel evil as evil and as good--at the same time--are you beginning to deal effectively with your Shadow, which in most cases is to say your unconscious traumatic memories and feelings.

Only in open space do dualities disappear.

And here is the thing with Leftists: they cannot claim or see their innate viciousness. It is absolutely true that jingoism and national bigotry have belonged to every national sense of self, every tribal sense of self.  But the categorical, simplistic rejection of such narratives, without any effort at deep understanding, is merely the same impulse, from which the virtues of loyalty and sanctity have been subtracted.

I might go so far as to call Leftism a "lonely tribalism".

The alternative is genuine Liberalism, which is asking yourself what you are doing, why, and if it is working.

Actually, I forgot the most important thing I wanted to say.  I keep reading stories about demons, and hauntings and possessions.  Somebody thought it would be terribly funny to stage a mock human sacrifice at CERN (the people who some physicists are concerned might be able to destroy the world).  The professional left decided it would use its media outlets to demonize Trump as "dark".

But I would suggest that emergent darkness is not new: it is merely now visible.  And that is progress.  There was a time when the Catholic Church successfully suppressed knowledge about priests molesting young children.  There is no reason to suppose this was unique to the modern era, and no reason not to suppose it has been happening for a thousand years or more.

There was a time when fathers in Vienna could molest their daughters without fear of consequences.  Freud inadvertently documented some of this.  That situation can be expanded around the world, and back through recorded time.  Charlemagne was supposedly openly guilty of it, if memory serves; and Muhammad of course had Aisha.

Wife beating, overt racism, rape, droit du seigneur, the imprisonment and torture of the imprudent, witch burnings, wars of all sorts, the Belgian Congo: all of these have existed through all human history.

Darkness hides in the cracks: in societies, and in people.  When it comes out, this means something is flushing it out.  This is a good thing.

Seen evil is vastly preferable to invisible evil.  Invisible evil can and usually does hide within the "good".  Very few crimes in human history have not been subsequently rationalized by their perpetrators as virtuous in some way.

David Horowitz on Trump

I liked this, and I like Trump's audacity here.  The REASON Trump is the nominee is other Republican fools would not speak obvious and needed truths like this: Democrats are and have always been failing the black community, their patronizing and ostensibly high minded rhetoric notwithstanding.
In this regard, it is worth noting that Horowitz himself was at one time a hard core Leftist, and proud of it.  He was a leader in the 1960's.  What changed him was he got a woman hired as an accountant by the Black Panthers, she caught them embezzling money, and she was murdered, her body dumped in the Bay.
Virtually everyone who has appointed themselves a black "leader" over the past 50 years has used and abused the power given them for personal enrichment.  This is awful.  It is horrible.  They have been betrayed again and again.  Perhaps the better word is continually.
In any relationship it is vital to set realistic expectations.  It was never realistic that white people, and white people's government, would rescue all blacks and make their lives sunshine and rainbows, even though to this very moment cynical opportunists like Hillary continue to do so.
No, JOBS, and the income that education and skill make possible, are what are needed.  That, and safe, clean streets, and skilled teachers are what are needed.
Trump: “Look at what the Democratic Party has done to the city of Detroit. Forty percent of Detroit’s residents live in poverty.  Half of all Detroit residents do not work. Detroit tops the list of Most Dangerous Cities in terms of violent crime. This is the legacy of the Democrat politicians who have run this city.  This is the result of the policy agenda embraced by Hillary Clinton…. The one thing every item in Hillary Clinton’s agenda has in common is that it takes jobs and opportunities from African-American workers.  Her support for open borders.  Her fierce opposition to school choice.  Her plan to massively raise taxes on small businesses.  Her opposition to American energy.  And her record of giving our jobs away to other countries.”

Friday, August 19, 2016

Free Speech

It is worth noting that enshrining free speech as a fundamental human right is a MONUMENTAL achievement.  This right has not been formally respected in any human society large enough to formulate standing governments and formal laws, at least none that I know of.  Every major civilization has had kings, and those kings have always enjoyed the right to punish anyone who criticized them.  They have been, of course, overthrown many times, but the new kings retained that same right, even if the wiser among them chose to exercise it rarely.

What is great about America?  Why don't we start with that?  We were the FIRST and still largely the ONLY nation on the planet which has free speech as a foundational right.  Certainly, other nations like Britain and Holland largely respect free speech, but they retain--and increasingly are using--the right to suppress speech they don't like--for example the words of people who want to tell needed truths about Islam in public.

And ponder Islam. You can be KILLED for publicly criticizing Islam, or its leaders.  You can be KILLED for becoming a Christian, or even an atheist.  All the Arab and other Islam-influenced governments retain the right--the governmental right, which is inversely proportional to individual human rights--to suppress any speech they want.

You do not have free speech in Cuba.  You have "free" shitty education, "free" shitty healthcare.  But if you want to rail against the system, you go to jail, where torture is a very real possibility.

How do human beings who claim to be worthy of the name somehow find themselves on the sides of torturers, and opposing the radical and much needed advancements in human civilization which found expression in the American Constitution?

Thursday, August 18, 2016

The John Birch Society

Look at this (from Wikipedia):

The organization supports limited government and opposes wealth redistribution and economic interventionism. It opposes collectivism, totalitarianism, and communism. It opposes socialism as well, which it asserts is infiltrating U.S. governmental administration. In a 1983 edition of Crossfire, Congressman Larry McDonald (D-Georgia), then its newly appointed president, characterized the society as belonging to the Old Right rather than the New Right.[14]

The society opposed the 1960s civil rights movement and claimed the movement had Communists in important positions. In the latter half of 1965, the JBS produced a flyer titled "What's Wrong With Civil Rights?", which was used as a newspaper advertisement.[15][16] In the piece, one of the answers was: "For the civil rights movement in the United States, with all of its growing agitation and riots and bitterness, and insidious steps towards the appearance of a civil war, has not been infiltrated by the Communists, as you now frequently hear. It has been deliberately and almost wholly created by the Communists patiently building up to this present stage for more than forty years."[17] The society opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming it violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and overstepped individual states' rights to enact laws regarding civil rights. The society opposes "one world government", and it has an immigration reduction view on immigration reform. It opposes the United Nations, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and other free trade agreements. They argue the U.S. Constitution has been devalued in favor of political and economic globalization, and that this alleged trend is not accidental. It cited the existence of the former Security and Prosperity Partnership as evidence of a push towards a North American Union.
I think there are 100% right.  I think Black Lives Matters is simply a new version of an old idea: use professional, paid radicals to stir up unhappiness and anger among unhappy and angry people, and use it to attack the system.  Use it to build tension, hatred, anger, violence, and then use the violence as a means to aggregating power in the government and police power. On the one hand, you create the crisis, and on the other, use it for cynical political purposes.  This is what Hitler did.  He controlled the mobs in the street, but was elected, in my recollection, in order to stop the rioting in the streets.

Perhaps it is, perhaps it is not technically accurate to call it Satanic, but it is clearly accurate to call it anti-Life, anti-Dignity, anti-Decency, anti-justice, and anti-Peace.

I know someone in a particular industry who has carved out a market niche for a particular product by creating multiple front companies, multiple names of companies, all of which sell the same product, and all of which populate the top 5 or so hits on Google searches, since he also does SEO.

There is an outward appearance of choice, but there really isn't.  It is glitter and illusion.  Much of our political world has become like that.  If you aren't paranoid, you are asleep.

I have hope for Trump.  He was not planned for, I don't think, and if anybody we have nominated in the past 50 years would be capable of laying off half the government, he would.

He's within a point of Hillary.  There is no question he can win this election.

And I want to be clear: in a sane, fair economic order, ALL people can take care of themselves.  A job is the only path to economic well being with dignity.  There is no other way.  What we are being shoveled into is mass unemployment and dependence on an omnipotent government.  That is not good for anyone: not for us, and not even for them.

People who hate people

People who love robots, who love artificial intelligence, are people who have lost their social capacity, who are functionally alienated from their fellow humans.  They are insect-people, who love nothing and no one.

They are EXCITED about eliminating a million jobs.  Why?  It's not the money.  It's a profitable segment already.  It is the IDEA. And the idea has no human cost, because there are no humans in their world.

That is my gut level view.  They may offer superficial rationalizations, such as that such cars will make driving safer, but the fact is that their engines will be plugged into a massive network that can be centrally controlled.  Not only will the government be able to hear and see virtually everything you go, but drive you where it wants you to go.

And for what?  So socially deactivated psychopaths can do work to plan yet more attacks on the soul of the human race while driving from one place to another?

The problem we have is that what I am going to start calling the insect instinct can be expressed physically in machines and robots, so those operating at the insect level can become obsessed with it, immersed in it, and bring it into mass being.

As a race, we are not remotely ready for what our collective traumas can and are driving us into.

Wednesday, August 17, 2016


I hit a patch today where I started feel straight anxiety.  It was odd.  I'm not used to it.  I feel many things, but not mainlined anxiety.

And it hit me that I have graduated to simple fear, versus complex, "complexified" fear.  Simple fear responds to relaxation, to HRV training, even to a good nap.

What I have felt was terror, horror, disconnection.  What I have felt has often felt like a heavy weight, or a thick mud which made every last action, every last decision, an act of will, followed by another act of will if I wanted it to happen.  Pushing, pushing: this has been my lot for some time.

Every piece of work: I confront it, am pushed away, then I fight my way back.  Most work is done in a mildly dissociated state.

Straight fear, while unpleasant, is simple by contrast.

This life: I chose it.  My task is to map.  My task is to understand, based on my time spent in the belly of the beast.  My task is to say "this way.  I've traveled this route before."

I will get this done.  I am still debating details in my mind, but my commitment is my life, and it is absolute.

Frederick Douglas

I just came across this magnificent speech, after watching this beautiful video:

This was written in 1862 (in the middle of the Civil War).

Excerpt: What shall be done with them [freed black slaves]?

Our answer is, do nothing with them; mind your business, and let them mind theirs. Your doing with them is their greatest misfortune. They have been undone by your doings, and all they now ask, and really have need of at your hands, is just to let them alone. They suffer by ever interference, and succeed best by being let alone. The Negro should have been let alone in Africa — let alone when pirates and robbers offered him for sale in our Christian slave markets — (more cruel and inhuman than the Mohammedan slave markets) — let alone by courts, judges, politicians, legislators and slave-drivers — let alone altogether, and assured that they were thus to be left alone forever, and that they must now make their own way in the world, just the same as any and every other variety of the human family. As colored men, we only ask to be allowed to do with ourselves, subject only to the same great laws for the welfare of human society which apply to other men, Jews, Gentiles, Barbarian, Scythian. Let us stand upon our own legs, work with our own hands, and eat bread in the sweat of our own brows. When you, our white fellow-countrymen, have attempted to do anything for us, it has generally been to deprive us of some right, power or privilege which you yourself would die before you would submit to have taken from you. When the planters of the West Indies used to attempt to puzzle the pure-minded Wilberforce with the question, How shall we get rid of slavery? his simple answer was, “quit stealing.” In like manner, we answer those who are perpetually puzzling their brains with questions as to what shall be done with the Negro, “let him alone and mind your own business.” If you see him plowing in the open field, leveling the forest, at work with the spade, a rake a hoe, a pick-axe, or a bill — let him alone; he has a right to work. If you see him on his way to school, with spelling book, geography and arithmetic in his hands — let him alone. Don’t shut the door in his face, nor bolt your gates against him; he has a right to learn — let him alone. Don’t pass laws to degrade him. If he has a ballot in his hand, and is on his way to the ballot-box to deposit his vote for the man whom he think will most justly and wisely administer the Government which has the power of life and death over him, as well as others — let him alone; his right of choice as much deserves respect and protection as your own. If you see him on his way to the church, exercising religious liberty in accordance with this or that religious persuasion — let him alone. –Don’t meddle with him, nor trouble yourselves with any questions as to what shall be done with him.
The great majority of human duties are of this negative character. If men were born in need of crutches, instead of having legs, the fact would be otherwise. We should then be in need of help, and would require outside aide; but according to the wiser and better arrangement of nature, our duty is done better by not hindering than by helping our fellow-men; or, in other words, the best way to help them is just to let them help themselves.

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Global Warming

This video is well constructed and useful.  That this farce is likely a principal "outwardly cognitive" (as opposed to the "inwardly real") reason so many people want global fascism is unbelievable to me.

The numbers don't add up.  The whole thing is ludicrous.

National debt

This is worth the watch.  John Stossel does good work.

Ponder the lunacy involved in the fact that we are $20 trillion in debt, that we will soon pay more in INTEREST on our national debt than we spend on the Department of Defense, and that NONE of the media are talking about this, and that neither Hillary nor Trump have made this a major campaign issue.

If we survive with any connection with our past--if totalitarian censors do not wipe the past clean and rewrite it--future generations will wonder how we could be so fucking stupid in such large numbers.


I've been following the story about the guy in Switzerland who attacked train passengers with a knife and who set a fire which apparently got on him, and played a role in his death.

They won't release his name, other than to say it is a "typical Swiss name".  Here is the problem: in the comments on one of the stories, someone said that the name was anything BUT Swiss, and that their efforts to post it had been repeatedly met with comment deletion.

I read German, so I looked up the Neue Zurcher Zeitung article on it.  They, too, say only that he was Swiss, he was not a registered foreigner, and that his name was "typical".  They then note in comments that there will be no comments, and they appreciate your understanding.

As I keep saying, how can you know what is being censored?  You can't.

Here is a plausible thesis: this guy is named Ahmed or Muhammad, and he was either born in Switzerland, or naturalized long ago.  He was supposed to be integrated, one of them.  The guy you can trust.

The people who do the censoring--the government officials who don't want to trust the people they are responsible for keeping safe--would be panicked to learn that even long naturalized Muslims can be radicalized and weaponized, right in their midst. This puts at risk the whole narrative of multicultural integration.  This makes it logical to question the loyalties of ALL Muslims.

We live in a very dangerous time.  I am paranoid by nature, but that is the only reason I am wide awake.  Most people prefer sleep, and I understand fully why.  The problems in play are enormous, and seemingly incomprehensible.  But all good has to start with truth, and that is a good start.  

Traumatic Automatism

As I continue to thaw--and that is the best word, I think--things frozen come alive and interact with me.  The roots of pieces of inner dialogue become clear.

And I realize that in important respects the traumatized reenact things with the same automatism, and with no more consciousness than, insects.  There is behavior, but it has no purpose.  It does not meet any current need.

You can imagine little race tracks, little loops, next to people who have trauma.  Their behavior and consciousness exists on that loop.  It goes around and around.  They never meet open ended lines.  The only forward is in a circle.  This is the only movement they can handle.  Some loops are bigger than others, but they all repeat.

I remember times when my mother just wasn't there.  I realize now that she herself suffered and suffers from severe trauma.  I can't tell her this, because she can't hear me.  I am not there.  I have never been there.  For that matter, she has never been there.  This is not her fault, mostly, although I don't doubt some alarm bell has been ringing in her all her life that something has been missing from our relationship, and she has chosen to ignore it.  She did not want to go there.

We have all seen vacant eyes, and met detached people.  They are everywhere. Large segments of their consciousness are taken up with what I might call "Insect memory".  This is unconscious memory, continually reenactments of things they can't remember.  Even when nothing seems to be going on, even when they themselves think they are calm and feel fine, large subroutines are running continually, crowding out the pleasures of life, and open curiosity.

This is all very, very interesting.  Large segments of human life are hidden.  They are subterranean.  We all see caves all day every day without realizing it.

And darkness is also where the rainbows are.