Archives for category: philosophy

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 –

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.”

*

There is, I believe, no more brutal humor on Earth, than bonafide Native American humor, and although this humor’s frequent darkness may be related to recent history (past few centuries), there’s really something else about the universal (across the tribes) trickster (god, with a small g) that is fundamentally opposed to the western or modern (to the Americas) mentality. One might consider the ‘taciturn’ Indian maybe doesn’t talk to the Whites (or their close kin, the ‘Black-Whiteman’) in the terms you see here (or talk much in the presence of Whites at all), it’s either because 1) they’re too polite to say what they actually think and/or 2) They know, more likely than not, in any case it’d be a wasted effort. In this 2nd case, I have to apologize to Mr Barking Dog (see below) for violating Native etiquette and pointing out ‘stupid is as stupid does’ is the most apropos folk proverb to describe this phenomenal problem of cross-cultural non-communication; no, wait. It’s not stupid is as stupid does, it’s the dilemma of trying to explain a few simple things to ‘people too stupid to understand they’re stupid.’ Consequently, I fear for my legacy; having tried to do just that. But I might be saved by the Native rule of paradox, because someone with a little bit of humility, having actually read through this following essay’s insults, might actually get the fundamentally sound lesson in the Native humor… it’s not that I mean to give anyone a lifetime’s mental complex, but in our (Native) world there are no excuses, you have to sort through, you cannot conceal, your bulls**t.

Barking Dog: “Want to understand ! Can’t get there from here. Stuck in Caucasian thought, way of doing things. Can you direct me to an area of studies starting at square one so I can understand. Or would it be a useless effort like a dog chasing his tail. Thanks for your work and sharing the earth people’s way”

So, I got this preceding message from Barking Dog over at James LaFond’s site where he [James] is kind enough to run my articles and books (chapter by chapter.) Well, I’ve tried, again and again [1], [2], [3], [4] [5] to bring the understanding across over a period of more than 30 years, without much success. So, here’s trying again:

The Time I Fondled a Dog’s Nuts

These (pre-Cartesian-Platonic) indigenous people were patient in a sense nearly unknown today. My own understanding of, and sight in that world, derives from freak circumstance (or destiny determined by the gods) I wouldn’t wish on anyone, the death of the western idea-forms ‘didn’t happen easily’ (perhaps the greatest understatement of my life, to now.) But here is trying one more time, to bring the working philosophy across.

The first thing to look at is, is the contrast between one of the great (and perhaps only universal) ‘gods’ of the Native world(s), that is ‘the trickster’, and the construct of the mentality according to western psychology. These are mutually exclusive approach to life; the western way is all about process shaping the ego as an adaptive tool engaging one’s surroundings, the Native way had been to pre-empt the emergence of ego in any form, and this had been the role of the trickster, who could quite accurately be described as the ego destroyer; in culture where ego had been diagnosed and treated as an anti-social mental disorder.

Culturally speaking, at the meta-level, never the twain shall meet. Here is example at the most base level; The western ‘inventiveness’ allows for ego-based individual pursuits independent of influence by surroundings, for instance a corporation is formed by an individual who applies for permits and begins dynamiting rock for cyanide heap leech mining operations. Because the Native mentality cannot perceive itself as detached from (or independent of) consciousness concerning the surrounding environment, this event would be perceived as criminally anti-social in a context the western science has only a small awareness or intellectual (not practical) grasp of:

“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” -Bernard d’Espagnat, Theoretical Physicist

Here it is demonstrated ‘Plato was wrong’ but in no way will that error halt his scientific ‘objectivity’ based ‘progress’, because western science cannot grasp the profound perceptual mistake made in the very [ego] self d’Espagnat is pointing to. In other words, the idea the human ‘self’, ego and associated, conscious self-awareness, is in any sense independent of our organic surroundings is just not true and this cannot be practically grasped or understood at the meta-level because it is a threat to the ego-self of the very culture. For that fact, it is beyond their comprehension.

This preceding versus

“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. It is merely power, with no way of knowing how to use it correctly … unless Spirit is with a man’s spirit for the light” -Red Tomahawk, Sioux

What is Red Tomahawk’s spirit? It is the collective consciousness of our surroundings, including the awareness embodied in the rock being blown up for cyanide heap leach gold extraction. Each of those dynamite explosions is exploding part of a process of sentient, aware intelligence. Red Tomahawk has an ages old, functional grasp of something western science is beginning to glimpse but dare not know the implications.

It follows, the indigenous perception would be, with killing off of our surrounding intelligence, the Earth is, accordingly, becoming severely dumbed down. The analogy would be, with the increasing loss of intelligent expression, our planet is becoming, in a practical sense, a brain damaged spastic. It can’t even coordinate its weather anymore. And there is no escaping consequence, we all are a part of all of it.

Then, western perception is, the exploitation, or as Red Tomahawk put it “the knowledge and use of any or all the powers of the objects on Earth around us”, to a point of destroying our life-giving environment (surroundings) is ‘progress’ because building civilization in the process enables ‘intelligent’ demonstrations of what ultimately amounts to grandiose acts of ego: “We put men in space.”

Well, you can proceed to destroy the planet by building civilization to a point you can send a shipload of colonists to Mars (to certainly die there) and no doubt this will titillate the collective ego of that very civilization, but how intelligent is it to sacrifice the underlying support mechanism, that is life sustaining nature, in the process? How is it western mentality (and the civilization it rules) cannot grasp this single, simple equation in an applied, practical sense? Ego is, quite literally, a destructive thing.

To begin to grasp Native mentality, westerner’s would have to take a mortal hit to ego, that’s the first step, and accept at the core of one’s being, you are a member of a class that are the most aggressive, dumbest fuckers to grace this planet with bipedalism since T Rex went extinct 66 or so million years ago, only less intelligent. T Rex didn’t deliberately blow his world up, only western civilization would do that.

Insofar as IQ, what you are actually measuring is the western projection of ego, not true intelligence which more closely resembles common sense, bringing us to this next:

If you can wrap your head around the idea Plato has insured your culture has created a socialization machine that mass produces people who are worse than total idiots and that includes yourself, and accept this as fact and as the beginning premise of your new intelligence (resolve to climb out of Plato’s pit of ego-driven stupidity), there’s hope for you but not much more than that, because now you have start unfucking everything concerning yourself that’s fucked up in this life and it’s a lot of work. This work begins with breaking habits in your thinking.

Rule one: “I don’t know anything” because from the point of view of the new system you aspire to learn about, you really don’t know s**t. Like a friend had recently stated to me, “I expect we grasp the nature of reality about as well as my dog understands how my Mastercard works.” Bingo. Good start.

From this immediate preceding premise, we are all equal; because in the system you are learning, you cannot *know* the nature of reality. It is what it is, you’ll never know its source or origins, you cannot, that’s the point of its name: The Great Mystery. The difference here, between your old perception, and the new perception you aspire to learn is, you have no right to jack the expression of this mystery around, like so many scientists jacking-off with their experiments in the lab do, because this all has consequence and you have no right to bring consequence down on anyone except yourself. There IS a right to behave stupidly, but only in relation to yourself, not in relation to me, not in relation to your mom, and certainly not in relation to your neighbor or larger environment. This is for the fact your environment is part and parcel of our social world; when you fuck it up for yourself, you fuck it up for everyone. This is NOT allowed. Consequently, for the socially retarded newcomer to this system, we have to inform you in absolutely retarded terms, you possess no more right to exist than the stuff you’re used to chopping down, blowing up, or whatever it is you do to enjoy a life out of proportion to your personal importance, which is, by the way, nil, except that you are recognized as valuable by the expression of the mystery, in effect our sentient environment, inclusive of trees and stones. Certainly we are not talking about recognition in any sense of Alfred Nobel.

Yeah, trees and stones. Now here’s something to think about. 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. When you make a reprise of this journey (now knowing the road) but the forest has been slaughtered by logging for pulp mills to make paper, it is then a Native understands what is murderous stupidity.

It is this murderous stupidity that must be weeded from your thinking. The ideas you had taken for granted, must become ideas that you viscerally hate. In every possible small way, you must learn to learn it all over again, and in every small way you must learn to resist the insanity:

“Everyone knows the Whiteman is crazy” -Blackfoot proverb

With all of the preceding said, I’d tried teaching this system to both men and women of the White world, over a period of 30 years. The result? One male, and only one, was able to grasp a working knowledge of this system, and it took five years before it began to ‘click’ for him. On the other hand, several women were able to see and begin to grasp (demonstrate a functional understanding) in as little as one afternoon’s walk together in the forest. More typically, these women were a more unique and respectful lesbian mentality without the male sense of ego found in feminist western women in a western culture where women’s emancipation has determined women adopt the aggressive postures of the western male. This 2nd were example of women who couldn’t make the phenomenon happen. Amazon intelligence they are not.

The time I fondled a dog’s nuts goes to shocking the western ego as a matter of demonstration. A younger Native male, my relative, was a hot-shot fire crewman, the elite of the USA’s wild lands firefighters. His White colleague had heard my dog was actually a wolf and wanted to see this creature. This ‘dog’ could take off the arm of anyone that ‘smelled’ wrong and wanting to see it for simple ego sake was not the brightest thing.

In any case, here was this White guy, all young and tough, walking up to see my dog and could be in easily be in danger, depending on how the dog perceived him. Not wishing to introduce fear into the exchange of energy, and not wishing to be rude and say ‘stay away from the dog’, I defused the situation by asking the question “Do you know how to determine if your dog trusts you?” The young guys looked at me, I gave the proper cue, and my dog lay down on his back for me and I then held the dogs balls and rolled them together gently, like large dice, and looking up with straight face said “When your dog will let you do this” as my dog’s tongue was spilled out the side of his mouth to maximum length and the dog’s expression was nothing short of heavenly joy.

Saying nothing (the White kid was speechless, the Indian kid knowing how to keep a straight face), the young men walked away but later, my relative (I won’t give up his identity) told me, speaking of his colleague, “Man, it JARRED him when he saw that.” But you know what? Those times that young man will want to brag he’d seen, and been up close and personal with, a wolf, he’ll be confronted with memory of the wolf rolling on its back to have his nuts fondled and his White culture’s gynophobic male identity or suppressed narcissistic homosexuality (experienced as homophobia) and it’s associated macho ego will take a hit. And that’s pretty funny, especially considering he’d never come close to knowing why I’d done what I’d done, Native humor saving his life as it were.

Y’all had to fuck everything up

One would hope the slaves of the 21st Century (likely includes you, the reader) would suffer a better fate than that of Spartacus’ army, but it seems unlikely. In the current era of medieval, feudal, cultural habits superimposed on a world of futuristic science fiction, a person with Emiliano Zapata’s belief “it is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees” is a rare find. In any case, here are links to considerable history, much of which you will never see taught in any public education system and, opportunity to emancipate your mind:

 

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

Most recent update 10 October 2017:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The full interview:

Prior ‘gladio’ updates:

Updated 23 July 2016:

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

Munich_3_Shooters.jpg - 1

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

Munich_3_Shooters_(2).jpg - 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Orlando eyewitnesses part 1:

Orlando eyewitnesses part 2:

 

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

BBC_Navy_Yard_SWAT.jpg - 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*

Related:

Deep State IV NATO & Gladio

Deep State V Economics & counter-insurgency

*

Ron10

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

Truth is seldom pure and never simple -Oscar Wilde

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Full text of the letter by Jack and Warren Christian:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*

*

 

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

APPROACHING SAMADHI WITHOUT PLANT MEDICINE

The post’s author begins:

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

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

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

Referencing this article which includes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*

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

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

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

 

%d bloggers like this: