Submission requirements

[Swede Synopsis: Student loans bad thing. Should make better. Move ahead to comment section.]
_________

handsThe biggest thing holding a country together is fearsome enemies. Since we don’t have any, we have to invent them. A great deal of effort is expended in this country to create those enemies and make sure that we know they are there and threaten us. Fake attacks have been staged, and television and movie drama highlights how our special men and women of the armed forces are keeping us safe. The FBI spends uncounted hours finding, arming, and then thwarting terrorist attacks, sometimes by pizza delivery boys. The idea that there are terrorists “cells” out there who are planning bad things comes right out of the 1950’s when we were told there were Communist cells planning to do bad things to us.
Continue reading “Submission requirements”

Now it can be told

Bill Maher’s Real Time last Friday was a pretty good show. He had Erin Brockovich (the gal who made Julia Roberts seem smart), Josh Barro, Carly Fiorina and Howard Dean. Willie Nelson stopped by at the end, and was his great old usual self. (He said that there was a guy one time who was hit on the head with a bale of marijuana, and that is the only known death from the substance.)

Somewhere in the latter part of the panel discussion, all three agreed that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was Romneycare, and that it had been written by industry executives. According to Dean, and the panel knew it as well, these people descended on Baucus’s office and had the run of the place, moved over the the White House for implementation, and are all now back in private industry.

I’ve been saying that for years now. However, it was on TV. Now we know it is true.

Tripping in Costa Rica?

This is something that has been on my back burner for quite a while, ever since David Sirota mentioned on his radio show in Denver that Steve Jobs credited much of his creative success to having taken LSD on a couple of occasions. He said it was a positive experience and made him more sensitive to touch and color.

I’ve mentioned to friends that I think it might be fun to take LSD, and I get a frightened response, as if it would fry my brain, the old reefer madness syndrome. It’s not legal in the US, but is in Costa Rica, I’m told. Hmmmmm…

Reddit did one of their ask-me-anything forums with Rick Doblin, PhD, of MAPS, the Multidisciplinary Association for a Psychedelic Studies. It’s very long but kept my interest. I liked the following exchange:

Hey Rick et al. Matt Johnson here from Johns Hopkins. Glad you’re doing this AMA. My question is: What do you think the world would be like today if psychedelic research (including therapeutic use research) had not shut down in the 1970? That is, both in terms of medicine and the larger culture. Good luck with all the questions… Thanks!

Hey Matt! If psychedelic research had not been shut down in the 1970s, and if the cultural crackdown had not taken place, I believe there is a very good chance that the United States would never have invaded Iraq and that the War on Drugs would have ended. The reason I say this is that the whole process of scapegoating and finding external enemies is in part because of our inability to handle our own flaws and imperfections, which we then project outward. Also, the process of dehumanization, the demonization of others, is reduced if we have a culture where spiritual experiences and a sense of unity are more widespread, and where we realize that we share more in common in other people than we have differences.

The UNESCO charter says, “Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.” I think the psychedelic mystical experience is one of the strongest defenses of peace that can be constructed. Albert Einstein said that the splitting of the atom changed everything but our mode of thinking, and that as we “drift toward unparalleled catastrophe,” what shall be required by mankind to survive is a whole new mode of thinking. This new mode of thinking is, I believe, a spiritual orientation.

For me personally, and for many others, psychedelics, more so than traditional religious rituals, have opened the door to spiritual experiences. I therefore think that if our culture had mainstreamed psychedelics in the 1970s rather than demonized them, 45 years later we would have a more spiritual world, a more compassionate world, and would be dealing with the stresses of globalization in much healthier ways.
-Rick Doblin, Ph.D., Founder and Executive Director

Sounds a little peacenicky, but I like it.

Embedding messages in a postmodernist climate

I was just reading this morning about postmodernism and its application to Shakespeare. It seems that it intersects with the crowd of skeptics who do not believe Shakespeare was Shakespeare. Postmodernism itself is quite a rumble, and frankly, I don’t even know what it means, but when you combine that with Shakespeare and the missing Bard, then feathers fly. Last week there was a conference in London, and this is but a brief summary.

OK, guys, regular readers. They are gone now, the usual suspects. We can speak freely. This post really has to do with stupidity, and the unavoidable fact that stupid people do not know they are stupid, and so can never recover from it. They need to be left to themselves. I’ve had an invasion lately, and I am but one level above stupid, and so engage them. Steve W went off yesterday on a stupid person, and therein lay the rub: Because he wrote more than a couple of lines, the stupid person did not read what he wrote.

I am suggesting here a code that we speak when dealing with these people. It will be soft and non-offensive, but at the same time be bland enough that they no longer engage us and leave in puzzlement. It could be something like “That’s a great point. Thanks for bringing it up. We’ll be sure to expand on it in future posts and comments.”

Does that work? The idea is not to engage but also not to offend, which only prolongs the pain. Your ideas are welcome. What follows in this post, to make it appear long, is nonsense. Not the usual nonsense. Special nonsense. You need read no further.

It is the decline in the rate of expansion of a civilization which marks its passage from the Age of Expansion to the Age of Conflict. This latter is the most complex, most interesting, and most critical of all the periods of a life cycle of a civilization. It is marked by four chief characteristics: (a) it is a period of declining rate of expansion; (b) it is a period of growing tensions and class conflicts; (c) it is a period of increasingly frequent and increasingly violent imperialist wars; and (d) it is a period of growing irrationality, pessimism, superstitions and otherworldliness. All these phenomena appear in the core area of a civilization before they appear in more peripheral portions of the society.

The most important parts of Western technology can be listed under four headings:
1. Ability to kill: development of weapons.
2. Ability to preserve life: development of sanitation and medical services.
3. Ability to produce both food and industrial goods.
4. Improvements in transportation and communications.

At this point the demographic cycle of and expanding population goes into a third states (Population Type C) in which the birthrate also begins to fall. The reasons for this fall in the birthrate have never been explained in a satisfactory way, but as a consequence of it, there appears a new demographic condition marketed by a falling birthrate, a low death rate, and a stabilizing and aging population whose major part is in the mature years form thirty to sixty. As the population gets older because of the decrease in births and the increase in the expectation of life, a larger and larger part of the population has passed the years of bearing children or bearing arms. This causes the birthrate to decline even more rapidly, and eventually gives a population so old that the death rate begins to rise again because of the great increase in deaths from old age or form the casualties of inevitable senility. Accordingly, the society passes into a fourth stage of the demographic cycle (Population Type D). This stated is marked by a declining birthrate, a rising death rate, a decreasing population, and a population in which the major part is over fifty years of age.

The military level is concerned with the organization of force, the political level with the organization of power, and the economic level with the organization of wealth. By the “organization of power” in a society we mean the ways in which obedience and consent (or acquiescence) are obtained. The close relationships between levels can be seen from the fact that there are three basic ways to win obedience: by force, by buying consent with wealth, and by persuasion. Each of these leads us to another level (military, economic, or intellectual) outside the political level. At the same time, the organization of power today (that is, the methods of obtaining obedience in a society) is a development of the methods used to obtain obedience in the society in the earlier period.

Capitalism provides very powerful motivations for economic activity because it associates economic motivations so closely with self-interest. But this same feature, which is a source of strength in providing economic motivation through the pursuit of profits, is also a source of weakness owing to the fact that so self-centered a motivation contributes very readily to a lost of economic coordination. Each individual, just because he is so powerfully motivated by self-interest, easily loses sight of the role which is own activities play in the economic system as a whole, and tends to act as if his activities were the whole, with inevitable injury to that whole. We could indicate this by pointing out that capitalism, because as it seeks profits as its primary goal, is never primarily seeking to achieve prosperity, high production, high consumption, political power, patriotic improvement, or moral uplift. Any of these might be achieved under capitalism, and any (or all) of them may be sacrificed and lost under capitalism, depending on this relationship to the primary goal of capitalist activity – the pursuit of profits. During the nine-hundred year history of capitalism, it has, at various times, contributed both the achievement and to the destruction of these other social goals.

Thus, clearly, money and goods are not the same thing but are on the contrary, exactly opposite things. Most confusion in economic thinking arises form failure to recognize this fact. Goods are wealth you have, while money is a claim on wealth which you do not have.

Oh yeah, it matters

Swede mentioned down below that

You guys keep digging up the non-consequential past and we’ll do the heavy lifting on the present.

This raises the legitimate question, why does JFK matter in 2014? There are several reasons:

  • To understand the present, it helps to understand the past.
  • It’s a portal. It’s a “never enough understanding” incident that leads one far away from the event itself and into the whole of postwar American history.
  • Since the cover-up is ongoing, it’s apparent that those who seized power that day still hold it.

Lee Harvey Oswald is an interesting character, as was Jack Ruby. Oswald apparently had ties to both CIA and FBI. Ruby was a local mobster with New Orleans connections, and knew Oswald well. That’s all interesting, but years after, of no real importance. Similarly, all of the evidence that has emerged over the decades about peripheral characters, the number of shooters, the fake autopsy, X-rays and autopsy photos, missing brain blah blah blah – from a Hound of the Baskervilles perspective, it’s a fascinating mystery, fun to read and connect the dots.

But as to the crime itself, it is easily solved, has been for decades. The was orchestrated by powers high enough in government that they could employ the Secret Service, CIA, FBI, military, and even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to serve its ends. These people are so powerful that fifty years later their legacies are still engaged in the ongoing cover-up, and still lying, and our news media is still afraid to speak up.

No member of JFK’s administration resigned in protest. No member of congress either. No judge anywhere. No district attorney anywhere, aside from Jim Garrison, ever attempted to investigate. No subsequent president has ever voiced qualms – in fact, one of them served on the body that covered up the crime, the Warren Commission. So the crime, open, obvious, easily solved, was ignored by the American establishment. Conclusion: That is how the United States is structured, and how it functions. Everything else – voting, fighting our issues, reading, writing, discussing everything till blue, is for naught. The crime was committed in the open and covered up, and no one of status anywhere ever spoke up.

That means that the office of the president was taken down that day, and has not functioned since. Every occupant has a gun at his head, and knows it. Watergate was a coup as well, but Nixon knew enough not to speak up about JFK other than by veiled references like “It all goes back to the Bay of Pigs,” code for the assassination (according to his aide Bob Haldeman).

Control of the past is control of the present. JFK matters, if only to teach us that.

Tramps shining

The Dealey Plaza “tramps.” Two of the men are probably future Watergate burglars E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis. The arresting officers have never been identified. They were not members of the Dallas police force.
I often challenge people who doubt my sanity and beliefs about such events as the JFK murder or 9/11 to examine the evidence. Few do, but those few always walk away deeply troubled. Doing so can lead to a transformative experience. That, to me, is the only remaining importance of such inquiry, as the people who did these crimes will never be formally accused, apprehended, or confess. No punishment awaits. In fact, so long after JFK’s death, it is probably safe to say that most of those involved at that time are now dead.
Continue reading “Tramps shining”

Something ain’t right

mlb_ap_arod1_300Over the holidays a relative of ours appeared wearing a wrist bracelet. It was high-tech. With it he was keeping track of calories ingested and calories burned. He was amazed at the results. On some days he took in maybe a thousand more calories than he burned. It is so hard for me to stay quiet during such exhibitions of ignorance, but I do. I’ve learned this over the years. I must STFU.

But I’m also aware of another feature of life in America, perhaps everywhere. Our minds are like river backwaters – without effort they easily fill up with brackish refuse. The easiest information to come by is the most commonly believed. Our relative’s notion is that body weight is a simply matter of counting calories. Without effort on his part, that information will stay resident in his mind. And there will be no effort to unseat the information as every dietary expert, every gym, every diet book emphasizes counting calories, burning calories, as the only solution to our obesity epidemic.
Continue reading “Something ain’t right”

The 555 jolt back to reality

Have you ever been watching a movie or TV show and get caught up in it, and they have to give a phone number as part of the plot and it is always a “555” number? They have to do that of course, as there are no 555 numbers in the land so that no one is bombarded with phone calls after a working number is accidentally given mass exposure.

Even so, once that happens, poof! I lose interest. It’s like seeing a wristwatch on a cowboy – it jolts me back into the present and forces me to admit to myself that I am watching fiction. The fun is over.

Perhaps we can all agree on a certain allotment of dead phone numbers that they can use that sound real, or they can pass the number to each other on a slip of paper or have a car horn go off when they are saying the number or something – these are really clever people. They can do better.

Is this just me? Is anyone else bugged by this annoying habit?

Eat your heart out

This post is really a footnote to the one below, but will be much shorter so that busy people might be more inclined to read it.

I questioned below the funding sources for Democracy Now!, noting that a venerable liberal magazine, The New Republic, owed its funding for decades to Wall Street. I am also wondering if DN! is similarly compromised and is operating as a “This far, no further” left-gatekeeping operation. Here’s some evidence to consider:

Jeremy Scahill is a regular contributor on DN!, and has been supportive of the US in attacking Syria. It’s just his opinion. Another opinion was offered by the Syrian nun Mother Agnes, who has been touring various places and claiming that the chemical weapons attack that was supposed to propel the US into that war was much more than just a hoax. She claims that the Western-backed terrorist forces abducted the children, murdered them, and then filmed their corpses for cover for the Obama attack.

That’s gross beyond words, but not at all beyond the pale for people who eat human hearts. (I do not know if that claim regarding what we are watching in that film is true, if it is a hoax or deliberately staged, and offer only this evidence: CNN is almost always supportive of US wars, even the supposed humanitarian ones. In this situation, it would be then a hostile witness carrying more weight than a normal one.)

Both Scahill and Mother Agnes were invited to a conference sponsored by the Stop the War Coalition in London last November, Scahill made it known that he would not participate if Mother Agnes was allowed to speak.

So much for democracy, now, Jeremy. Some voices should be heard others not. (Mother Agnes demurely pulled back, a typically leftist fault, not wanting to disrupt the conference. Scahill had no qualms about doing the same.)