Even dear Milty Friedman admitted before he passed on that there is no such thing as a "free" market ... and there certainly is no such thing as "free" trade.
It is hard to imagine any science resting on certain economics assumptions that are taken quite literally as gospel ... for instance, what if meteorologist ascribed the funnel shapes of tornadoes to "The Invisible Hand"? ... or physicists, the flowing of sand through a funnel falling into a perfect cone? ... or an ocean whirlpool?
Why is there no such thing as "free" in markets or trade? Because the underpinning of "free" markets and "free" trade is the pursuit of self-interest in each micro-transaction ... which can only work as long as there some sort of equality between the actors (those individuals [and corporations acting as indivduals] participating in the transactions) ... but the very nature of pursuing self-interest is to gain AND accumulate advantage ... and BECAUSE these individual actors are NEVER equal there will always be the gaining and accumulating of advantage.
And like my REAL scientist friends tell me: Duh!
Monday, May 21, 2007
On the nature of religion
Religion is a culture's narrative of existence that explains the "why" of the world around us.
Our narrative of existence began in our primordial past as a species with myths explaining the otherwise unexplainable that nonetheless required an explanation lest we be inhibited by fear of its recurrence. (Ref: The Power of Myth, by Joseph Campbell) Thus religion from its very inception encoded the possibility of hope, the power to instill courage in the face of mystery ... and the possibility of purpose for all that we experience, and that this purpose is inherently benevolent toward an end ... as the biblical teaching: "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose." Romans 8:28 King James Version New Testament, http://www.blueletterbible.org/.
One of the substantive "civilizing" benefits of a religion is the instilling of fear of authority in children, allowing the wisdom of elders to replace the hormones of youth in selecting leadership. And this is a key element in being able to consider the religion as rational, that it makes sense to age groups from childhood through young adult. After that, the individual has been sufficiently co-opted as to render him/her as nonthreatening to the hierarchal structure of a society.
Reducing, even eliminating, the conflicts over sexual fulfillment became a cornerstone of the Abrahamic religions—the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—those claiming Abraham in their sacred history . We now know, of course, that they got it all wrong. Sexual desire is not a force of evil controlling our body, but rather the biochemistry of procreation, essentially disproving these religions' doctrine.
But whether or not someone such as myself who has been raised in a moral/ethical milieu of Western Civilization's Christianity BELIEVES the religion's doctrine, I am still "a fish in water" as to it mores and practices. I wear clothes covering my sexual and secretion organs and orifices. I do not engage in overt sexual activity nor do I urinate or defecate in public or settings other than those specifically designated for that purpose ... or where I am assured of the requisite level of privacy. I do not touch other people "inappropriately", nor do I indicate in any manner a sexual interest in another person in a setting where such behavior is considered inappropriate.
But then I try not to belch or fart in public, either ... or display gross eating habits, such as slurping my soup ... or other "negative" behavior habits, such as scratching my genitals or butt.
In other words, I am ... and as many of us are ... "housebroken" according to the mores of Western Civilization Christianity. Its narrative of existence is embedded in my psyche.
There are some philosophical considerations that I should note in this discussion. They are that all beliefs are speculations and these beliefs should be examined with rational skepticism. What I do know for certain is that I am aware of my experiencing, and that I experience my experiencing as a continuum of events in which the present came out of the past which is the same as saying the future will come out of the present. And what I experience is diverse in that it is not all the same.
The discussion continues ... I'll get back to you.
Our narrative of existence began in our primordial past as a species with myths explaining the otherwise unexplainable that nonetheless required an explanation lest we be inhibited by fear of its recurrence. (Ref: The Power of Myth, by Joseph Campbell) Thus religion from its very inception encoded the possibility of hope, the power to instill courage in the face of mystery ... and the possibility of purpose for all that we experience, and that this purpose is inherently benevolent toward an end ... as the biblical teaching: "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose." Romans 8:28 King James Version New Testament, http://www.blueletterbible.org/.
One of the substantive "civilizing" benefits of a religion is the instilling of fear of authority in children, allowing the wisdom of elders to replace the hormones of youth in selecting leadership. And this is a key element in being able to consider the religion as rational, that it makes sense to age groups from childhood through young adult. After that, the individual has been sufficiently co-opted as to render him/her as nonthreatening to the hierarchal structure of a society.
Reducing, even eliminating, the conflicts over sexual fulfillment became a cornerstone of the Abrahamic religions—the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—those claiming Abraham in their sacred history . We now know, of course, that they got it all wrong. Sexual desire is not a force of evil controlling our body, but rather the biochemistry of procreation, essentially disproving these religions' doctrine.
But whether or not someone such as myself who has been raised in a moral/ethical milieu of Western Civilization's Christianity BELIEVES the religion's doctrine, I am still "a fish in water" as to it mores and practices. I wear clothes covering my sexual and secretion organs and orifices. I do not engage in overt sexual activity nor do I urinate or defecate in public or settings other than those specifically designated for that purpose ... or where I am assured of the requisite level of privacy. I do not touch other people "inappropriately", nor do I indicate in any manner a sexual interest in another person in a setting where such behavior is considered inappropriate.
But then I try not to belch or fart in public, either ... or display gross eating habits, such as slurping my soup ... or other "negative" behavior habits, such as scratching my genitals or butt.
In other words, I am ... and as many of us are ... "housebroken" according to the mores of Western Civilization Christianity. Its narrative of existence is embedded in my psyche.
There are some philosophical considerations that I should note in this discussion. They are that all beliefs are speculations and these beliefs should be examined with rational skepticism. What I do know for certain is that I am aware of my experiencing, and that I experience my experiencing as a continuum of events in which the present came out of the past which is the same as saying the future will come out of the present. And what I experience is diverse in that it is not all the same.
The discussion continues ... I'll get back to you.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Senator Hagel for President?
I think a run by Senator Hagel as an Independent from the heartland of America could be really, really good for we the people ... maybe shake things up a bit.
First some basics ...
The ruling power elite in our nation is made up of three main nodules ... and the current political struggles (since Truman?) are really about which nodule's power center is going to control the power of the federal government ... in a macro sense. (Don't ya just LUV those words like "macro"? I could just as well used, "generally speaking" ... but I didn't.)
There's international finance with the Clintons and the Rockefellers as their iconic politicos on one end ... and big oil with the Bushs et al on the other ... and smack dab in the center are the pharmaceuticals, insurance, automotive, and other.
The international finance group GAVE away our economic base under Clinton trying to get control of all the money in the world ... then big oil joined forces with the neocons (with like interests in controlling the Middle East) to capture the political enthusiasm of the Christian Right leading us to where we are now with the big oil group + neocons + Christian Right squandering our world leadership in Iraq trying to hang onto the oil ...
The future can clearly be seen: The Decline and Fall of the Great American Economy and Its World Leadership Status ... (Kevin Phillips will shorten the title when he writes the book.)
Right now we seem to be hanging onto the idea that we gotta be the leader ... 'cuz why? ... 'cuz we still have the most nukes ... and that means God is on our side, right?
But when it all comes crashing down ... whenever China no longer needs our markets to REALLY get control of both the money and the oil 'cuz it is investing in its people ... our power elite will blame it on us, the people.
(And you know, in a way, the power elite will be right?)
So I think a run by Senator Hagel to help shake this all up BEFORE hand, would be a good thing ... don't you think?
Friday, May 11, 2007
A political tsunami is headed here ...
Factoid Numero Uno: Secure access to Middle East oil aka energy resources is a strategic objective of the United States warranting the use of military force to maintain. Neither Republicans NOR Democrats will give that up, unless ...
And this is what has the power elite of this country worried ... like in DEEPLY concerned ... that the incompetence of Bush 43 resulting in the unconscionable loss of blood and treasure PLUS the psychopathic political tactics of Karl Rove resulting in the assault on our constitutional form of government ... have so aroused the anger and dismay of we the people that we are going to rush to the exits, overturning everything the corporatists have built since WWII.
The power elite has felt the first real tremors of a huge earthquake deep in the populace ... and rightly fear a tsunami that well sweep away their control.
We could be in for a real democratic revolution come November 2008 if we the people don't blink ... or get confused by pseudo small "d" democrats like Hillary.
Watch General Batiste on Keith Olbermann:
http://www.votevets.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=263&Itemid=69
And this is what has the power elite of this country worried ... like in DEEPLY concerned ... that the incompetence of Bush 43 resulting in the unconscionable loss of blood and treasure PLUS the psychopathic political tactics of Karl Rove resulting in the assault on our constitutional form of government ... have so aroused the anger and dismay of we the people that we are going to rush to the exits, overturning everything the corporatists have built since WWII.
The power elite has felt the first real tremors of a huge earthquake deep in the populace ... and rightly fear a tsunami that well sweep away their control.
We could be in for a real democratic revolution come November 2008 if we the people don't blink ... or get confused by pseudo small "d" democrats like Hillary.
Watch General Batiste on Keith Olbermann:
http://www.votevets.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=263&Itemid=69
Thursday, May 03, 2007
You can't make this stuff up!
Gonzales and Wolfowitz ... and how many before those two? Like, "Heckuva job, Brownie."
Bush says, "I'm the commander guy."
You can't make this stuff up!
If you line up mug shots of Karl Rove, Kyle Sampson, and Tim Griffin (with his glasses on) and you get three peas in a pod of pudgy buddies.
I mean, c'mon, folks!
They were politicizing the JUSTICE Department ... and what was the Republican response? It's done all the time!
Gimme a break!
We need to get out the "Impeach Bleach" and clean the rot out of the Bush 43 administration. We may be holding our noses now, but at this rate we will be gagging and retching at the stench by January, 2009, when the new president takes over ... if we don't clean the mess up.
Bush says, "I'm the commander guy."
You can't make this stuff up!
If you line up mug shots of Karl Rove, Kyle Sampson, and Tim Griffin (with his glasses on) and you get three peas in a pod of pudgy buddies.
I mean, c'mon, folks!
They were politicizing the JUSTICE Department ... and what was the Republican response? It's done all the time!
Gimme a break!
We need to get out the "Impeach Bleach" and clean the rot out of the Bush 43 administration. We may be holding our noses now, but at this rate we will be gagging and retching at the stench by January, 2009, when the new president takes over ... if we don't clean the mess up.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
The new economics - Post 8
Globalization: a ploy to reduce the cost of labor
Labor rights are a major issue in globalization and expose the brilliant idiocy of many global economists. Globalization for them is—among other things—a ploy to reduce the cost of labor in the industrialized west.
The irrational nature of this ploy pertaining to labor in the current conventional wisdom on global economics is exposed by the rational concept that equilibrium is reached between two or more fluid materials/situations (multiple transactions in bounded settings) at the LOWEST level IF the pull of "gravity" is toward the lowest level achievable, i.e. lowest cost.
Lowest cost is the "gravity" of the individual transaction or microeconomic event because the "buyer" is the actor—the individual who decides whether or not to act (or buy)—and given the opportunity to get more or less of the same thing for a given "price" will rationally choose to get more, i.e., buy at a lower price.
Think of it as two barrels filled with fluid and kept separate for a time. One fills up faster than the other. Now, connect them so they can reach equal levels ... it is patently obvious that the higher one will come down. Now think of the one that had the higher level as a 55 gallon drum and the one that had the lower level as a 5500 gallon tank ... the previous higher level is going to come WAY down.
Does anyone really wonder what is happening between the United States and China regarding workers’ wages?
Labor is more than just a commodity. It is how we think about ourselves and how we connect to our communities and make our contribution. We have a right to be treated fairly and equitably.
If we treat our labor simply as a commodity, simply to be purchased rationally at the lowest possible price, we effectively erode our society. This is because we do not have a system for updating the costs of maintaining the worker above the basics of minimum food, shelter, and clothing. Our current mechanism of determining the cost of labor on the global market, drives it down to slave wages, or the cost of having a human mule.
We need to move forward to a new understanding of how markets work. Old theories are out of date ... both free market capitalism and central control socialism.
Labor rights are a major issue in globalization and expose the brilliant idiocy of many global economists. Globalization for them is—among other things—a ploy to reduce the cost of labor in the industrialized west.
The irrational nature of this ploy pertaining to labor in the current conventional wisdom on global economics is exposed by the rational concept that equilibrium is reached between two or more fluid materials/situations (multiple transactions in bounded settings) at the LOWEST level IF the pull of "gravity" is toward the lowest level achievable, i.e. lowest cost.
Lowest cost is the "gravity" of the individual transaction or microeconomic event because the "buyer" is the actor—the individual who decides whether or not to act (or buy)—and given the opportunity to get more or less of the same thing for a given "price" will rationally choose to get more, i.e., buy at a lower price.
Think of it as two barrels filled with fluid and kept separate for a time. One fills up faster than the other. Now, connect them so they can reach equal levels ... it is patently obvious that the higher one will come down. Now think of the one that had the higher level as a 55 gallon drum and the one that had the lower level as a 5500 gallon tank ... the previous higher level is going to come WAY down.
Does anyone really wonder what is happening between the United States and China regarding workers’ wages?
Labor is more than just a commodity. It is how we think about ourselves and how we connect to our communities and make our contribution. We have a right to be treated fairly and equitably.
If we treat our labor simply as a commodity, simply to be purchased rationally at the lowest possible price, we effectively erode our society. This is because we do not have a system for updating the costs of maintaining the worker above the basics of minimum food, shelter, and clothing. Our current mechanism of determining the cost of labor on the global market, drives it down to slave wages, or the cost of having a human mule.
We need to move forward to a new understanding of how markets work. Old theories are out of date ... both free market capitalism and central control socialism.
Mind mirrors matter
There you have it, the mind mirrors matter. Actually, life mirrors non-life.
In the orderly recurrence of relational events, life is able to establish itself as the effect of these orderly recurring relational events, becoming a bounded set of same ... a lifeform.
Mind then becomes the etching of same as if a stylus was recording the contours of a figure on a drawing ... the etching of events within and without the boundary of the lifeform ... within the lifeform in a manner in which they can be "remembered" ... which is to say, the etchings can be retraced.
More to come ...
In the orderly recurrence of relational events, life is able to establish itself as the effect of these orderly recurring relational events, becoming a bounded set of same ... a lifeform.
Mind then becomes the etching of same as if a stylus was recording the contours of a figure on a drawing ... the etching of events within and without the boundary of the lifeform ... within the lifeform in a manner in which they can be "remembered" ... which is to say, the etchings can be retraced.
More to come ...
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The new economics - Post 7
Does free trade and globalization work? Depends on the objective. Are we talking amassing owned wealth for the few or creating a resource-rich community of nations for the many?
One thing it does NOT do is preserve higher labor costs for work that can be performed somewhere else at a lower labor cost. But, you might say, that is rational. But, I would counter, it is not rational if rationally determined ethical values (labor rights) regulate one labor source and laissez-faire values regulate the competing source of labor. Slavery, child labor, or 72 hour work weeks should not be options for civilized trading partners. (For that matter, neither should global pollution be an option.)
Another point—it would seem to me—is that in a fluid situation where a commodity such as labor cost is free to flow between disparate settings, equilibrium will be achieved at the lowest common level ... all else being equal. Here the "gravity" factor is the tendency for the buyer of a commodity to seek the lowest price ... all else being equal.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Democrats let Bill Clinton pursue globalization, giving up our market leverage that could have been applied to rational labor rights and environmental regulations in the trade agreements. Except that Bill was never a democrat (small "d") but rather a moderate (Rockefeller) Republican.
One thing it does NOT do is preserve higher labor costs for work that can be performed somewhere else at a lower labor cost. But, you might say, that is rational. But, I would counter, it is not rational if rationally determined ethical values (labor rights) regulate one labor source and laissez-faire values regulate the competing source of labor. Slavery, child labor, or 72 hour work weeks should not be options for civilized trading partners. (For that matter, neither should global pollution be an option.)
Another point—it would seem to me—is that in a fluid situation where a commodity such as labor cost is free to flow between disparate settings, equilibrium will be achieved at the lowest common level ... all else being equal. Here the "gravity" factor is the tendency for the buyer of a commodity to seek the lowest price ... all else being equal.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Democrats let Bill Clinton pursue globalization, giving up our market leverage that could have been applied to rational labor rights and environmental regulations in the trade agreements. Except that Bill was never a democrat (small "d") but rather a moderate (Rockefeller) Republican.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
HuffPo comments for Tuesday, April 17
French Intelligence Warned CIA Of Al-Qaeda Hijack Plot In Early '01
"Everyone knew that something was cooking, that these people were preparing something big and spectacular," Alain Chouet, former chief of the security intelligence service at the DGSE, told AP. "Our American colleagues knew, our European colleagues knew, everyone did. But nobody had a hint it would happen inside the United States _ on the contrary."
Excuse me, but you might say there was a hint contained in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the United States." After which President Bush told the briefer, "Okay, you have covered your a--." I guess the French intelligence was just one more clue ignored. No wonder Condi Rice, then National Security Advisor, was scheduled to give a major speech on September 11, 2001, on the urgent need for a ballistic missile defense. Of course, that speech never happened.
By: GabrielOak on April 16, 2007 at 06:39pm
And remembering back to the summer of '01 and the military-industrial hype for the ballistic missile defense system(shield) ... then considering the "Shock and Awe" strategy of "rapid dominance" ... plus ... and ... plus ... and we can see the picture that here is a group of brilliant idiots whose only reality is their own delusions of alpha-hood.
I'm going to have watch DR. STRANGELOVE again ... I'm getting the creepy feeling that the neocons stole the script without giving proper credit.
By: hglindquist on April 17, 2007 at 09:45am
"Everyone knew that something was cooking, that these people were preparing something big and spectacular," Alain Chouet, former chief of the security intelligence service at the DGSE, told AP. "Our American colleagues knew, our European colleagues knew, everyone did. But nobody had a hint it would happen inside the United States _ on the contrary."
Excuse me, but you might say there was a hint contained in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the United States." After which President Bush told the briefer, "Okay, you have covered your a--." I guess the French intelligence was just one more clue ignored. No wonder Condi Rice, then National Security Advisor, was scheduled to give a major speech on September 11, 2001, on the urgent need for a ballistic missile defense. Of course, that speech never happened.
By: GabrielOak on April 16, 2007 at 06:39pm
And remembering back to the summer of '01 and the military-industrial hype for the ballistic missile defense system(shield) ... then considering the "Shock and Awe" strategy of "rapid dominance" ... plus ... and ... plus ... and we can see the picture that here is a group of brilliant idiots whose only reality is their own delusions of alpha-hood.
I'm going to have watch DR. STRANGELOVE again ... I'm getting the creepy feeling that the neocons stole the script without giving proper credit.
By: hglindquist on April 17, 2007 at 09:45am
Monday, April 09, 2007
How are we absurd? Let me count another way ... Post 2
Imus slanders the Rutgers women's basket ball team on MSNBC ... and keeps his job as of today.
A little six year old black girl is arrested and booked as a felon in Florida ...
We have become absurd ...
Don Imus has apologized�and has put his apology at the top of his web site�for calling the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos" after they lost in the NCAA finals.
Just when it didn't seem possible, Imus, host of MSNBC's "Imus in the Morning," managed to reach a new low. While discussing the NCAA women's basketball game between Rutgers University and the University of Tennessee, Imus openly described the team, which has eight black and two white women on it, as "nappy-headed hos" after the show's producer, Bernard McGuirk, called the team "hardcore hos."
A little six year old black girl is arrested and booked as a felon in Florida ...
When 6-year-old Desre’e Watson threw a tantrum in her kindergarten class a couple of weeks ago she could not have known that the full force of the law would be brought down on her and that she would be carted off by the police as a felon.
But that’s what happened in this small, backward city in central Florida. According to the authorities, there were no other options.Bob Herbert
6-Year-Olds Under Arrest
April 9, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/opinion/09herbert.htm
We have become absurd ...
Sunday, April 08, 2007
The new economics - Post 6
We should take what we have learned from Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism and move on to a new economics system based on a rational market.
What do I mean by a "rational" market? A rational understanding of the world typically means that we understand the cause and effect relationship of events. If the temperature of water drops below 0 degrees Centigrade/ 32 degrees Fahrenheit then the water freezes.
In a market in order to produce goods or services to sell or exchange, the producer/seller has to use a given set of resources and thereby incurs what should be the costs of bringing the goods and services to market. These "costs" are the "cause" of the "effect" of having goods or services to sell or exchange in a market. A market is rational to the extent that the costs (cause) are paid for out of the selling price (effect) of the market, as one factor.
We know from experience that the traditional market is not efficient in matching all costs incurred in producing given goods and services to the selling prices of those goods and services; and therefore some costs are left out of the current market price system (euphemistically called the free market or free price system). These costs not included are called "externalities". Examples of externalities are the cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, the excavating and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams to get at coal seams in the mountains, and the dumping of dioxin in the Delaware and Hudson Rivers--to name but three.
It really doesn't take a rocket scientist of an economist to figure this stuff out, yet we have had these brilliant idiots foisting the benefits of free market globalization off on us unsuspecting laypersons at least since Eisenhower became president.
It doesn't take a higher level equation to prove the free market economists wrong, simple common sense will do. The key thread to pull on to unravel their gossamer theory is the concept of "The Invisible Hand". Anyone who abandons rational skepticism for some god-like mechanism has already identified themselves as a flim-flam faker in the post-enlightenment world. (Yes, I understand that's a little hard to swallow for some folks.)
Do we still believe that whirlpools or tornadoes are the work of an angry God? Do we believe that pouring sand through a funnel and having it fall into a cone shaped mound is the work of an Invisible Hand?
What is more, is the whirlpool the ocean? Is the tornado the sky?
What do I mean by a "rational" market? A rational understanding of the world typically means that we understand the cause and effect relationship of events. If the temperature of water drops below 0 degrees Centigrade/ 32 degrees Fahrenheit then the water freezes.
In a market in order to produce goods or services to sell or exchange, the producer/seller has to use a given set of resources and thereby incurs what should be the costs of bringing the goods and services to market. These "costs" are the "cause" of the "effect" of having goods or services to sell or exchange in a market. A market is rational to the extent that the costs (cause) are paid for out of the selling price (effect) of the market, as one factor.
We know from experience that the traditional market is not efficient in matching all costs incurred in producing given goods and services to the selling prices of those goods and services; and therefore some costs are left out of the current market price system (euphemistically called the free market or free price system). These costs not included are called "externalities". Examples of externalities are the cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, the excavating and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams to get at coal seams in the mountains, and the dumping of dioxin in the Delaware and Hudson Rivers--to name but three.
It really doesn't take a rocket scientist of an economist to figure this stuff out, yet we have had these brilliant idiots foisting the benefits of free market globalization off on us unsuspecting laypersons at least since Eisenhower became president.
It doesn't take a higher level equation to prove the free market economists wrong, simple common sense will do. The key thread to pull on to unravel their gossamer theory is the concept of "The Invisible Hand". Anyone who abandons rational skepticism for some god-like mechanism has already identified themselves as a flim-flam faker in the post-enlightenment world. (Yes, I understand that's a little hard to swallow for some folks.)
Do we still believe that whirlpools or tornadoes are the work of an angry God? Do we believe that pouring sand through a funnel and having it fall into a cone shaped mound is the work of an Invisible Hand?
What is more, is the whirlpool the ocean? Is the tornado the sky?
Friday, April 06, 2007
Cheney as the Queen of Hearts ...
Cheney Reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam Link
WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his assertions of al-Qaida links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq on Thursday as the Defense Department released a report citing more evidence that the prewar government did not cooperate with the terrorist group.
ALICE'S ADVENTURES IN WONDERLAND
by Lewis Carroll
THE QUEEN'S CROQUET-GROUND
A large rose-tree stood near the entrance of the garden: the roses growing on it were white, but there were three gardeners at it, busily painting them red. Alice thought this a very curious thing, and she went nearer to watch them, and just as she came up to them she heard one of them say, `Look out now, Five! Don't go splashing paint over me like that!'
`I couldn't help it,' said Five, in a sulky tone; `Seven jogged my elbow.'
On which Seven looked up and said, `That's right, Five! Always lay the blame on others!'
`You'd better not talk!'said Five. `I heard the Queen say only yesterday you deserved to be beheaded!'
`What for?' said the one who had spoken first.
`That's none of your business, Two!' said Seven.
`Yes, it is his business!' said Five, `and I'll tell him--it was for bringing the cook tulip-roots instead of onions.'
Seven flung down his brush, and had just begun `Well, of all the unjust things--' when his eye chanced to fall upon Alice, as she stood watching them, and he checked himself suddenly: the others looked round also, and all of them bowed low.
`Would you tell me,' said Alice, a little timidly, `why you are painting those roses?'
Five and Seven said nothing, but looked at Two. Two began in a low voice, `Why the fact is, you see, Miss, this here ought to have been a red rose-tree, and we put a white one in by mistake; and if the Queen was to find it out, we should all have our heads cut off, you know. So you see, Miss, we're doing our best, afore she comes, to--'
Do I have to tell anyone how much the Queen of Hearts reminds me Vice President Cheney?
Paint the white roses red ...
We have become absurd.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Comments on the War in Iraq ... Thursday, April 5
And we are supposed to continue the surge because General Petraeus knows what he is doing and he has confidence ... confidence in what? that the surge MIGHT work? That's the confidence of a general who wants another star and needs a ticket punch.
Petraeus has also said that there is NO military solution. So is this a training exercise for our field grade and higher officers?
I mean, what the hell is going on? The charge of the light brigade? Gallipoli? What delusion grips our brilliant idiots along with our plain old dumb ones as leaders to the point that we send ill-equipped, ill-prepared youth into battle?
At least if there were a draft there would be SOME kind of shared sacrifice ... but if the children of the rich and powerful had to go, we wouldn't be having this war would we?
The leaders our nation should be following are Congressmen Charles Rangel and John Murtha ... men who personally know what shared sacrifice in the time of war is all about.
...
A quote I like:
It was and still is absurd to think we could pacify Iraq with the size of occupation force we used. Generals Colin Powell, Eric Shinseki, and Anthony Zinni all said the same thing, to quote Zinni:
It is time we the people took our nation back.
Petraeus has also said that there is NO military solution. So is this a training exercise for our field grade and higher officers?
I mean, what the hell is going on? The charge of the light brigade? Gallipoli? What delusion grips our brilliant idiots along with our plain old dumb ones as leaders to the point that we send ill-equipped, ill-prepared youth into battle?
At least if there were a draft there would be SOME kind of shared sacrifice ... but if the children of the rich and powerful had to go, we wouldn't be having this war would we?
The leaders our nation should be following are Congressmen Charles Rangel and John Murtha ... men who personally know what shared sacrifice in the time of war is all about.
...
A quote I like:
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"I have been writing for some time now that we are absurd as a nation.-Voltaire.
It was and still is absurd to think we could pacify Iraq with the size of occupation force we used. Generals Colin Powell, Eric Shinseki, and Anthony Zinni all said the same thing, to quote Zinni:
"I think it was clear they underestimated what they were going to face in the aftermath of the war. They didn't have sufficient planning for some of the problems they would face in major reconstruction of a country so centrally controlled and dominated by one figure and also had control of the institutions."The generals who went along with the neocons' absurd wild-eyed dreams and schemes are not only responsible for the military debacle that has unfolded for more now more than four years but also for the atrocities of Abu Garib (for starters).
It is time we the people took our nation back.
The new economics - Post 5
Let's hear it for The Invisible Hand ...
Are you kidding me? Whatever happened to the concept of skeptical review of speculation ... and speculation is all that any belief really is. (What? Of course I am an existentialist. Why do you ask?)
Some background from wikipedia.com:
What is more, a market or price system just doesn't spring miraculously into existence. It arises, layer by layer, on an emerging system of economics within a community of people ... and while that foundation may seem permanent, it isn't. It needs to be renewed generation after generation by educating each new generation, by maintaining and enhancing infrastructure, by building on what we have without allowing the foundation to deteriorate. If these costs aren't paid, the system is not maintained and it collapses ... sooner or later.
It is this community system as a foundation that is the platform for individual performance. Even if "the sky's the limit", launching oneself from a swamp or a crumbling deck is not the best way to reach the sky.
The simple facts of people paying their bills on time, of obeying traffic laws so trucks can move goods, of sending their kids to school each day and all that goes with that effort ... and yes, even being willing to suffer the indignity of welfare rather than resort to robbery ... all this and more that people do in working to make a community work economically ... can dissolve into a Hobbesian jungle or an autocratic dictatorship before our very eyes if people lose faith in the ability of their community to provide economic justice, to be treat them fairly in return for their effort and commitment.
What do you think it is going to be like around here when people wake up to the fact that our brilliant idiots in charge of economic policy have given away our labor rights so they can live in mansions?
Note: My god, there are those who still think Clinton was a democrat (small "d")! He was and is a Rockefeller Republican. Get real, folks.
Are you kidding me? Whatever happened to the concept of skeptical review of speculation ... and speculation is all that any belief really is. (What? Of course I am an existentialist. Why do you ask?)
Some background from wikipedia.com:
The invisible hand is a metaphor coined by Adam Smith to illustrate how those who seek wealth by following their individual self-interest, inadvertently stimulate the economy and assist society as a whole. In the general opinion, in The Wealth of Nations and other writings, Smith claims that, in capitalism, an individual pursuing his own good tends also to promote the good of his community, through a principle that he called “the invisible hand” of the market, which ensures that those activities most beneficial and efficient will naturally be those that are most profitable. The specific mechanism for this, Smith saw as being the free price system.The biggest problem with Adam Smith's conjecture is that there is no such thing as a "free price system" BECAUSE individuals are unwilling (under the dictum of the invisible hand to pursue self-interest) to give up any advantage that skews the market in their favor. In other words, they are unwilling to pay all the costs incurred in "earning" their profits. Economists call these costs left unpaid "externalities", and aptly so so because while they exist, they are external to the price system. For instance, cancer caused by second-hand cigarette smoke, or the digging up and dumping of mountaintops into valleys and streams below to get at coal seams, are externalities.
What is more, a market or price system just doesn't spring miraculously into existence. It arises, layer by layer, on an emerging system of economics within a community of people ... and while that foundation may seem permanent, it isn't. It needs to be renewed generation after generation by educating each new generation, by maintaining and enhancing infrastructure, by building on what we have without allowing the foundation to deteriorate. If these costs aren't paid, the system is not maintained and it collapses ... sooner or later.
It is this community system as a foundation that is the platform for individual performance. Even if "the sky's the limit", launching oneself from a swamp or a crumbling deck is not the best way to reach the sky.
The simple facts of people paying their bills on time, of obeying traffic laws so trucks can move goods, of sending their kids to school each day and all that goes with that effort ... and yes, even being willing to suffer the indignity of welfare rather than resort to robbery ... all this and more that people do in working to make a community work economically ... can dissolve into a Hobbesian jungle or an autocratic dictatorship before our very eyes if people lose faith in the ability of their community to provide economic justice, to be treat them fairly in return for their effort and commitment.
What do you think it is going to be like around here when people wake up to the fact that our brilliant idiots in charge of economic policy have given away our labor rights so they can live in mansions?
Note: My god, there are those who still think Clinton was a democrat (small "d")! He was and is a Rockefeller Republican. Get real, folks.
How are we absurd? Let me count another way ...
The corporate monopolists/neocons in control of our nation have abandoned the pursuit of self-criticism for the pursuit of self-interest. Self-interest trumps truth.
Bob Herbert, NY Times OpEd columnist, in his column today titled "Our Crumbling Foundation", writes:
Herbert continues:
ab·surd /æbˈsÉœrd, -ˈzÉœrd/ -adjective
1.utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 05 Apr. 2007. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/absurd>.
Bob Herbert, NY Times OpEd columnist, in his column today titled "Our Crumbling Foundation", writes:
Blackouts, school buildings in advanced states of disrepair, decrepit highway and railroad bridges — the American infrastructure is growing increasingly old and obsolete. In addition to being an invitation to tragedy, this is a problem that is putting Americans at a disadvantage in the ever more competitive global economy.While seeking to dominate the globe, our brilliant idiots in charge have hollowed out our core in pursuit of personal wealth and power. They tell us they are doing this to keep America strong while weakening our foundation.
Herbert continues:
Felix Rohatyn, the investment banker who helped save New York City from bankruptcy in the 1970s, has been prominent among those trying to sound the infrastructure alarm. Along with former Senator Warren Rudman, he has been criticizing the government’s unwillingness to invest adequately in public transportation systems, water projects, dams, schools, the electrical grid, and so on.
...
“A modern economy needs a modern platform, and that’s the infrastructure,” Mr. Rohatyn said in an interview. “It has been shown that the productivity of an economy is related to the quality of its infrastructure. For example, if you don’t have enough schools to teach your kids, or your kids are taught in schools that have holes in the ceilings, that are dilapidated, they’re not going to be as educated and as competitive in a world economy as they need to be.”
ab·surd /æbˈsÉœrd, -ˈzÉœrd/ -adjective
1.utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 05 Apr. 2007. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/absurd>.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Bush is the King of Hearts in wonderland
The emperor has no clothes ...
Bush 43 isn't King of the USA, he is the King of Hearts in Wonderland ... absurd ... where down is up, and up is down.
How did our great nation get to this point? It happened when our leaders abandoned skepticism in the pursuit of truth for the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps truth.
It isn't just Bush who is absurd. Look in the mirror, America.
We have plans for success for our children in preschool ... I mean the kind that plot out the steps to high-paying adult careers, for chrissakes!
And you think that's going to turn around anytime soon?
I repeat, we as a society have bought--hook, line, AND sinker (the perfect pun)--the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps the pursuit of truth.
We have abandoned skepticism toward both our understanding of "what is" AND our choices of "what ought to be" ... and in doing so we have become absurd.
Instead of listening to leaders like Congressman Charles Rangel and his concepts of governance taken from the New Testament Book of Matthew, we listen to the likes of Tim Russert who discusses the issues with an eye on ratings.
And worse ... We are the ones who sit glued to the tube watching the news of Anna Nicole Smith's death unfold. We are the ones who spend more time tracking the contestants on American Idol than the policy statements and records of our political candidates.
We are a combination of Rome with the circuses in the Coliseum and Nazi Germany with the fear of others. We are absurd.
Sadly, with the sell-out of labor rights in globalization, we drove off the cliff. Now we have nothing to support a renewal.
And we have no prophets to call us to repentance ... sack cloth and ashes don't wear well in the board room.
Bush 43 isn't King of the USA, he is the King of Hearts in Wonderland ... absurd ... where down is up, and up is down.
How did our great nation get to this point? It happened when our leaders abandoned skepticism in the pursuit of truth for the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps truth.
It isn't just Bush who is absurd. Look in the mirror, America.
We have plans for success for our children in preschool ... I mean the kind that plot out the steps to high-paying adult careers, for chrissakes!
And you think that's going to turn around anytime soon?
I repeat, we as a society have bought--hook, line, AND sinker (the perfect pun)--the corporate monopolist/neocon dictum that the pursuit of self-interest trumps the pursuit of truth.
We have abandoned skepticism toward both our understanding of "what is" AND our choices of "what ought to be" ... and in doing so we have become absurd.
Instead of listening to leaders like Congressman Charles Rangel and his concepts of governance taken from the New Testament Book of Matthew, we listen to the likes of Tim Russert who discusses the issues with an eye on ratings.
And worse ... We are the ones who sit glued to the tube watching the news of Anna Nicole Smith's death unfold. We are the ones who spend more time tracking the contestants on American Idol than the policy statements and records of our political candidates.
We are a combination of Rome with the circuses in the Coliseum and Nazi Germany with the fear of others. We are absurd.
Sadly, with the sell-out of labor rights in globalization, we drove off the cliff. Now we have nothing to support a renewal.
And we have no prophets to call us to repentance ... sack cloth and ashes don't wear well in the board room.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Some thoughts along the way
- I can think of only two absolutes.
1. There is more than one element making up the cosmos.
2. "What is" is the ground of "what will be" in the awareness of existence.
- Most of what we think we know should be examined with a great deal of skepticism.
- The problem with being too skeptical is not being willing to buy a ticket to Paris if we have never been there. Some faith in "hearsay" is necessary to live.
- How do we separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were? Too much uncertainty results in anxiety, even fear.
- We are taught a narrative of existence from childhood on. To what extent are we able to question it before anxiety or fear are felt?
For example, say that as young children we are taught by the adults in our lives that Disney World, heaven, and hell all exist. Before we go to Disney World it is just the adults telling us it exists. Then we start planning to go there, and because we really believe it exists (have no doubt whatsoever because mommy and daddy told us and others confirm it), we get excited. Then we get there and it is everything and more than what they said it would be like. On the way home from Disney World Mommy and Daddy reaffirm that we are going to heaven if we believe in Jesus and to hell if we don't. Once that emotional marker is set in childhood, it's there for life.
While skepticism will in time alter rational speculations, the emotional element will always be there to be triggered by the skepticism. Because one has to doubt to be skeptical, and doubt alters faith, and our Christian religion teaches that it is faith that saves us ... and in a sense it is right because we act on our beliefs as in whether or not we believe the plane will actually fly.
Think for a moment what it would be like to be taught that dying as a warrior for God results in being awarded direct transport to heaven with a personal cornucopia of goodies provided on arrival ... but I digress.
The rational issue is getting from the aboriginal's spear to the Apollo program ... of getting from planet earth to the outreaches of the universe. In this process skepticism regarding currently accepted speculations is necessary.
Skepticism isn't necessary in itself, but if we are to create what we choose ought to be out of what is, then it is necessary to be skeptical ... both about what is and about what we choose ought to be.
Simply put, it is possible to destroy the world. But because it is possible doesn't mean it should be done. It is possible to burn a person to death, and it has been done. We have decided that is something we should no longer do on purpose as a penalty for heresy or committing a crime.
We now have diseases we can treat with medicine and medical science. There was a time when we relied on our faith in God.
Why are some choices considered moral or ethical choices and others aren't? What is a moral or ethical choice has changed across both time and cultures.
Anyway, some thoughts along the way.
1. There is more than one element making up the cosmos.
2. "What is" is the ground of "what will be" in the awareness of existence.
- Most of what we think we know should be examined with a great deal of skepticism.
- The problem with being too skeptical is not being willing to buy a ticket to Paris if we have never been there. Some faith in "hearsay" is necessary to live.
- How do we separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were? Too much uncertainty results in anxiety, even fear.
- We are taught a narrative of existence from childhood on. To what extent are we able to question it before anxiety or fear are felt?
For example, say that as young children we are taught by the adults in our lives that Disney World, heaven, and hell all exist. Before we go to Disney World it is just the adults telling us it exists. Then we start planning to go there, and because we really believe it exists (have no doubt whatsoever because mommy and daddy told us and others confirm it), we get excited. Then we get there and it is everything and more than what they said it would be like. On the way home from Disney World Mommy and Daddy reaffirm that we are going to heaven if we believe in Jesus and to hell if we don't. Once that emotional marker is set in childhood, it's there for life.
While skepticism will in time alter rational speculations, the emotional element will always be there to be triggered by the skepticism. Because one has to doubt to be skeptical, and doubt alters faith, and our Christian religion teaches that it is faith that saves us ... and in a sense it is right because we act on our beliefs as in whether or not we believe the plane will actually fly.
Think for a moment what it would be like to be taught that dying as a warrior for God results in being awarded direct transport to heaven with a personal cornucopia of goodies provided on arrival ... but I digress.
The rational issue is getting from the aboriginal's spear to the Apollo program ... of getting from planet earth to the outreaches of the universe. In this process skepticism regarding currently accepted speculations is necessary.
Skepticism isn't necessary in itself, but if we are to create what we choose ought to be out of what is, then it is necessary to be skeptical ... both about what is and about what we choose ought to be.
Simply put, it is possible to destroy the world. But because it is possible doesn't mean it should be done. It is possible to burn a person to death, and it has been done. We have decided that is something we should no longer do on purpose as a penalty for heresy or committing a crime.
We now have diseases we can treat with medicine and medical science. There was a time when we relied on our faith in God.
Why are some choices considered moral or ethical choices and others aren't? What is a moral or ethical choice has changed across both time and cultures.
Anyway, some thoughts along the way.
Monday, April 02, 2007
The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ...
If we the people can't have the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth concerning how justice is pursued by the Bush 43 Administration ... then when can we have it?
I mean, if they won't tell us (truthfully, which means under oath for this gang) how and why citizens are hauled into court ... what is Bush 43 aka Shrub willing to tell us truthfully?
This has got nothing to do whether folks are Democrats or Republicans ... or at least it shouldn't. It's got everything whatsoever to do with the concept of justice being blind ... which is not supposed to be the three monkeys: speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil ... no matter what Bush and Gonzales try to foist off on us.
I mean, they have to be kidding, right?
Or are they really that dumb? ... like in, "it's the stupidity, stupid."
I mean, if they won't tell us (truthfully, which means under oath for this gang) how and why citizens are hauled into court ... what is Bush 43 aka Shrub willing to tell us truthfully?
This has got nothing to do whether folks are Democrats or Republicans ... or at least it shouldn't. It's got everything whatsoever to do with the concept of justice being blind ... which is not supposed to be the three monkeys: speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil ... no matter what Bush and Gonzales try to foist off on us.
I mean, they have to be kidding, right?
Or are they really that dumb? ... like in, "it's the stupidity, stupid."
Saturday, March 31, 2007
The new economics - Post 4
Concept: A community's wealth is not given to it by God. It arises out of the synergy of the community, comprising the efforts and mores of the community's people, including their leaders ... whose efforts and mores, by the way, may be in conflict with those of the people.
Concept: If a community's people contributes to the production of wealth by their efforts or by their adherence to the rules of the community, they have a rational right to a rationally proportionate share of that wealth. For example, if we expect people not to steal bread when they are hungry in a community with enough bread to go around, then we had better make sure everyone is fed. It is as simple as that. It is irrational to expect others to quietly go off and die so that I can keep eating.
Concept: Raising the broad foundation for sharing does not impose a limit on the height of the solitary pinnacle. It does, however, provide a firmer footing.
Concept: The United States of America has lost its way in the world and become absurd—economically, politically, ethically— BECAUSE we allow the corporate monopolists' dictum of self-interest to trump truth as an ethical value. We are in that situation of just having driven off the cliff and while not yet falling because the thrust of our forward progress still overcomes the pull of gravity, we cannot stay the course and the only change of course left is to crash. Make no mistake, the corporate monopolists in their greed—selling our birthright of core values that would guide us toward oughtness for a pot of porridge—are the root cause ... while the rest of us pray that we will win the lottery before it all comes crashing down.
Concept: If a community's people contributes to the production of wealth by their efforts or by their adherence to the rules of the community, they have a rational right to a rationally proportionate share of that wealth. For example, if we expect people not to steal bread when they are hungry in a community with enough bread to go around, then we had better make sure everyone is fed. It is as simple as that. It is irrational to expect others to quietly go off and die so that I can keep eating.
Concept: Raising the broad foundation for sharing does not impose a limit on the height of the solitary pinnacle. It does, however, provide a firmer footing.
Concept: The United States of America has lost its way in the world and become absurd—economically, politically, ethically— BECAUSE we allow the corporate monopolists' dictum of self-interest to trump truth as an ethical value. We are in that situation of just having driven off the cliff and while not yet falling because the thrust of our forward progress still overcomes the pull of gravity, we cannot stay the course and the only change of course left is to crash. Make no mistake, the corporate monopolists in their greed—selling our birthright of core values that would guide us toward oughtness for a pot of porridge—are the root cause ... while the rest of us pray that we will win the lottery before it all comes crashing down.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Thoughts on Bill and Hill(ary)
Bill and Hillary are card-carrying members of the political class that is in bondage to corporate monopolists seeking to make the normal pyramid of wealth distribution into an obelisk on the broad base of low-wage labor.
These are people who believe wealth is dispensed from above by God or an Invisible Hand, and not generated out of the synergy of the community producing goods and services for use and exchange in what should be a rational market.
As an aside: In this drive to amass wealth and power, it seems like our friends of the Judaic-Christian persuasion have forgotten the Biblical concept of Jubilee.
You know, the real wealth of a community is like the potential power in a compressed spring. What can be done if it is freed to work? That wealth resides in the health and education of the people. Leaders who do not understand this are Pharoahs building their tombs.
These are people who believe wealth is dispensed from above by God or an Invisible Hand, and not generated out of the synergy of the community producing goods and services for use and exchange in what should be a rational market.
As an aside: In this drive to amass wealth and power, it seems like our friends of the Judaic-Christian persuasion have forgotten the Biblical concept of Jubilee.
You know, the real wealth of a community is like the potential power in a compressed spring. What can be done if it is freed to work? That wealth resides in the health and education of the people. Leaders who do not understand this are Pharoahs building their tombs.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Regarding the fate of the eight ...
It's so darn simple ... If we the people don't have the right to know "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" about how justice is applied by our government, then why do we even bother calling ourselves a "government of the people by the people for the people"?
The Democrats and Republicans are NOT two Texas Junior High School football teams, for chrissake ... on whom we are keeping score ... except maybe in the minds of the emotionally stunted psychopaths in the White House.
Geez-lou-eeze, doesn't anyone know how to govern around here? (With apologies to Casey Stengel.)
The Democrats and Republicans are NOT two Texas Junior High School football teams, for chrissake ... on whom we are keeping score ... except maybe in the minds of the emotionally stunted psychopaths in the White House.
Geez-lou-eeze, doesn't anyone know how to govern around here? (With apologies to Casey Stengel.)
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Unemployment under 5%?
In today's (Thursday, March 15) NY Times, Bob Herbert writes:
The core of Herbert's column is that unemployment for large groups of black men is a third or more.
Our nation is living in such a deep state of denial regarding our economy that we have no realistic chance of turning it around for the common good before we crash.
We have become the Theater of the Absurd ... The Alice In Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass of industrialized nations ... because we call ourselves a Christian nation and we do not heed the demands of Christianity's core values:
Another theme from the book of Daniel in Old Testament that fits us is the story of the hand writting on the wall:
The national unemployment rate came in at 4.5 percent last week and was generally characterized as pretty good. But whatever universe those numbers came from, it was not the universe that black men live in.You can read the column, The Danger Zone if you have TimesSelect ... which I recommend if for only having regular access to Bob Herbert and Paul Krugman.
The core of Herbert's column is that unemployment for large groups of black men is a third or more.
Their employment histories are gruesome. Over the past few years, the percentage of black male high school graduates in their 20s who were jobless (including those who abandoned all efforts to find a job) has ranged from well over a third to roughly 50 percent. Those are the kinds of statistics you get during a depression.
For dropouts, the rates of joblessness are staggering. For black males who left high school without a diploma, the real jobless rate at various times over the past few years has ranged from 59 percent to a breathtaking 72 percent.
Our nation is living in such a deep state of denial regarding our economy that we have no realistic chance of turning it around for the common good before we crash.
We have become the Theater of the Absurd ... The Alice In Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass of industrialized nations ... because we call ourselves a Christian nation and we do not heed the demands of Christianity's core values:
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me.
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.Matthew 25:41-46 New Testament KJV, www.blueletterbible.org
Another theme from the book of Daniel in Old Testament that fits us is the story of the hand writting on the wall:
And this [is] the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN.
This [is] the interpretation of the thing: MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it.
TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.
PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.Daniel 5:25-28 Old Testament KJV, www.blueletterbible.org
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
It's the oil, stupid
Antonia Juhasz in her OpEd piece today in the NY Times, Whose Oil Is It, Anyway?, explains how the Bush 43 administration is working to open a substantial amount of Iraq's oil reserves "to international oil companies for a generation or more." Quoting her:
Iraq’s oil reserves — thought to be the second largest in the world — have always been high on the corporate wish list. In 1998, Kenneth Derr, then chief executive of Chevron, told a San Francisco audience, “Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas — reserves I’d love Chevron to have access to.”
and ...
Iraqis may very well choose to use the expertise and experience of international oil companies. They are most likely to do so in a manner that best serves their own needs if they are freed from the tremendous external pressure being exercised by the Bush administration, the oil corporations — and the presence of 140,000 members of the American military.
Iraq’s five trade union federations, representing hundreds of thousands of workers, released a statement opposing the law and rejecting “the handing of control over oil to foreign companies, which would undermine the sovereignty of the state and the dignity of the Iraqi people.” They ask for more time, less pressure and a chance at the democracy they have been promised.
It's the oil, stupid.
Monday, March 12, 2007
The new economics - Post 3
We have turned our very persons into commodities: the accountant, the teacher, the mechanic, the doctor, the professional sports person, the lawyer, the CEO ... and so forth and so on ...
In a real sense we have stopped thinking of ourselves as human beings first: mother, father, lover, son, sibling, ... citizen, neighbor.
In so much of what we do we have internalized our obligation to enhance our own value as a commodity as much as possible. We have swallowed hook, line and sinker the concept that by giving ourselves the best shot at making the most money possible, we are choosing the best means of enhancing the common good. We select the "issues" and the "views" we will publicly support with a careful eye on their impact on our resume. God forbid that we would get arrested in a public demonstration! And dare we be seen at a protest rally ... about anything?
And how do we know if we have succeeded in maximizing our own value? By the wages package we "earn" as the market commodity we have converted ourselves into, of course.
In the process the whole endeavor has morphed into shortest, direct straight shot at getting the most money we can ... and skipping anything between that we can. Winning 100 milion or more in the lottery is the pinnacle of success.
And if we are going to apply ourselves at something, we justify it as a way to increase our earning power. Exercise, education, even repose and rest are not seen as enriching our lives as much as potentially enriching our wallets and purses. We even have the saying of the "trophy spouse" ... a relationship that is designed to make us better candidates for upward mobility in the wage ranks.
Need I tell you ... as the Biblical prophets told the Israelites ... that selling our birthright of humanity—the creative imagination to turn swords into plows, and selfishness into caring for others—will destroy us?
And that it takes generations—the sins of the fathers will be visited on his sons and his sons' sons (in the sexist language of the day)—to alter course?
And we have yet to experience the calamity that will get us to even think of changing course, let alone start the course correction?
The image is of driving full-speed off the cliff and not yet starting to fall ... in a state of denial.
In a real sense we have stopped thinking of ourselves as human beings first: mother, father, lover, son, sibling, ... citizen, neighbor.
In so much of what we do we have internalized our obligation to enhance our own value as a commodity as much as possible. We have swallowed hook, line and sinker the concept that by giving ourselves the best shot at making the most money possible, we are choosing the best means of enhancing the common good. We select the "issues" and the "views" we will publicly support with a careful eye on their impact on our resume. God forbid that we would get arrested in a public demonstration! And dare we be seen at a protest rally ... about anything?
And how do we know if we have succeeded in maximizing our own value? By the wages package we "earn" as the market commodity we have converted ourselves into, of course.
In the process the whole endeavor has morphed into shortest, direct straight shot at getting the most money we can ... and skipping anything between that we can. Winning 100 milion or more in the lottery is the pinnacle of success.
And if we are going to apply ourselves at something, we justify it as a way to increase our earning power. Exercise, education, even repose and rest are not seen as enriching our lives as much as potentially enriching our wallets and purses. We even have the saying of the "trophy spouse" ... a relationship that is designed to make us better candidates for upward mobility in the wage ranks.
Need I tell you ... as the Biblical prophets told the Israelites ... that selling our birthright of humanity—the creative imagination to turn swords into plows, and selfishness into caring for others—will destroy us?
And that it takes generations—the sins of the fathers will be visited on his sons and his sons' sons (in the sexist language of the day)—to alter course?
And we have yet to experience the calamity that will get us to even think of changing course, let alone start the course correction?
The image is of driving full-speed off the cliff and not yet starting to fall ... in a state of denial.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
It's time to impeach Bush/Cheney!
To every [thing there is] a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up [that which is] planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
It is time to impeach.
By John Nicols, March 7, 2007, in The Nation
Here's the Middlebury, Vermont, resolution:
We the people have the power -- and the responsibility -- to remove executives who transgress not just the law, but the rule of law.
The oaths that the President and Vice President take binds them to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." The failure to do so forms a sound basis for articles of impeachment.
The President and Vice President have failed to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" in the following ways:
1. They have manipulated intelligence and misled the country to justify an immoral, unjust, and unnecessary preemptive war in Iraq.
2. They have directed the government to engage in domestic spying without warrants, in direct contravention of U.S. law.
3. They have conspired to commit the torture of prisoners, in violation of the Federal Torture Act and the Geneva Convention.
4. They have ordered the indefinite detention without legal counsel, without charges and without the opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention -- all in violation of U.S. law and the Bill of Rights.
When strong evidence exists of the most serious crimes, we must use impeachment -- or lose the ability of the legislative branch to compel the executive branch to obey the law.
George Bush has led our country to a constitutional crisis, and it is our responsibility to remove him from office.
Pass it on!
"Attacks on Iraq Shiite Pilgrims Continue" ... Dah!
Quoting Lauren Frayer's AP article, March 7, 2007, posted on www.huffingtonpost.com:
My comment in response:
Our absurd leadership has once again altered the dynamics of the conflict without adequately preparing for the predictable results.
We do not have and never have had and now never will have enough boots on the ground to control the insurgency ... like not being able squeeze the entire balloon, so it pops out wherever there is a lack of pressure ...
So saying we are doing the best we can as people are being killed is absurd especially when what we have done and are still doing is creating the ground of the violence in which they are being killed.
And all this so some general (Petreus) can get his "battlefield command experience" and keep his career on track? 'Cuz if he told the truth--according to his own criteria for fighting an insurgency--and said, "Y'know, this ain't gonna work," he would be canned.
BAGHDAD, Iraq — Attacks on Shiite pilgrims showed no sign of easing Wednesday with at least 11 people killed by bombs and gunfire as they streamed toward a Muslim shrine ahead of a weekend holiday.
The targeted violence came a day after two suicide bombers exploded themselves among pilgrims lining up at a checkpoint, killing at least 120 people and wounding about 190, police and hospital officials said.
My comment in response:
Our absurd leadership has once again altered the dynamics of the conflict without adequately preparing for the predictable results.
We do not have and never have had and now never will have enough boots on the ground to control the insurgency ... like not being able squeeze the entire balloon, so it pops out wherever there is a lack of pressure ...
So saying we are doing the best we can as people are being killed is absurd especially when what we have done and are still doing is creating the ground of the violence in which they are being killed.
And all this so some general (Petreus) can get his "battlefield command experience" and keep his career on track? 'Cuz if he told the truth--according to his own criteria for fighting an insurgency--and said, "Y'know, this ain't gonna work," he would be canned.
Bush, Cheney, & the Neocons aka The Theater of the Absurd
Quoting from Tom Friedman's column in today's—Wenesday, March 7—NY Times, titled, "Don't Ask, Don't Know, Don't Help", regarding scenes from our own Theater of the Absurd:
"Mr. Bush summoned the country to D-Day and prepared the Army, the military health system, military industries and the American people for the invasion of Grenada."
and ...
"In an interview last Jan. 16, Jim Lehrer asked President Bush why, if the war on terrorism was so overwhelmingly important, he had never asked more Americans 'to sacrifice something.' Mr. Bush gave the most unbelievable answer: 'Well, you know, I think a lot of people are in this fight. I mean, they sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible images of violence on TV every night.'"
This ain't funny, folks. Our best and brightest working class youth are being devoured while the wealthy get tax breaks. Like the late Moll Ivins would ask, "How come we aren't in the streets at least making noise?!"
"Mr. Bush summoned the country to D-Day and prepared the Army, the military health system, military industries and the American people for the invasion of Grenada."
and ...
"In an interview last Jan. 16, Jim Lehrer asked President Bush why, if the war on terrorism was so overwhelmingly important, he had never asked more Americans 'to sacrifice something.' Mr. Bush gave the most unbelievable answer: 'Well, you know, I think a lot of people are in this fight. I mean, they sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible images of violence on TV every night.'"
This ain't funny, folks. Our best and brightest working class youth are being devoured while the wealthy get tax breaks. Like the late Moll Ivins would ask, "How come we aren't in the streets at least making noise?!"
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Libby found guilty!
Well, well, well ... now it's really going to get interesting ...
'Cuz the rule in the CYA crowd is that you start expecting to have your own ass protected when you cover the backside of the person ahead of you ... and Libby was good at his position in the daisy chain ...
So ... does he get a pardon? ... or ... does he out Cheney if he doesn't get a pardon?
I think he will hold strong, banking on the pardon. But I don't think the pardon is a sure thing ... Bush 43 has already started to put some distance between him (B43) and Cheney. This could allow B43 to start pinning the whole fiasco set on Cheney as the Darth Vader to the Emperor.
'Course Libby will stay out of jail on appeal ... so it will be awhile before the rubber hits the road ... but we have the elections of '08 coming up ... and something will have to be done to remove Libby as red meat ... so either the pardon will be done right away so it can get lost in all the other horror stories coming down the pike ... or it will have to wait for the twilight hours of the last day of B43's presidency and after the election ... but that's damn risky, 'cuz Libby will be hanging out there if he actually is out of prison ...
The gentlemanly thing for Libby to do would be to pop into prison sometime before the election and show he's a straight shooter for the boss (Cheney) and the Party ... thereby letting his negatives sorta die down ... then get his pardon for having served enough time.
'Course, I would love to see Libby rat out Cheney to avoid prison. Wouldn't that be fun?
Any way it goes, it's gonna be interesting ...
'Cuz the rule in the CYA crowd is that you start expecting to have your own ass protected when you cover the backside of the person ahead of you ... and Libby was good at his position in the daisy chain ...
So ... does he get a pardon? ... or ... does he out Cheney if he doesn't get a pardon?
I think he will hold strong, banking on the pardon. But I don't think the pardon is a sure thing ... Bush 43 has already started to put some distance between him (B43) and Cheney. This could allow B43 to start pinning the whole fiasco set on Cheney as the Darth Vader to the Emperor.
'Course Libby will stay out of jail on appeal ... so it will be awhile before the rubber hits the road ... but we have the elections of '08 coming up ... and something will have to be done to remove Libby as red meat ... so either the pardon will be done right away so it can get lost in all the other horror stories coming down the pike ... or it will have to wait for the twilight hours of the last day of B43's presidency and after the election ... but that's damn risky, 'cuz Libby will be hanging out there if he actually is out of prison ...
The gentlemanly thing for Libby to do would be to pop into prison sometime before the election and show he's a straight shooter for the boss (Cheney) and the Party ... thereby letting his negatives sorta die down ... then get his pardon for having served enough time.
'Course, I would love to see Libby rat out Cheney to avoid prison. Wouldn't that be fun?
Any way it goes, it's gonna be interesting ...
The new economics - Post 2
Today's—Tuesday, March 6, 2007—Star-Ledger carried an article by Amy Ellis Nutt, Star-Ledger staff, titled, "Study: Canned food has toxic chemical".
Here's the lead paragraphs:
"A plastic ingredient used to line many kinds of food and drink cans may be poisoning pregnant women and infants, according to study commissioned by an environmental advocacy organization.
"Cans of commonly eaten goods, such as soup, fruit, vegetables and soda, were found to contain more than 200 times the acceptable level of bisphenol-A, the study says. BPA is a plastic resin repeatedly linked to a host of health problems including breast and prostate cancer, infertility, diabetes, obesity and asthma."
This is how the so-called "free" market protects us by letting us pay the costs of the mistakes of those who gain the profits.
Why doesn't anyone or any entity have to prove the benign nature of the substances they introduce into our environment? Yes, I can understand the failures of past ignorance ... BUT we have known for some time that a wide array of substances can have harmful effects ... and we STILL have powerful folks trotting out the province of the Invisible Hand as the best caretaker of the common good.
Don't get me wrong, the market can exert a powerful influence for the common good ... but there is nothing absurd about setting rational rules to dampen its obvious harmful excesses. We can simply observe the differences between major league baseball and major league football to learn that concept. I mean George Steinbrenner and the Yankees are grotesque, don't you think?
Here's the lead paragraphs:
"A plastic ingredient used to line many kinds of food and drink cans may be poisoning pregnant women and infants, according to study commissioned by an environmental advocacy organization.
"Cans of commonly eaten goods, such as soup, fruit, vegetables and soda, were found to contain more than 200 times the acceptable level of bisphenol-A, the study says. BPA is a plastic resin repeatedly linked to a host of health problems including breast and prostate cancer, infertility, diabetes, obesity and asthma."
This is how the so-called "free" market protects us by letting us pay the costs of the mistakes of those who gain the profits.
Why doesn't anyone or any entity have to prove the benign nature of the substances they introduce into our environment? Yes, I can understand the failures of past ignorance ... BUT we have known for some time that a wide array of substances can have harmful effects ... and we STILL have powerful folks trotting out the province of the Invisible Hand as the best caretaker of the common good.
Don't get me wrong, the market can exert a powerful influence for the common good ... but there is nothing absurd about setting rational rules to dampen its obvious harmful excesses. We can simply observe the differences between major league baseball and major league football to learn that concept. I mean George Steinbrenner and the Yankees are grotesque, don't you think?
Friday, March 02, 2007
Hillary, dillary ... is going down the drain
Hillary enlists Bill to try to halt her campaign from going down the proverbial tubes. It may get a blip, but it won't change the outcome ... and that's because Hillary has so many visceral negatives she never will be elected President ... and MOST real small "d" democrats know this.
Thursday, March 01, 2007
The good ol' USA as the Theater of the Absurd
The USA as theater of the absurd ... where down is up ... the Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass effect.
The latest two examples are (1) sending properly trained and equipped troops is somehow NOT supporting the troops, and (2) the problems—in this case Building 18 at Walter Reed Hospital—the military faces are the result of the grunts as a few bad apples ... or the media not focusing on the positive issues of the day.
This is continuing evidence of the mantra that I best serve the common good by serving my own self-interest. You know, the world where the common good is guided by the Invisible Hand ...
Seems I remember an old story—one that the neocon idiots should be familiar with since it comes from the Old Testament—about the harm that is done by selling one's birthright (core values) for porridge (personal benefit).
"These people" at the top are tripping all over themselves to preserve their personal perks ...
The other iconic image of our generation is Thelma and Louise driving off the cliff ... with a little twist to the motivation, I can picture us having shot off the proverbial cliff ... and because we are still flying, we think we are doing great.
Maybe these grand leaders should study history. It ain't the working class that gets led to the guillotine when comes the revolution ... like when we crash.
Our biggest worry will be to avoid some fascist bastard promising to save us from ourselves.
The latest two examples are (1) sending properly trained and equipped troops is somehow NOT supporting the troops, and (2) the problems—in this case Building 18 at Walter Reed Hospital—the military faces are the result of the grunts as a few bad apples ... or the media not focusing on the positive issues of the day.
This is continuing evidence of the mantra that I best serve the common good by serving my own self-interest. You know, the world where the common good is guided by the Invisible Hand ...
Seems I remember an old story—one that the neocon idiots should be familiar with since it comes from the Old Testament—about the harm that is done by selling one's birthright (core values) for porridge (personal benefit).
"These people" at the top are tripping all over themselves to preserve their personal perks ...
The other iconic image of our generation is Thelma and Louise driving off the cliff ... with a little twist to the motivation, I can picture us having shot off the proverbial cliff ... and because we are still flying, we think we are doing great.
Maybe these grand leaders should study history. It ain't the working class that gets led to the guillotine when comes the revolution ... like when we crash.
Our biggest worry will be to avoid some fascist bastard promising to save us from ourselves.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Support the troops?
Is supporting the troops sending more bodies without body armor? Or sending them without reasonable training or rest before deployment? Or failing to provide adequate mentor support to our returning permanently wounded for navigating the bureaucratic minefield of separation from active duty to the care of the Veterans Administration?
What does "We support the troops" mean?
Does support the military mean stripping the National Guard of soldiers and equipment so we are more vulnerable here at home against any one of the many potential disasters we face? Or does it mean hiding the fact that we are now accepting less than the best and brightest—even by Army standards—into the ranks of those commanded to kill the enemy? Isn't THAT what is truly demeaning our soldiers?
What does "We support the military" mean?
Who now doubts that Bush 43 and Cheney are delusional? As I wrote previously:
If as President Bush said—clearly, by the way—"that Iraq is the central front in 'the decisive ideological struggle of our time,' " to quote Frank Rich in today's NY Times (OpEd, Sunday, December 14, 2007) ... then is "the surge" the last, best chance for victory in the Iraq?
The "decisive ideological struggle of our time" is being paid for with tax reductions for the wealthy? and the blood of the working class's children?
Who does not see the absurdity in this?
Why aren't we, like the late Molly Ivins wrote, out in the streets beating on our pots and pans, making noise?
Have we already driven off the cliff and just haven't started falling yet?
And there are those who say Congressman Murtha has "stumbled"? Are they kidding?
What does "We support the troops" mean?
Does support the military mean stripping the National Guard of soldiers and equipment so we are more vulnerable here at home against any one of the many potential disasters we face? Or does it mean hiding the fact that we are now accepting less than the best and brightest—even by Army standards—into the ranks of those commanded to kill the enemy? Isn't THAT what is truly demeaning our soldiers?
What does "We support the military" mean?
Who now doubts that Bush 43 and Cheney are delusional? As I wrote previously:
If as President Bush said—clearly, by the way—"that Iraq is the central front in 'the decisive ideological struggle of our time,' " to quote Frank Rich in today's NY Times (OpEd, Sunday, December 14, 2007) ... then is "the surge" the last, best chance for victory in the Iraq?
The "decisive ideological struggle of our time" is being paid for with tax reductions for the wealthy? and the blood of the working class's children?
Who does not see the absurdity in this?
Why aren't we, like the late Molly Ivins wrote, out in the streets beating on our pots and pans, making noise?
Have we already driven off the cliff and just haven't started falling yet?
And there are those who say Congressman Murtha has "stumbled"? Are they kidding?
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Where do we go from here?
With the wars still raging in Afghanistan and Iraq ... with our own "What? me worry?" King George high horsing it until January of 2009 ... What do we do now? Where do we go from here?
I mean ... who are we kidding? If what Bush 43 and Cheney did in starting a war of aggression against Iraq are not high crimes and misdemeanors deserving of impeachment ... then what is?
But nothing is going to come of it, is it? Because the whole political class is falling all over themselves trying to avoid any kind of direct action that would somehow taint them in anyway with some segment of the electorate that would eliminate them from election or re-election ... because it isn't about serving the people. It's about getting elected because in their minds that is the only way one can effectively serve the people. The hell with calling attention to our core values ... that just gets you assassinated.
When the death of Anna Nicole Smith sucks the oxygen out of the news ... we are in as big a mess as Rome was when the Romans thronged to the circus.
And the egregious violence of 24 Hours as well as our other "entertainment" ... have we become so inured to violence that our youth have no pangs of conscience when the abuses of Abu Garib or Guantanamo unfold on their watch? Isn't that the real story of photos passed from soldier to soldier?
Have we become so caught up in the comfort and wealth of our way of life that we really don't see the irony of changing light bulbs in 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10,000 square foot homes? Or of everyone of driving age in a household having their own Prius?
Have we gone totally insane? Living so deep in denial that we have already soared off the cliff ... and just not started to feel ourselves falling ... yet. You tell me.
I mean ... who are we kidding? If what Bush 43 and Cheney did in starting a war of aggression against Iraq are not high crimes and misdemeanors deserving of impeachment ... then what is?
But nothing is going to come of it, is it? Because the whole political class is falling all over themselves trying to avoid any kind of direct action that would somehow taint them in anyway with some segment of the electorate that would eliminate them from election or re-election ... because it isn't about serving the people. It's about getting elected because in their minds that is the only way one can effectively serve the people. The hell with calling attention to our core values ... that just gets you assassinated.
When the death of Anna Nicole Smith sucks the oxygen out of the news ... we are in as big a mess as Rome was when the Romans thronged to the circus.
And the egregious violence of 24 Hours as well as our other "entertainment" ... have we become so inured to violence that our youth have no pangs of conscience when the abuses of Abu Garib or Guantanamo unfold on their watch? Isn't that the real story of photos passed from soldier to soldier?
Have we become so caught up in the comfort and wealth of our way of life that we really don't see the irony of changing light bulbs in 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10,000 square foot homes? Or of everyone of driving age in a household having their own Prius?
Have we gone totally insane? Living so deep in denial that we have already soared off the cliff ... and just not started to feel ourselves falling ... yet. You tell me.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Hillary, dillary, dumb ....
Hillary shot herself in the foot in her comments about Geffen ... and Obama.
It's going to be downhill for her from here ... that's a prediction we can come back and track in the months ahead.
Actually, it was downhill from the moment she made it clear that she would not admit that she had made a mistake in voting to authorize the Bush 43's war in Iraq.
Now it will only be a question of how far down she will drag the populist/progressive movement in her attempt to become President.
When we return the Democratic Party to the people, we will win elections. That is what the "corporationists" fear most. Hillary is willing to be a tool of the power elite in order to win the Presidency ... it is all about her ... and very little about we the people.
It's going to be downhill for her from here ... that's a prediction we can come back and track in the months ahead.
Actually, it was downhill from the moment she made it clear that she would not admit that she had made a mistake in voting to authorize the Bush 43's war in Iraq.
Now it will only be a question of how far down she will drag the populist/progressive movement in her attempt to become President.
When we return the Democratic Party to the people, we will win elections. That is what the "corporationists" fear most. Hillary is willing to be a tool of the power elite in order to win the Presidency ... it is all about her ... and very little about we the people.
Monday, February 19, 2007
The Edwards-Richardson ticket
I might as well come right out and say it, "I support John Edwards for President in 2008, and I support Bill Richardson as his running mate."
I mean, get it out there on the table now.
There probably are some folks who question why I support this ticket. Mostly those who don't read this blog ... so, yes, that is like most folks out there.
But on the other hand, these are notes to myself basically ... a journal, a log, a diary of thoughts along the way, that I can go back and look at later ... to see how I evolved, how my world evolved ... and how close to my predictions, to the direction I thought we would take ... or how divergent from the path I predicted ... or planned or hoped we would take.
I am constantly reminded of how small of a group it takes to alter the course of the future. We have the iconic image of Jesus and his twelve disciples meeting in the upper room in Jerusalem. We have the reality of twelve individuals meeting in a small Quaker bookstore in 1783 leading to the abolition of slavery in Great Britain.
This is chaos theory at work. A small pebble can alter the course of a boulder as starts to roll down the mountain.
I have no excuse for not trying to guide the course of my nation in keeping with what I believe are its core values: social, economic, and legal justice for all under the rule of law.
I mean, get it out there on the table now.
There probably are some folks who question why I support this ticket. Mostly those who don't read this blog ... so, yes, that is like most folks out there.
But on the other hand, these are notes to myself basically ... a journal, a log, a diary of thoughts along the way, that I can go back and look at later ... to see how I evolved, how my world evolved ... and how close to my predictions, to the direction I thought we would take ... or how divergent from the path I predicted ... or planned or hoped we would take.
I am constantly reminded of how small of a group it takes to alter the course of the future. We have the iconic image of Jesus and his twelve disciples meeting in the upper room in Jerusalem. We have the reality of twelve individuals meeting in a small Quaker bookstore in 1783 leading to the abolition of slavery in Great Britain.
This is chaos theory at work. A small pebble can alter the course of a boulder as starts to roll down the mountain.
I have no excuse for not trying to guide the course of my nation in keeping with what I believe are its core values: social, economic, and legal justice for all under the rule of law.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
The new economics - Post 1
"Free" markets don't exist and are impossible to implement universally.
"Fair" markets don't exist and are impossible to implement universally.
In both cases success of any player immediately unbalances the market unless the player as buyer is equally rewarded as the player as seller in that they both achieve an optimum objective of present value in the transaction. One major problem is that all future assignable costs incurred by the total process of bringing goods and services to market and selling and buying and then consuming them, are NOT covered by the sale/purchase transaction. Note: We do not transfer the liability of future costs as easily as we transfer the potential for future profits when we transfer "ownership". These externalities—such as secondhand smoke from cigarettes—create imbalances in markets. There are others, but beyond the purposes of this comment which is to simply point out that "free" and "fair" markets cannot exist universally.
We need to implement "rational" markets. These are markets that monitor and regulate transactions and their processes before, during, and after the actual "transfer" of ownership by the simple physician's dictum, "First, do no harm."
I will discuss the concept of a rational market in terms of a "fair" market underlying or forming the level playing-field/foundation for a "free" market to operate with minimum impediments to market forces. Raise the foundation for all, with access to the sky for those who can build strong structures least likely to fall over on us.
"Fair" markets don't exist and are impossible to implement universally.
In both cases success of any player immediately unbalances the market unless the player as buyer is equally rewarded as the player as seller in that they both achieve an optimum objective of present value in the transaction. One major problem is that all future assignable costs incurred by the total process of bringing goods and services to market and selling and buying and then consuming them, are NOT covered by the sale/purchase transaction. Note: We do not transfer the liability of future costs as easily as we transfer the potential for future profits when we transfer "ownership". These externalities—such as secondhand smoke from cigarettes—create imbalances in markets. There are others, but beyond the purposes of this comment which is to simply point out that "free" and "fair" markets cannot exist universally.
We need to implement "rational" markets. These are markets that monitor and regulate transactions and their processes before, during, and after the actual "transfer" of ownership by the simple physician's dictum, "First, do no harm."
I will discuss the concept of a rational market in terms of a "fair" market underlying or forming the level playing-field/foundation for a "free" market to operate with minimum impediments to market forces. Raise the foundation for all, with access to the sky for those who can build strong structures least likely to fall over on us.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Well, it's clear ... isn't it?
While the insurgency in Iraq was rearing its head in June, 2003, our prescient leaders where going all out trying to quell the claims by critics of the decision to go to war that the intelligence in support of that decision was cooked up by Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.
So instead of doing something concrete about the growing insurgency, they did something covert about their critics ... and stonewalled any investigation right up until the seating of new Congress this January, three-and-a-half years later ... with the Republican Congressional members now claiming it is "old news".
The Republican Party was hijacked by neoconservatists and now they are trying to blame Democrats for the mess they created ... are they kidding us? They should not only be voted out of office, they should be laughed out ... riding on a rail, covered with tar and feathers ... for they have sold us out for personal gain within their clique ... at a time when we could use some rational conservatism to weigh in on our progress.
So instead of doing something concrete about the growing insurgency, they did something covert about their critics ... and stonewalled any investigation right up until the seating of new Congress this January, three-and-a-half years later ... with the Republican Congressional members now claiming it is "old news".
The Republican Party was hijacked by neoconservatists and now they are trying to blame Democrats for the mess they created ... are they kidding us? They should not only be voted out of office, they should be laughed out ... riding on a rail, covered with tar and feathers ... for they have sold us out for personal gain within their clique ... at a time when we could use some rational conservatism to weigh in on our progress.
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Is "the surge" the last, best chance for victory in Iraq?
The surge ...
The escalation ...
The augmentation ...
If as President Bush said—clearly, by the way—"that Iraq is the central front in 'the decisive ideological struggle of our time,' " to quote Frank Rich in today's NY Times (OpEd, Sunday, December 14, 2007) ... then is "the surge" the last, best chance for victory in the Iraq?
And Bush and his cohorts like Senator Lieberman keep saying there is no viable alternative plan ... what about the Baker-Hamilton Commission's report outlining a series of concrete and defined steps to resolve the conflict?
But the question is, if this is "the decisive ideological struggle of our time" then is throwing 21,500 more troops ... bringing the current total to something less than the highwater mark in this war ... an appropriate response? Of course it isn't. 50,000 more troops wouldn't work ... and what is more worrisome, our soldiers will now stay in the conflict zones as embeds in the Irag military, rather than withdrawing to secure areas for rest and and renewal.
And that is the duplicity of this step ... for it does little if anything to end the civil war now raging in Iraq, while making our soldiers easier targets ... but it does take us closer to the Battle of Armageddon ... the dream of the neocons.
The escalation ...
The augmentation ...
If as President Bush said—clearly, by the way—"that Iraq is the central front in 'the decisive ideological struggle of our time,' " to quote Frank Rich in today's NY Times (OpEd, Sunday, December 14, 2007) ... then is "the surge" the last, best chance for victory in the Iraq?
And Bush and his cohorts like Senator Lieberman keep saying there is no viable alternative plan ... what about the Baker-Hamilton Commission's report outlining a series of concrete and defined steps to resolve the conflict?
But the question is, if this is "the decisive ideological struggle of our time" then is throwing 21,500 more troops ... bringing the current total to something less than the highwater mark in this war ... an appropriate response? Of course it isn't. 50,000 more troops wouldn't work ... and what is more worrisome, our soldiers will now stay in the conflict zones as embeds in the Irag military, rather than withdrawing to secure areas for rest and and renewal.
And that is the duplicity of this step ... for it does little if anything to end the civil war now raging in Iraq, while making our soldiers easier targets ... but it does take us closer to the Battle of Armageddon ... the dream of the neocons.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
On the eve of President Bush's latest proposal for victory in Iraq ...
For the forseeable future it is in our—the United States'—interest to have a stable Middle East in which oil can be provided to the world as a commercial commodity. Yes, there are caveats to that statement, but in the general sense it expresses my point of view.
How do we achieve that starting from where we are?
My primary assertion is that it is only in the interests of fundamentalist ideologues to have instability. Notice I don't say "terrorists", and I don't say "fundamentalists". I say "fundamentalist ideologues". Because it is the fundamentalist ideologues of all stripes who are using the cover of chaos to advance their ideology and its objectives ... whether they be Christian Rapturists, Neocons, Zionists, violent jihadists, or skinheads, for that matter.
It is in the interest of most people and their leaders in the region to have some form of stability that allows them to pursue what is for them a normal existence in a secure community.
Therefore, it would seem to me, that the wisest path to negotiating regional and national stability for secure communities to exist for the people, would be to bring all major groups in the region to the table and explain the facts, which are that the major powers of the world cannot afford to let the region descend into the kind of chaos that would interrupt the supply of oil as a commercial commodity—clear and simple. If it comes to that, we will have a world war, and nobody will win then, and some will lose more than others—go figure ... so we had better figure out a solution before that happens.
The problem with this approach, as I see it, is not with the lessor powers in the region, but with the United States. We are not behaving objectively or rationally as the world's superpower. Which is to say that we do not have a set of rules that we ask everyone—including ourselves—to live by. And as long as we treat different parties to the conflict differently, we will never achieve stability in that or any other region. In fact, we have no strategy of carrots and sticks to get everyone on the same page. We have a strategy to keep everyone except ourselves and our allies off our page ... and we do very little to make it benefit the others if they comply. Mostly we have tried to make our strategies work to benefit us.
International engagement does not have to be a zero sum game. Dah!
And escalating the war in Iraq by sending in more U.S. soldiers without initiating a regional peace process is delusional. We will still have too few troops to control the outcome of the civil war now raging, so we don't have a real stick. And our carrots don't feed peace. President Bush is obviously too caught up in an some kind of an oedipal emotional reaction to act rationally.
I mean, we have a war machine thrashing about with no clear objective possible ... and we can't pull the plug?!
How do we achieve that starting from where we are?
My primary assertion is that it is only in the interests of fundamentalist ideologues to have instability. Notice I don't say "terrorists", and I don't say "fundamentalists". I say "fundamentalist ideologues". Because it is the fundamentalist ideologues of all stripes who are using the cover of chaos to advance their ideology and its objectives ... whether they be Christian Rapturists, Neocons, Zionists, violent jihadists, or skinheads, for that matter.
It is in the interest of most people and their leaders in the region to have some form of stability that allows them to pursue what is for them a normal existence in a secure community.
Therefore, it would seem to me, that the wisest path to negotiating regional and national stability for secure communities to exist for the people, would be to bring all major groups in the region to the table and explain the facts, which are that the major powers of the world cannot afford to let the region descend into the kind of chaos that would interrupt the supply of oil as a commercial commodity—clear and simple. If it comes to that, we will have a world war, and nobody will win then, and some will lose more than others—go figure ... so we had better figure out a solution before that happens.
The problem with this approach, as I see it, is not with the lessor powers in the region, but with the United States. We are not behaving objectively or rationally as the world's superpower. Which is to say that we do not have a set of rules that we ask everyone—including ourselves—to live by. And as long as we treat different parties to the conflict differently, we will never achieve stability in that or any other region. In fact, we have no strategy of carrots and sticks to get everyone on the same page. We have a strategy to keep everyone except ourselves and our allies off our page ... and we do very little to make it benefit the others if they comply. Mostly we have tried to make our strategies work to benefit us.
International engagement does not have to be a zero sum game. Dah!
And escalating the war in Iraq by sending in more U.S. soldiers without initiating a regional peace process is delusional. We will still have too few troops to control the outcome of the civil war now raging, so we don't have a real stick. And our carrots don't feed peace. President Bush is obviously too caught up in an some kind of an oedipal emotional reaction to act rationally.
I mean, we have a war machine thrashing about with no clear objective possible ... and we can't pull the plug?!
Monday, December 25, 2006
First things first ...
Some musings ...
There is variation in the cosmos ... the cosmos being everything, and the universe being everything we know about.
If there were no variation in the cosmos, there would be uniformity.
Therefore there has to be "at least two states" of whatever there is.
Let us call the first state of the "at least two states", "on" and represent it with the value "1" or "one". Lets then call the second state of the "at least two states", "off" and represent the value "0" or zero.
Ah yes, binary math ... if we can combine 1's and 0's ...
Let us surmise that there is no way to combine or alter the relationship between the separate states of the "at least two states". Then there would be no activity in the cosmos.
Therefore there has to be at least some way to combine or alter the relationship between the separate states of the "at least two states".
If at any time their ceased to be a way to alter the relationship of whatever states existed of the "at least two states", activity would stop.
Whenever the conditions exist for the "at least two states" to alter their relationship, they do -- having the potential of becoming something different. If, in fact another "new state" is formed, than the above statements hold true for this "new state" and it's relationship to the prior existing states of the "at least two states".
If the forming of a "new state" eliminated variation in the cosmos, uniformity would exist and activity would stop. Therefore we can surmise that multiple items in "at least two states" exist simultaneously. And that being in one of "at least two states" applies to a set of items having that characteristic. Thus we have a transcending characteristic across multiple items.
We can surmise that "new state" and its relationship with the "at least two states" -- a set of which the "new state" is now a member -- can form new patterns of states and new patterns of relationships that did not exist prior to the existence of the new states -- even though the potential existed for their existence to be realized in their coming into existence.
We can also surmise that the cosmos has not reached its limit of altering relationships between multiple items with variations in being characterized as one of "at least two states", thereby creating new items with a "new state".
In this process, existence builds upon itself.
And as the 0 and 1 of binary math has the potential for expressing all real numbers, existence has the potential of all that is real.
Note: I will be working on this for awhile ...
----------------
Footnotes:
surmise v. an idea or thought of something as being possible or likely.
surmise. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/surmise (accessed: December 25, 2006).
There is variation in the cosmos ... the cosmos being everything, and the universe being everything we know about.
If there were no variation in the cosmos, there would be uniformity.
Therefore there has to be "at least two states" of whatever there is.
Let us call the first state of the "at least two states", "on" and represent it with the value "1" or "one". Lets then call the second state of the "at least two states", "off" and represent the value "0" or zero.
Ah yes, binary math ... if we can combine 1's and 0's ...
Let us surmise that there is no way to combine or alter the relationship between the separate states of the "at least two states". Then there would be no activity in the cosmos.
Therefore there has to be at least some way to combine or alter the relationship between the separate states of the "at least two states".
If at any time their ceased to be a way to alter the relationship of whatever states existed of the "at least two states", activity would stop.
Whenever the conditions exist for the "at least two states" to alter their relationship, they do -- having the potential of becoming something different. If, in fact another "new state" is formed, than the above statements hold true for this "new state" and it's relationship to the prior existing states of the "at least two states".
If the forming of a "new state" eliminated variation in the cosmos, uniformity would exist and activity would stop. Therefore we can surmise that multiple items in "at least two states" exist simultaneously. And that being in one of "at least two states" applies to a set of items having that characteristic. Thus we have a transcending characteristic across multiple items.
We can surmise that "new state" and its relationship with the "at least two states" -- a set of which the "new state" is now a member -- can form new patterns of states and new patterns of relationships that did not exist prior to the existence of the new states -- even though the potential existed for their existence to be realized in their coming into existence.
We can also surmise that the cosmos has not reached its limit of altering relationships between multiple items with variations in being characterized as one of "at least two states", thereby creating new items with a "new state".
In this process, existence builds upon itself.
And as the 0 and 1 of binary math has the potential for expressing all real numbers, existence has the potential of all that is real.
Note: I will be working on this for awhile ...
----------------
Footnotes:
surmise v. an idea or thought of something as being possible or likely.
surmise. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/surmise (accessed: December 25, 2006).
Friday, December 22, 2006
The narrative of existence ...
Our awareness creates and the stores a narrative of our existence in our brain. This narrative is given us by the those we turn to as children for information. It's "purpose" (utility for survival) is to allow us to connect the sensory and other forms of "information" we receive in the present to some pattern set, providing a means of classifying and coordinating the present ... and thereby organizing our lives coherently.
This narrative of our existence has become a key component in evolution's struggle for survival, for the ongoingness of human life ... and conceivably with the unleashing of nuclear energy, of life itself on this planet.
Different groups of human beings have different narratives encoded in their brains. We are watching the cataclysmic clash of different narratives in Iraq as this is being written.
The shear absurdity of thinking people are born with a narrative for democracy and freedom as defined by Western Capitalism encoded in them, is ... well, is so far beyond rational thought that only an ideologue would put forward the concept.
Our whole recorded history demonstrates the importance of encoding the conventional wisdom of a culture in the children of that culture WHILE they are still children, and recognizes the difficulty in changing that encoded narrative later in life.
More to come ...
This narrative of our existence has become a key component in evolution's struggle for survival, for the ongoingness of human life ... and conceivably with the unleashing of nuclear energy, of life itself on this planet.
Different groups of human beings have different narratives encoded in their brains. We are watching the cataclysmic clash of different narratives in Iraq as this is being written.
The shear absurdity of thinking people are born with a narrative for democracy and freedom as defined by Western Capitalism encoded in them, is ... well, is so far beyond rational thought that only an ideologue would put forward the concept.
Our whole recorded history demonstrates the importance of encoding the conventional wisdom of a culture in the children of that culture WHILE they are still children, and recognizes the difficulty in changing that encoded narrative later in life.
More to come ...
As a Christian Transcendental Existentialist ...
Disclosure ... I think of myself as a Christian transcendental existentialist ... who does NOT believe in the necessity of a supreme being in the Biblical (King James Version - KJV) sense of that identity.
Let us begin ...
I believe my interpretation of John 1:1-4:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
... which is that the potential of existence existed at the beginning, whatever that "beginning" was (is?)
... which deals with the idea that "what is" came out of "what was" and "what will be", will come out of "what is" ... which of course is the "transcendental" part ...
Pause
Let us begin ...
I believe my interpretation of John 1:1-4:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
... which is that the potential of existence existed at the beginning, whatever that "beginning" was (is?)
... which deals with the idea that "what is" came out of "what was" and "what will be", will come out of "what is" ... which of course is the "transcendental" part ...
Pause
Though we perceive existence (are aware of -- "awareness" relative to "existence" is important to existentialists ... like in which comes first, the chicken or the egg?) as ongoing -- past, present, future -- the reality of the cosmos does not HAVE to be in that "form". It could be like the infinity symbol and we are (I am?) simply passing along it's endless band ... or multiple bands with or without multiple dimensions.
However ... I experience my existence as ongoing -- past, present, future ... in a universe that is ongoing.
And -- this is my interpretation of Kierkegaard's leap of faith -- I choose to believe that my existence and that of the universe has meaning in its unfolding "ongoingness".
I am engaged in a search for that meaning.
From Luke 17:20-21 (King James Version, New Testament): Note: "He" is Jesus.
And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
I find the meaning of my existence, including my awareness of experiencing my existence, within myself. I come to "understand" that meaning by sharing my awareness with others as they share theirs with me.
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Matthew 18:20
If the sharing of experience is done in the spirit of pursuing the truth (as in the blind men and the elephant) it frees us from the mistakes of our past.
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. John 8:32
More to come ...
ncswede
Footnotes:
Søren Aabye Kierkegaard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kierkegard
As tiny url:
All Biblical quotations are taken from:
Pause
Putting aside the issue of dealing with our mistakes for a moment ...
Fear ... how do I conquer fear?
As a child I drew close to a parent or my older brother as I walked through the forest at night.
Now when I have time to think, I "assess" the situation ahead and "calculate" whether or not I can handle it ... then continue or turn aside.
When caught up without warning, the adrenalin kicks in and I react. (One of the reasons I love the Interior Alaska wilderness ... the adrenalin high is awesome because I have not been there long enough to have being in that environment become "normal". The individuals I REALLY admire are like the mountain climbers, and the rock climbers. I can get another shot of adrenalin simply by taking another step further into the bush.)
But what happens to a person in the devastation of a disaster such as a hurricane, a drought, an earthquake, ... war ... when the person is caught up in something so vast and consuming that every last vestige of hope in it ever getting better again is taken from him/her?
Or something close and personal and singular like the death of one's child ...
What then?
What rekindles the flame of the human spirit, what rekindles hope?
For me it is faith ... faith that "this to", whatever it is ... will have meaning as I (we) go on.
And I do not mean that in the sense that it is "a lesson to be learned" ...
And it does not mean that I could or would retain my faith if I were in the middle of a seemingly unending disaster ... I can't say because I have lived such a "blessed" life.
I can only discuss these issues from the perspective of my perception ... which is NOT the whole elephant by any means.
But faith was instilled in me as a child ... and it has never left me.
Now I don't believe in some Supreme Being acting as producer and director of the "Show On Earth" ... mostly because it ain't "the greatest" for whole bunches of people.
But I do choose to believe that what is happening/unfolding (living) has meaning in its becoming what it does become ... and that what I do now does affect the outcome ... (as in chaos theory of the small pebble being able to alter the course of the boulder as it starts to roll down the hill ... or as Jesus taught, "if you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move a mountain"[sic].)
And in this process of living, I make mistakes ...
Pause
I'm going to defer my discussions of "mistakes" (sin?) for now ... again.
I was reading in Gilson, Langan, & Maurer's RECENT PHILOSOPHY: Hegel to the Present last night in bed about the emergence of Existentialism with the works of Soren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche.
"Nietzsche's greatness lies in his discovery of the individual existent as the unequivocal "lieu" of historical Being's coming-to-be"
This is to me the incredible excitement of existentialism. "I" and my awareness of "I" comes out of existence. Existence does NOT come out of awareness.
I reject the nihilism of Nietzsche by accepting faith, not specifically in God as Kierkegaard did, but in meaning ... and not in coming out of a past purpose but going toward a future in which I can and do participate meaningfully (as chaos theory demonstrates) out of my awareness ... by choosing what I believe ought to be and acting to make it what is.
And that choice is mine to make, as a result of searching for meaning within my own experience ... that I validate in concert with others to the extent that I am willing to be truthful (honest) about my own experience.
I find the roots of this incredibly exciting point of view in the teachings of Jesus ... which itself has roots in other teachings ... but I came to my point of view by believing that what Jesus taught has relevance for my life ... and exploring Jesus' meaning relative to my experience.
An aside: Y'know ... that almost 6,000 mile journey across the North American continent taught me one thing ... I have enormous liberty in a culture based on Judeo-Christian values. Not everyone in that space has the same freedom to come and go as I do for numerous reasons ... I think that freedom should be expanding, not shrinking. But how to do it? That's what we should talk about at some point. Is there any other place on our planet where a relatively poor, relatively old person such as myself can have this much freedom? I love it so!!!
ncswede
Footnote:
nilihism n- an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.
nihilism. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1). Retrieved December 05, 2006, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nihilism
lieu n- Note this is the French word commonly translated as "place", and here meaning the point of Being, not as an idea put as a real center of awareness/experience in the cosmos that has arisen out of (from the ground of) existence.
Pause
If we are not honest with each other ... telling each other the truth about ourselves ... not worrying about our mistakes because all of us make mistakes (For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 New Testament, King James Version, www.blueletterbible.org)... then we cannot discover the meaning of our existence unfolding into the future. Because the potential of our future is with us here and now.
So, when those in authority lie to us ... they lead us astray from the discovery of the true meaning of our existence. That's the same for parents who do not tell their children (at the appropriate time) what is happening to their bodies and minds as they grow older. That's the same for teachers who do not provide the actual history of our world. That's for politicians who say one thing to get elected and another once elected. Or leaders who lie us into a war of their choosing. Or even friends who do not tell one another how they really feel about the way we treat each other.
An interesting experiment is having people guess the number of jelly beans in a jar. The larger the number of people guessing, the closer the average of all the guesses is to the actual number in the jar ... which makes a lot of sense.
Pause
A couple of ideas from Jesus ... that the Kingdom of God is within us (like, within ME) ... and Heaven is it's the realization of it's (the "Kingdom's) potential ...
I can readliy wrap these ideas into the transcendentally evolving ongoingness of existence ... toward (never ending) something positive ...
All of life responds positively to the nuturing of life ... and the seemingly limitless diversity of life within a given environment (bounded only by that environment ... which can in fact interact randomly (chaotically) with events overlapping from other systems/environments to expand possibilities) ...
So life is in the process of exploring all its options in its setting ... and expanding into those that are positive for one form or another ... which may be negative for another form of life ...
But then ... we humans ... seem to be able to build new environments to accentuate the positive ...
Fascinating ... to say the least.
PauseInvitation to Philosophy Issues and Options - Eighth Edition,
by: Stanley M. Honer, Mt. San Antonio College, Emeritus; Thomas C. Hunt, Mt. San Antonio College, Emeritus; and Dennis L. Okholm, Wheaton College
There is a section on Existentialism in Chapter 4 Epistemology: How We Know. It asserts the nihilistic view that all knowledge is subjective and therefore "there is nothing stable or objective about" knowledge.
It does go on with the view of religious existentialists as "likely to argue that human beings cannot know; they can simply believe. And belief is a nonrational 'leap of faith.'"
YES!!! I choose to believe ... and to work out my "knowledge" for forming my belief out of an honest dialogue with others.
And it is not the past governing the future put the future forming out of the present ... a future that I can affect by my choices. I do not disregard the past, put I m not bound by it either. I can decide that "what is" is NOT "what ought to be".
To be continued in Part II ...
Friday, December 01, 2006
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Life has purpose
From dictionary.com we learn the definition of "purpose":
If we plant a carrot seed we anticipate getting a carrot if we nuture its growth.
But we cannot say that life is "the" or even "a" purpose of the cosmos. There is no reason to believe that life developed other than because it was the possible outcome that occurred. Life didn't "have" to happen. It "did" happen.
But once it happened and the functionality—the ongoing capability—of life to replicate biochemical events persisted long enough for the existence of life to produce the awareness of existence then human life took on purpose and meaning:
To extrapolate the reverse sequence of purpose producing awareness producing existence as in the mind of God ... is what has gotten the human race into trouble ... because it can be clearly seen that we attribute OUR purposes to our Gods. We imbue our Gods with our purposes ... and therein lies the crux of our error.
For as the existentialist says, it matters not whether God exists or doesn't exist, for we are aware of our existence and not of God.
It's like the foxhole prayer ... everyone prays it (or most everyone). Those who survive gives thanks to God. Those who don't survive, we don't hear from.
More to come.
n 1: an anticipated outcome that is intended or that guides your planned actions;
purpose. (n.d.). WordNet® 2.0. Retrieved November 18, 2006, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/purpose
If we plant a carrot seed we anticipate getting a carrot if we nuture its growth.
But we cannot say that life is "the" or even "a" purpose of the cosmos. There is no reason to believe that life developed other than because it was the possible outcome that occurred. Life didn't "have" to happen. It "did" happen.
But once it happened and the functionality—the ongoing capability—of life to replicate biochemical events persisted long enough for the existence of life to produce the awareness of existence then human life took on purpose and meaning:
meaning n 2: the end, purpose, or significance of something: What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of this intrusion?Existence preceeds awareness and awareness preceeds purpose ... for having a purpose is the anticipation of an outcome of which one must be aware—even if it is imaginary.
meaning. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1). Retrieved November 18, 2006, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/meaning
To extrapolate the reverse sequence of purpose producing awareness producing existence as in the mind of God ... is what has gotten the human race into trouble ... because it can be clearly seen that we attribute OUR purposes to our Gods. We imbue our Gods with our purposes ... and therein lies the crux of our error.
For as the existentialist says, it matters not whether God exists or doesn't exist, for we are aware of our existence and not of God.
It's like the foxhole prayer ... everyone prays it (or most everyone). Those who survive gives thanks to God. Those who don't survive, we don't hear from.
More to come.
Existence preceeds awareness ...
Existence preceeds awareness ... so what?
So that is the defining understanding of our experience ... and why I call myself an existentialist.
There was no "awareness" that "produced/created" existence. Existence produced awareness. Awareness "arose" out of the consistent replication of biochemical events.
This not so hard to fathom now that we know that simple states of "on" and "off" or "1" and "0" can produce in their complex combinations and recombining of combinations into new combinations, the computer program (software) as separate from yet dependent upon the actual computer equipment (hardware).
And it is the consistent functioning of the underlying operating system (Mac OS, Windows XP, DOS, Unix ... ) that allows the building of higher levels of integrated software.
Some thoughts ...
There has to be more than one state of energy/matter ... because with only one state, we would have uniformity throughout the universe/cosmos.
What "is" comes out of what "was". Which also means that what is going on now is the seeded ground from which the future arises. Even if there was a "beginning" preceeded by "nothing", that beginning arose out of that nothing ... and that is why I am a transcendalist ... or a transcendental existentialist.
What we have learned form chaos theory is that even the smallest act can have a huge effect on future events ... like the pebble at the top of mountain diverting the bloulder as it starts to roll down the mountainside and changing where it will wind up at the bottom; therefore everything I do—and everyone of us—is important.
Note: I use "universe" to denote the known and "cosmos" to denote everything, the known and the unknown.
So that is the defining understanding of our experience ... and why I call myself an existentialist.
There was no "awareness" that "produced/created" existence. Existence produced awareness. Awareness "arose" out of the consistent replication of biochemical events.
This not so hard to fathom now that we know that simple states of "on" and "off" or "1" and "0" can produce in their complex combinations and recombining of combinations into new combinations, the computer program (software) as separate from yet dependent upon the actual computer equipment (hardware).
And it is the consistent functioning of the underlying operating system (Mac OS, Windows XP, DOS, Unix ... ) that allows the building of higher levels of integrated software.
Some thoughts ...
There has to be more than one state of energy/matter ... because with only one state, we would have uniformity throughout the universe/cosmos.
What "is" comes out of what "was". Which also means that what is going on now is the seeded ground from which the future arises. Even if there was a "beginning" preceeded by "nothing", that beginning arose out of that nothing ... and that is why I am a transcendalist ... or a transcendental existentialist.
What we have learned form chaos theory is that even the smallest act can have a huge effect on future events ... like the pebble at the top of mountain diverting the bloulder as it starts to roll down the mountainside and changing where it will wind up at the bottom; therefore everything I do—and everyone of us—is important.
Note: I use "universe" to denote the known and "cosmos" to denote everything, the known and the unknown.
Friday, November 17, 2006
Notes on the journey ... Friday, November 17, 2006
I'm back in New Jersey. I flew in from Alaska on the evening of November 7 in time to vote.
I'm chronicling my trip to Interior Alaska—which started when I left for Florida on Friday, September 8—over on my Steese Review blog.
Here I want to restart my musings about cultural/economic/political/social stuff affecting my corner of the world ... for which, by the way, there was an excellent post by Jeff Madrick over on The Huffington Post titled "Milton Friedman: Not A Man For All Seasons". I recommend reading it ... plus Tim Sanders' post "Bury Friedman's Concept Of A Good Company", and David Goldstein's "On Milton Friedman, Comment Spam, and the Amorality of the Market", both also on The Huffington Post.
That election was something else, wasn't it? Wow! And then James Carville has the audacity to criticize Howard Dean's leadership of the Democratic National Committee. Carville has clearly lost it, whatever it was that he had. Read the straight scoop about Dean's leadership in the Kansas City Star.
Now we get to see what happens ... and it still may come to invoking Jack Cafferty's (of CNN) solution and impose term limits on everyone in Congress who was there prior to this last election.
Bush? Rove? They're totally exposed as carnival shills or clowns ... depending on your point of view.
But like I said, I'll watch how it unfolds ... see what happens when the new Congress convenes in January ... that's not too long for me, though it sure as hell is an ungodly long time for those in the military fighting and dying and getting wounded for what is now pretty much acknowledged as a lie and a mistake.
In the interim I'm going to spend some time letting my emerging understanding of the cosmos take shape here.
I'm chronicling my trip to Interior Alaska—which started when I left for Florida on Friday, September 8—over on my Steese Review blog.
Here I want to restart my musings about cultural/economic/political/social stuff affecting my corner of the world ... for which, by the way, there was an excellent post by Jeff Madrick over on The Huffington Post titled "Milton Friedman: Not A Man For All Seasons". I recommend reading it ... plus Tim Sanders' post "Bury Friedman's Concept Of A Good Company", and David Goldstein's "On Milton Friedman, Comment Spam, and the Amorality of the Market", both also on The Huffington Post.
That election was something else, wasn't it? Wow! And then James Carville has the audacity to criticize Howard Dean's leadership of the Democratic National Committee. Carville has clearly lost it, whatever it was that he had. Read the straight scoop about Dean's leadership in the Kansas City Star.
Now we get to see what happens ... and it still may come to invoking Jack Cafferty's (of CNN) solution and impose term limits on everyone in Congress who was there prior to this last election.
Bush? Rove? They're totally exposed as carnival shills or clowns ... depending on your point of view.
But like I said, I'll watch how it unfolds ... see what happens when the new Congress convenes in January ... that's not too long for me, though it sure as hell is an ungodly long time for those in the military fighting and dying and getting wounded for what is now pretty much acknowledged as a lie and a mistake.
In the interim I'm going to spend some time letting my emerging understanding of the cosmos take shape here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)