Archives for category: culture

forgiveness |fərˈgivnəs|
noun
the action or process allowing the forsaking of ethical self-development; a primary progenitor of psychopathy: expecting the priest would forgive her, she drove the knife into his heart. Progenitor of collective sociopathy: Nikki Haley’s fundamentalism allowed for her endorsement of humanitarian violence in Syria, pleasing the church-going stockholders of McDonnell-Douglas and General Dynamics. Related to duopoly: Condoleezza Rice on Hillary Clinton “I think she is doing a lot of the right things… She is very tough… I think she has done a fine job, I really do”

And so it is the killer of one million Iraqis (infrastructure destruction and related disease) endorses the creator of today’s slave markets in Libya and there is little discernible difference betwixt the three of these babushki when it comes to Haley’s Syria position at the United Nations.

hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē|
noun (pl. hypocrisies)
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.

babushka |bä|bo͝oSH|ka|
noun (pl. babushki)
a mean-spirited, controlling, hyper-critical Russian granny

Author’s Preface

My Christian, Muslim and Jewish readers, when perusing this series, should bear in mind Jesus is a much abused historical figure, bearing a name that has been used for cynical manipulations since the era of the Crusades. There is a world of difference between the authentic Jesus and the Jesus put forward by radical Christian Zionists who would cynically see the Christians of Syria made extinct (along with Alawites and Druze) by machinations that enrich the American military-industrial complex in tandem with the Israeli radical right wing and Bibi Netanyahu’s pursuit of the Yinon Plan for a Greater Israel. If one gave it one minute’s thought, it raises a question: why are there Christians on both sides of every issue?

This series explores the behaviors of faux Christians and their dishonest allies, that is if authentic Christians follow the Sermon on the Mount. The two cannot be conflated; you cannot stamp out Syria’s Christians in the name of Jesus except to practice oxymoron or hypocrisy. But that would be precisely the outcome if the USA & Israel’s employ of Salafi-Takfiri to overthrow Assad were to prevail. Authentic Christians should be deeply disturbed at the following narrative little different to Jews practicing Tikkun Olam should be deeply disturbed at Netanyahu’s role in the same. No doubt the authentic practicing Sufi who reads here will know precisely what I am speaking of as well, as there are sincere parties in the 1/2 of each group determined to be ‘the righteous of God.’

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 1 treason at the apex

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 2 treason at the apex

The Plot To Capture The White House Part 3 treason at the apex

Additional thoughts: Historically (since JFK’s assassination) it had been more or less CIA neoliberal elements had controlled the White House; best reflected in the nominally ‘conservative’ Christian-Republican George H.W. Bush, whose criminal behaviors were influenced by his (and the CIA’s) Ivy League roots. Ironically, it was the culturally West Texan George W. Bush saw the pendulum begin to swing towards a more radical breed, or hard-core evangelical members of the Doug Coe cult, aligned with the Pentagon, ascend towards practical control of the White House, presently reflected in Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Dan Coats, Jeff Sessions, Betsy DeVoss (sister of Eric Prince), and The Generals.

The third historical player (other than CIA & Pentagon) in this tug-of-war would be MOSSAD. All of these cooperate in some areas, and contest in other areas of policy. Each of these vie to control the White House. But just now, there is a fourth agency in the play, that is the personality of Donald Trump, conducive to manipulations but not control. The present era is likely the first era, since Allen Dulles had been Director, the CIA hasn’t had the upper-hand. Interesting times!

Moreover, whether ‘God’s Chosen’ in the original Zionist form, or the ‘new chosen’ in the radical Christian Zionist iteration of übermensch, these present Zionist ‘partners’ fully intend that each will attempt to annihilate the other before all is said and done. There’s not much room for the rest of us (other than as collateral damage) in their plans.

Afterthought would be; the more in the remote past the National Security Act of 1947 had become embedded in the USA’s institutions of governance, the more in the remote past de jure (factual) democratic and constitutional principles had been in play. ‘Liberal democracy’ is just an existential threat (to all of us) and cosmic joke at this point in time.

Footnote: Insofar as the Vatican’s fascist fingers in the intelligence agencies’ pie, the curious won’t be disappointed (or will be terribly disappointed depending on your  degree of cynicism) with a read of this (external link) 1983 investigative history-report that remains relevant today: ‘Their Will Be Done.’ A more recent assessment HERE.

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you” -Chuck Schumer

Well, Schumer is likely correct in the preceding but there’s a very questionable follow-on…

“Whether you are a super liberal Democrat or a very conservative Republican, you should be against dismantling the intelligence community” -Chuck Schumer

I’m not aware Trump has called for ‘dismantling’ the intelligence community per se but it should be mentioned in the context of Schumer warning everyone ‘don’t go there’, there have been numerous, I would characterize as responsible, calls over the years to dismantle the operations sector of the CIA. But maybe Schumer’s protective scare-mongering over the matter of our notoriously corrupt intelligence agencies goes to a deeper matter; the matter of the most powerful intelligence agency operating in the USA is MOSSAD, an entity which has penetrated every aspect of American governance. And then recall we are dealing with Zionists, whether the hyper-conservative cult-Christians dealt with in Part 1 of this series or the ‘super liberal’ Chuck Schumer and his ilk. There is one public forum in this world and likely only one, where you would discover a man whose cult beliefs conflate Jesus’ teachings with Hitler’s behavior and expect that a good thing, that is Mike Pence, rubbing shoulders and sharing a podium with a super liberal Democrat along the lines of Chuck Schumer: that venue is AIPAC.  AIPAC is one of MOSSAD’s favorite playgrounds and it’s not the first time [1] Jewish Zionists have consorted with Nazis (important note: all Jews are not practicing Zionists, not by a long shot, just as a majority of Christians are not political Zionists, despite theological demand in certain sects of both religions that Zionism is paramount.)

Now, let’s look at a thumbnail sketch of past possibilities versus actual outcome and we can reasonably surmise which intelligence agency had come out on top (to now) in the most recent USA election cycle. To begin, we examine Bernie Sander’s role as ‘sheepdog’ [2].

“The sheepdog’s job is to divert the energy and enthusiasm of activists a year, a year and a half out from a November election away from building an alternative to the Democratic party, and into his doomed effort. When the sheepdog inevitably folds in the late spring or early summer before a November election, there’s no time remaining to win ballot access for alternative parties or candidates, no time to raise money or organize any effective challenge to the two capitalist parties.

“At that point, with all the alternatives foreclosed, the narrative shifts to the familiar “lesser of two evils.” Every sheepdog candidate surrenders the shreds of his credibility to the Democratic nominee in time for the November election. This is how the Bernie Sanders show ends, as the left-leaning warm-up act for Hillary Clinton” –Bruce Dixon, May 2015

Why the sheepdog in the larger, geopolitical picture? The only real threat to Israel’s miscreant behaviors lies outside of the normal body politic or, a third party success, with the American voter freed from the constraints of the Democrat-Republican ‘duopoly’ in the USA. The Democrats habit is the ‘sheepdog’, the Republican habit in the 2000s had been computerized vote fraud in the primaries, it is a known fact that’s how Ron Paul had been disposed of in most primaries over more than one election cycle and is how George W Bush was elected in 2000 (with a Supreme Court decision pushing him over the top) and reelected in 2004; but this would have been too obviously dangerous to attempt in 2008, 2012 & 2016 general elections and wasn’t applied in the 2016 primaries likely for the reason is this phenomena had become closely monitored by two many parties since the documentary Hacking Democracy [3]. Both of these methods, when putting evangelical Zionists into office as means to the stated end, that  is working towards implementing the Yinon Plan, would be supported by MOSSAD. It must have been a great temptation for a Pentagon that could not stomach Hillary in the 2016 cycle in a system where it is allies of the Department of Defense counts your vote [4].

“E-voting has obvious downsides—no ability to check recorded votes, no ability to perform meaningful recounts and susceptibility to electronic voting fraud. Nonetheless, the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandates that by January 1 states submit plans to make the switch in time for the 2006 elections.

“More troubling, the backers of the act and the manufactures of e-voting machines are a rat’s nest of conflicts that includes Northrop-Grumman, Lockheed-Martin, Electronic Data Systems (EDS) and Accenture. Why are major defense contractors like Northrop-Grumman and Lockheed-Martin mucking about in the American electoral system? And who are Accenture and EDS?”

More likely than not, when computerized voter fraud is too dangerous to employ at the national (general) election level, it is nevertheless frequently employed at the state level with an eye to pushing the national agenda in certain direction [5].

Back to the ‘sheepdogging’ model: Sanders sandbagging the progressive electorate for the Democrats in 2016 is a particularly interesting case, relevant to today’s subject. There was a tremendous drive that was anti-Clinton in the liberal progressive movement organized behind Sanders. This unnerved the Clinton people within the DNC who began working to sabotage Sanders lest he morph from sheepdog to unintended nominee. This is when things get interesting with the DNC mails leak promoted in Western corporate media as a so-called ‘hack.’

No one has argued the released mails detailing the DNC plot to sabotage Sanders were not authentic. But rather than employ effort to call out and to disqualify Clinton, Sanders kept his head down, endorsed Hillary and effectively sent enough of his base off to elect Trump [6].

Sanders_vote - 1

Did Sander’s people challenge ‘the Russians did it’ propaganda line, demand the DNC servers be examined by forensic specialists and investigate Crowdstrike? No. They sat back and said nothing as the FBI folded the tent concerning the entire business of investigating the DNC (didn’t seize the server that was supposedly hacked) and what’s more is, Sanders has joined the chorus of ‘Putin is the 21st Century’s geopolitical Vlad the Impaler’ [7]. As well we have:

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (D.C.) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told BuzzFeed in an email.

“According to one intelligence official who spoke to the publication, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers.

“Instead, the official said, the bureau and other agencies have relied on analysis done by the third-party security firm CrowdStrike, which investigated the breach for the DNC. [8]

Looking a bit deeper, a very relevant question is posed:

“Is giving misleading or false information to 17 US Intelligence Agencies a crime? If it’s done by a cyber security industry leader like Crowdstrike should that be investigated?” [9]

In actuality we know it was the assassinated Seth Rich took the DNC mails with a thumbdrive [10]. More than that, we know the DNC mails that had damaged Clinton together with Sanders sheepdog act were released by Wikileaks whose fingerprints are found all over [11] the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ that has thrown the Middle-east into turmoil, breaking up nations and generally following geopolitical footprints that point to a gradual implementation of the Yinon Plan for a ‘Greater Israel.’ In this midst of this, Bernie Sanders doesn’t want you to know that he was a big piece of the electoral puzzle that fell together in favor of Trump. Why? Why is ‘anti-war’ Sanders on ‘the Russians did it’ path (pointed towards war) when in fact there is entirely too much evidence to the contrary available to his people to credibly make that case, particularly in regards to the DNC mails? Why did Sanders deliberately fold his hand in favor of Trump? Meanwhile Sanders supports the absolutely corrupt script detailed in Part 2 of this series…

“Democrats should wait for special counsel Robert Mueller to complete his investigation against the president before seeking impeachment, Sanders said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” He was referring to a Democrat-led resolution to impeach Trump that died on the House floor Friday.

“I think Mr. Mueller is doing a very good job on his investigation,” Sanders said. “If Mueller brings forth the clear evidence that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, I think you have grounds for impeachment” [12]

…even as Trump implores his treasonous Attorney General Jeff Sessions to do something…

““Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” Jeff, this is GREAT, what everyone wants, so look into all of the corruption on the “other side” including deleted Emails, Comey lies & leaks, Mueller conflicts, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr……” [13]

&

“Ex-NSA contractor to spend 63 months in jail over “classified” information. Gee, this is “small potatoes” compared to what Hillary Clinton did! So unfair Jeff, Double Standard” [14]

…that will not be done. Trump doesn’t get that Jeff Sessions is a Mike Pence fraternal brother (Coe cult radical Christian Zionist) ‘Never Trump’ personality who purposely allows this charade to go forward in a process supported by Sanders. At this point Trump is expendable to the Israelis, having moved the American embassy to Jerusalem and torn up the Iran agreement, all that is left to do is get an American war with Iran going, to push Netanyahu’s support for Yinon forward, and the chances of that go up with an American President in deep trouble. How odd it would seem to the uninitiated but clear eyed observer, were one to perceive Bernie Sanders ultimately responsible for a President in hard hitting war with Iran and ayatollahs showing no inclination whatsoever to ‘make a deal.’

“Oded Yinon … 1982 paper for Kivunim (Directions) entitled “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s”, is often used as a reference point for evidence of an Israeli aim to balkanise the surrounding Arab and Muslim world into ethnic and sectarian mini-states” [15]

It follows, Vladimir Putin, the man standing in the way of Syria’s breakup and working to keep the Iran agreement intact and avert a war, must be demonized to realize Bibi Netanyahu’s goals. In fact, Israel’s intelligence services focus has historically prioritized Russia, first, and the USA second [16]. Relevant to this, I had begun this series with an Alastair Crooke quote from his excellent essay ‘The Metaphysics of our Present Global Anguish’ where he details the failures of secularism resulting in pushing people away from enlightenment inspired thinking and towards renewed focus on national religion, national patriotism and national ethnic identity rooted in diverse ancient memories of origin, all things despised by neoliberal globalists. Here is a bit more complete quote:

“500 years ago, the Enlightenment crushed the brief impulse from the Ancient world in Europe, known as the Renaissance. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and it is the world of today’s élites which is imploding. What had been imagined as defeated, beyond recovery, is cautiously arising out from our crumbled ruins. The wheel of time turns, and comes around, again. It may all fare badly – the mode of linear one-track thinking implanted in the West does have an inbuilt propensity towards totalitarianism. We shall see” –Alastair Crooke [17]

The paradox of Crooke’s essay in relation to this series is, at the heart of this circumstance, at this stage of the game it is difficult to distinguish between the neoliberal Zionist and the authentic Nazi; where on either party’s part the actual ‘identity’ is behind a mask. But if you were the MOSSAD people manipulating or instructing Bernie Sanders (not to speak of Jared Kushner!), the reader never guessing Sanders’ present program perfectly merges with the treason of faux followers of Jesus at the Pentagon, would be part and parcel of the intelligence agency plan.

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

6,000 words or 30 minutes read:

I

This political essay is, in the Western academic sense, necessarily shallow. Why shallow? For two reasons, primarily; 1) the thought all analysis must be subject to exam for the fact of necessary cultural bias, when bias must be synonymous to belief, and 2) this essay does not delve deeply into the subject in ‘academic’ sense but necessarily notes certain phenomena in a context of inter-cultural observation exterior to what is known (in the common vernacular) as the ‘ivory tower.’ This is necessitated by the observation Western academia can be (more often than not is, as a matter of rule) a feedback loop where mistaken ideas are perpetrated by a process of ‘peer review’ or subjected to strict framing by ‘empiricism’ (3rd party interpretation) with a vested interest in protecting a status quo.

The method is not Western but derives from oral history form exterior to European culture. This method proposes a story constructed from metadata and is a hybrid in the sense philosophical elements of non-Western oral history and related underlying principles of thought and format is applied to (or superimposed upon) Western metadata.

It should be noted with short explanation that, in context of the preceding, the following is influenced or shaped by the rules of ancient tribal matriarchy modified or conformed to Western language and thinking. Necessarily adapting the following to the culture (language) of ‘Europe’ is neither an easy nor comfortable fit. This matriarchy had been far away from western feminism or the dualism of the larger ‘old world’, the difference is stark; the (matriarchal) perception would be the western feminists, when competing with men, are becoming the very thing they despise, an order of chauvinism issuing diktat upon the other sex.

In the ancient Native American matriarchal model, radically mistaken Western anthropological interpretations and stereotype set aside, it was the elder women educated the young males to time of puberty, creating from that human clay young giants that should mature into practical demigods (ethical titans) when exiled to male society; by comparison superior in every respect to today’s typical Western male. Complimenting this, the elder women trained the females to care for these males as nothing less than divine beings. The sexes were seen in complimentary light, not opposites, with great respect between their respective worlds. In the course of this social phenomenon, women were the philosophical disciplinarians, stabilizing a radically decentralized society, where men were the enforcers. However youth might have seen opportunity at rehabilitation, woe unto the woman or man who trespassed certain immutable laws, the elder women insisted on a judgement that saw any socially criminal woman (for instance persistent gossip causing problems between families, or promiscuity involving married men) disfigured and enslaved for life, whereas certain criminal men (rapists, example given) were executed outright. Beyond this, there was little law other than practicing a high ethical code inclusive (especially) of a self restraint, often translated (somewhat inaccurately) as ‘non-interference’, extending to all of one’s surroundings, whether human or natural, where all environment is perceived as ‘social.’ Top-down management in the Western sense had been unknown. As such, this social organization had remained in a stable state of equilibrium for millennia.

Grasping and understanding this system, together with living the expected behavior, contrasted to the rampant criminality of a culture remarkable for its compulsion to interfere and control everyone’s business, the present state of the world remind the culturally intact indigenous of nothing so much as trapped in a dark science fiction cinema plot.

It is in the preceding context this essay contemplates top-down hierarchy and the likes of Pence, Pompeo, Kelly, Mattis and Bolton on the one side (with Trump disqualified as an atypical Western political mentality), and Vladimir Putin, Dmitry Medvedev and Alexander Dugin, on the other side, and more generally, the West versus Russia.

The first or Western group, are the ‘liberal democracy’ phenomenon explained as a peculiar ‘religious sociopathy’ sourced malignant curse on civilization in the essay Beware the Perception [1]. Understanding the Russian group is a bit more tricky, as it must depend on acquaintance with Russians who are not particularly political (to temper bias), and secondary sources. It was just such an apolitical source, a Russian whose observation is the Russian mentality, although nominally European, is significantly modified away from typical European thought by its longtime exposure to, one even might say to some extent integration to, Asian cultural influences. This is not to speak of ‘classical’ Asian influence so much as the Siberian cultural influence and other ‘tribal’ societies with longtime influence on Russian mentality. Immediately, from a (perhaps distant but maybe not culturally distant at all) ancient Native American perspective there seems an understanding of one aspect of Russia, the Russian individual’s ability to self sacrifice for the sake of the larger whole. As a metaphor it could described it something like this: when two face five in potentially lethal circumstance, if it were (Western) European men facing Europeans and the fewer number had some slight leverage (everyone’s weapons at the ready) the smaller party should name who they would kill before they died. This might back the larger party down. If it were (Western) Europeans facing a larger group of indigenous tribal people, the strategy that might work would certainly NOT name the individual but simply point out one (at least) of the opposing party must die. Why the difference? The (Western) Europen men put a higher value on the individual, no one should set the precedent for his own ‘betrayal.’ On the other hand, if you were to name the tribal individual, that very named individual would be likeliest to initiate the attack, ‘to take a bullet for the boys.’ In the tribal people’s concept of a successful strategy, the compatriot is more important to the individual than the individual’s life. The Russian mentality seems very Native American in this respect. Siberia’s influence?

In this preceding regard, when one contemplates Putin has Dmitry Medvdev on his liberal left and Alexander Dugin on his conservative right, men with ostensibly opposed approaches to future vision of Russia, it might be expected it is a very wrong perception this is somehow a cynical manipulation on Putin’s part, playing one off the other, and underestimates the Russian character. Suppose, just suppose, Medvedev is loyal to Russia beyond his personal political prejudices and Dugin is the same. Were this actuality, Medvedev is Putin’s loyal foot-soldier for the sake of Russia, more so than personal loyalty to Putin, and Dugin lends his philosophical expertise to Putin with identical motivation. In this case, the three of them might be Russian patriots in a sense of patriotism rising above that demonstrated by the politicians of the USA where Hillary Clinton back-stabbed Bernie Sanders for the sake of her individual ambitions; and likely reaction of Pence, Pompeo, Kelley, Mattis and Bolton would be to snort a laugh through the nose at the very suggestion of Sanders as a serious contributor to the Trump administration. Western individualism fences out collective action for the common good, and this even goes so far as Sander’s refusal to compromise his ‘individual’ image as a loyal Democratic Party operative and step away from that corrupted institution to attempt a credible 3rd party run for the greater good or opening a future for his supporters.

Into the vacuum this individualism creates in the American politic steps the ‘shadow government’ (corporate board personalities) and their ‘deep state’ minions (bought in bureaucrats.) Never were there so dangerous a world where a ‘super-power’ sees military-industrial profit and related individual power (wealth-greed) supplant a patriotism of personal integrity dedicated to the greater good.

Relevant to this, 2024 will be a momentous year, that is, if the world is to survive the psychopathy of the liberal democracies’ determination to encircle, isolate and dismantle Russia. Rome had its’ Nero, ‘modern’ Russia had its’ Gorbachev, who lost his grip, and its’ Yeltsen, who surrendered his sobriety prior to Russia manifesting a man who has raised Russia from the coming ashes of almost certain ruin. What is to insure a post-Putin political consolidation of Russia will see this nation placed in competent hands? Certain able men serve the interests of Russia in the present moment but none of them are immortal. One dissolute ruler can undo the work of ten titans preceding, so one might hope Russians look to the psychology of Siberia as in Russia’s best interest, sans liberal delusions of individualism and return of the oligarch.

II

When compared to the top-down Western hierarchy of Europe, and its’ many iterations of violent, internal and inter-national (within Europe) upheavals, the radically decentralized, ancient tribal matriarchy with millennia of stability, does at first glance look to be the superior model. But then, one is reminded the decentralized system stood no chance when confronted with Europe and its’ hierarchical or concentrated power in pursuit of wealth that is become capitalism. How could one encounter the concentrated power (wealth) of a top-down hierarchy and not experience a perfect slaughter of the decentralized authority? Is there a middle way?

Simplified, why the decentralized or tribal model sustained for millennia worked like this: there was no opportunity for abuse of power because the leadership was immediately accountable to the community at the local level. This system was ‘federalized’ in a sense where the communities each sent a single elected representative as a ‘spokes person’ with no power other than to express his community’s view to a gathering of like representatives who elected a greater ‘spokes person’ with no power other than to express a consensus view, where the communities would meet to determine future direction. This system was founded on immutable law that laid down a constraint preventing any deviation from the common good, down to the nuclear family level, without exception. In other words, if it were true the law recognized the common good as inviolable across the spectrum of the allied communities, the law also necessarily recognized no one community’s best interest could be singled out as expendable to the benefit of the other communities. For this system to function, communities must have real power over the totality of their environment at the local level. This system would be altogether incompatible with hierarchical structure imposed from the exterior. The fatal element concerning this decentralized structure in the present day is, if the local community were so empowered to protect its values at every level, and those values were inclusive of minimal social and environmental impacts for purpose of maintaining traditional lifestyles, the local communities would have not only a power to block certain national development initiatives, a corporate model of sustained development becomes nonviable.

III

History points to top-down hierarchy as subject to collapse. Native America experimented with this form of hierarchy, and if we are to correctly consider the oral histories, these hierarchies were imports from elsewhere (prior to Columbus) as well noted in some instance by European historians, example given:

“I saw in this land an Indian woman and a child who would not stand out among white blonds. These people [of the upper class] say that they were the children of the gods” – Pedro Pizarro, chronicler of the Spanish conquest of Peru

The Toltec collapsed prior to the Aztec and the Maya collapsed prior to the Spaniards, Cahokia collapsed prior to the arrival of the English and no doubt the Aztec, Inca and Maya (2nd iteration) would have collapsed as well, as opposed to being conquered, had they been left to their devices. The rise and fall of hierarchies related to Europe, with its many internecine wars, are too many to bother with counting. Asia and its classic cultures, as well, has its numerous examples of rise & fall and meanwhile, the Blackfeet tribal culture and others, based on the decentralized model shortly described in the preceding, had remained stable for millennia.

Top-down hierarchy, by its nature, depends on exploitation of humankind in its’ environment. If the term ‘capitalize’ (take advantage of) is self-descriptive in every respect, the associated deceit of ‘democracy’ notwithstanding, by contrast it would be of superficial consequence if the Marxist model claimed emancipation for the ‘workers’, the workers ended up working for someone other than themselves and in practice this meant the Central Committee, Politburo and Secretariat in what amounted to a top-down hierarchy, no matter any pretense of power derived from the ‘base’ of the pyramid. Relevant to the preceding, whether the capital model or the Marxist model, the economic development necessary to ‘progress’ has proved environmentally destructive, inclusive of the human social environment. In this regard it should be noted the necessary underpinning of progress that is ‘sustained development‘ of natural resources, is based precisely on a principle of cancer. Where do you see this proposed fact amending policy? Would a healthy policy ‘manage’ its cancer (state of denial) or work to remove its’ cause?

It follows, a culture practicing ‘plausible deniability’ should be examined as suffering from a virus, an underlying principle or driver of a sickness in the Western, modern, or European (readers choice) human spiritual state. This diagnosis is as easy as the simple and very black & white observation where a culture incompatible with its pretensions should assert liberal democracy is egalitarian. There is nothing egalitarian whatsoever in a scheme consolidating corporate-fascist control where feeding weapons into conflict increases a geographic theater’s social alienation. This in turn increases the violence level which demands more armaments applied to suppression of the increased level of violence, an oxymoron in actuality; and all of this vicious cycle is then billed to the consequent financially drowning common citizen-taxpayer while the liberal democracies’ stockholder-oligarchs are fed obscene amounts of money. The only egalitarian opportunity within this plausibly deniable scheme as applies to the liberal democracies’ ‘war on terror’ is the opportunity to sell one’s soul; as detailed in a rather ‘Calvinist’ (sociopathic) American folk-monograph: ‘The Devil and Daniel Webster.‘

Plausible denial must be as old as vertical hierarchy and related civilizations. Insofar as the ‘cradle of civilization’ responsible for birthing the modern liberal democracies or, alternatively stated, a culture incompatible with its pretensions of egalitarianism, one need look no farther than the English philosophers.

Thomas Hobbes contribution to Western philosophy is a typical self-imploding set of contradictions, in an era where Gutenberg had practically made it possible for anyone literate to become a blogger of that era. Hobbes, finding himself at loose ends, decided he would become a Western philosopher (‘confidence man’ would be the better description.) The recipe is simple in the Western European tradition; fill a 900 liter bag with verbiage-verbosity like Bernard-Henry Lévy, engineered as to incredibly complicate a subject, à la James Joyce, and discover result in generations of philosophical progeny spending endless semesters wrestling a ‘Leviathan‘, whilst attempting sense of nonsense.

Distilled from Hobbes’ inordinately complex, presumed order of things, his points may be summed up so: In our natural state or in raw ‘nature’, mankind is an inestimable beast prone to every savage act where:

“the life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”

And in the same moment, without Man’s ‘natural’ understanding, 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 ‘naturally endowed’ beastly nature inspires one to deeper knowledge of God’s message? Is he acknowledging ‘God’s image, man’ is naturally possessed of the violence we have seen Englishmen 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 that can serve no other purpose than to conceal the facts. What we are actually looking at is, the phenomena of Western philosophers burying their culture’s contradictions in immense complications, so those contradictions never need be faced. Hobbes is a master of this common (but patently dishonest) philosophical fraud. And then, we have John Locke.

The similar problem with John Locke’s “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding” is, his philosophy demands all men are born a completely blank slate upon which everything is drawn subsequently. In effect, there is no innate understanding bestowed on man in which case there can be no innate spirit. If that were true, then his 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 the awareness of omnipresent “God”, who ‘created man in his image,‘ drew a portrait of self based in a perfect human ignorance. Again we find a fundamental contradiction buried in dishonest method employing circumlocution. Similar contradictions (culturally self-excusing form of denial) may be found in either the works or lives of Francis Bacon, David Hume, Jeremy Bentham and more recently, Richard Dawkins:

“Plants cannot think, and you’d have to be pretty eccentric to believe they can suffer. Plausibly the same might be true of earthworms” -Richard Dawkins

In fact earthworms writhe mightily in pain, while being skewered the length of their bodies on a fish-hook, where technique requires the shank of the hook must be entirely concealed in the worm’s living flesh. And plants can’t think? Plants & trees remain Platonic ‘objects’ for purposes of Dawkin’s scientific atheism and yet are known to communicate  by land and by air. But for reluctance to look, where Dawkins plausible denial could be confronted, is in the modern lab:

“The [Cartesian-Platonic] doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment” -theoretical physicist Bernard d’Espagnat

What Russia is confronted with in its relations with the Anglo-Saxon world, and the related liberal democracies, or for that matter in a larger sense, the culture of Europe, is a denial mechanism.

IV

One cannot pretend to know how the Siberian cultures affected and/or modified the Russian mentality if one were not Russian and have no sense of the historical context of that experience from within the Russian community. On the other hand, this naivete also might be useful, sans Russian cultural bias, particularly were the Siberian cultures to have some very fundamental similarities to the Native American, and this would appear to be the case as detailed by Karl Schlesier in his “The Wolves of Heaven.” There is no pretense made the cultural critique herein [the present essay] would come from any but the tribal side; however any criticism must be oblique as there is no presumption to go direct to the Siberian tribes’ Russian experience.

That said, if, as expected, the Russian ability to self-sacrifice and rise above the Western or European individualism is due to Siberian (or other tribal) cultural influence, there should be other Siberian (or other tribal) cultural markers as well. One of those markers should be an impelled intention to state the facts in no uncertain terms per the American folk proverb ‘say what you mean and mean what you say.’ Now, comes the relevant anecdote that might surprise (or discover denial in) many more Americans than Russians:

It was in America from its earliest days, but with increasing frequency post trans-Appalachian migrations or from 1830s and onset of Manifest Destiny, through the 1880s or end of the Indian Wars, tens of thousands of mixed marriages occurred between White European males and tribal women during the American expansion west. This marks the period of not only Manifest Destiny with its many wagon trains west, but also the ‘mountain men’ (fur trade), gold rush (California, Montana), Civil War (many thousands of Army deserters fled west, Mark Twain is perhaps the most famous of these), aftermath of Civil War (dislocated populace due to devastation of the South and lost livelihoods), where many single males took aboriginal wives during an era which had seen enhanced mortality of aboriginal males throughout (Indian wars.) The majority of offspring from these marriages were absorbed into what became the predominantly White Western states population. The result of this had been quite unexpected; the children of what amounted to robbers, with great disdain for the rights of the aboriginal people they had abused, became the precursor of conservative, highly principled men of the Western territories where one’s word was one’s sacred bond, or men who ‘say what they mean and mean what they say.’ How did this happen? The aboriginal women raised these children in the only way they knew how: to become ethical titans. Within a subsequent generation, again and again, a class of men sprang up whose handshake on any oral agreement was an inviolable contract.

The tribal peoples very survival had, over millennia, demanded accurate reporting, placing a high value on truth and this value passed, via the aboriginal women, into the Western territories new populace. The pity is, this social value never became a prerequisite to wield power in the American political experiment, rather having remained localized and ultimately become overwhelmed by the corrupt nature (or as the case may be, reactionary forces, such as the religious right) of liberal democracy per se.

It is true it would be a speculation from the North American indigenous perspective, as to whether the present day Russia, finding itself somewhat freed from its’ Euro-centric political past, were to discover its’ source of impatience with the liberal democracies pervasive lying (a denial mechanism) stems from the Siberian cultural influence. However if this were indeed the case, it should surprise no one familiar with certain tribal cultures.

V

Ostensible Siberian (or other tribal) cultural influences aside, the relevant question would be to what extent the self-deceit of Europe DOES hold the Russian mentality in its grip. If this small inquiry had begun with insistence exploring the subject matter must necessarily be in some sense shallow, let us conclude, if only for a moment, what must be shallow is a means to intelligent end; a tribal bias circumventing the European philosophers’ propensity to bury the contradictions of European culture in circumlocution.

To begin, let us examine what would seem patent nonsense on its’ face: the thought ‘without the chainsaw, there could be no advanced space exploration.’ But suddenly this absurd proposal might seem less far-fetched, were one to consider the idea in a sightly refined form; 1) chainsaws are typically employed to strip valleys slated to be filled with the water of hydroelectric projects 2) in turn feeding the electric grid supplying the immense power requirement of the CERN Large Hadron Collider (particle accelerator) which 3) provides necessary understanding to design advanced probes capable of long term survival in space.

Now, we can extrapolate from this immediate preceding and consider it is not only the altered environment from hydroelectric but also gas, coal and nuclear, with all of its’ environmental cost, makes powering the Large Hadron Collider possible. Meanwhile, the chainsaw not only fells the Amazon and the forests of Indonesia, but also encroaches in Siberia, while feeding a principle, that is sustained development, a principle of cancer, that has made development of civilization possible to point of exploring space. It follows, the tribal understanding’s challenge to the honest Russian physicist would be to give us the mathematical equation providing the sustained development related ratio of damage to our environment to the ratio of achieved advancement in knowledge necessary to explore space. God did not provide us with wings, let alone propulsion rockets integrated to space suits, maybe the intention was to keep our feet on the ground.

VI

Whether for 14,000 years or 40,000 or more years, a concept similar to intelligent design, which Richard Dawkins rejects as matter of fact, preexisted the European top down hierarchy through which Dawkin’s science descends. We don’t know if this idea were borrowed by, or influenced, the Deists of the Enlightenment who also were essentially believers in Intelligent Design recalling Thomas Paine…

“The wonderful structure of the universe, and everything we behold in the system of the creation, prove to us, far better than books can do, the existence of a God, and at the same time proclaim His attributes. It is by the exercise of our reason that we are enabled to contemplate God in His works, and imitate Him in His ways”

…but we can know it is the study of quantum mechanics moved one of its’ primary researchers to the same:

“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. Believe me, everything that we call chance today won’t make sense anymore. To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance” -theoretical physicist Michio Kaku

Recalling theoretical physicist Bernard d’Espagnat stating…

“The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment”

…consider these preceding and then have a look at how it is Native American tribal people were thinking:

“In 1918 Christian missionary A. McG. Beede took Yale graduate Harry Boise to the Standing Rock Sioux and Turtle Mountain Chippewa reservations on separate occasions, where Boise explained scientific ideas to tribal leaders. Beede wrote in his report that both groups immediately understood the concepts without difficulty, saying: “There is no difficulty in leading an old Teton Sioux Indian to understand the ‘scientific attitude’ that the processes that give rise to phenomena may be more and more known by man and may be, to some extent, controlled by man, and that in this way the forces of nature may become a mainspring of progress in the individual and in the human race. The idea of atoms and electrons is easy and pleasing to an old Indian, and he grasps the idea of chemistry.” -Vine Deloria, Evolution, Creationism, and Other Modern Myths

The two tribal groups spokesmen replied to Harry Boise, following discussion among themselves:

”The ’scientific view’ is inadequate to explain … how man is to find and know a road along which he wishes and chooses to make this said progress, unless Manitoo by his spirit, guides the mind of man, keeping human beings just and generous and hospitable”  -Rising Sun, Chippewa

“The knowledge and use of any or all the powers of the objects on Earth around us, is as liable to lead a man wrong as to lead him right, because it is merely power, with no way of knowing how to use it correctly- except that spirit is with a man’s spirit for the light” -Red Tomahawk, Sioux

When Rising Sun says ‘Manitou by his spirit’ (guides the mind of man) he is speaking of collective creation, our very surroundings are intelligent design integrated to nature, or one might say omnipresent god. When Red Tomahawk says ‘spirit is with a man’s spirit’ (for the light), he is saying the same thing, both these men, at the end of their cultures’ many millennia era of knowledge, are looking at what d’Espangnat stumbles upon nearly 100 years later; recognizing an innate consciousness embodied in our surroundings plays in everything we can experience.

Moreover, Red Tomahawk is discriminating between a sole, intimate knowledge of any single object’s raw power, and an understanding of the larger purpose concerning the nature of that very object, recognizing these are distinct things. His understanding (different to the European concept) opens to the possibility of allowing for the trees (recalling trees communicate by land and by air), stones, or for that matter, everything surrounding us, to possess consciousness and to ‘know’ purpose exterior to the European self-centered or ‘individual’ cultural shaping and resultant handicapped perception. And it is only when this larger door of understanding is opened, we can know how to listen, know the ‘timing’ (the knowledge of creation as synchronized, to grasp nature as a living clock), and to ‘see’ our way through the multiple dimensions of reality; as the nearly extinct Native thought embodied in now past Native American elders so often attempted to point out to us, when stating ‘it’s all related.’ In retrospect, who are the primitives? The tribal people? Or the people who, if they were to work out honest equation, must discover their ‘advancement’ & ‘progress’ via method of sustained development exploiting, desecrating one could say, the omnipresence of what amounts to the living god expressing us through creation, must point to our ceasing to exist and nullify awareness? Jesus admonished “Know you not you are gods?” What sort of gods should we propose to be? Those who put creation to death through the arrogance of the individual ego? That would be the effect of sustained development, globalism and the international oligarchs’ cancer on the very expression sustaining us.

Summed up from the ancient tribal view, when incorporating the modern understanding, 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 or mimic’ because the tribal 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 ancient tribal persona of humility: There are some things one simply cannot know. This is why (in the tribal view) we cannot know ‘god’ except as a projection where man has created god in man’s image. The mystery of our existence cannot see god individuated except in a sense of arrogant projection of individual self, the ultimate self-deception. Our creation and inseparable god is named a “mystery” for the very fact of its’ indecipherable nature; and when this is accepted, by a community in its entirety, the mystery opens at several levels but always with a caveat: no-one can know absolutes; as ‘reality’ is an elastic thing with frequently shifting parameters and any related ‘truths’ are often of fleeting relevance. Absolutes, something the European monotheists crave, are counter to flexible adjustments necessary to navigating reality, example given, Indo-European ‘civilization’ and its’ hierarchal relatives have a habit of rising and falling; wherein this Western civilized perception ‘truths’ become absolutes, 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 the shifting nature of reality in actuality.

I somehow doubt the major Indo-European family’s 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. The many cases of rise & fall throughout history are example of the hierarchies stasis of thinking or inter-generational inflexibility of thought pointing to repeat of collapse. There is likely no greater coming probability of collapse than that of present day Europe and its’ foundation in the objectivity of Plato.

Finally, this ‘outside looking in’ analysis from the tribal side holds the focus on the individual sets the collective adrift, there is no anchor to prevent a collective suicide where archetypal myth determines Europe create its’ collective fate altogether independently of its’ leaders; when events take on involuntary volition powered by a ‘super-conscious’ intelligence that is organized, functions as though it were managed by individuals (even when it is not) and the result is, we can read into today’s events as though they were managed in a sense they actually are not. If this were the case, the idea the West’s leaders could correct course is impotent. This collective ‘meme’ can explain what is called in the biblical sense ‘principalities of darkness’ or that is to say a ‘spirit of evil’ progressing in a sense of superstition yet effectively implementing reality. Thusly Western culture creates reality independent of the individual’s aware thought, despite appearance this is certainly by design, when design is not actually the case. Such would explain a belief in Illuminati when in fact it did not exist in any factual ego-aware or organized form but nevertheless manifest as an observable phenomena of symptoms or consequence derived from a collective super-conscious phenomenon. A conclusion could be the European mentality has created paradox of a seeming unconscious yet ‘super aware’ phenomenon of evil as its’ cultural driver. The natural progression to end result would be, when a large portion of an aggressive society collectively believes in an Armageddon archetype, all of the necessary players will naturally manifest in a super-conscious organized format empowered to bring it off, where no one individual or group of individuals or players could effect this by individual or personal volition; nevertheless the super-consciousness of the event’s initiating group insures creation of this reality for the collective whole. A case of Shiva causing Europe to fall on its’ sword?

There is a remarkable convergence in the apocalyptic ‘good versus evil’ fables driving our world’s several fundamentalist religions’ reality. If a futuristic cosmology of destruction is the effective driver of what appears to be pointed to inevitable catastrophic outcome, better to change fables should be a rational conclusion. Or alternatively, turn to ancient tribal intelligence for inspiration. A society founded on a redevelopment of North America-Siberia tribal principles and related ethics should prevent Man’s technical applications aspiring to exercise the authority of God.

VII

If one can be convinced, cultural bias notwithstanding, radical decentralization with total community control over environment, social and physical, is the only road out of today’s geopolitical madness and environmental train wreck; with a strict model of community self-sufficiency demanding high degree of care for the natural environment of the world we live in, one should not be so naive to expect this should happen overnight. One only need recall what happened to the said tribal cultures in North America when faced with top-down hierarchy and the thoughtless, multiple aggressions of Europe. The history of Manifest Destiny and its European predecessor (and contemporary), that is colonialism (and present day corporate neocolonialism), should caution not only the tribal people, but also Russia and much of today’s world. Empire covets the untapped, raw natural resources of Siberia, and Russia herself, if she fully commits to the European path (never forget what went on while Yeltsen was drunk!) will cease to be a reservoir of possibilities for future sanity. In this regard, one should not envy President Putin, even had the internal circumstance he inherited been sane; never yet has Europe learned from its’ mistakes, but only compounds them, and it cannot be denied Russia is also Europe. Let’s hope Russia’s most remarkable minds step up to not only support consolidating a future Russia pointed to its’ best interests but also fearlessly support new direction open to possibility of discarding the European ego’s (whether individual or collective) most damnable traits.

How Europe came about was the fusion of Plato’s misogyny (denigration of female intelligence principles) with the Judeo-Christian archetype myth ‘The Fall.’ It would not matter whether you were an astro-physicist with an IQ of 170, all are subject to the reality-perception limitations created by European cultural shaping, from infancy, of this artificial, internal conflict of intelligence or conflicting light-dark duality. This unnatural duality (split) is reflected in the personalities of those high IQs in science who can see no oxymoron in the fact of any proposed ‘saved by science future’ is relying on the culture and mentality producing the technologies destroying us, to save us. Grasping this oxymoron of conflicted spirit is key to surviving the trap the Western mentality had set for itself. As Einstein had noted, our “Problems cannot be solved with the same mindset that created them”

 

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s Western educational background (no degree) is social psychology. Ronald spent over thirty years of his life in close association with (often integrated to) the Blackfeet Indians (those who still spoke their language) of Montana.

Related:

Life in Indian Country

Collected stories, folklore and anecdotes concerning my many years life with Blackfeet Indians and traversing Native American territories –

Copyright © 2018 by Ronald Thomas West. For profit & mass paper media redistribution prohibited.

Beware the Perception

A cautionary tale of the developmental psychology or first 70 years of the USA and resultant contemporary social psychology of the Americans; for my friends in Russia (Western reader short attention span warning, 7,000 words)

In my observations of Russia, I’ve noticed a consistent misapprehension of reality concerning the West. The West, particularly the USA, is a social phenomenon that largely defies self-understanding, let alone understanding from without, even by the titan observer Solzhenitsyn, who lived a number of years in Vermont.

To begin this analysis, we’ll note the USA’s ‘enlightenment’ founders were Deists, and James Madison’s animus to Christianity was not an animus towards a deity per se, but an animus towards political Christianity and the history of the several incarnations of western church meddling in the affairs of men and nations, pointing to a particular arrogance:

“Experience witnesses that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and virtue of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution” -James Madison

This thinking among our brighter founding minds is perhaps best personified in the philosopher of the American Revolution, Thomas Paine:

The Deist needs none of those tricks and shows called miracles to confirm his faith, for what can be a greater miracle than the creation itself, and his own existence? There is a happiness in Deism, when rightly understood, that is not to be found in any other system of religion. All other systems have something in them that either shock our reason, or are repugnant to it, and man, if he thinks at all, must stifle his reason in order to force himself to believe them. But in Deism our reason and our belief become happily united. The wonderful structure of the universe, and everything we behold in the system of the creation, prove to us, far better than books can do, the existence of a God, and at the same time proclaim His attributes. It is by the exercise of our reason that we are enabled to contemplate God in His works, and imitate Him in His ways. When we see His care and goodness extended over all His creatures, it teaches us our duty toward each other, while it calls forth our gratitude to Him.”

Other than Madison, the author of our constitution, and Paine, another great American ‘enlightenment’ Deist was Benjamin Franklin, considered the greatest scientist of the age in Europe during his own lifetime; and notable in his uppermost thoughts concerning the founding of America’s so-called ‘liberal democracy’ at the time of our Constitutional Convention, were his doubts… when the crowd shouted to him when emerging from the final meeting of the states delegates: “Mr Franklin, Mr Franklin, what form of government have you given us?” Franklin replied “A republic, if you can keep it.” We couldn’t.

To equate secularism with atheism, per the intentions of those American ‘enlightenment’ founders (not all of our founders were enlightenment inspired thinkers, notably John Adams), is a patent mistake; moreover our ‘enlightened’ founders were of an educated class that seriously doubted whether the social experiment would work. And it did not work, largely because of foreseen dangers, whether a lack of social maturity or, alternatively stated, the lower human nature.

When I see the term ‘Cultural Marxism’ trained on the USA’s subsequent-resultant social circumstance in wake of the failed American revolution’s founding ideas and charter, it puts the hair up on this dogs back; as it too often appears a simplistic jingoism little different to liberals assigning a broad neo-nazi paintbrush to the term ‘Alt-Right.’ This is not necessarily a matter of ‘the truth is somewhere in between’, but more a matter of intertwined mosaic of social allergies where several antigens are not stimulating a proper immune response, almost certainly because from this republic’s inception, there was papered over a multiple fracture rather than a coalescence. There is blame aplenty can be assigned to multiple parties in the ensuing history.

I will wander afield here for a moment, for the benefit of my Russian friends, and by way of suggestion; consider the wide gulf of experiential difference between your own experience, that of a more or less consistent or singular Christian experience, that is Orthodoxy, and that of the USA; an un-amalgamated 1,500 or so Christian faith groups that can be sorted by meta-group, wing, denomination, theology, and/or family. Your experience of emancipation from feudalism versus our experience of rapidly subjugating a continent for as many motives as there had been multiple actors; whether Calvinists so intolerant Europe would not tolerate them, too many mercantilists desiring a Baron’s station and privilege to count, tens upon tens of thousands of Europe’s undesirables, whether petty criminals & the mildly retarded or insane, reflected in Europe’s vacated prisons, the inevitable Catholic proselytizing, White slavery euphemistically called ‘indentured servitude’, and finally, Black slavery. This is not a comprehensive list.

As a social psychologist, with an understanding that biographical history underlies socialization, I would not presume an intimate understanding of the Russian mind reflected in that great nation’s national psychology; nor would I expect a Russian should presume an intimate understanding of the many social tensions integral to the multiple personalities of the USA.

Back on topic of the USA and the underpinning of how we became a dissolute, aggressive and sociopathic national POLITIC (not as a people in some comprehensive sense), firstly we must toss out the idea the USA is a ‘liberal democracy’ in the sense of a “godless anti-Christian “humanism”” on account of its Enlightenment founders. Rather the negative American qualities stemming from the lower nature of man markedly & substantially come from the Christian community as much as or more so than anywhere else in American society. At this point I’ll ask my more open-minded conservative friends to swallow hard and keep reading. My liberal friends would not necessarily like what will be coming either.

Recalling Thomas Paine’s “It is by the exercise of our reason that we are enabled to contemplate God in His works, and imitate Him in His ways. When we see His care and goodness extended over all His creatures, it teaches us our duty toward each other, while it calls forth our gratitude to Him” we should understand a close similarity to Solzhenitsyn’s A return to God, voluntary self-restraint and self-restriction of humankind, emphasizing duties instead of ever-expanding “rights”, prioritizing inner freedom, and rejecting the sacrifice of national life not only to totalitarian utopia but also to the orgy of freedom.” What is that similarity, one might ask?

To begin, the USA’s secular demand mandated in our founding charter was never about shunting God aside in our national life but was a practical recognition of the impossibility of reconciling the numerous competing beliefs in what amounted to a multicultural society with a deep antipathy to central authority; based in political persecutions that cannot be separated from a history of church-state relations in Europe. By the time of the USA’s founding, it was recognized if John Calvin, Marten Luther or The Pope’s adherents were to gain an upper hand in governance of these United States, the presumed result would be antithetical to the long term social maturity and stability of the newly founded nation.

Rather the expectation would be the unique and new secularism of the United States should see sectarianism set aside towards pursuit of the greater good for the whole. It is in this demand we see an implicit but clear parallel to Solzhenitsyn’s “voluntary self-restraint and self-restriction of humankind” that never demanded God be set aside but sectarian self-centeredness set aside instead. This would require a self restraint that was an intended goal but proved an impossible demand; as ‘freedom’ became a practical ‘taking liberties’ or ‘god helps those who help themselves’ in a sense of gross opportunism. Let us not forget where this had evolved to in several short decades with “a sucker is born every minute” ostensibly attributed to circus magnate PT Barnum, but no matter falsely, this had become an indelible folk wisdom equating the by now established legal principle of Caveat Emptor or ‘let the buyer beware.’ Christian principles, that is if Christian principles are embodied in larger concepts or notions like ‘charity’, had been easily cast aside in these largely ‘Christian’ United States, and any principled stance of self restraint stepped on. It is the lower instinct, greed particularly, flourished.

Backing up a bit, it must be noted the United States founding charter had been fatally flawed from inception; where the charter’s underlying ‘bedrock’ or Declaration of Independence stating “All men are created equal” had been discarded in reality when wealthy ‘special interests’ demanded this maxim did not pertain to negroes. Already the pirate culture of America’s eastern seaboard demonstrated a superior model were one to be honest; where Blacks had a vote electing a captain and share in the spoils of those ships taken by crews made up of White and Black escaped slaves. In our charter, White slavery was abolished but Black slavery was not.

This slavery was justified by ‘Christians’ employing biblical references per these examples: Noah’s “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren”, “By this decisive, explicit, irrefragable authority of the written work of God, it is evident that servants… are commanded under the Mosaic law to be bought; and that when so bought of alien sojourners, that they and their issue become inheritable property”, and “Like patriarchs of old, at the head of their children and grandchildren, their flocks and their herds, their bondmen and bond maids [are] to be an inheritance for their children after them to be their bond men forever” [pdf]

If one were to wonder where an individual’s ‘Christian’ conscience might play in the preceding, there needed be none; as Scots Presbyterians, English Baptists and Dutch ‘Reform’ Protestants had introduced what became a peculiar ‘Christian’ sociopathy that became widespread, that is John Calvin’s “predestination” where it is held the individual is born on this Earth preordained to either Heaven or Hell. It followed, whether one owned slaves was of no consequence in any sense of morality or personal ethics. This practical sociopathy, via inter-generational socialization, adequately explains how ‘devout’ American Christians of the 21st Century can feel no compunction whatsoever in relation to the destruction of entire societies; and were one to use the example of inter-generational violence, it should come as no surprise even ‘devout American Christians’ who are Black now can be seen in this mold, example given, fervent Evangelical Christian Condoleezza Rice. This phenomenon is not precisely new, it can be noted, American Black slaves repatriated to Africa set themselves up as ‘masters’ of their now culturally distant cousins in Liberia, and it could also be noted certain Jewish State actors, allied to today’s sociopathic Christianity of the West, somewhat resemble the perpetrators of kristallnacht, only now in relation to their own expansionist ambitions.

But I digress. Once again back to our founding era, there was a certain schizophrenia papered over at our nation’s constitutional convention, reflected in the so-called Federalists and anti-Federalists, shortly described as those American founders who favored a strong central authority, or mercantilist financiers like Alexander Hamilton and his ilk, and those opposed to the same, represented in Thomas Jefferson. The federalists insisted the purpose of the convention was to produce a governing document, maintaining there was no authority in the convention’s mandate to create a bill of rights, whereas the anti-federalists would not sign off on a constitution without this check on central authority over the common citizenry. The compromise reached was the federalists agreed a separate “Bill of Rights” would be drawn up and submitted to the several States for adoption, following the USA’s founding charter coming into force. However upon the ‘first ten amendments’ or ‘Bill of Rights’ having been adopted, future federalist jurists appointed to the United States Supreme Court had, in ensuing decades, set out to undermine the same. These rank political animals ‘interpreting’ our charters first ten amendments decided, despite plain language indicating otherwise, these amendments did not apply except as the court would tightly control via a contrived theory they called ‘incorporation doctrine’ or that is to say a judiciary constituting political appointments would take it upon themselves to tightly control or to decide when, how, and even whether, any of these ‘enumerated’ (spelled out) rights of the citizens should be applied. Nowhere is this more clear than example of roughly 225 years old language of the Seventh Amendment never having been “incorporated” or become binding on the several states…

“In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law”

…despite the Constitutions Article Six or ‘supremacy clause’ language:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”

This has left the door open to judiciary tampering with jury awards of compensation & damages or, in other words, shielding the wealth of the criminal & corrupt, example given a judge deciding a jury award had been ‘excessive.’

Anticipating this subversion of the American foundational law was the early case in legal controversy where a contractor from South Carolina was owed a war debt by the State of Georgia, which didn’t wish to pay up. The Supreme Court had ruled there was no such thing as State sovereign immunity from suit, in the case of Chisholm v Georgia. Nearly all of the states balked at the prospect of having to pay their war debts and the 11th Amendment to our founding charter was passed, stating:

“The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State”

And just like that, certain remarkable things happened; with the passing of the 11th Amendment by the several states legislators, all of the lawsuits pending in federal court per state war debts had been erased with citizens forced into the jurisprudence of states that did not wish to pay, and half the language of Article One, Section Nine, of the Constitution had been tossed into the ash bin: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Thomas Jefferson indicated this language had been meant to cover both criminal and civil circumstance of law, and the constitutional language supports this assertion by Jefferson; ‘Bill of Attainder’ should refer to criminal, and ‘ex post facto’ should refer to civil liabilities. In other words, the USA should not have been allowed to make law, criminalizing or creating liability, or excusing crime or liability, after the fact, to get the outcome it wants. The 11th Amendment neither mentions nor lifts this other constitutional provision. But now, civil ex post facto law happens frequently, such as a 21st Century Congress ‘forgiving’ the telecom companies illegally spying on Americans, erasing liability and robbing citizens of their day in court.

Although the 11th Amendment is specific and narrow, and doesn’t so much as mention Sovereign Immunity, the legendary English Common Law expert William Blackstone’s Sovereign Immunity doctrine had been reinstated in the former colonies:

“The King moreover is not only incapable of doing wrong, but even of thinking wrong; he can never mean to do an improper thing: in him is no folly or weakness.”

Only now, suddenly it is no longer the ‘King’ can act with impunity, but the institutions of government in the United States per a case as late as 1991, Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak, where the Supreme Court wrote:

“we have understood the Eleventh Amendment to stand not so much for what it says, but for the presupposition of our constitutional structure which it confirms: that the States entered the federal system with their sovereignty intact, that the judicial authority in Article III is limited by this sovereignty, and that a State will therefore not be subject to suit in federal court unless it has consented to suit, either expressly or in the “plan of the convention”

And there you have it, from the early days of the Supreme Court saying Sovereign Immunity from suit is a non existent thing in immediate post colonial USA law, to the several states’ legislatures passing the 11th Amendment, amending the federal charter, an amendment which doesn’t so much as mention Sovereign Immunity, to escape war debt, to the modern Supreme Court stating the language of our constitution’s 11th Amendment doesn’t mean what it actually says, but instead means what they want it to say, essentially stating ‘we’ll extend ‘the King’s prerogative‘ as far as we please, and we’ll use the 11th Amendment to absurdly assert what amounts to a claim the King’s Sovereign Immunity (impunity) was never a point of the American Revolution.’

Subsequently, the United States federal government adopted sovereign immunity as its own, usurping ‘the people are sovereign’, and has used this doctrine to cancel out the core of the first ten amendments:

The fourth amendment’s “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

The fifth amendments Amendment’s “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

And the 6th Amendment’s “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence”

These preceding rights have been nullified by the United States claiming sovereign immunity relevant to ‘state secrets’ when citizens have attempted to petition for redress of grievances due to central authority over-reach under the pretext of ‘terror’, as well as the central authority having established a secret court where the accused has no access nor advocate. This ‘coup de grâce’ over the rule of law in the USA had been finally made complete by “National Security Act of 1947” creating the lawless Central Intelligence Agency, and is law which opened the door to FISA secret court. This act enabled the rule of law to be converted to “color of law” or simple pretense of constitutional integrity at the pinnacle of the USA’s institutions of government. But I am getting ahead of myself, let us back up once more.

It does well to recall each of the preceding steps of imperative dishonesty described, in a process of the rule of law’s erosion, had been initiated and largely sustained by so-called ‘Christians.’ If Deism were ostensibly protected in this system, little differently to Islam, Judaism or sundry flavors of heathen belief, these were of little consequence where the overwhelming numbers of the USA’s populace were Christian of the Western stripe. Darwin had not yet arrived with his hypothesis, atheism had yet to discover its ‘manhood’ & elope with science, and it would two hundred and more years in the making before the Western conservative Christianity would finally co-opt Deism’s ‘intelligent design’ and pervert it with an inculcated ignorance resulting in a 21st Century Vice President of the United States’ belief Man had walked the Earth together with dinosaurs. I expect the term ‘believer’, closely examined on both parties part, might be one of vastly different connotation between Western Christianity and the Orthodoxy of Russia.

If, in the Western canon, the most lied about intentions of any individual were the grossly misrepresented thoughts of Jesus, in particular due to the perversion of Christianity by John Calvin, the most lied about intentions of any group of men would be the American founders. When the contemporary American religious fascist claims the USA had been founded as a Christian, not secular, nation, they must ignore history and the USA’s first treaty with Libya…

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Islamic] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries”

…noting the preceding language had been drafted by the American republic’s executive and unanimously ratified by the Senate in the early years of our foundational law. When the subsequent American conservative Christian subversion of our charter had been reinforced by religious propaganda via imagined fantasies surrounding America’s founders, those fantasies had been consequently encapsulated by a honest historian with the cynical epithet “Liars for Jesus.” By contrast it should be explained our present national schizophrenia’s ‘liberal’ element had done no better. At last, we shall move forward from the era of our founding.

Recalling the Western liberal poet Oscar Wilde’s “Truth is seldom pure and never simple”, we now shortly examine the fact of the United States tearing itself apart a scant seventy years since its founding. Pertinent to this violence, American sociopathy introduced by Calvinism did not confine itself to the conservative religious community in much the same sense of earlier example, where repatriated American Black slaves became ‘master’ over their African subjects. Restated in a perfect cynicism of American shallowness of character: ‘if one can do so, so can two, never-mind do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks” would be perhaps the best description of today’s liberal ‘humanitarian violence’ rooted in a co-opted Calvinist sociopathy; where one could scarcely find a difference between the justifications of a Hillary Clinton’s rape of Libya or a Nikki Haley’s rape of Syria. These indistinguishable political lies are ‘protected free speech’ of necessity; for if the American sociopath is without empathy, conscience or soul, these pretenders to humanity are not altogether without fear of facing accountability. They are similar to the children who’ve become compulsive liars when caught in proximity to result of a miscreant behavior, perhaps they will be able to lie their way out of punishment as opposed to the idea if they are do not conceal their complicity in certain delinquencies, they must face consequences

It follows, the American ‘free press’ promised to the people as a means to unmask corrupted power has become conflated with ‘free speech’ and turned on its head; where media has become almost wholly owned by a 3rd party that is neither the People nor the State but greed personified in the non-living legal entity of the corporation. It is this press which no longer unmasks the corrupt rather via the corporate veil buys and protects the corrupted politician and a ‘free press’ is become purveyor of political lies construed to be ‘free speech.’ We see this process already well underway in the decades preceding America’s civil war, with the self-justifying (Paine’s aptly described ‘mental lying’) press giving cover to politicians who could never come clean and admit what became the “Manifest Destiny” of the United States via conquest of the western territories was little more than a series of violent robberies. In the process of this virulently criminal expansion, the folk wisdom ‘treaties were made to be broken’ entered into the American lexicon, approximating the actuality; where early example had been the ‘civilized tribes’ sued the United States over the Executive branch of the Federal government’s Indian tribes removal policy and won, whereupon President Andrew Jackson stated “[Chief Justice] John Marshall has stated what the law is, now let him enforce it” and the tribes were pushed out of their ancestral lands across the Mississippi River into an alien wilderness regardless of the rule of law. Or, in the case of stealing the lands of Mexico, what amounted to the prototype ‘color revolution’ was staged by a group of Americans in California. Inasmuch as bringing ‘Christianity’ and ‘civilization’ to the heathen natives was the stated rationale, this could not hold up in the case of the noted ‘civilized tribes’, in actuality it was a violation of Moses ‘thou shall not covet.’ In the case of taking half or more of Mexico, it mattered not one bit Mexico was a Christian nation, only a differing method of lie or sleight of hand recalling color revolution needed applied. Relevant to this immediate preceding, it should be noted although existing populations in the conquered territories were not Black, neither was the majority populace ‘White’, recalling certain justifications for slavery but in this case ‘God’s will’ providing cover via the American press for a class of political suborner’s lies justifying theft of properties belonging those considered lesser to themselves. In this light, it should be known today’s “American Exceptionalism” had come into the lexicon as a synonym to “Manifest Destiny.”

However in the northeast of the United States there were some disgruntled noises made over the barbaric treatment afforded the Native tribes, in what were growing ‘liberal’ circles, from the relative safety of ‘civilized’ New England, this should not be construed to be some societal conviction of conscience; as New England states have been happy to deny its own Native tribes surviving tracts of wilderness, as recently as the late 20th Century, due to treaty violations by the USA having been, in the words of the court, ‘crushed by the burden of history.’ It should be noted the preceding indicates any sincerity of the Northern abolitionist societies agitating for an end to slavery, per the USA’s civil war, might well have been pecuniary as relates to social jealousy. In America, if there is an abundance of anything, it would be hypocrisy.

What became known as “Manifest Destiny” was the core cause which led to civil war, as competing visions of a future for those territories being conquered had raised the ghosts of the USA’s federalist versus anti-federalist divisions, however disingenuously. The North was pointed to an industrial, centralized future, the south was clinging to, and guarding, an agrarian, pastoral lifestyle and resented the north’s coveting the resources of the south. Black slavery was the undoing of the south, not because a majority of the north were unwilling to tolerate this, but because it provided cover for the industrialists (one could these days say oligarchs) of the north to bend the south to its will. With the inevitable loss to the industrialized north, it is noteworthy that great field marshal, Robert E. Lee, had made at least one cynical political maneuver, when he encouraged Christian ‘revivalism’ in the southern armies; as a means of boosting troop morale in the face of what he had to have known were overwhelming odds. ‘God’ were never so abused as in the American tradition; pointing towards a certain faux patriotism of the present day.

Finally, it was the south self-justifying its stance, particularly noting slavery, on the ninth and tenth Amendments or the final two clauses of the so-called ‘Bill of Rights’, handed long term political victory to the Federalists, those longtime sublime liars who’d never contemplated Thomas Paine’s American revolutionary concept of “Common Sense” should be fulfilled, their hypocritical condemnation of slavery not withstanding, for all men should become slaves to mercantilism run amok and the following constitutional language ultimately bowed to central authority:

Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”, the laws of individual states notwithstanding”

Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”

In the Calvinist South, Blacks, of course, weren’t ‘people’ but were property. But let us note this attitude was not geographically limited in some black & white sense (or more cynically, there was no geographic limitation of this attitude in a very Black & White sense!) for it had been a mere seventy years previous, the North had allowed for Black slavery to become integrated to the United States at their formation; where our charter determined enslaved Blacks were to be counted in the federal census as “three fifths of a man.” It required no ‘stretch of the imagination’ to claim the ‘States Sovereignty’ referred to could presume a self-determined future that was decidedly anti-mercantilist, and in its stead a pastoral one, but this could not stand up to the North’s faux morality exploiting the slavery issue, slavery which had been stupendously-stupidly clung to by the South as a ‘State’s Right.’ Here it should be noted not only had one of Abraham Lincoln’s political mentors burned a political treatise authored by Lincoln, defending Thomas Paine’s Deism, to spare Lincoln’s political career from the wrath of the North’s own intolerant ‘Christian’ mob, as well there is likely no political corruption in today’s Russia can come close to matching Abraham Lincoln’s first nomination to run for president of the United States, at Chicago, in 1860.

Concluding this immediate preceding section, it must be noted the mercantilist ‘liberal’ North’s politicians, including Lincoln, were perfectly willing to abide a continuation of slavery where it was already established in the South, were the South to surrender any claim to take its own political vision forward in the conquered western territories. This willingness to ‘compromise’ the freedom of Blacks in America only died with the North’s achieving some military victories, relevant to Abraham Lincoln stated political position:

“If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union…. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free”

Lincoln’s burned apologetic of Paine’s Deism notwithstanding, in this context we see a man perfectly recalling Paine’s maxim…

“It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime”

…which cannot come as any surprise where Lincoln had achieved his presidency via as corrupt a process as had ever been witnessed in this leading Western and henceforth ‘liberal’ democracy.

If these ostensibly ‘Christian’ political lies (Calvin’s sociopathy) were not great enough on both parties part, we must further note a liberal-left promotion of a revisionist history undermining what had remained of our core civil liberties, with a smear attacking the conservative historical revisionism with its own historical revisionism. Today’s liberal urban legend claims the anti-federalist philosophy is rooted in setting out to protect slavery by weakening the provisions for an American central government. This argument on the liberal-left is as distorted as the American conservative political revisionism it attacks; the patently false idea The United States was founded as a Christian Nation per se.

Because of confusion of ‘state’ as a larger nation with ‘state’ as a state, in these United States, in the American English dialect, ‘nation’ had come to replace ‘state’ in a sense of federal or national. However this was not yet the case at the time of our founding law being written; and the founding context of the language of the USA charter’s Second Amendment is a singular ‘people’ and refers to a ‘state’ in the sense of the United States as a nation, people of all the states inclusive. Any attempt to conflate the greater ‘state’ in the Second Amendment with the individual ‘states’ comprising our nation is patently dishonest:

Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

None of our first through eighth amendments protection of the rights of individual citizens had anything to do with Blacks of the founding era, as they were not enfranchised citizens as a class, and the facts are at odds with liberal-left’s popular myth (urban legend) that somehow the anti-federalists got their way with undermining a federalist inspired central government in order to protect slavery.

Simple common sense demands the anti-federalist authored fourth amendment concerning privacy in one’s papers cannot have anything to do with propping up slavery, a given example of motivation in the anti-federalists’ actual intentions. Or other rights, for instance prohibition of a bill of attainder. Or the right to confront your accuser. To name but a few provisions of the first through eighth amendments authored by the anti-federalists.

If our “Bill of Rights” had been insisted upon by anti-federalists, and it most certainly was, the entire world, it would be implied by this specious and twisted revisionism coming from the liberal left, is indebted to American slaveholders for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights inspired by the American Bill of Rights and certain of its provisions.

Anti-federalism was by no means an exclusive southern phenomena related to a minority of slave owners but was a general angst of the new republic’s citizenry from Georgia to New Hampshire. This angst primarily concerned historic abuses of power by central governments traced in the American tradition to the Magna Charta particularly and the European powers’ abuses of citizenry generally. The right of the ‘people’ (all inclusive) to bear arms was deemed necessary as a check of last resort on a central government. This anti-federalist authored ‘Bill of Rights” specifies core civil liberties of citizens our anti-federalist founders meant to secure us from the tyranny of a police state.

This liberal dishonesty plays into the following circumstance, a practical extending of superior privilege to our returning soldiers, consolidating the central authorities’ gains; when building a symbiotic relationship between the USA’s military and the USA’s police forces where the altogether wrong sort of meme involved with creating a collective mentality, germinated in the American military, is being infused into the American ‘civilian’ police.

When ‘veterans preference’ law creates a privileged class, in violation of our Constitution’s 14th Amendment or “Equal Protection” clause, is imposed on police hiring as a matter of law, and a society such as ours is one recently put through some considerable stresses, economic and social, resulting in both heightened paranoia and less opportunities at well paying jobs, the civilian police forces have become packed with ‘war on terror’ military veterans. These combined phenomena will translate into many veterans who’ve developed an ‘us versus the enemy’ mentality integrated into America’s police forces in relation to community, and this is particularly dangerous when ‘community’ is demographically dissimilar to one’s own, and we see this mindset manifest when Black communities are policed by White officers. The result is Blacks being shot down by White officers with impunity.

Now, we stir into the mix some more unpleasant facts; in today’s America, conservatism has become altogether poisoned by an extreme religious movement, Christian Domionism, asserting ‘God’s Law’ (their own interpretations of scripture) supersedes civil law. A volunteer military is historically attractive to conservative mentality, more so than other outlooks, and this is what will be fed into the police hiring rosters in by far out of proportion (to larger society) numbers. The American religious right is primarily White and we have seen has undeniable racist roots in a large segment or subculture. But there is more than a significant, underlying elements of racism, at issue here.

The soldiers advocate-civil rights group Military Religious Freedom Foundation, has determined that one third (1/3) of the United States military is presently “Christian Dominionist” or that is to say very much on the far right of the conservative right, one could say ‘Christian Taliban.’ These people do not respect the original intention of our secular democracy, they do not respect people holding different viewpoint or opinion, and they most certainly do not respect a civil rights movement traditionally rooted in the left of the political spectrum.

A simple rule of social psychology would be, with an extreme ‘strict father’ model of conservatism’s upbringing, extreme even by traditional conservative standards, the religious extremist desiring to exercise ‘authority’ is the prototype personality that will gravitate to police employ via ‘veterans preference’ … strengthening the hand of those corrupt fascist forces rapidly gaining practical control over every facet of American society as a whole. Christian Dominion sympathetic personalities have already gained control over Congress and the Pentagon and by extension, NATO, and now these patently reactionary, militant forces are taking practical control of America’s streets, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibition of America’s military policing our citizenry notwithstanding.

As a matter of consequence, our rapidly militarizing police have integrated, and continue to integrate, those personalities most inclined to view the public they were intended to serve as an opposing or threatening force .. as ‘the enemy’ .. with all of the attending impunity they experienced in a hyper-religious military environment; whether attitude a woman’s rape ‘must’ve been God’s will’ with little motivation to pursue and solve cases or punish perpetrators (except in case of a Black on White rape, that must be prosecuted in any White supremacist ruled society.) Society is now policed by men whose military background had been poisoned by theological interpretations on the far right of the right; by officers who shoved religious motivation down soldiers throats (officers who believe Muslims are ‘the children of Satan’ as taught by the Assemblies of God, example given.) These soldiers are now moved on to bashing in the heads of civil dissidents because any American refusing to conform to their corrupt religious fascism must be liberal, left, and deviant. This transitions to White officers policing Black neighborhoods seeing themselves in circumstance little different to occupying a hostile neighborhood in a war zone; where everyone, including children, are not only a threat, but are in no uncertain terms viewed as ‘the enemy.’

At the end of the day, ’veterans preference’, favoring tens of thousands of “Christian Dominion” personalities whose primary motive is towards an America to be ruled by those ‘chosen by God’ (their own kind, exclusively, who just happen to be mostly White), in patent violation of our constitution, with attending attitude of our citizens civil rights be damned, is one more large step on the road to societal disintegration; ultimately inviting a severity of control along the lines of Franco’s Spain or Pinochet’s Chile or even so extreme as Nazi Germany. In this latter case, let us not forget the USA’s anti-communist religious fascists had rescued and rehabilitated many of Nazi Germany’s worst war criminals, particularly those intimates of the Nazi intelligence structure experienced in matters of the WWII Eastern front and Soviet affairs, epitomized in Reinhard Gehlen.

A postscript would be, the USA’s constitutional prohibition of any prerequisite ‘religious test’ to serve in government, would appear to have been turned on its head in present circumstance; whereas any applicant for police work in any American force, includes nearly all police in the USA, includes federal police, the several states police, even the police of local communities, could not be questioned or evaluated per an extreme fascist religious belief devoted to the undermining and ultimate overthrow of the secular democratic principle, opening a most unpleasant panorama.

Conclusion

Today’s shameless self indulgences attributed to “Cultural Marxism” in the West are a misapprehension of the reality. Whether a conservative self indulgence of ‘prosperity gospel’ where it matters not what suffering had been inflicted on others in attaining one’s fortune, you are rich because ‘God is blessing you’, or a liberal self indulgence of imposing ‘humanitarian violence’ on other societies to make those societies into a narcissistic image of self because ‘we know better what is good for you’, or an atheist self-indulgence in the idea ‘science cannot prove there exists a god’, or the hedonist self indulgence in sole self-gratification without care or cultivation of that self in sense of possessing a soul and sincere care for another, what we are seeing is the sociopathy of John Calvin; whether that sociopathy had perverted the religious vehicle or had abandoned religion altogether. If the intentions of Jesus had struggled mightily enough trying to survive the neo-Platonic church at Rome, these ideas could never survive John Calvin.

What Johannes Gutenberg had enabled became the spread of ideas that are not necessarily healthy. John Calvin’s ‘predestination’, and resultant spread of a religion sourced sociopathy across the West, freeing Western capitalism from a sense of personal accountability, should be held up as example prima facie of how irresponsible man might confer irreparable damage on mankind. It follows, today’s ‘free press’ of the liberal democracies are little more than purveyor of shameless political lies rooted in the sociopathy of Calvinism. This meme now racing at light speed via fiber optic in the age of internet reminds one of the race of chemotherapy; where the modern medicine can kill the patient more quickly than it kills the cancer. It does seem true there is something missing in the West; a missing culture of natural antibodies in the maintenance of humanity’s spiritual health, things like practical morality and principled ethics, increasingly are becoming memories of a distant past. Recalling Jesus had said “you cannot serve god and money” and today looking only to find “In God We Trust” embossed on every denomination of American currency, I think we know who America’s practical ‘god’ is.

But to make the accusation ‘secular’ democracy in the USA is somehow tied to intention of rejecting God is to miss the mark; the point of the secular demand of the USA’s founding charter had been to provide opportunity to rise above sectarianism. In the end, man proved incapable to achieve this; the lower instincts pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth proved too great.

Lastly, I had read every work of Solzhenitsyn’s I could lay my hands on, Ivan Denisovich, Candle in the Wind, The First Circle, The Cancer Ward, Gulag Archipelago, and finally, some years later, August 1914. There is no question in my mind the man is one of the great observers of our age but I would offer a caveat to Solzhenitsyn’s Russian adherents; do not make the mistake of misapprehension or a belief Solzhenitsyn’s tremendous capacity for understanding Russia and Russians can be somehow translated to a deep understanding of the West or related to American conservatism. It can’t. There is no authentic comparison. The several conservative denominations of Calvinism imported to America birthed the sociopathy we see across the spectrum of American politics and produced conservative and liberal psychopath alike. America’s degeneracy is not a state of ‘Cultural Marxism.’ It is John Calvin. It is not a rational State, rather it is a nuclear armed, collective psychopath’s criminality that has burned its bridges behind, come what may.

This piece is a rebuttal to ‘Alexander Solzhenitsyn – A Russian Prophet’ by Egor Kholmogorov with introduction by Fluctuarius Argenteus & Anatoly Karlin @ http://www.unz.com/akarlin/prophet-solzhenitsyn/

Updated 22 May 2018

*

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired paralegal/investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption and human rights. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s educational background is primarily developmental & social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire –

Bageera

^ the author’s pre-exile summer life

My essay ‘Modern Indian Society‘ from the book ‘Penucquem Speaks’ (published 2006) has received considerable attention over recent months; and judging by the associated search terms, this has to do with the indigenous concept of shadow or, more precisely, ‘lost shadow.’ Consequently, I decided to expand on the concept that had been only briefly mentioned in the book. This is the result.

The ancient native concept translated as ‘shadow’ is the ‘dynamic’ portal from which you are observed by the world of ‘spirit’ (nature), perhaps best represented in English with this definition…

dynamic |dīˈnamik|
adjective
1 Linguistics (of a verb) expressing a process

…in a case where self-recognition is not ego-based but environmentally substantiated within a context of nature; where all surroundings are social. How you could experience this from this side (in non-egoic sense as part of process), example given, where there is a wild plum tree in full blossom alive with honey bees; you don’t see or differentiate the bees or parts of the tree (blossoms) separately but rather first instinct understands the tree as alive with the sound of the bees, all as integrated organism. This is information delivered via the ‘portal.’

You also innately know this is a shifting phenomenon of process that is constantly in motion and your’s is in a place of moving process. In other words, your shadow is a shifting or mutating awareness attending oneself or one’s presence, constantly feeding one information. How you would know you are seen from the ‘other side’ (in same non-egoic sense or as part of process), example given, let’s say you are hunting and as a hunter you understand it is what will be offered to you is what you are allowed to take; also it is spring and you shouldn’t take the doe carrying a young one. The Mule Deer herd senses your presence and begins to move away but a large doe stands still and offers herself. You take her because you understand she has offered herself; and discover she is barren. This is knowing both; how to read and how to write. It is a form of literacy, sans pen & paper. The doe knew the herd’s best outcome was giving herself up, you read that, and taking her, you wrote the best outcome for all concerned; your people are fed and the mule deer community kept it’s future in a higher state than if you’d taken any of the other deer.

Or, as I had previously written HERE:

Let’s say because you are of the old indigenous mental construction and you know *how* to pray *through* the trees, while traveling, you come to a Y in the road. To now, you only know there is a way through the forest you are traversing, but you have no map and no detailed instruction. Because you know *how* to pray *through* the trees, the environment (which is sentient, intelligent, and social) recognizes, respects, and even *anticipates* your thought when you send it out – “which way” – and a large bird of prey drops out of a tree and flies down right fork in the road, your questions are responsibly answered along this and other lines, with 100% accuracy, throughout the trip … because this indigenous mentality can repeat this *read* of the environment with fluency and confidence, whether it is a bird calls in the precise moment, or noticing a feature resembling a face in a rock outcropping (psychosis to the Platonic mentality), even a puff of breeze moving leaves on an otherwise still day and more.

How is it this ‘portal’ of understanding translates as your shadow?

This interactive understanding is an awareness that moves with you, except in case where you’ve been knocked out of alignment with your ‘portal’, in which case it can be said you’ve ‘lost your shadow’, a serious and even life threatening circumstance; with your loss of ability to ‘read’ surrounding environment. This ‘portal’ that follows (or precedes or surrounds) oneself is a critical component of essence or being in context of survival.

If you cannot ‘read’, you cannot take what is offered, as you cannot take what you cannot see and you’ve become out-of-sync. As well, because your surrounding environment is sentient and aware, you may easily become the environment’s ‘offering’ for lack of this ability to read; this loss of yourself is recognized by the greater social awareness (your natural surroundings.) In this case, you could easily become the surprised kill. This last is akin to the wolf identifying and taking the weak of the herd. They ‘know’ because they have ‘shadow’ or portal of understanding as well. When the environment, which is sentient, aware and social, knows you are out-of-sync, it’s only a matter of time and you will be taken.

How this system of awareness came to be related to early ‘frontier’ photography and the concept of ‘shadow stealing’ is actually quite simple; this was era entire native nations had been knocked out of alignment with their natural social environment (interactive nature.) With the Whites came a severe damage to this world of perception, with severe disease related losses, ecological damage and the disappearing of wildlife, together with attending psychological impact, almost nothing worked as it had.

The static ‘capture’ of image (photography) easily fit the concept of lost shadow, as it must have looked as one would imagine nature were to perceive the self, where previous to western culture, one might only behold in reflective water. However reflection in the water did not threaten; because it did not seize and keep the image. In a world without concept of coincidence, it could not be construed as anything other than, with the Whites’ arrival, and the near simultaneous loss of the interactive ‘literacy’ of living integrated to nature, portrait photography came to represent the ultimate theft of this unique awareness.

Badger_River

^ The ‘shadow’ classroom

Related: Cosmos & Consciousness

*

In the matter of Ostensible Roman Soldier versus Member of the Crowd, with 3rd party intervenors, Ostensible Jesus and Ostensible Judas.

The Court to the jury:

“All of the parties have stipulated and agree the film of the incident is accepted into evidence; the only controversies entertained before this court are matters of interpretation.

“The defendant, that is Member of the Crowd, holds because he is an illiterate Amazon tribesman, recently proselytized & converted by CIA under cover of Protestant missionaries, he cannot be held liable for retroactively correcting the course of history; with pre-empting necessity of Ostensible Jesus having to follow the line ‘forgive them, for they know not what they do.’

“The plaintiff, that is Ostensible Roman Soldier, argues this matter constitutes vigilante justice, no matter how sincere or a naïf in his belief defendant was saving Ostensible Jesus’ life, and no matter any sincere noble intent, a theologically wrong, Protestant inspired assault, even when stemming from deep misapprehension of reality, cannot be excused against a Roman Catholic actor.

“Over all parties objections, Ostensible Judas cause is joined by this court to the cause of Ostensible Jesus, both must be aligned with the plaintiff, that is if ‘collateral’ 3rd party damage inflicted on job security is found, were Ostensible Jesus to be rescued, rather than suffer ostensible mortal wound inflicted by Ostensible Roman Soldier. Ostensible Judas’ claim of irreparable harm to his reputation, if his betrayal of Ostensible Jesus were for naught, cannot be separated from Ostensible Jesus claim of future job security harm, as a compensated actor.

“We have heard considerable conflicting expert testimony on whether Ostensible Jesus’ position of harm to future taxable wages, when joined to the cause of Ostensible Judas, is consistent with the historical role.

“Consequently, this court instructs if you find for Ostensible Jesus, in all future productions, Ostensible Judas having been paid 30 pieces of silver cannot be portrayed as a bribe related to betrayal; but must be declared actor’s union wage, no different to taxable wages paid to the actors Ostensible Jesus and Ostensible Roman Soldier.

“A special note of instruction is, despite Ostensible Jesus’ words cannot ever be questioned, this does not automatically confer a decision in his favor and may not prejudice any award; it is your duty to fairly resolve on all parties part. This may or may not, wholly or in part, be to Ostensible Jesus’ favor. Anything Ostensible Jesus has ever said must be objectively contextualized to the circumstance, to be considered in your decision.

“This court orders members of the jury sequestered. You will now begin deliberations”

Jury note to the judge: “Juror seven insists to know, Ostensible Roman Soldier, having been prevented from delivering ostensible mortal wound, can mere ‘malicious intent’ negate compensation?”

Judge’s note to jury: “As a soldier of empire, the question of law is whether Ostensible Roman Soldier is entitled to Sovereign Immunity, also known as state impunity. Because the state is not a party to this suit, you may consider malicious intent.” [the CIA cum missionaries in the gallery put on a sour look]

Jury note to the judge: “Juror two insists to know, were Amazon Indian proselytized with the Protestant King James version? If so, would use of ‘hath, doth, thou and thee’, and the like, be mitigating factor or favor inability to grasp reality?” [the judge grimaces]

Judge’s note to the jury: “It is written ‘I am the same yesterday, today and forever.’ Thou must not make haste to excuse the Indian’s ignorance in thy understanding.”

Ostensible Jesus: “Uh, that was a bit harsh. Are you a closet Calvinist?” [judge turns beet red]

Judge to Ostensible Jesus: “Forgive me, I’ll be deferring to you in the hereafter.”

Jury note to the judge: Juror five insists to know, if Ostensible Jesus associated with tax-gatherers, how are they substantively different from the money-lenders?”

Judge to Ostensible Jesus: “How do I answer that?”

Ostensible Jesus: [looking embarrassed] “Well, I don’t know. Ostensible Magdalene always took care of the tax-gathers for me, but the money-lenders were gay, and wouldn’t resolve with her offering of ‘in kind’ contribution. That REALLY made me angry.” [the judge senses a migraine onset]

Judge’s note to jury: “There is no distinction, the planets didn’t align for Ostensible Jesus on the one occasion, that’s all.”

Jury note to judge: “Juror twelve insists to know whether 30 pieces of silver should be adjusted for inflation, 32 AD to present, and if so, what would that amount be today at the COMEX?” [with the side of his head pounding, the judge passes a note to his clerk instructing an Oxycontin tablet and glass of water brought to the bench]

Judge’s note to the jury: “Juror twelve is replaced by alternate juror one, who shall hereafter be identified as juror thirteen.”

Jury’s note to judge: “Juror thirteen insists to know [at these words, the judge sees floating sparks of advancing migraine] can St Augustine’s ‘just war’ theory be squared with Ostensible Jesus turning the other cheek? Moreover, juror four insists to know, is the ‘just’ in ‘just war’ an adverb rather than the widely assumed adjective?” [the judge looks at Ostensible Jesus with a helpless expression]

Ostensible Jesus: “Well, I’m ostensibly Jewish, I’ve always been ostensibly Jewish and I have no idea what the Christians went on to write in their Meforshim or whatever it is they call it.”

Judge to Ostensible Jesus: “I have a migraine and can’t think. With your ostensible infallibility, will you hazard a guess?”

Ostensible Jesus: “Well, it should be easy enough, if Augustine is a Roman, it can only be the adverb.”

Judge’s note to the jury: “It’s ‘just’ the adverb.”

Jury note to the judge: “Juror three insists to know, when Ostensible Jesus said “Give to Sid Caesar what is Sid Caesar’s”, would that be considered taxable income?”

Judge to Ostensible Jesus: “You said that?”

Ostensible Jesus: “It was a joke. Anyway, I said it backstage, but there was an open mic.” [Judge puts his face in his hands]

Judge to Ostensible Jesus: “Well, you said it. Now, whose image was on the coin?”

Ostensible Jesus: “It wasn’t a real coin, it was a wooden nickel. Mainly, it had to do with a conversation around political correctness in Hollywood and #Me Too jokes. Look, we’re ostensible Jews and Sid, bless his memory, would have fallen over laughing.”

Judge’s note to the jury: “Anything ‘given’ to Sid Caesar, can be considered solely an undeclared, carnal tax.”

Jury foreman’s (Juror eight) note to Judge: “We have a hung jury: This foreman and jurors six, nine, ten & eleven insist on reducing Ostensible Judas award by half, because he changed his story of remorse, the other seven jurors want to deny him compensation altogether; on account of in one version he hangs himself, in the other version he disembowels himself.”

Judge to Ostensible Judas: “You changed your story?”

Ostensible Judas: “It wasn’t me, it was the script writers, mid-production. They thought hanging wasn’t bloody enough.”

[at this point, the court briefly recessed, when the Judge’s migraine required court medics administering the ‘nuclear option’ of a Demerol injection, direct to the brain]

In reconvened session, the judge: [with a great sense of relief and very high, in fact ‘almighty’ high] “Order! Bailiff! Clear the gallery, triple security and call in the jury!

The Judge: “Per Rule 56 (f)(3) Federal Rules of Procedure, this court may exercise summary judgment of its own accord after identifying for the parties material facts that are beyond dispute.

“Per the aforementioned rule, and having read all the jury’s notes of inquiry, this court enters into the record the indisputable fact all of the jurors in this case are absolute, total and complete idiots. If they went with the argument of the plaintiff, they’d do it as morons. If they found for the argument of the defendant, they’d do it as morons. If they compensated the 3rd party intervenors, they’d do it as morons. [the judge looks at the bailiff]

“Hang them all.”

Bailiff: “Dismissed juror twelve?”

The Judge: [over his shoulder, on his way to chambers] “Consider him Ostensible Barrabas.”

*

%d bloggers like this: