Archives for category: culture

I was perusing the news and came across an article at Zero Hedge pointing to the proposed idea White men actually work more while on the job. Now, this raised some red flags in my satirical instinct, recalling those several occasions I’d witnessed White males with hard hats, standing around with hands in pockets; at federal highway construction projects, watching Blacks labor like slaves. This recalled Mel Brooks:

Now, maybe the social scientists at The Economist believe their statistics, and I have no problem with numbers per se, it’s how numbers are interpreted is what puts the hair up on this satirist animal’s back. It’s the small matter of cultural narcissism, also known as ethnocentric bias. It follows, applying what JRR Tolkien called ‘The Vulgar Tongue’ to simple social principles, we can  come up with alternative sight to what is actually going on.

  1. White men put more into the job during actual work hours because they are stakeholders in ‘the system’ or legacy of colonialism that is culturally White from historical perspective; in effect, they are better slaves because they ‘believe.’ Slaves!? some might ask? Sure, America was built on White indentured servitude, not only Black slavery, and the ‘belief’ was looking forward to that day of emancipation never offered to Blacks in a legal, contractual basis. Consequently, these days, White men are, by and large, the bigger suckers in a system that could give a rats ass about the color of your skin, so long as you are stupid enough to ‘buy in’ to a machine that will grind you throughout life and spit you out, not only more than tired, but broke and struggling to survive on social security. So, yes, the Whites are still the more hardworking slaves, despite their ’emancipation’ is demonstrated to be a lie.
  2. This immediate preceding brings up another cultural self-deceit, of Whites possessing the higher IQ. Again, it’s a matter of social interpretation of the numbers. The more you’re ‘bought in’ as a stake-holder, the higher your score is likely to be; due to socialization instilling work ethic, so, rather than ‘playing hookey’, that is, cutting school to do things that will make you HAPPY, you’re already slaving at the homework which will have the effect of raising your IQ score. In short, the sooner you surrender to the system, the earlier the age, and coming from the White heritage instilling the ‘work ethic’ (‘achievers’ most often come from families of ‘achievers’), the higher that’s going to jack up your IQ where IQ testing is designed measure your abilities as a slave in service to the system which owns you.
  3. This immediate preceding ‘work ethic’ is derived from a social phenomenon having little to do with happiness, as noted in H.L. Mencken’s maximum that Puritans (who brought the ‘work ethic’ to North America) must preoccupy themselves with the horrifying thought “Someone, somewhere, might be happy.” Not very intelligent that, irrespective of measurable IQ.
  4. Consequently, you have a society that is miserable in divers ways; and in the course of making other people’s lives miserable, they live out their own miserable lives.

So these ‘hard working’ people learned to follow Jesus command to ‘love’ by ‘loving’ to hate. Because of the ‘love’ factor in ‘loving’ to hate themselves, their kids and their fellow man, making ‘love’ is more often a rape than not, ‘loving’ their brothers and sisters is ‘loving’ to tell other people how to live their lives, and ‘loving’ security is to create an insecure society so they can ‘love’ the idea of a police state. None of this is about the arguably higher intelligence of experiencing ‘happiness’, intelligence White men apparently can’t know how to measure.

The good news here is, ‘White’ is a state of mind and no one need behave like these privileged White striped skunks:

Of this world’s 1,645 billionaires, 12 of them are Black, and of those twelve, the majority are Nigerian. Well, that should be no surprise, the biggest scam on the planet is a system where the eight top billionaires own as much as the world’s poorest half of the globe combined:

The world’s eight richest billionaires control the same wealth between them as the poorest half of the globe’s population, according to a charity warning of an ever-increasing and dangerous concentration of wealth

Just a step down in this story is where you find America’s Black billionaires, Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jordan, close to the 1% top:

“The richest 1% now has as much wealth as the rest of the world combined”

The total three American Black billionaires included in the world’s 12 Black billionaires of the world’s collective 1,645 billionaires, ‘own’ a significant chunk of the happiness of billions of colonized people and they’re not ‘sharing the sweatshop equity’ (read ‘sharing the sweatshop equity’ any way you like.)

Colonized? one might ask. That’s right, the wealth figures preceding were accomplished through the neo-corporate colonialism which had replaced colonialism, which never really went away but was ‘bait and switched’ … as in when a Belgian mercenary pilot assassinated (shot down) UN General Secretary Dag Hammerskold who was on his way to meet with Patrice Lumumba, the first democratically elected leader of ‘de-colonized’ Congo, who in turn was assassinated by MI6 (with body delivered to CIA for disposal) and about six or so million ‘blood diamond’ deaths later, we all know how that worked out for corporate stocks:

The bad news is, you can be Black and culturally White, that is to say possess a European cultural mentality, behaving little differently to our neo-colonial masters. The White man Obama (handed off to his White grandparents for upbringing, by a single, White, CIA officer ‘mother’ who couldn’t handle raising a kid), giving a ‘Medal of Freedom’ to billionaire Michael Jordan, would seem little different if King Leopold of Belgium had conferred an award, making a certain Congolese colonial subject a countess, for her history of cooperative behavior, all the while setting a ‘proper’ example in the colonial system:

Human_Zoo

^ Human Zoo, Brussels, 1958

Civilization as we know it in the 21st Century is the economic legacy of Europe; or better said, we are all niggers, no matter the color of your skin, in the service of the world of the White man’s top 1%. You believe you are free? If you were to stop working for the ‘man’ tomorrow, even if you supposedly ‘owned’ your house, you owe property tax. There is no better example par excellence of what is actually feudalism.

Now, going to the intelligence of ‘happiness’, which one makes more sense, a community that can set its own environmental standards and fence the nastiness out (that is NOT what happened with Keystone in South Dakota) or shoving unwanted environmental problems down people’s throats to a point they will hate you? (that IS what is happening with Keystone in South Dakota.) Take the same idea, and expand it to American corporate world domination (with Pentagon the enforcer), where “the pursuit of happiness” is not only denied across the planet, this denial causes a profound, visceral hatred, and associated problems, up to and including international ‘terror’ as a case of ‘chickens come home to roost.’ Now, tell me the White man is more intelligent and I’ll tell you, you can keep your White man’s IQ and you can eat it too.

If anyone were to interpret this small essay as some rank apologetic for socialism, they couldn’t be more mistaken. If you were to take all of the world’s wealth and divide it equitably, you still haven’t yet escaped the White man’s IQ that treats natural resources as a bank account with infinite, unaccountable, overdraft potential. Mass extinction in the ‘anthropocene’ (go there) would be the same effective result of redistribution of wealth, as opposed to SURRENDERING wealth, and little different environmental outcome to the birth of capitalism:

As people became more agricultural and settled, the rich became richer as the ancient farmers who could afford oxen, cattle and other large animals increased their crop production. This provided significant opportunities for amassing and transmitting wealth, and the degree of household wealth-based inequality became much higher in Old World Eurasian contexts [versus the ‘uncivilized’ New World], as measured by house size.

“High degrees of inequality did not contribute to long-term stability in ancient societies. That is something that should concern us given the extraordinary high degree of inequality in our own society”

Recalling the failed dialectic of Marxism, juxtaposed to today’s runaway corporate train, an IQ of happiness would begin with the idea civilization doesn’t need reformed, civilization needs dismantled. It might seem paradox to the ‘bought in’, but to begin down the path to happiness, via initiating dismantling of civilization with radical decentralization, is certainly not a rocket science requiring a White man’s IQ. Most of the environmentally damaged communities today are dirty because of hierarchy from the outside forcibly shitting on them; this is irrespective of whether it had been Marxist model or present corporate hierarchy, when in fact most ‘ordinary folk’ would prefer keeping a clean community.

So, relating to our dysfunction, which one got it right, Orwell or Huxley?

Conservative Sympathetic Failure

Orwell saw the future from a perspective describing a collective, but sequestered, sort of fundamentalism & hierarchy with strictured mentality you would find along the lines of his experience embedded in a colonial authority. A conservative church is in the Orwell model.

Liberal Sympathetic Failure

Huxley saw things along the lines of a dissolute future ‘it’s all about me’ MTV generation or social orgy subjected to mass media manipulation and control. Social media, particularly Twitter, is in the Huxley model.

One being right did not make the other wrong. Sane people are caught-trapped somewhere on periphery of either or both models of hierarchy.

Despite some overlap, the very nature/extremism of both phenomena’ participants altogether kills any sort of sincere dialogue towards a way out of the mess, and that leaves everyone screwed, because it is precisely how the 1% keep their reign of corporate/colonizing military industrial insanity marching forward. Oops. None of it seems so bright.

*

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” – Seneca the Younger

This short, brutal essay could have been called jealousy. Or envy. It is about the inter-generational violence of ideas. It is the distilling of what had been simple and straightforward but rendered complicated through centuries of the Christian culture’s pretense of charity; back to the simple and straightforward. In short, it is an essay about a culture that is not compatible with its’ pretensions.

The messiah nobody prophesied

Jesus rarely makes pronouncements or speaks about himself in the first person.  Jesus makes no claim to be the Anointed, the messiah”

Well, it’d be difficult for most Christians in this day and age to accept the idea Jesus never claimed to be the messiah. But hey, guess what? All of the ‘mainstream’ scholars of early Christianity accept the idea Christianity was ultimately created by a group having little to do with the historical Jesus, going so far as to state the movement that co-opted Jesus as its’ cultic hero put words on Jesus lips. Example prima facie is, Jesus did not speak words John put in Jesus mouth:

All New Testament scholars agree that Jesus did not say what John puts into his mouth, but that it is the position of the Gospel’s author”

Now, suppose you’ve named a messiah and you’ve been kicked out of the synagogue, not for that, but for radical departure from the norms governing Jewish society’s cohesion; with incoherent demand Greeks, Romans, and their ilk, be allowed in without regard to the rules. Well, that’s essentially what had happened to the followers of the Pharisee turned apostate Saul, also known as Paul. So, the evictees had to take their messiah with them and claim he was the authentic one. Otherwise, not only do you have a messiah who never claimed the title, you also have a messiah nobody prophesied and you’d have to invent something. Granted, this second instance would be little less ludicrous than an angel named Moron appeared to pastor Smith, as he laughed all the way to the bank, so to speak, at his flock’s naiveté, but that’s human nature:

“You can’t convince a chimpanzee to give you a banana with the promise it will get 20 more bananas in chimpanzee heaven. It won’t do it. But humans will” -Behaviorist Yuval Noah Harari

Quite naturally, human nature being what it is, the eviction caused a lot of injured feeling and consequent name-calling, as the exiled group essentially had not only become Romanized, but now had to come up with a mythology to self-sustain (a foundation of human social structure.) This name calling made it into the new Christian cult’s scriptures, along with a rather childish ‘we’re the real Jews with the real messiah’ assertion, never mind the cultural Jewishness had been squished out of the new group, by the now predominate Greco-Roman elements, a little bit like juice spurts out of a stepped on bug. But that didn’t prevent the new Greco-Roman-Christian theology claiming to be the ‘real Jews’ and the originals to be ‘devil deviant murdered Jesus’ Jews.

Consequently, when projecting subsequent ethnocentric bias (cultural narcissism), you wouldn’t necessarily have to be a Christian to suffer what Christian rooted culture shapes people to experience, a sort of butt-hurt jealousy over Jewish people never surrendered legal title to, or their sovereignty over, the noun Jew, necessary to legitimize what amounts to stolen prophecies of a messiah. It’s a kind of deeply rooted insecurity but nothing unusual within the culture. As mundane as, and possibly why, a lot of people masturbate. Or go on rampage with pogroms.

In related irony, with Christian theology demanding Christians are the real Jews, and hyper-Christian types, or better said in Christian terminology, when radical ‘New’ Jews, like Condoleezza Rice, see opportunity to make a bit of money (with her Chevron stocks), the stereotype is perfect!

Not a very charitable history now, were it? For that matter, the example given is neither a Rastafarian one.

Meanwhile, having been stepped on for well over a millennia by these  ‘New Jews’, it should come as no surprise to any more or less socially astute observer; there will manifest paranoid-insane-psychopath Jews of the original tribe with names like Krystal, Krum, Dershowitz and Netanyahu, whose antipathy to the Christian goy is protective of their own to point of collective, self-destructive madness – in case of Israel taking advantage of USA to fight Israel’s real and/or imagined enemies, inclusive of very real enemies created from acts of pure paranoia.

This ‘better their boys die than ours’ motivation, taken in a rather sardonic light, seems superior to what amounts to attitude of Ann Coulter or ‘shoot them all and let god sort them out’ or, in the case of the related sending fellow Americans to die, a Nikki Haley ‘let those who will be shot, be shot and god will ‘gracefully’ sort them out’ reflection of the Christian psychopath. Such a perfect ‘peace’ is conferred by her ‘jesus.’

By way of balanced perception, it’s a pity these ‘new jews’ had never discovered their own version of Tikkun Olam, or repairing the world we live in; as opposed to an apocalyptic-messianic tradition more resembling a northern pagan or Teutonic Jüngster Tag:

Black_Valkerie - 1

Related: Jews in the News

For those unfamiliar with ‘GLADIO’, this is the name assigned a known history of western democracies intelligence agencies unleashing terror on their own citizens for purpose of influencing or manipulating public opinion to the advantage (historically-typically) of the right wing in politics. In the history developed since GLADIO first spilled into the open in Europe in 1990, we see the Central Intelligence Agency was central to setting up the original cells. Although exposed for mass murders falsely blamed on left wing political movements, the initial GLADIO actors were never prosecuted and the apparatus behind GLADIO never shut down. There is a video documentary of GLADIO  (NATO’s secret armies) farther down this page, followed by more print information. Meanwhile, presented here are the holes in the stories of several USA mass shootings, raising the specter of ongoing GLADIO operations –

Most recent update 10 October 2017:

Gunshot victim testimony of what went on from inside the venue matches the previous analysis of multiple shooters:

Las Vegas, gunfire from at least two automatic weapons, analysis:

2nd, 19 second recording, clearly two automatic weapons:

All for the ‘fact’ of a lone shooter who must simultaneously work two automatic weapons like Rambo (and then conveniently commit suicide.) BUT, What I clearly hear is two separate calibers, two rates of fire, the heavier caliber a lower rate of fire at distance but steady, indicating it is belt fed. The lighter caliber with higher rate of fire is much closer and in bursts. It’s been 45 years but you never forget the nature of the noise, in fact you need to learn to accurately interpret the noise because it can give you critical information in a fluid combat circumstance. These are 2 separate weapons without question, employed from distinct locations.

Then, the Las Vegas Sheriff (going ‘off script’, read on) says the shooter had to have had help, at least in pulling the act together (setting it up)

If you follow the Sheriff over the entire (longer, following) interview, what becomes clear is, in his own words, the ‘facts’ he reports are coming from the FBI. Is the FBI corrupt? Oh yes. So, when we hear two automatic weapons discharging from separate locations, you have to look for openings in the ‘lone shooter’ story the FBI is feeding us.

Interesting ‘facts’ are 1) the ‘hero’ security guard is sent packing before the room is breached by the police team. Is this sanitizing witnesses? The other interesting fact is, the Sheriff states there was a second team hauled a large, heavy bag of weapons to the location in the midst of the operation. Is this opportunity to swap out weapons used? Did large quantities of ammo and, spent brass with associated weapons come up to the room and, a belt fed machine gun and associated ammo and spent brass & belt links go back down in that bag? 3) It has been reported there was a full hour passed after the shooting had stopped, with police on location, before the police forced their way into the ‘shooters’ room. This, coupled with ‘the adjacent room’ (adjoining suite) spoken of by the Sheriff, provides plausible separate entry and exit, with ample time to swap out the evidence.

Also, the Sheriff’s investigators don’t have access to the ‘shooters’ girlfriend, all this information will be fed via the FBI who appear have total control over all information.

An interesting aside, the ‘gentlemen’ (includes FBI ‘investigative’ leader) standing behind the Sheriff like minders, while giving very close attention to every reporter and every question asked, pass a note from one to the other at minute 32:17. What couldn’t wait to be known at that moment? These two guys seemed more interested in the reporting than the crime.

The full interview:

Prior ‘gladio’ updates:

Updated 23 July 2016:

GLADIO returns to Munich: “A Munich police spokesman says witnesses have reported seeing three shooters with “long guns” who attacked a McDonald’s in a city mall”

Munich_3_Shooters.jpg - 1

Three gunmen then magically morph into a single shooter who commits suicide: “A teenage German-Iranian gunman who killed nine people in a shooting spree at a busy Munich shopping centre and then committed suicide had likely acted alone, German police said Saturday”

Munich_3_Shooters_(2).jpg - 1

This preceding would appear to be the more recent USA GLADIO model re-exported to Europe; recalling there has never been a satisfactory explanation for how a recently sold in the USA military grade assault rifle was reported to be employed in the Paris Bataclan massacre: “Milojko Brzakovic of the Zastava arms factory told The Associated Press that the M92 semi-automatic pistol’s serial number matched one his company delivered to an American online arms dealer in May 2013. It was not clear how the gun got back to Europe”

As well at the Bataclan, a member of the band stating: “When I first got to the venue and walked in, I walked past the dude who was supposed to be the security guard for the backstage. I immediately went to the promoter and said: ‘Who’s that guy? I want to put another dude on. Eventually I found out that six or so [band security detail] wouldn’t show up at all.”

Moving on to the USA and the recent killing of police in Dallas, immediately, it is apparent the reporting is problematic; with initial reports of multiple snipers firing from elevated positions, which would be consistent with an initial high rate of police casualties. Most of the police appear to have been gunned down in the first minutes. It was also reported the fire (from multiple snipers) was “triangulated” or a professionally set up, coordinated ambush. Former CIA officer & clandestine service Afghanistan veteran William Hurd stated: “When gunfire started exchanging, you had folks in cross positions that were moving towards the target,” the Texas Republican told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program. “Usually, most folks that have never been in that situation are going the opposite direction. The level of coordination, there seemed to be some type of triangulation”

This information is also stated by the Dallas Chief of Police: “We believe these suspects were positioning themselves in a way to try to triangulate against officers,” Brown said”

But within 48 hours the narrative had dramatically changed; it is now a ‘lone gunman’ whom the police took care to blow up with a robot after they had him cornered (never-mind they’d initially reported he’d shot himself.) Question: Why, after cornering the suspect, instead of holding out for a negotiated surrender and possible critically important intelligence gains, would they take him out with an explosive device?  How could  the professional police of Dallas, many of them military veterans qualified  to make an accurate first assessment, get it all so wrong as to have to change the entire story?

At San Bernardino; three shooters, tall with athletic build: eye witness account. Of course we all are subsequently informed this was a (conveniently dead) lone gunman…

 

Orlando nightclub shooting; eyewitnesses claim more than one shooter and accomplices preventing escapes, blocking exit doors from the outside, while shooting went on. Of course this morphed into a single, dead shooter…

Orlando eyewitnesses part 1:

Orlando eyewitnesses part 2:

 

The Navy Yard shootings generated initial reports of multiple gunmen at more than one location, but ultimately a single lone gunman is dead at the scene. But this one gets a little stickier; a swat team on location was ordered not to intervene and leave scene of the ongoing shooting: “A tactical response team from the force was told by a supervisor to leave the scene instead of aiding municipal officers, police sources told the BBC”

BBC_Navy_Yard_SWAT.jpg - 1

Aurora: The evidence covered up by law enforcement and the court in the ‘Batman’ theater shooting is nothing short of overwhelming. Video of close eyewitness accounts (<preceding link is expanded witness accounts) clearly detail the shooter(s) had inside help and this evidence is suppressed:

The only difference between the old domestic Gladio which had been western intelligence agencies engineering terror and the current version of domestic Gladio (Gladio B) is the label put on the enemies supposedly responsible; today’s boogeyman is radical Islam whereas previous to the fall of the Soviet Union the terror boogeyman was communism. A fifty minutes documentary of social engineering via GLADIO terror cells employed by intelligence agencies in Europe is a good place to start:

A postscript observation would be concerning historian Daniele Ganser’s otherwise excellent conclusions in his 2004 book NATO’s Secret Armies:

‘Prudent Precaution or source of Terror?’ the international press pointedly asked when the secret stay-behind armies of NATO were discovered across Western Europe following the Gladio revelations in Italy in late 1990.

After more than ten years of research and investigation the answer is now clear: Both. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO were a prudent precaution, as the available documents and testimonies amply demonstrate. Based on the experiences of the Second World War and the rapid and traumatic occupation of most European countries by the German and Italian forces, military experts feared the Soviet Union and became convinced that a stay-behind army could be of strategic value when it came to the liberation of the occupied territory. Behind enemy lines the secret army could have strengthened the resistance spirit of the population, helped in the running of an organised and armed national resistance, sabotaged and harassed the occupying forces, exfiltrated shot down pilots, and gathered intelligence for the government in exile.

Based on the fear of a potential invasion after the Second World War highly placed officials in the national European governments, in the European military secret services, in NATO as well as in the CIA and the MI6 therefore decided that a secret resistance network had to be set up already during peacetime. On a lower level in the hierarchy citizens and military officers in numerous countries of Western Europe shared this assessment, joined the conspiracy and secretly trained for the emergency. These preparations were not limited to the 16 NATO member countries, but included also the four neutral countries in Western Europe, namely Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland, on which the author is preparing a second publication. In retrospect it has become obvious that the fear was without reason and the training had been futile for the invasion of the Red Army never came. Yet such a certainty was not available at the time. And it is telling that the cover of the network, despite repeated exposures in many countries during the entire Cold War, was only blown completely at exactly the same moment when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO, however, were also a source of terror, as the evidence available now shows. It has been this second feature of the secret war that has attracted a lot of attention and criticism in the last decade, and which in the future will need more investigation and research. As of now the evidence indicates that the governments of the United States and Great Britain after the end of the Second World War feared not only a Soviet invasion, but also the Communist Parties, and to a lesser degree the Socialist Parties. The White House and Downing Street feared that in several countries of Western Europe, and above all in Italy, France, Belgium, Finland and Greece, the Communists might reach positions of influence in the executive and destroy the military alliance NATO from within by betraying military secrets to the Soviet Union. It was in this sense that the Pentagon in Washington together with the CIA, MI6 and NATO in a secret war set up and operated the stay-behind armies as an instrument to manipulate and control the democracies of Western Europe from within, unknown to both European populations and parliaments. This strategy lead to terror and fear, as well as to “humiliation and maltreatment of democratic institutions’, as the European press correctly criticised.

Experts of the Cold War will note that Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies cast a new light on the question of sovereignty in Western Europe. It is now clear that as the Cold War divided Europe, brutality and terror was employed to control populations on both sides of the Iron Curtain. As far as Eastern Europe is concerned, this fact has long been recognised, long before it had been openly declared. After the Red Army had in 1968 mercilessly crushed the social reforms in Prag, Soviet leader Leonid Breschnew in Moscow with his infamous ‘Breschnew doctrine’ had openly declared that the countries of Eastern Europe were only allowed to enjoy ‘limited sovereignty’. As far as Western Europe is concerned the conviction of being sovereign and independent was shattered more recently. The data from Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies indicates a more subtle and hidden strategy to manipulate and limit the sovereignty, with great differences from country to country. Yet a limitation of sovereignty it was. And in each case where the stay-behind network in the absence of a Soviet invasion functioned as a straightjacket for the democracies of Western Europe, Operation Gladio was the Breschnew doctrine of Washington. The strategic rationale to protect NATO from within cannot be brushed aside lightly. But the manipulation of the democracies of Western Europe by Washington and London on a level which many in the European Union still today find difficult to believe clearly violated the rule of law and will require further debate and investigation. In some operations the secret stay-behind soldiers together with the secret military services monitored and filed left-wing politicians and spread anti-Communist propaganda. In more violent operations the secret war led to bloodshed. Tragically the secret warriors linked up with right-wing terrorists, a combination that led – in some countries including at least Belgium, Italy, France, Portugal, Spain, Greece and Turkey – to massacres, torture, coup d’etats and other violent acts. Most of these state-sponsored terrorist operations, as the subsequent cover-ups and fake trials suggest, enjoyed the encouragement and protection of selected highly placed governmental and military officials in Europe and in the United States. Members of the security apparatus and the government on both sides of the Atlantic who themselves despise being linked up with right-wing terrorism must in the future bring more clarity nd understanding into these tragic dimensions of the secret Cold War in Western Europe.

If Cold War experts will derive new data from NATO’s stay-behind network for their discourse on limited sovereignty during the Cold War, then international legal experts and analysts of dysfunctions of democracies will find data on the breakdown of checks and balances within each nation. The Gladio data indicates that the legislative was unable to control the more hidden branches of the executive, and that parliamentary control of secret services is often non-existing or dysfunctional in democracies on both sides of the Atlantic. Totalitarian states have long been known to have operated a great variety of largely uncontrolled and unaccountable secret services and secret armies. Yet to discover such serious dysfunctions also in numerous democracies comes as a great surprise, to say the least. Within this debate of checks and balances military officials have been correct to point out after the discovery of Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind network that there can never be such a thing as a ‘transparent stay-behind army’, for such a network would be exposed immediately in case of invasion and its members would be killed by the invasion force. Parliamentarians and constitutional lawyers meanwhile have been equally correct to emphasise that both the armed forces and the secret services of a democracy must at all times be transparent, accountable, controlled and supervised closely by civilian representatives of the people as they represent the most powerful instruments of the state.

This clash between mandatory secrecy and mandatory transparency, which lies at the heart of the Gladio phenomenon, directly points to the more general question of how much secrecy should be granted to the executive branch of a democracy. Judged from the Gladio evidence, where a lack of transparency and accountability has lead to corruption, abuse and terror, the answer is clear: The executive should be granted no secrecy and should at all times be controlled by the legislative. For a secret government, as it manifested itself in the United States and parts of Western Europe, can lead to abuse and even state terrorism. The growth of Intelligence abuses reflects a more general failure of our basic institutions’, US Senator Frank Church had wisely noted after a detailed investigation of CIA covert operations already in the 1970s. Gladio repeats this warning with a vengance.

It can hardly be overemphasised that running a secret army and funding an unaccountable intelligence service entails grave risks every democracy should seek to avoid. For the risks do not only include uncontrolled violence against groups of citizens, but mass manipulation of entire countries or continents. Among the most far-reaching findings on the secret war, as seen in the analysis, ranges the fact that the stay-behind network had served as a tool to spread fear amongst the population also in the absence of an invasion. The secret armies in some cases functioned as an almost perfect manipulation system that transported the fears of high-ranking military officers in the Pentagon and NATO to the populations in Western Europe. European citizens, as the strategists in the Pentagon saw it, due to their limited vision were unable to perceive the real and present danger of Communism, and therefore they had to be manipulated. By killing innocent citizens on market squares or in supermarkets and blaming the crime on the Communists the secret armies together with convinced right-wing terrorists effectively translated the fears of Pentagon strategists into very real fears of European citizens.

The destructive spiral of manipulation, fear and violence did not end with the fall of the Soviet Union and the discovery of the secret armies in 1990, but on the contrary gained momentum. Ever since the vicious terrorist attacks on the population of the United States on September 11, 2001 and the beginning of the ‘War on Terrorism’ fear and violence dominate not only the headlines across the globe but also the consciousness of millions. In the West the ‘evil Communist’ of the Cold War era has swiftly been replaced with the ‘evil Islamist’ of the war on terrorism era. With almost 3,000 civilians killed on September 11, and several thousands killed in the US-led war on terrorism so far with no end in sight, a new level of brutality has been reached.

Such an environment of fear, as the Gladio evidence shows, is ideally suited to manipulate the masses on both sides into more radical positions. Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaida terror network manipulated millions of Muslims, above all young male adults, to take up a radical position and believe in violence. On the other side also the White House and the administration of George Bush junior has fuelled the spiral of violence and fear and lead millions of Christians and seculars in the United States and in Europe to believe in the necessity and justice of killing other human beings in order to enhance their own security. Yet human security is not being advanced, but on the contrary decays, as the atmosphere is drenched with manipulation, violence and fear. Where the manipulation and the violence originate from and where they lead to, is at times very difficult to dissect. Hitler and the Nazis had profited greatly from manipulation and the fear in the wake of the mysterious Reichstagsbrand in Berlin in 1933, whereupon the Third Reich and Second World War followed. In 2001 the war on terrorism began, and once again radical critics have argued that the White House had manipulated 9/11, the largest terrorist attack in history, for geostrategic purposes.

As people across the globe share a vague sensation ‘that it cannot go on like that’ many search for an exit strategy from the spiral of violence, fear and manipulation. In Europe a consensus is building that terrorism cannot be defeated by war, as the latter feeds the spiral of violence, and hence the war on terrorism is not part of the solution but part of the problem. Furthermore also more high-tech – from retina scanning to smart containers – seems unable to really protect potential targets from terror attacks. More technology might even increase the challenges ahead when exploited for terrorist purposes and asymmetric warfare, a development observable ever since the invention of dynamite in the nineteenth century. Arguably more technology and more violence will therefore not solve the challenges ahead. A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions. As more secrecy and more bloodshed are unlikely to solve the problems ahead the new millennium seems a particularly adequate time to begin with such a shift in consciousness which can have positive effects both for the world and for oneself.

Following on his excellent deconstructive analysis of GLADIO, Ganser’s epic fail is in the last paragraph where…

A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions

…naively presuming the class of psychopaths risen to rule from the shadow will somehow magically correct the organic deficit in their personalities. What’s more and what’s worse is, on top of ‘leopards don’t shed their spots’ or criminals do not voluntarily surrender their business models, utterly missing is the ‘how’ that will be required; to weed out a pervasive criminal ‘deep state’ apparatus rooted in every branch and at every level across western democratic institutions. This septic infection of western democratic institutions has become the world’s largest and most entrenched organized crime family, where military-industrial corporate boards are fused with rogue intelligence agencies and ‘terror’ is essential to their bottom line: PROFIT. The stark reality is, generating terror has become a money making venture of such magnitude, were the symbiotic relationship between deliberately generated terror, and the armaments and related industries that derive immense profits from the same, were interrupted, the western culture’s economic engine would collapse.

Insofar as Genser’s ‘non-violence’ proposal, that is well and good, provided it is not manipulated akin to the Gene Sharp model where Ghandi’s moral and ethical principles had been suborned to amoral utilitarian ends based in ‘color revolutions.’ This evil, and those who’ve perpetrated it, must be put away. As well, Genser’s last paragraph should not be construed to allow the GLADIO criminal elements forgiveness along the lines of a ‘truth and reconciliation’ process, which is inconsistent with accountability and the rule of law. If the criminals were to walk free, the principle of deterence is not only rendered meaningless, recidivism would reinfect every institution.

The cycle of revolution attending the ‘rise and fall’ phenomena of the western civilized hierarchies throughout history demonstrates a failed model. At the end of the day, that required going forward will be more along the lines of a ‘reverse’ Social Darwinism where decentralization is the habit and the rule, and all those aspiring to the rise of hierarchy are speedily and effectively squelched; demanding an entirely new social perspective. The impediments to this are formidable.

Example given, rather than initiate a program to convert eastern Europe’s small farmers to organic production, when expanding, the European Union has forced tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of small farmers off the land with required equipment and farm to market ‘upgrades’ these small farmers could not afford or had no access to where the infrastructure did not exist, effectively handing ‘food security’ to multinational conglomerates such as Monsanto and Syngenta. Already a new generation is coming up having lost critical knowledge in community self-sufficiency. There have been few less criminal and anti-democratic acts in the annals of democracy; where the actual facts demand surrender of a community right to self-sufficiency. On the pretext of ‘sanitation’ the EU took away the largest source of clean, community produced foodstuffs and has positioned the likes of Monsanto and Syngenta to replace this vanished community produce with product that, were it labelled honestly, would sport a skull and crossed bones.

Every day that passes with these sort of events left unchecked, reduces the chances of intelligent dismantling of a system gone horrendously wrong; sans violence and escalated social trauma. Everyday that passes under the current criminal class of leadership, those GLADIO false flag actors represented in Obama, Cameron, Merkel, Hollande & company, who either cannot or will not look and act beyond the amorality of ‘Realpolitik’ and move on behalf of people rather than a corporate system which feeds on people, compounds the problem.

Each day of deferred action determines increased gravity in coming, inevitable, social collapse. It is the undeniable repeat history of western civilization. Short of intelligent dismantlement, a radical event in the age of the most lethal weapons the world has ever seen, there almost certainly will be no ‘phoenix’ rise from the western civilization’s ashes, this time. C’est la mort.

*

Related:

Deep State IV NATO & Gladio

Deep State V Economics & counter-insurgency

*

Ron10

In any democracy, ethics, self restraint, tolerance and honesty will always take a second seat to narcissism, avarice, bigotry & persecution, if only because people who play by the rules in any democracy are at a disadvantage to those who easily subvert the rules to their own advantage (Ronald’s Maxim)

Truth is seldom pure and never simple -Oscar Wilde

I’d tacked the Oscar Wilde quote onto my preceding post on Charlottesville as an afterthought. Then, having thought about Wilde’s maxim, considering his dialect and 19th Century literary period, today he might have rather modified his short statement, in effect, ‘Truth is seldom clean and never simple.’

Since, I’ve read both; Glen Ford’s pointing to the USA founded as a racist state; Trump’s protestations of ‘where does it end’ with removing American monuments; so called ‘scholars‘ disputing Trump’s equating General Lee with General Washington; and finally, I’ve read the letter of Stonewall Jackson’s great, great grandsons, Jack and Warren Christian, natives of Richmond, Virginia.

Prior to my conclusions, allow me to inform you all; I am eligible to belong to the fraternal order “Sons of the Confederate Veterans.” In fact, if they had a ‘noble line’ of descent from the families of the old ‘southern aristocracy’, I would certainly qualify.

According to remote memory, family oral history & genealogy (I had been briefed on these in distant past, and am not intimately familiar with the material), if I recall events correctly, my own great, great grandfather was a casualty of the war, while serving in the Southern military. This orphaned my great grandfather who had been taken in by cousins; these migrated to California some years after the war, I seem to recall from the vicinity of Texarkana, Texas. As a not very interested adolescent, I may have this history transposed and it was an orphaned cousin traveled to California with my ancestor. Either way, I am informed we are somehow related to a Captain Daniel of the 9th Texas artillery or Daniel’s Battery of the Confederacy’s Trans-Mississippi Department, although this last may have no direct bearing on my ancestry, I just don’t know. What I do know is, my great grandfather’s surname was “Daniel” (no ‘s’ at the end of the family’s name) and descended from one of the ‘first’ families of Virginia, or as Wikipedia puts it “a [Virginia] family of old colonial heritage.” In any case, this last is not a distant memory’s conjecture on my part, but had been clear, I’m informed I am descended via a Confederate veteran of the Civil War who was of this ‘Daniel’ family; via my maternal line.

Now, for those unfamiliar with arcane American history, I will give example of this highly educated, southern aristocratic family’s progeny: my relative, the Virginian Peter Vivian Daniel, was author of a concurring opinion in the 1857 decision Dred Scott v Sandford in which he stated:

“the African negro race never have been acknowledged as belonging to the family of nations”

Beyond this seeming remote history (I was in Vietnam when the California branch of the Daniel family held a big reunion, drawing more than 1,000 extended family, mostly educated professionals) I can give up a couple of embarrassing family secrets, one of them pretty bad. If it weren’t bad enough one of my great uncles had been named Forrest, for Nathan Bedford Forrest, whose troops murdered en mass the captured Black Union soldiers at Ft Pillow, one of my great aunts (I had many, so her identity is not in danger) once gave me the original lyric to a certain (in)famous slave auction block ditty or southern nursery rhyme:

Enee, Meany, Miney, Moe
Catch a nigger by the toe
If he hollers
Make him pay
With fifty lashes
Every day

My-mother-told-me-to-choose-the-very-best-one

Fortunately, I was not so deeply immersed in these attitudes to prevent mental escape and, had a wider exposure to our world. Although it never crossed my mind to apply for membership in the Sons of Confederate Veterans, I’d now looked and found lingering influence of a White slant to history, as later I’d read “Lee’s Lieutenants” (several large volumes), a “Robert E Lee Reader” and much more. All of this history has a White slant, regardless of whether the author was a Southern or Northern partisan. I should have read Frederick Douglass but I didn’t. My interest in those days had been primarily martial, not social. What I now understand is, for many, the war and the slave owning South are not exactly remote events. Particularly for Black people with Jim Crow only recently off their back, and, it would seem, for those many Whites who cling to White supremacy as a god-given right to White people.

Going to my amended statement of Oscar Wilde where ‘Truth is seldom clean and never simple”, my take on Trump versus Glen Ford is, both have it right but Ford’s truth is ‘cleaner.’ Trump equates General Lee with General Washington as unequivocal American heroes, whereas Glen Ford equates General Lee with General Washington as racists serving the cause of White supremacy. In the USA founding document, where a ‘negro’ is worth 3/5 of a White Man according to Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution…

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons” (in effect, Black people)

…according to our founding document, Glen Ford has it right. The USA was founded as a racist state based on “White privilege”

This recalls the ‘scholars’, one of whom stated:

[the monuments] “force us to contemplate the centrality of slavery to the making of the nation,” said Gregory Downs, a history professor at the University of California, Davis who studies the impact of the Civil War on the United States. But he also said the difference between the nation’s first president, George Washington, and then [sic] man who sought to secede from the nation, Robert E. Lee, isn’t complicated.

“It is obvious that traitors in arms to the nation are not equivalent to those who created it,” he said”

Pardon me Mr Gregory Downs, but both men sought to perpetrate slavery by the willful acts of their own volition in a civic context. How is a man, General Washington, who sought to found a nation (United States of America) perpetrating slavery, any different than a man, General Lee, who sought to found a nation (Confederate States of America) perpetrating slavery? This is not a case of comparing apples to oranges.

I expect there’d be many who would join a new organization called “Dissident Sons of the Confederacy” or even “Dissident Sons of the Revolution.” Maybe there is some handful of motivated persons out there would be interested to invest in such an endeavor. Perhaps they will stumble across this blog post. Meanwhile, my hat is off to Stonewall Jackson’s great, great grandsons Jack and Warren Christian, and particularly, my hat is off to Glen Ford at Black Agenda Report.

Full text of the letter by Jack and Warren Christian:

Dear Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney and members of the Monument Avenue Commission,

We are native Richmonders and also the great-great-grandsons of Stonewall Jackson. As two of the closest living relatives to Stonewall, we are writing today to ask for the removal of his statue, as well as the removal of all Confederate statues from Monument Avenue. They are overt symbols of racism and white supremacy, and the time is long overdue for them to depart from public display. Overnight, Baltimore has seen fit to take this action. Richmond should, too.

In making this request, we wish to express our respect and admiration for Mayor Stoney’s leadership while also strongly disagreeing with his claim that “removal of symbols does [nothing] for telling the actual truth [nor] changes the state and culture of racism in this country today.” In our view, the removal of the Jackson statue and others will necessarily further difficult conversations about racial justice. It will begin to tell the truth of us all coming to our senses.

Last weekend, Charlottesville showed us unequivocally that Confederate statues offer pre-existing iconography for racists. The people who descended on Charlottesville last weekend were there to make a naked show of force for white supremacy. To them, the Robert E. Lee statue is a clear symbol of their hateful ideology. The Confederate statues on Monument Avenue are, too—especially Jackson, who faces north, supposedly as if to continue the fight.

We are writing to say that we understand justice very differently from our grandfather’s grandfather, and we wish to make it clear his statue does not represent us.

Through our upbringing and education, we have learned much about Stonewall Jackson. We have learned about his reluctance to fight and his teaching of Sunday School to enslaved peoples in Lexington, Virginia, a potentially criminal activity at the time. We have learned how thoughtful and loving he was toward his family. But we cannot ignore his decision to own slaves, his decision to go to war for the Confederacy, and, ultimately, the fact that he was a white man fighting on the side of white supremacy.

While we are not ashamed of our great-great-grandfather, we are ashamed to benefit from white supremacy while our black family and friends suffer. We are ashamed of the monument.

In fact, instead of lauding Jackson’s violence, we choose to celebrate Stonewall’s sister—our great-great-grandaunt—Laura Jackson Arnold. As an adult Laura became a staunch Unionist and abolitionist. Though she and Stonewall were incredibly close through childhood, she never spoke to Stonewall after his decision to support the Confederacy. We choose to stand on the right side of history with Laura Jackson Arnold.

We are ashamed to benefit from white supremacy while our black family and friends suffer. We are ashamed of the monument.

Confederate monuments like the Jackson statue were never intended as benign symbols. Rather, they were the clearly articulated artwork of white supremacy. Among many examples, we can see this plainly if we look at the dedication of a Confederate statue at the University of North Carolina, in which a speaker proclaimed that the Confederate soldier “saved the very life of the Anglo-Saxon race in the South.” Disturbingly, he went on to recount a tale of performing the “pleasing duty” of “horse whipping” a black woman in front of federal soldiers. All over the South, this grotesque message is conveyed by similar monuments. As importantly, this message is clear to today’s avowed white supremacists.

There is also historical evidence that the statues on Monument Avenue were rejected by black Richmonders at the time of their construction. In the 1870s, John Mitchell, a black city councilman, called the monuments a tribute to “blood and treason” and voiced strong opposition to the use of public funds for building them. Speaking about the Lee Memorial, he vowed that there would come a time when African Americans would “be there to take it down.”

Ongoing racial disparities in incarceration, educational attainment, police brutality, hiring practices, access to health care, and, perhaps most starkly, wealth, make it clear that these monuments do not stand somehow outside of history. Racism and white supremacy, which undoubtedly continue today, are neither natural nor inevitable. Rather, they were created in order to justify the unjustifiable, in particular slavery.

One thing that bonds our extended family, besides our common ancestor, is that many have worked, often as clergy and as educators, for justice in their communities. While we do not purport to speak for all of Stonewall’s kin, our sense of justice leads us to believe that removing the Stonewall statue and other monuments should be part of a larger project of actively mending the racial disparities that hundreds of years of white supremacy have wrought. We hope other descendants of Confederate generals will stand with us.

As cities all over the South are realizing now, we are not in need of added context. We are in need of a new context—one in which the statues have been taken down.

Respectfully,
William Jackson Christian
Warren Edmund Christian
Great-great-grandsons of Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson

*

*

 

Time to time I delve into the impossible subject of the psychology of ‘god’ in the western incarnation; here is my Sisyphus endeavor again, whence an (authentic) friend drew my attention to this Facebook post:

APPROACHING SAMADHI WITHOUT PLANT MEDICINE

The post’s author begins:

“I really resonate with this article and the timing of its showing up in my life is interesting given what happened yesterday.

“On Thursday, June 8, 2017 (a date I will record in my diary) I had a profound encounter with the numinous and entered an altered state analogous to what I experience with psilocybin mushrooms or edible cannabis, without the assistance of such plants. This is something I’d hoped for, eventually, but was surprised that happened the first time I sat down for a serious long meditation session in a long while.

“The teacher plants appear to have opened up some kind of portal or neural pathway for me to the universal awareness that exists silently behind all things, which functions like the operating system of a computer — entraining all experience embedded in the software of this dimension. Like training wheels, the plants taught me how it “feels” to ride the bike. Yesterday I rode on my own for the first time…”

Referencing this article which includes:

“The integral SELF [emphasis on SELF is original to the article] is therefore a yoking of the ego (our time bound self) with the soul (our eternal self). The point is that there is no good reason to assume that just because forms are temporary that they are not holy. The higher-self within us often hates to be confined or defined into forms, and the material self within us often hates to be taken outside of its familiar home or trappings into the boundless freedom of the higher self.

“Freedom, true freedom, is perhaps ultimately found in acceptance and balance”

This preceding is actually narcissism underlined and emphasized; where all is focused on the ‘self’ returning to ‘god’ (my deliberate lower case g) whereas in the ancient native community (the article’s author seems to think this had influenced his upbringing) the ‘self’ is at the bottom of the ‘totem pole’ (forgive, if not overlook my irreverence.) EVERYONE was expected to integrate to surrounding reality in sense of community sans ‘self’ interest and that’s where all dwelled, except that community elevated one via path of community observation (all eyes are on you) for purpose of sharing exceptional sight. Exceptional sight in this sense had precisely zero to do with any individual path.

It was considered ‘cheating’ to do psychedelics in the tradition where I spent decades. There is no substitute for hard work on shaping the interior to opening to awareness requiring (for westerners) narcissism die or the total death of the ego-self.

Actually ‘ego’, as experienced by the westerners’ sense of self, had been in indigenous cultures, diagnosed and treated as a mental disorder.

The object sought in our tradition is a background state of awareness in which there is no entry or exit, no coming and going, an ever present state where both; you deal with mundane task or life complexity equally and persistently in a state of ‘the spirit puts into the mind of a man to know what to do.’ No high or low, all experience is to be found in a steady state of ‘level.’

As MJ Zimmerman notes in her Being in Nature’s Mind:

“Carl Jung once warned that Western people who take up Eastern spiritual practices run the danger, first, of doing those practices inauthentically, since they are not beginning with an Eastern psychic structure, and secondly, of using those practices to avoid the real psychological work they, as people with Western psyches, need to do to ever become ready for higher spiritual practice

“I believe that the same warning applies to modern urban people who take up Native American practices. I am glad that there is growing interest in Native American thought because I believe it is a deep and subtle source of wisdom which the planet needs; however, it will serve no one to have Westerners appropriate Native ceremonies or practices and act them out while staying completely within Western ontological assumptions and Western psychological experiences. A more radical deconstruction of the Western mind is required in order for Europeans to finally begin to see into another way of being and other ways of knowing” (Zimmerman’s free pdf on the web)

I had, on previous occasion, attempted to explain the ancient native perception in these precise terms:

“Our existence is Macro-Gaia (in the big picture) or all is [inter] related, from sub-atomic particle to planetary structures, with an element of Vitalism (the ‘great mystery’), taken together presenting as quasi or mimic intelligent design. The intelligent design would be ‘quasi’ because the native take on this aspect would be better described as intelligent expression, ‘design’ implies an egoic projection or attribution, whereas ‘expression’ should not. This thought goes to the native persona of humility: There are some things one simply cannot know”

This why (in our native view) we cannot know ‘god’ except as a projection where man has created god in man’s image. The mystery of our existence cannot be individuated except in a sense of arrogant projection of self, or the ultimate false perception.

Our creation is named a “mystery” for the very fact of its’ indecipherable nature; and when we accept this, as a community in its entirety, the mystery opens at several levels but always with a caveat: none of us can know absolutes; as ‘reality’ is an elastic thing with frequently shifting parameters and any related ‘truths’ are often of fleeting relevance.

This is why, example given, Indo-European ‘civilization’ has a habit of rising and falling; wherein this western civilized perception ‘truths’ can become absolute, leading to a brittle construction when the elasticity of reality shifts away from any particular society’s foundation in the Indo-European family of nations. Brittle constructions imply impending collapse as the given society’s parameter of ‘perceived reality’ which is actually a state of inter-generational perception in stasis, becomes farther and farther removed from shifting reality in actuality.

I somehow doubt the major Indo-European enlightened figures, whether in the historical order of Krishna, Buddha, (or the adopted) Jesus and Mohammed, made any pretense to embody the entirety of the Great Mystery of our existence but it didn’t matter, lesser men were certain to falsely confer this upon them; insuring lesser ideas became fixtures of those respective cultures. These are example of the Indo-European stasis or inter-generational inflexibility of thought pointing to collapse, of which there is likely no greater coming probability than that of Europe and Plato.

*

Notes on the preceding: I’m not aware of whether any motive for the (South America) Native Americans providing Ayahuasca to European and North American Whites is a great source of amusement as might be expected in more northerly Native communities (how many crucified Jesus joke did I hear over the decades? Countless.) But no doubt it has been a source of revenue to the Native communities that is much appreciated. Do the Natives have a real grasp of how the European mentality is constructed and the fact any Ayahuasca experience provided in a ‘spiritual’ context to these people is almost certainly worthless from the indigenous perspective? Probably not. Little different to Brant Secunda‘s self-deceits the Huichol way is appropriate to the numerous Americans and Europeans he has ex-filtrated that peoples’ ceremony to. I use the especially harsh term ‘ex-filtrate’ on account of the multiple deceits involved in superimposing a Native ceremony on non-Native community without multiple disclaimers concerning absence of contextual validity. The native thinking and world view just isn’t there.

What approaches criminal in the preceding, is the dearth of understanding of the indigenous mentality from which numerous co-opted practices derive. It should be the responsibility of the teachers to explore (deeply) how it is those practices might mean entirely different things to the separate communities, indigenous & western, and challenge the western (particularly) to understand if these practices are to become anything resembling a healthy, valid practice, it will require (noting the previously mentioned work of MJ Zimmerman) a radical deconstruction of the western mentality; in effect, doing what westerner’s simply do not do – take responsibility for the damage western culture is inflicting not only on the other cultures, but on life itself. This should require, at minimum, a radical departure from pursuit of wealth in a context of success per the western modality. How many would do it? Certainly Brant hasn’t. You probably couldn’t count the number on one hand, of westerners practicing the co-opted ceremonies that have (zero.)

Altogether separately, anyone inclined to believe the Peyote experience of the Native American Church is somehow an ancient cultural phenomenon could not be more self-deceived. Today’s Native American Church is a Native American version of evangelical Christianity created from an amalgam of the ancient Ghost Dance as reinterpreted by the Paiute, Wovoka, incorporating Evangelical Christianity and a southern Native Peyote ceremony. It is not yet 150 years old.

 

It’s not often I’d post up a link to Pink News but this is too rich to pass up; with the New York Times and other (typically lying) media all abuzz with Bannon’s “meeting of  the hearts” (perhaps more appropriately known as a ‘bosom buddies’ crush) with Catholic arch-conservative Cardinal Raymond Burke. Let’s dig deeper and get to the ‘bottom’ of what’s really going on. Traced to the original source, the online, hard right, Opus Dei aligned (fascist), Catholic magazine Aleteia:

bannon_burke-jpg-1

“When you recognize someone who has sacrificed in order to remain true to his principles and who is fighting the same kind of battles in the cultural arena, in a different section of the battlefield, I’m not surprised there is a meeting of hearts,” said Benjamin Harnwell, a confidant of Cardinal Burke who arranged the 2014 meeting”

Going to a ‘meeting of the hearts’ concerning ‘battles in the cultural arena’, one must more than simply wonder exactly what this particular ‘battle’ has to do with internal strife concerning one’s sexuality. Why hadn’t Aleteia just ‘come out’ on behalf of Burke, and stated the obvious; Bannon’s recent ‘bosom buddy’, the mandatory-by-theology-homo-hating Burke, has his own serious sexuality issues:

Screenshot from Fellini’s ‘Roma’ satire of Vatican fashion, 1972:

Fellini

Cardinal Raymond Burke at the Vatican in 2013:

camp2

Nearly identical fashion in frocks, you think? Who’d have dared plagiarize Fellini’s designs for the queens of fashion at the Vatican? Some character out of Satyricon, patronizing the Vatican’s new digs?

Satyricon_I

^ According to WaPo’s inside sources at Langley, Virginia, we are informed the suspect is almost certainly linked to this story:

Rome_Bath_House

Yo! Steve! What’s up with that shit? How’s that ‘meeting of the hearts’ working out behind closed doors?

burke

^ Whoa! Bannon! You scored a date with HER? This should be clarified immediately! What’s the current crusading closet agenda concerning the knights over at Sovereign Military Order of Malta? (also known as S’MOM or Steve’s mom)

steve-rosie-obannon

Catholic fundamentalist & Trump chief strategist  Steve ‘rosie’ O’Bannon

Related:

Saint Chester Prince of the Church & patron saint of boys

Raphael’s Paradox On Catholic hierarchy & civilization

Deep State VI Opus Dei & Christian Dominion

*

On the philosophical roots underlying Meryl Streep’s criticisms of President Trump

philosopher |fəˈläsəfər|
noun
a person engaged or learned in philosophy, especially as an academic discipline.
ORIGIN Middle English: from Old French philosophe via Latin from Greek philosophos ‘lover of wisdom,’ from philos ‘to love’ + sophos ‘wise.’

“from Greek philosopos”

What to make of those philosophers who conceal the fact their culture is not compatible with its pretensions? Is to ‘love’ perpetrating a lie to make one ‘wise?’

“Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, was an English philosopher who is considered one of the founders of modern political philosophy. Hobbes is best known for his 1651 book Leviathan, which established the social contract theory that has served as the foundation for most later Western political philosophy”

Distilled from Hobbes’ inordinately complex, attempted order of things, contradictory points made in ‘Leviathan’ may be summed up so: In the…

“natural condition of Mankindthe life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”

And in the same moment, without Man’s ‘natural reason’, God’s inspirations cannot be known:

“we shouldn’t renounce our senses and experience, or our natural reason, which is the undoubted word of God”

Do you suppose Hobbes actually meant to insinuate understanding derived from a man’s ‘naturally endowed’ beastly nature inspires one to deeper knowledge of God’s message? Is Hobbes acknowledging ‘God’s image, man’ is naturally possessed of the violence we have seen Englishmen, and their present day American cousins, visit upon every culture deemed inferior to their own?

Certainly not. If Hobbes were of a proclivity to be honest, he wouldn’t have to bury the contradictions of his culture in a massive circumlocution or a ‘leviathan’ that can serve no other purpose than to conceal a contradiction of ‘holiness’ inspired violence.

What we are actually looking at in the Hobbes example is, the phenomenon of Western philosophers burying western culture’s primal contradictions with artificially constructed complications, so those contradictions – in a culture incompatible with its’ pretensions – need never to be faced.

Hobbes is a master of this common (but patently dishonest) philosophical method. The result? A culture of philosophical progeny where, among other deceitful social phenomenon, you will find ‘prosperity gospel’ holding promise no matter your wealth derives from a military-industrial corporate colonialism responsible for the deaths of untold millions, if you ‘personally’ live an upright life and happen to be rich, it is because ‘God is blessing you’, the associated dead be damned of their (in your thinking) own volition.

At the other end of the spectrum? Hollywood actors, who make tremendous money selling distractions while profiting from the same cultural deceit; now shouting perfectly ineffectual ‘human rights’ remonstrations but kept their mouths shut when it had been the neo-liberal Obama pulling the trigger on drones slaughtering innocents.

Moving on to David Hume’s impossible postulation:

“In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remarked, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when all of a sudden I am surprised to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, ’tis necessary that it should be observed and explained; and at the same time that a reason should be given, for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it. But as authors do not commonly use this precaution, I shall presume to recommend it to the readers; and am persuaded, that this small attention would subvert all the vulgar systems of morality, and let us see, that the distinction of vice and virtue is not founded merely on the relations of objects, nor is perceived by reason”

…is summed up in Western ethics as ‘Hume’s guillotine’ or the ‘ought-is problem.’ Now, forgive my naiveté when faced with this immutable Western dilemma of philosophy where the ‘ought-is problem‘ is posed…

“how, exactly can an “ought” be derived from an “is”? The question, prompted by Hume’s small paragraph, has become one of the central questions of ethical theory”

…as it occurs in my small universe if:

  1. A corporation is paying militia to terrorize the people of the Congo to buy rare minerals on the cheap. As this is a crime, hadn’t the people responsible ought be punished? David Hume’s cultural progeny would bury it with ‘how can an ought be derived from an is’ circumlocution (as if assigning responsibility were not possible.) So it is, Bush-Cheney walked free from a world-wide crimes spree when Barack Obama ‘looked forward, not back’ because we ought move on (move along folks, nothing to see here.) Meanwhile, on Obama’s watch, American special operations commandos deployments to the Middle East dropped 55% but climbed in Africa by 1,600%. How easily ‘we’ twist the philosophy (is there not some collective responsibility? Had that ought not be punished?)
  2. Going to collective punishment, Jesus reputedly said “as you sow,  so shall you reap”, patently ignored by both sides, more or less across the spectrum. But English philosophy is so convoluted, an evangelical can appear to believe Jesus saying “Blessed are the peace-makers” should be construed to speaking of, for all practical corporate colonial purposes, Colt revolvers.

Then, we come to Western Christian Civilization’s John Locke who no doubt had been influenced by Hobbes. Locke’s philosophy demands all men are born a completely blank slate upon which everything is drawn subsequently. In effect, there is no innate knowledge bestowed on man. If that were true, then Locke holding…

“The Bible is one of the greatest blessings bestowed by God on the children of men. It has God for its author; salvation for its end, and truth without any mixture for its matter. It is all pure”

…demands “God” who ‘created man in his image‘ couldn’t know the difference between his own butt-hole and either end of a hollow log, when he’d arrived on the scene in Genesis. No small wonder western philosophy is so fucked up.

The cumulative result should be no surprise, a culturally self-justified, rationalization for an unquestioned, unlimited State authority to rule over men and nations; nations of those very ruled over men who claim “They hate us for our freedoms.” But freedoms should not be conflated with ‘taking liberties.’ In reality, ‘they’ hate us for ‘taking the liberty’ of robbing their nations of natural resources at the point of a bayonet, for generations. When was Meryl Streep speaking out while Obama was ‘taking the liberty’ of slaughtering the innocents of multiple nations in ongoing resource grab, artificially propping up the outlandish standard of living, comparatively speaking, a majority of Americans actually believe they are entitled to? Where was Meryl Streep speaking out when Hillary was the first lieutenant of NATO, when NATO was decapitating the nation of Libya? The pretext of ‘humanitarian violence’ replacing Gaddafi’s relative few ‘abuses’ with tribal warlords, al Qaida and a chapter of Islamic State actually served to derail Libya transitioning to a gold backed dinar, an immense threat to the USA dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Why conceal the motive with a seeming compulsive lie? A matter of habit? More plainly, this is certain example of a culture’s action incompatible with its pretension. This is a matter of cultural habit.

Hobbes and his peers would not only be a supporter of the Divine Right of Kings & colonialism but in today’s world, with their self-serving convoluted denials of responsibility concealing contradiction – would support a modern police state and label it ‘freedom.’ English philosophy, deeply, culturally ingrained, but examined honestly, provides for apparatus of state represented in Robert Mugabe or Kim Jong-un as easily as a Barack Obama, The Donald, or The Donald’s rival, Hillary. They’re all cut from a similar cloth. They all behave as autocrats. They all either are, or harbor, kleptocrats. They’re all vampires, whether feeding off victims foreign or domestic or both. Their populations are, all, in some one respect or another, propagandized to point of immensely clueless. Their minions, for the greater part, don’t deviate from ‘the party line.’ They all suffer self-aggrandizing-self-conceited-self-deceits.

The substance of what Meryl Streep says (or doesn’t say) about Trump doesn’t bother me at all. What is astounding is, the stunning degree of hypocrisy, ingrained as it were, in the colonists’ philosophers and widely seen in their cultural progeny. Streep is, by definition, a colony sponsor; it matters not whether it were a historic rivalry between British sponsors of Rhode Island versus Massachusetts or Streep as sponsor of Hillary’s efforts at colonizing Syria with regime change versus The Donald’s desire to recolonize Iran. When the colonizing leader was to Streep’s liking, whether Obama or Clinton, she kept her mouth shut.

Per the inherent denial built into the English language philosophical patrimony, represented in Streep and her sincere self-deceit she holds the moral high ground, better were our inherited English philosophers labeled ‘falsifiers’, the phonetics seem close enough: fəˈläsəfər

*

Parry_Clown

Brought to you by the free speech clown

%d bloggers like this: