Thursday, April 27, 2017

ANTI-EVERYTHING?


A reactionary is someone who unreasonably resists any ideas or behaviors that are different from the status quo or his/her concept of what is ideal. For example, I am admittedly reactionary in response to gangster rap music. I can reason out its origins and its artistic merits, but I have a gut reaction against its drug culture, violent imagery, misogyny and homophobia. My reactionary distaste is mollified by reason. In other words, I would not promote a ban on gangster rap. I value free speech over my reactionary impulses. I just won't buy it or listen to it. 

Being reactionary is part of being human. There are good survival mechanisms involved in the reactionary response. The fight-or-flight mechanism is one of the most basic. This most likely explains why old people, small children and many people who become extremely ill are more reactionary than others. This interests me because I am older and have survived severe debilitating illness. I am also a retired registered nurse. So, I have been able to look at this issue from several vantage points. My hypothesis from my observations is this: Human beings resist change in direct proportion to their state of comfort or discomfort. 

Those who are extremely wealthy, like Bill and Melinda Gates, may become less reactionary. For example, they may give out some of their great wealth to promote global change. They may become more flexible politically. They may move from opportunism to philanthropic altruism. Those who are extremely poor may also be less reactionary. They have little to lose with change and perhaps something to gain, if they are presented with an opportunity to increase their comfort. They may move from impoverished stagnation to hopeful opportunism. This can be used for bad purposes by bad people, as we have seen historically. 

Those in society's middle have always been the roiling mass of both progressive energy and reactionary resistance. Their gravitation to either pole seems to be related to where they are economically in society. The most progressive seem to be those on the way up economically. The most reactionary seem to be those on their way down economically. Those most moderate in this middle group appear to be those, in capitalist society, who have capital enough to sustain a stable economic future whether there is political/social change or not. Excluding mental illness, education, combined with capital stability, promotes moderation in the face of either stasis or change.

Why is the current anti-everything-Trump mania in the USA seated in the progressive middle? In other words, why are those who are climbing up the economic ladder from the middle (for example, college students) the most hysterical reactionaries against the current government administration? I believe the vehement reactionary wave against anything Trump among progressives has little to do with the specifics of Trump's stated goals or with their loss of the 2016 election. 

The denial of its steady losses by the economic middle of the USA in the recent decades is obvious. Rather than conforming to the globalist goal to knock down their lifestyles in favor of wealth redistribution globally and wealth maintenance of capitalist aristocrats, many in the USA's economic middle have worked more hours, leveraged themselves to the hilt and gone on a spending binge on credit to compensate for the misery of their lives. The result has been a tenuous grip on their economic stability and an increase in their stress. One more stock market failure or banking failure could crack off the edge of the economic cliff from which they are hanging by their fingernails. 

Then why are the wild protesters against Trump generally younger? I speculate that the most vehement anti-everything-Trump protesters are those whose lives are most dependent on the status quo. This sounds counter-intuitive, since quiet conservatives are traditionally seen as guardians of the status quo. 

Consider the children of middle-income families who now medically insure them under Obamacare until they are 25. This is a wide swath of young Americans of the economic middle. Consider the high number of children from the lower level of middle income and lower who have been raised in the expanded food stamp program. Consider the children whose college educations come from the leveraged equity of their parents' homes or businesses. In other words, consider the possibility that these vehement anti-everything-Trump protesters are not social justice warriors. Consider that they may be understandably protesting change in the status quo from a position of personal entitlement. This is not progressive. This is understandably reactionary, but it does not represent some ethical superiority. 

If people in the USA continue to subscribe to capitalism as it now exists in The West and increasingly around the globe, they should catch up with the inevitability of Trumps and Putins. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. Republics throughout history have been ruled by aristocrats. Being reactionary against everything-Trump is basically being reactionary to a system to which you have subscribed election after election for decades. In other words, ignorant conformity in any political direction, combined with operating on a basis of selfish capitalist individualism, will inevitably lead to authoritarian regimes. Bernie Sanders is an anomaly. Trump and Clinton were simply examples of the system progressing farther along to more power for the elite and less for the middle.  

Friday, April 14, 2017

WHY ME? WHY NOT ME?

Actor Aaron Paul as Jesse Pinkman

I finally caught up with the TV series Breaking Bad. This is an admission of my aversion to commercial TV and conformist adulation of any media. I waited for it to come on Netflix so I could binge watch the complete show, all 5 seasons. And I recommend it.

The show has roots in Greek and Shakespearean tragedies with a little Dickens thrown in. In other words, it is quite brilliant. Its characters and plot lines beautifully convey universal messages about personality, greed, addiction, family and choices. It is an intricate portrait of modern American needs, mores and values.

Jesse Pinkman, a central character who is a meth addict, frequently whines indignantly "Why me?" whenever asked or told to do something he doesn't want to do. Jesse is the perpetual adolescent, representative of today's spoiled middle-class youth. He has invested nothing in himself in order to contribute to society. He has been enabled by materialistic parents. He takes unless bullied into contributing something. He turns his own home into a meth den to block out his loneliness and desperation. Then he plays with the addled meth heads in his home like dolls or pets. They are his bitches in Jesse-speak. Parallels to the adolescent emperors of ancient Rome. 

The "Why Me?" culture is part of the generalized victim culture in developed countries today. It is fueled by personality politics and celebrity obsession of narcissists. If a person feels unrecognized or coddled in any way by society in this sick frame of reference, he/she becomes a victim. The reality is that a victim of this kind is actually a victim of self-oppression and/or character disorder. Sufficiently mesmerized into a group-think with other self-identified victims, this individual can easily be manipulated to violence and destruction. In the fog of false victims everywhere, actual victims of harmful injustice go unnoticed and ignored.

I learned something about this at an early age. My mother, a strong and capable woman, was prone to say "Why me?" whenever I got sick or was found to have some problem requiring intervention.  My wise old-school pediatrician heard her say this in his office when I came in with a nasty infection in my preschool years. He looked at my mother over his spectacles with a frown and said sternly, "Mrs. Creeden, he is a child. Children get sick." That doctor treated me with special tenderness whenever I came in after that. The lesson may have been wasted on my mother, who continued her "Why me?" responses, but it was not a lesson wasted on my impressionable mind. 

The irrational cult of victim status and the irrational cult of unrealistic human happiness are intertwined in a society ruled by commercial media. These cults are also fueled by the technology of instant selective information. Victims gather views, tweets and retweets. Celebrity lifestyles, mostly unearned in any rational way, are pushed into the faces of the struggling masses as ideal. The role of average hardworking citizen is no longer valued. Practicing simple honesty and decency within one's lot in life is seen as dysfunctional, depressive or weak. Aggression, begging, whining, indignation and bragging are the acceptable standards of modern behavior in many segments of society. If a person's goal is to always feel special, he/she is condemned to a frustrated life of "Why me?" and "Why not me?".

I like to deconstruct "Why me?" for myself whenever tempted to think it. "Why" is simple for me. There is no "Why" in the Universe as I understand it. God, sin, karma, heaven, hell ... all these "Why" constructs mean nothing to the rational me, yet I manage to live a relatively peaceful and responsible life with normal incidence of human pain and suffering.  The "me" concept, as a descriptive of some uniquely central human being in a vast Universe, also means nothing to the rational me. I am a construct of genetics and environment, no different than any other creature on a purely existential level. If anything, my consciousness of my own unexceptional state on this planet is as much burden as attribute. Starting there has helped me survive, persevere and function with relative serenity in a Universe which really doesn't care if I do or don't. 


Thursday, April 6, 2017

AGE OF MASS UNCONSCIOUSNESS


Yes, I am a product of my time. The natural way of things is to age into obsolescence, whether trying to or not. As upbeat and with-it as we may try to be, old people cannot fully experience the world which the young populate. The reverse is also true.

If you swim in a New England pond today, you do not know what water uncontaminated by acid rain feels like on the skin. You do not have the experience of minnows and tadpoles so numerous that they are tickling your legs when you stand near the shore. When you walk along a beach on Cape Cod, you no longer see scores of skittering sand crabs at the surf line. These experiences are etched on my brain, but are completely absent from the brains of 20-somethings. That imprinting of the brain effects the way we experience the world.

If never being able to sit down in a subway car at rush hour is all you know, you most likely cannot easily relate to outrage about overpopulation or exploitation by property developers. Most young city dwellers would readily shrug when attention is brought to the forest of cranes erecting tower after tower in their cities without any commensurate improvements being made to public infrastructure. This malaise is enhanced by the lack of a skeptical media, print or visual. McLuhan's prophetic The Medium is the Massage is here in full force.

I am not prone to nostalgia, but I have a sharp sensual memory, photographic actually. Perhaps my memory is why I am not as nostalgic as some of my peers who remember their old world through an enhanced haze. For example, when I think of trolley rides here in Boston where we once had 140 street trolley routes, I remember them being cold in winter and hot in summer. I also remember sliding side-to-side on the leather bench seats as the trolley careened around a corner. So, when I ride a rare trolley car today, I relish the climate control and bucket seats, but I regret not being able to sit down much of the time. My attempts to exit a packed trolley car with polite expressions of "Excuse me." are thwarted by headphones on the ears of passengers staring at screens with mouths open. 

I have a similar experience of being in an urban neighborhood today. I grew up in the most densely populous American city of the mid 1950's. 48,000 of us lived in less than one square mile. That city was relatively quiet by today's standards. There were no blasting woofers in cars. There were fewer cars altogether. One of the loudest sounds was the occasional human voice of a tradesman hocking his wares from a small van or even from the handles of his pull cart. Knife sharpeners, rag collectors, metal collectors. Now I am bombarded through closed double-glazed windows by a constant flow of city rumble. Trucks, sound systems, helicopters, a parade of pedestrians sharing their phone conversation as they walk by my house. This noise goes unnoticed by my young neighbors who seem to think this is a quiet neighborhood.

If we were all conscious of how polluted our air is, perhaps action would be taken aggressively to fix it. If we were all prone to walk through our neighborhoods, rather than ride, perhaps we would all be aware of the unnecessary noise and litter we encounter. If we were all conscious of the high water marks at our nearest beaches, we would be outraged, not disappointed, at anyone who denies environmental crisis. If we were all conscious of the ravaging of our planet by the petrochemical industry, perhaps none of us would even consider buying a large gas-powered vehicle. 

But this is the age of mass unconsciousness. Too many human beings have turned to electronic technology to block consciousness of their surroundings. In poor, overpopulated countries, this is a natural fit, exploited by vendors of phones and headsets. In urban America, even Liberals will turn to watching video reports of war and global poverty rather than actually doing anything about either. How can any individual have an impact on the quality of life on the planet when that individual cannot even acknowledge the humanity of the stranger next to him/her on a subway car? If the young are inured to deteriorating human ecology, what is the hope for our human ecology in the future? 


Saturday, April 1, 2017

OLD FOOL


I found the house I am now residing in on April Fools' Day five years ago. Unlike today's dismal wintry weather, the sun shone brightly on flowering gardens that day. The real estate agent who was hosting the open house was tidying up in preparation to leave when I arrived. The house had as many flaws as pluses, but it spoke to me like the eyes of a scruffy puppy through the bars of an animal-shelter cage. I saw potential. When I called Peter and told him that I thought my seemingly endless search for a place had ended, he laughed and said, "I know. It's April Fool." 

Fooling people has become a regular methodology in our society. It is governed by liars and thieves. An oil company executive now determines our embassy policies and covert activities in the world. A climate-change denier runs the Environmental Protection Agency. A casino-hotel mogul is President. Our economy is firmly in the hands of scheisters on Wall Street, who own our most vocal Progressive politicians. No fooling.

I have been a fool. I foolishly allowed my parents to rule my life for far too long. This cost me an assured Ivy League education in favor of a continuation of a Roman Catholic education, which had its intellectual value but lacked the social provenance/confidence of an Ivy degree. I went to dental school post-grad to please those same parents, even though I knew in my heart that I would never be a dentist. I foolishly thought pleasing them would get them off my back. It was displeasing them that actually worked. They disowned me for the first time when I left dental school after one semester. They disowned me the second time a few months later when I came out to them as a gay man.

I learned to embrace the lessons that came from foolish failures. I had help from some worldlier peers and far worldlier older men whom I met along the way. I was lucky to become an adult gay man at a time when our subculture still valued the wisdom of older gay men. We didn't see them as trolls, today's dismissive framing of all old gay men by spoiled youth. My mentors ranged in age from 45 to 85. One ancient had been a silent film actor and bum boy to a German archduke. Others were CEO's and high ranking public servants. At high-tea soirees and between the sheets, I polished my formal heterosexual education with the healthy cynicism of their lessons. 

The faux-Progressives at Google have now apparently decided to prevent children, defined in different ways in different places, from viewing any gay content on YouTube. I don't mean pornography. I mean anything that makes references to homosexuality. Their censors are reportedly planning to restrict certain "unacceptable" political and social commentary as well. I wonder if they will protect children from gender reassignment information or anti-White racism. In other words, You Tube will become a propaganda tool for creating generations of brainwashed fools to come.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. This is old wisdom. However, it is based on the assumption that I have free access to the information necessary to avoid being fooled a second time. I feel so fortunate to have come along at a time when I was able to access information freely in libraries and on line. Future generations may have to fight hard for that access to truthful information. The door on the light of truth is closing rapidly. Once closed, the key to that door will be held by the 1% who rule. And they themselves may become fools by eventually believing the fabricated lies they foster to maintain their own power. This has happened in human history over and over again. 

Thursday, March 30, 2017

ACHIEVEMENT WINS RESPECT.


The current victim culture in the developed world is perhaps the least effective way of gaining progress with the issues of those who utilize it to shame or embarrass others to cede to their demands. Whiners are not activists. They are whiners. Whining is passive complaining. The emotional immaturity in current victim movements is stunning. Individual whining flips into mob outrage unpredictably. This is the behavior of children, not adults. The lack of sane leadership in these victim-oriented groups should inform the more intelligent to go elsewhere to contribute to society. 

I believe the current wave of anti-Trump outrage is fueled by a victim mentality among some groups in mass media and on campuses. Adjusting effectively to the Constitutional reality that Trump is POTUS requires some gumption. Living in the challenging world of conservatively led government requires smarts and mature resolve. I know. I lived through the Reagan administration while the AIDS epidemic blossomed around me. I worked with the mentally ill throughout the Reagan administration as it dismantled public (free) psychiatric centers (with long term residents) in favor of private prisons, soup kitchens and shelters. 

Casting any group in society as universally victimized is not a way to help that group ascend into public recognition and respect. The disabled and mentally ill are often pointed to as victims in the same breath as minorities and the economically disadvantaged. This is the height of hypocrisy in a wealthy country which has withdrawn free and accessible medical care for the disabled and mentally ill, who deserve both acceptance and accommodation because they are in need of them. They are indeed the victims of life's precariousness and heartless public abandonment in the USA.

Systematically disadvantaged minorities who are healthy, however, should not be simply accepted or accommodated like disabled people. They should be aided in their ability to achieve equality and prosperity. Achievement, not whining, yields respect and cooperation. Respect and cooperation outweigh acceptance and accommodation, because respect and cooperation form a solid foundation for propagating advancement. Unearned acceptance is tokenism. Those who are accommodated without skill or incentive eventually fail. Their failure simply enforces negative stereotypes of their perceived group identities.
  
What do I mean by achievement? I simply mean hard work at any socially worthwhile endeavor within the law. Achievement can mean keeping up a subsidized rental property while contributing time and effort to improving your community if you are poor. Achievement can be raising your children to be well-mannered, well-groomed and literate. Achievement can mean being a happy, unmarried and childless woman. Achievement can be growing up in a rough neighborhood and still managing to get an education which can lead to honest employment. Achievement can mean staying away from the drug culture by getting involved in an alternative culture in the same neighborhood. Achievement can mean adopting institutionalized children. Achievement can mean acknowledging a fundamental personal difference, learning self-respect and devising functional ways to exist in the world. Achievement might mean not having children to avoid passing on identified genetic illness. These achievements are not out of the reach of any healthy person who chooses to pursue them. 

We have had two generations of emotionally overindulged children in the USA. Many have been raised on an addictive form of acceptance and accommodation. They have been taught to believe that losers are winners. They have been told that they have an innate wisdom, despite their actual competence. They have not been taught that "No." means "No.". They have not been taught respectful regard for legitimate authority and mature wisdom. They have been subsidized and sometimes enabled in dysfunction by helicopter parents.

Is it any wonder that they readily identify with law-breakers over law-enforcers? Is it any wonder that they have no skeptical judgment of social behaviors in themselves or others? Is it any wonder that they see acceptance and accommodation despite their own disrespectful behaviors as their unquestionable right?  And is it any wonder that whining, mixed with gang tantrums, comes so readily to them when that acceptance or accommodation is denied by rational human beings?  

Sunday, March 26, 2017

ENOUGH WITH THE NAZIS ALREADY.


This morning, after kill-switching the BBC World Service with disgust at the level of its propagandizing, I tried to listen to Scott Simon on NPR's Saturday Morning Edition. I've been listening to Scott Simon for decades. However, in recent years I have listened much less. Why? Well, something happened to Scott and to me along the way. 

Simon used to be a quick-witted punster whose glib reactions to the news were refreshingly spontaneous. I could perceive an independent mind behind his broadcasting persona. I noticed a difference after he became a father. He began telling me ad nauseam that he was a father, for one thing. He went all puppies and kittens for some years. His edge blunted, then turned to cotton wool.

This morning, Scott Simon committed the unpardonable journalistic sin, in my view. He hosted an author of an apologist book about Germans and their Nazi past. This author, granddaughter of a German immigrant, should be congratulated on her timing. And I do not mean that as a compliment necessarily. Simon coaxed and led his witness like an ambulance chaser in front of a sleepy jury. He gradually drew from her a limp insinuation that these political times are somewhat reminiscent of 1930's Germany. I turned the dial to my classical music station. I was hoping they would play Beethoven or Wagner as antidote. Instead I was soothed by classical Spanish guitar.

The USA is not closely analogous to 1930's Germany. If you think it is, I recommend you read more about post-WW-I Germany and politics in general. And I recommend you use that knowledge to grow up a bit by honing your skepticism, if not also your active participation in the electoral process.

I do not dismiss valid Nazi analogies. One of my two grandmothers was the descendant of German (Bavarian) Jews. As a gay man, I have skin in the Nazi-vigilance game. Gay rights and gay culture in the developed world were set back 100 years by the Nazi persecution of organized Leftist homosexuals of the Weimar Republic. Homosexual academics and political leaders were purged after the rise of Hitler. Many gay men died in labor camps, a fact which is often contested (denied?) by those with vested interests in Holocaust exploitation for religious, social and political reasons. As a gay man today, I see the bulk of Nazi-wannabes in ANTIFA mobs and cadres of transgender-obsessed pawns of demented college professors. 

Simon's insinuative leading of his radio guest smacked of the current Progressive Left media's lockstep propaganda against the Trump presidency. I suggest they look elsewhere for Nazi sympathizers. For example, George Soros, a major Jewish-born patron of the Progressive Left, worked for the Nazi regime in Hungary in his youth. His revelation of this on U.S. broadcast television in the 1990's came without the hint of remorse from him or reaction from others. The Progressive Left might also look to the Jewish Rothschilds, owners of the Bank of England. Their forebears actually funded the Third Reich. Finally, one might look more closely at Angela Merkel, whose father, Horst Kasner, was a troop leader of Hitler Youth in high school. Perhaps Nazi-guilt, combined with her Bilderberg-Group credentials, has a little something to do with Saint Angela's politics. 

I think dredging up the specter of Nazi Germany belies anyone's ignorance of the dynamics of European history in the 19th and 20th centuries. The same airheads who gush over Queen Elizabeth and her offspring overlook the fact that their ancestors were entirely responsible for WW I. They ignore the support of Hitler by King Edward VIII, who was forced to abdicate but remained a popular royalist figure. Their fans ignore the fact that British royals live an exalted lifestyle on the backs of millions of dead soldiers and Jews due to their alliance with the Rothschilds' Bank of England. And they ignore the fact that the economic and social devastation of WW I by these bankers was largely responsible for the rise of National Socialism in Germany, alongside the utter incompetence of Left-Liberal leadership in the Weimar Republic. 

Trump is an elected POTUS. His conflict with Congress and the US courts is a healthy sign of the Constitutional process of governance. He is not a fascist. The fascists in our midst are those so-called Progressives who would censor dissent from non-Progressives because they are angry that Hillary Clinton did not win. Their fantasies about how this nation would be significantly different under Clinton are just that ... fantasies, bordering on delusion. 

Many of those howling "Nazi" at Trump today have been smugly silent during 16 Obama-Bush years of American invasions abroad which have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, mostly Muslim, and displaced millions more. They cheered our invading and internationally destabilizing military. They thanked soldiers in these invasions and occupations for their service. Who among us are more likely to resemble the crowds who cheered on Hitler as he invaded Poland and Czechoslovakia? I suggest we all stop pointing and complaining. This country and our entire planet are falling apart on a purely physical level. All this political wrangling is distraction from real hard work that needs to be done, while it might still make a difference in the fate of the human species. 

Friday, March 24, 2017

IT'S COMPLICATED.


Human life is complicated by our own awareness of it. Our own propensity to evolve quickly as a species in response to environmental influences is also our potential downfall. Our evolution as a species has gotten us into the polluted and overpopulated mess we find ourselves in today. This may lead to a major, more intentional, change in our evolution as a species. I am sure some elite power-brokers have their ideas on that, like the elimination of Euro-American culture in favor of a more manageable and chaotic multiculturalism. Dividing and conquering is harder when a population has a solid cultural identity and uniform language for easy communication. But what then? I shudder to think of where that mentality leads. 

7+ billion other people make things more complicated. For example, transgender issues may directly effect less than 1% of the human population, but that is now around 70 million people. Is there any wonder that their voices are being heard? The confusion caused by radical religions is amplified in the same way, by sheer numbers. A "minority" with such large numbers cannot be considered a shivering handful of helpless victims. The onus falls back on them to organize their own numbers to support themselves by developing better coping strategies. Crying wolf at every turn is simply counterproductive. 

Human consciousness is also complicated. There's what you think you think. There's what you actually act out based on what you really think. There's what you want to think, based on nothing evident in the reality around you. Hell, few of us have any idea of what we truly look like or sound like to others, despite all our video and audio technology. Control of our reality through mind or myth is simply an illusion, easily disrupted by events.

Much of what I do in my life is an attempt to make my own life less complicated. I wish I could say that the world around me cooperates. It does not. 

Life as a modern human in a developed country is measurably easier as compared to developing countries or the past in developed countries. The availability of machines for just about every domestic chore from robotic vacuum cleaners to computerized dishwashers has reduced physical labor to the point that obesity has replaced the chore-related accident as a public health nightmare. This relief of physical stress has been accompanied by the increased stress of environmental degradation caused by our sheer numbers and our use of space and resources. We have become inured to the stress because it has so permeated our urban lives. 

Stress ignored is more lethal than stress recognized. Three peers of mine have recently had strokes. These are people whose lives are fairly typical in today's urban environments. All three are careful about their diet and exercise requirements. All three were relatively healthy prior to their cerebral vascular accidents. So why would they suddenly suffer from a condition related to a peak in high blood pressure in their 60's? Part of that answer, I am convinced, is the baseline stress of modern life.

I am not surprised by the rise in cults of victim identity here in the USA. When the environment has become too complicated around you for you to make a dent in improving it, increased stress is inevitable. Your impotence in the face of this environmental onslaught can easily be perceived as persecution, consciously or subconsciously. This bubbling feeling of impotence can fuel many things from ulcers to depression to rage attacks to screaming nonsense in a silly pink hat. Repressed feelings of impotence can spawn violence if sparked by the wrong messianic message. There is evidence throughout history of mobilization of this sense of mass victim identity for evil.

My own experience of impotence, real and imagined, has been assuaged by meditation, reflection and action. First, I must accept the simple fact that there are 7+ billion other people on the planet. Too many people, of course, but that's where we are. If I were a fertile young woman, I might take that into consideration when assessing my own stress and life plans. Rather than railing against men and expecting 'the patriarchy' to make my life better, I might consider not having children as an option. That would be one way to reduce the complication and stress in life overall. It would also be a worthy sacrifice for those to come.

I am an old man, older by virtue of being chronically ill. I have made my life uncomplicated in as many ways as I can without unnecessarily increasing my stress, but age itself will complicate it inevitably until I finally die. I am not a victim of aging. That mindset, despite being exploited commercially in thousands of ways by capitalism, is absolutely ridiculous. Aging is as much a part of the human experience as fucking. However, fucking feels better. And that quest to feel better is perhaps the most complicating human flaw of all. 

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

THE RUSSIANS?


The U.S. Congress dithers in public over Russophobia. It's a safer gambit than holding public meetings on what people would like from government's intervention in health care. I laughed quietly yesterday when I came across a biography of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the stacks of a public library. It was just a few shelves away from Mao's biographies. I mused that they were both better summarized in print than in the flesh.

All this nonsense about spying is simply public theater. It is so old. It's older than Mata Hari. It is a ploy of governing elites to maintain the illusion of public choice of political systems. There are corporate equivalents in this age of corporate domination. Apple vs Windows. Android vs Apple. 

I hold the dubious distinction of being old enough to have been subjected to sheltering drills during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Despite Nikita Khrushchev's unseemly resemblance to my maternal grandmother, who had the most nuclear temper in my little world, I doubted the sincerity of the whole business. This was confirmed by my father when he was enlisted from our local police department to become Civil Defense Director for our city of 40,000 inhabitants. He was disgusted by the corruption he witnessed from inside that government propaganda program (not unlike today's Department of Homeland Security). So disgusted that he fended off several future solicitations to run for public office. He quickly returned to police work. 

If you doubt that the current posturing of anti-Russian politicians is simply a distraction from the dismantling of health entitlements and the obvious alienation of the common citizen from the Democratic Party, I encourage you to consider that Russia is perhaps the single most powerful developed country (in military and natural resource terms) which has not submitted to the globalist ideals of the Bilderberg mafia which attempts to rule through Brussels and the United Nations currently. The 2016 Presidential election has shaken its grip in the U.S. just when they had Canada and Mexico wrapped up as part of creating a North American Union, similar to the E.U.. Obama was their man. Trump is not. He is calling them out. And out they come. 

And they are coming out swinging. Pseudo-Democrats, like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, are livid. You can see their outraged confusion whenever they speak against the Trump presidency. Hillary Clinton was the Bilderberg candidate, groomed and chosen decades ago to succeed her husband eventually. The George Bushes were in their pocket as well. This thirty-year project, furthered by Cheney and Greenspan starting in the Reagan administration, had suddenly met popular resistance by the masses, the "deplorables" in Clinton's own words. The banner slogans of "Islamophobia", "Xenophobia" and "Racism" had not scared them off. Like the Brits who voted for Brexit, these victims of globalist manipulation by co-opted banks and politicians have stood up straight and said a resounding "No!". The look on Merkel's face during her recent state visit to Washington reflected the weariness and disgruntlement of the frustrated global elite. 

The death of David Rockefeller, one of the Bilderberg founders along with the Rothschilds and the Dutch royals, has most likely shaken the security of the globalists' agenda to expropriate the wealth of Northern Europe and the United States even further. Trump's 'Make America Great Again' strikes at the globalist sell-off of major American infrastructure projects and utilities to foreign-owned entities. 

Here in Boston, for example, our commuter rail system, a publicly constructed and subsidized transit system, is now operated by a French corporation. Other projects like the Trans-Texas Corridor, a Spanish-corporate scheme to possibly use American interstates, built by U.S. taxpayers, to collect tolls to fund political unification of North America, was defeated by the Texas legislature in 2011 after mass protests against it. Despite corporate and nationally funded media's attempts to dismiss any public awareness of globalist schemes as conspiracy theories, a significant percentage of the U.S. and British population have risen against those schemes through democratic means. 

Tapping fear of Russia is just silly. It displays the narcissism of Washington. It also reveals its shameless contempt for the U.S. population, which it has overtly deprived of decent public education and decent public health care for decades in an attempt to subjugate and plunder.  The lack of any straight answers from FBI and CIA officials makes the whole shadow play even more ridiculous. Putin must be having a good laugh. He couldn't have done more damage to Washington's credibility than what they are accomplishing themselves by trying to make him the super villain in their lame comic-book drama. 

Friday, March 17, 2017

ISNESS

Medicine Buddha

I'm into isness (IS'-ness) more than business. What is isness? It depends. I will digress and then return to the business of isness, which is neither somber nor frivolous. 

I fortunately pursued a Jesuit education when I was twelve. My parents were astounded. I was a shy kid, but had good grades in my nun-staffed Catholic elementary. One of the more benign women in black had pointed me in the direction of the Jesuits, who had a prep school on the other side of Boston. I managed to contact the school and apply to take the rigorous entrance exam. My parents reluctantly assisted with transportation and fees. They stated their preference for a local Catholic school in a neighboring working-class city. My working-class Catholic elementary education got me admitted into Boston College High School's lowest entry homeroom, tenth out of ten, Class J.

This is a long way to my point. I did eventually have seven years of Jesuit education, back in the day when it was actually education by Jesuits. Now, like Mr. Trump, the Jesuits have sold their brand to their old schools which are staffed predominantly by non-Jesuits. When Jesuits structured education, they founded it on theology, philosophy, logic and European history. Then a student was encouraged to move on to Classics (Arts/Humanities), Math-Science or Business. I chose Math-Science. 

My basic education in theology and philosophy brought me to independent study of Eastern (Asian) religions as a hobby while I continued in Science. I was also interested in the writings of Freud and Jung, especially in the context of Nietzsche's work. I began to see a progression of thought beyond the Christian-biased official history of Western civilization, which I had been thoroughly taught. 

When I began reading translations of Eastern sources, they spoke clearly to me. Bhavagad Gita, Upanishads and Dhammapada became my favorite sources for some time. I have simply opened them at random throughout the years since. I don't pretend to have any special insight into these texts. I am not a scholar. They have been useful to me in forming my own daily mental process. They speak a comforting language to me. 

Now back to isness. 

Reading Martin Buber's I and Thou in college started my quest to deconstruct metaphysical and philosophical writing in order to see if there was any practical merit in it. After reading sufficient long tomes on being and becoming, I realized that the writers were all grappling with a shadow in the dark, as was I. This didn't sit well with me at all. I am a minimalist at heart. Not rigidly so, like a religious Zen monk, mind you. I am willing to try on new things while maintaining loyalty to my own developed core practice and ethics. I believe this ongoing process fertilizes the soil of my mind, my consciousness. 

Isness came to that mind recently, when I was reflecting on meditation. Actually, isness came to me while I was meditating, to be honest. Isness is more fun than the overused being and becoming. I see isness as being consciously aware of having been, being and becoming all at once in the moment. It is the timeless consciousness so hard to enter and even harder to sustain. Perhaps this is the spark of enlightenment. I have experienced isness few times in my nearly seven decades of life. I will share one example.

One crisp November night in 1987 I was unable to sleep. I left my one-room cottage in Provincetown and walked deserted streets to the edge of town and beyond. I eventually reached Herring Cove without really thinking much about what I was doing or where I was going. It was a cloudless night. I looked above. There was The Universe. Stark and clear. A mosaic of tiny lights against infinite blackness. I realized in a stunning moment that I was propelled, flying, in the vastness of Space, far from the beach in soundless, breathless, effortless joy. My whole was that joy, without body or mind. 

I have no idea how long I was in that state, but I know it was the second profound psychological point in my life. Whenever times have gotten rough, I have tried to recall that particular experience, or its shadow in memory. It has sustained me, erased fear, brought me to a certain peace with earthly existence. It was my most intense experience of isness, though I have had others subsequently. And I do not believe it can be sealed in a can and marketed as religion or self-improvement. I believe that isness comes when fertile consciousness least expects it. All the chanting, fasting and praying to some deity will not bring it unless that fertile consciousness is open to simply being what it is in a special moment. 

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

HEALTH IS NOT A COMMODITY


Mr. Trump is arguably the most animated POTUS of my lifetime. I was taught at one time in my life that saying nothing was better than saying something negative about a person. That was my lame attempt to tone down my true estimation of the man in The Oval Office. 

Mr. Trump seems to think that fixing The Affordable Care Act is possible. As a retired registered nurse and very experienced consumer of health care by virtue of bad luck, I'd say he hasn't a bloody clue. The Affordable Care Act was broken when it was built. It continued to keep alive the notion that health is a commodity. This is delusional nonsense.

Health care, however, is a commodity when you refuse to give it to those who need it on an equitable and readily available basis. In other words, in America, you need to buy health care, no matter how desperately you need it. You must go through the humiliation when desperately ill of having someone question whether you are insured. Then, even if you are, you are forced to sign a contract saying you will be personally responsible for the bills if your insurance will not pay. Otherwise, they may well just not treat you, depending on how nasty the facility is, or they may just treat you badly. After all, how is a desperately ill person going to gather the strength to get a good litigation attorney or even submit a consumer complaint to a government body.

The other health care business model is like slumlords who collect huge government rental subsidies for housing the indigent. These health care providers treat anyone in an emergency room, as they must by law. Then the taxpayer ends up paying for those who cannot. These providers get an incentive for not promoting preventative health, follow up or health education. As long as they know the game, they collect. Big time. But the average taxpaying citizen hasn't a clue how this all happens and how expensive it is.  It's like waging war ... there is no referendum about it ... the government decides for us. 

But none of this makes health itself a commodity. You cannot actually provide health to anyone. A person must maintain his/her own health with whatever skills and tools are available. Some people will never have health, due to being brought into this world with genetic disorders which were entirely predictable by parents who were ignorant or willing to gamble with developing the life of another human being. Others will never have health because they contract diseases which cannot be cured. And others will never have health because of accidents or trauma sustained while engaging in violent activities, such as war. And others will never have health because they have neither money nor education. 

A core question that faces Mr. Trump and Congress preceded the lousy Obamacare placebo: Are we a nation which truly cares enough to provide health care to everyone who needs it within our borders? People in our government have been trying to avoid answering that question for decades.

The behavioral answer so far on both sides of the aisle and in The Oval Office has been a definite and resounding "No!" Congress, Mr. Obama and now Mr. Trump, it seems, do believe in caring for all the health insurance companies and medical centers within our borders. And most of them seem quite healthy already, since they are usually associated with other investment entities. Their CEO's are paid vast sums. Insurance companies hire thousands upon thousands of nurses and doctors to review claims and fend them off whenever possible. (I know this because I briefly was one.) Medical centers get reimbursed by insurance companies and government. They even have the audacity to run donation campaigns.besides. They too hire thousands nationally to submit claims and argue with the insurance company reviewers. Its a real bureaucratic wet dream...which makes both sides rich at the expense of sick people and taxpayers.

There is only one way to fix The Affordable Care Act: Abolishing it entirely. If Americans were not kept so stupid generally about health maintenance due to bad educational systems, they would be marching on Washington for universal health care as a civil right of U.S. residents. This march would not require pink hats or superstar lunatics. It would require the American population's health education by those who are most knowledgeable about health. But, wait! How can that happen when those same people work for pharmaceutical companies, medical centers and insurance companies? Heartless capitalism wins again. 

Friday, March 10, 2017

WHAT'S NOT HOMOPHOBIA

This mother has labeled her own child "transgender"
before that child has the brain capacity or adult sexual experiences to label him/her self. 
Questioning the mentality of this mother is not homophobic. 

I am becoming as sickened by the casual use of "homophobia" as I am by casual use of "Islamophobia" by the ideologically ignorant and those in media who indoctrinate them. "Homophobia", irrational fear of homosexuality, had its day in the sun as a useful and accurate tool in the fight against anti-homosexual discrimination and violence. It grew from the vast conversion of the mental health providers in the U.S. and Europe from frustrated purveyors of ineffectual and sadistic cures for homosexuality to supporters of mentally healthy gay men and lesbians, as that group became more visible and politically powerful  in society.

Some background might be helpful. I am in my late 60's. In grammar school, I was attacked on my way home from school by a gang of eight classmates, led by a mentally disturbed boy my age who perceived me as a sissy. They encircled me, tore my clothes, punched and kicked me. I got my punches and kicks in too. They retreated eventually, and I was never bothered again. I take some grim satisfaction that the gang leader later died young of alcoholism. Life wounds all heels. 

I live with a man who is also in his late 60's. In 1990, while eating ice cream with his male lover in Boston's South End on a hot summer evening, he and his lover were attacked by an adolescent gang of several Black-Latino residents from a nearby city housing project. They were both nearly stabbed to death with dozens of wounds, as well as being punched and kicked unconscious. Their neighbors, out on stoops in the heat, simply watched. None would give a statement to the police. And the police asked the victims when they came out of coma what they had done to provoke the attack. The Boston Police failed to find even one suspect for this horrendous attack. 

These are two cases of anti-homosexual violence which could be related correctly to the fear-hatred which is called "homophobia". One of the markers of true "homophobia" is its general social acceptability, even among those who know homosexuals they like or even love. It is irrational. Imagine if the these same stories above had been placed in a context of anti-Semitism when they happened. 

Today's LGBTQ+ mob (from whom I dissociate myself as a gay man) have taken the word "homophobia" as a weapon against anyone who expresses any opinion, no matter how scientific or considered, which diverges from their goose-step political line. I believe the political elite of that mob foster this kind of fascistic blind loyalty and enforcement of their ideology to keep themselves in six-digit Washington jobs. Every elite needs an enemy against whom to mobilize its followers against threats to its validity. American-European corporate capitalists need "The Russians", for example.

Since "homophobia" refers to a senseless fear-hatred of homosexuality, a  sizable segment of the LGBTQ+ mob cannot experience "homophobia" when getting negative responses to their behaviors or appearance. Why is that?  Most transgender activists demand that their condition not be associated with homosexuality. They strongly differentiate between sexuality and gender. So, how can they be subject to "homophobia"? And, logically, how can they be considered part of a gay (homosexual) rights movement?  "Transphobia", another term of dubious merit today, should be better defined by those who throw it about. It should not be considered relevant to a gay (homosexual) rights cause.

I do not maintain that senseless fear-hatred of homosexuals has evaporated. To the contrary, I feel that hatred of homosexuals has rebounded, largely due to their association with ideologies which are either irrelevant to homosexuality or directly a threat to homosexuals, like religious ideologies. A blind complacency in the gay and lesbian population has allowed this to happen by enabling through unquestioning financial support organizations like Human Rights Campaign and local Pride non-profits who have surrendered to religious, transgender, queer/questioning(?) and bisexual subgroups within. The bullied have now become bullies in LGBTQ+ contexts. They have hijacked the gay rights movement. 

What's not homophobia? It is not homophobic to resent a mob which tries to silence an intelligent and articulate opinion about anything. It is not homophobic to resist mind and speech control of any kind. It is not homophobic to question the sanity or medical ethics of castrations and mastectomies, performed on disturbed adolescents with or without the permission of their parents. It is not homophobic to react negatively to a screaming mob of people who dress and act like rejects from a circus audition while demanding to be taken seriously. It is not homophobic to defend homosexuals in the face of murderous religious ideologies, such as fundamentalist Islam, Judaism or Christianity. For example, it is not homophobic to protest the defense of Islam by misguided LGBTQ+ activists. It is not homophobic to suggest that you are not a homosexual unless you naturally desire and prefer to have sexual intercourse with a person of  your same gender. 

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

PRINCIPLES VS ABSOLUTES


The term "operating principle" (similar to Latin's modus operandi) implies movement. This is the crucial difference between having principles and following absolutes. Principles are evolving, living processes. Absolutes are prescribed commands or rules to be followed as devised and handed down. This may explain why so many religious people are sadly unprincipled. 

Principles are not given or handed down from above. To have principles, a person must actively commit to some consciously chosen standards of thought and behavior. This takes education and work. Yesterday's principle can easily turn into stale stubbornness for lack of its being nourished by fresh information and thoughtful challenges. 

The two great commandments of the Biblical Christ illustrate the difference between religion and principles. I have always been impressed with these as the symbol of the Christian revolution against Old Testament absolutism. The first cardinal directive from that Christ reinforces Old Testament monotheism, the foundation of Jewish identity: Love the Lord, your God, above all else. However, the second is revolutionary: Love your neighbor as you love yourself. This second commandment stabs at the heart of a hierarchic, absolutist society, based on hereditary provenance and economic status. It is a principle by which to live daily life outside the temple of absolutes. Its elevation to equal monotheism by the Biblical Christ is perhaps the best thing in all Christendom because it is an exhortation to nonviolence and compassion simply on the basis of shared humanity. 

Human beings appear to naturally prefer absolute directives over individual principles. Two thousand years after this suggestion of principled living by the supposed icon of morality in The West, human beings are still living selfishly and greedily while justifying that behavior through hollow theology, cleverly devised over centuries to absolve disregard for Christianity's basic message. Even secularists are slowly sliding back into those shadows of conformist denial of principles in favor of popularity and acceptance. Top-down economics simply reflect top-down morality, practiced by the educated elite to control/exploit the uneducated masses. This isn't Marxism. This is simply an observation of modern life.

Principles are integral to science. The scientific method is based on principled behavior, based on agreed conditions for research, experimentation and reporting within disciplines. What some scientists do with their scientific discoveries may be totally unprincipled. This usually entails using their discoveries for profit or politics. I back this up by pointing out that the Soviet Union, a dysfunctional mess economically and politically, was far more scientific than The West in its time. The quarantining of Russia by Western capitalists has deprived and still does deprive The West easy access to some of the world's great scientific minds.

Dogmatic ideologies, based in absolutes, are meant to bend individual principles to a common purpose, usually involving violence and power historically. For example, the Biblical message of the Christ of Christians is explicitly nonviolent and anti-capitalist. The Christian West is greedily capitalist and violent by political will. Capitalism is rapidly evolving toward totalitarian absolute as the global economic model. No wonder truly Christian Vatican pronouncements are seldom given much air time, as opposed to the papal announcements which support globalist-capitalist politics. 

Non-religious Buddhism, "Source Buddhism", accessed by individual reading and practice based on that reading, is perhaps the most credible principled ideology alive in today's world. It is amazingly atheistic and non-dogmatic for its time. It speaks to the individual without any prescribed reliance on rabbi, priest or imam. Its closest thing to an absolute is this: "Unintentional human life in a material world is suffering." And this has been substantiated scientifically thousands of years later. We are all inevitably doomed to decay and death, but we know mental health and physical well being are achievable through mindful living in practice. 

Developing principles through any chosen means is the process of maturing as an open and educated human being. Learning about our ancient forebears' prescriptions for behavior is helpful as long as it is not twisted into a method for subjugating minds to some group-think purpose. Studying religions, without falling prey to their seductive laziness of mind, is a good start for becoming a person of principles. Dawdling there, however, is counterproductive and corrupting.  Education without application is selfish, in my opinion. "Do as I say, not as I do." is the height of hypocritical lack of principles. This is the disease that comes with religious fundamentalism of any kind. 

Whether human beings will turn from their current course toward absolutism (and away from individual principles) is most likely the test of whether we grow as a species or devise our own decline. The seemingly unavoidable pressures of mindless capitalism, overpopulation and environmental decline may simply push most humans into the waiting arms of those who wish to dictate and control. This may be an inherent flaw of our species, part of a an evolutionary balance. It may also be an unnecessary waste of an exceptional evolutionary development, the human brain, on this once-beautiful and very rare planet. 

Friday, March 3, 2017

IT'S JUST JUSTO.




I have shared this wonderful video from RT International's documentary collection on YouTube. It profiles the life of a Spanish man, named Justo, who has been building a cathedral in his small Spanish hometown for about 50 years. Justo has had no formal architectural or engineering training. He is designing and building the cathedral as he goes along. The town's people call it "Garbage Cathedral".

Justo tried to belong to a local monastery in his youth, but was ejected. Given the fact that he was then the potential heir of a family fortune in real estate and agriculture, I have to speculate that his behavior was too crazy for the other monks to tolerate. They used the excuse that he had been diagnosed with tuberculosis. His longevity seems to provide evidence that he was not that severely ill.

After a short time in Madrid, Justo returned to his village and worked on his parents' land. He had hoped to find a wife in Madrid, but says that he could find no woman prettier than the Blessed Virgin Mary. So, he vowed celibacy and resolved to build his cathedral. He inherited his parents' property. He has used the proceeds from selling it off to finance his project.

The story of lovably eccentric Justo says so much about Roman Catholic indoctrination's hold on Spanish life. The entrenched sanctification of family by religion is shown as empty. Justo inherited despite his impaired mental capacity. His mismanagement of his family's wealth had serious impact on the people of the community. Subsequently, his three nephews, who had profited from Justo's management of his estate by extracting money  and land from him in exchange for some grudging labor at the cathedral site, tried to undermine his efforts by beating up Justo's devoted assistant, a man who sold his own house to help Justo pay off some debts. 

Money, family, religion ... a troubling triad, exposed beautifully in this short documentary. I strongly recommend it.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS, I MISS YOU.



Last December 11th was the fifth anniversary of a tremendous loss to those who prized reasoned argument, laced with sardonic wit, wrapped in a husky British accent. Christopher Hitchens would be in his element today, as a staunch defender of free speech in the face of violent anti-speech activism among college students and religious fanatics.

I thought of Christopher Sunday morning after getting annoyed adjacent to Boston Common, where a doe-eyed boy approached me with a clipboard and asked, "Would you like to abolish hate?" I answered in the negative, since I believe hate is sometimes a natural response to being treated hatefully. What I do with that hate is more important than the emotion itself. I asked him whether his initiative, whatever it may have been, would try to interfere with free speech and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. He immediately said, "No." Then he told me how the petitioners would like to pass a law against hate speech. Duh, I thought silently.

I moved on from there. I don't dally with idiots, especially idiots being paid by the likes of George Soros to corrupt the American Constitution. Yes, billionaire George Soros, who profited as an adolescent from the confiscation of the property of Jewish Hungarians, deported to death camps. Why should I look to the likes of George (nee Schwartz) Soros and his paid minions for the moral high ground, much less support their causes? That is the kind of rational thinking that  Hitchens verbalized so eloquently with the detachment of a Zen master in his later years.

Today, after watching the video of the 2010 debate above, I realized how badly discourse has slipped in America to name-calling and Twitter niddling,  Now in 2017 the energetic secularism which Hitchens represented so well has become diluted by those who have caved to acceptance in lieu of principle. They whine that Hitchens and others who strongly expressed their honest rational ideas are/were "too strident" or "too harsh". Yet, these same compromising secularists will rally around the flags of those who are fascistic in their demands for special treatments as victims. They will participate in banning speakers from universities. They will collude with those who strongly adhere to ideologies which are violent, misogynist and homophobic in the name of interfaith cooperation. 

Give me Hitchens and those like him. They will challenge and inspire. They will infuriate and mobilize disagreement against themselves with enthusiasm. They are forgers of nonviolent independent thought, not dictators of oppressive conformist stupidity.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

THE "31 GENDERS" OF LIBERAL FASCISM


Bill De Blasio, the current mayor of New York City, has obviously outdone the closeted Wizard of Oz. He has flown way over the LGBTQ+infinity rainbow to Absurdistan. He has stamped his signature to a declaration of 31 distinct genders in this bizarre pamphlet outlining New York City "law", which will hopefully be challenged and found unconstitutional. My sincere hope is that Marty Walsh, Boston's own ultra-Liberal mayor, doesn't catch this disease before the Supreme Court upholds the First Amendment against this genre of threat once again. Liberals used to like the First Amendment. What happened?

I am considering dressing up in a banana suit. I will declare myself trans-species. I will insist that people address me as "Top Banana", "Your Topness", "Your Fruitiness", I will file a hate-crime complaint against anyone who tells banana jokes in my hearing, makes monkey references, threatens to cut me up for cereal, offers to peel me, or refers to my yellow-ness in anything but complimentary terms. I will demand the respect and governmental protection due to any birth-human who decides to become a fruit or vegetable (except radishes, because they give me gas). 

I suppose genetic testing may be used to determine whether or not I am actually a banana. But I will persist. I will not let science stand in the way of my apparent dementia. I will shame and terrorize all those who persist in maintaining any measure of normalcy, based in statistics and science. How dare they? I know they will be freaked out by my obviously insane persistence. This gives me power. 

We have now learned that fascism isn't what we thought it was. Yes, it is the gang mentality of the brutal few who try to inflict their ideology on the masses through intimidation and media manipulation. But it isn't associated necessarily with straight-backed soldiers in uniform doing the goose step.

The new Liberal fascism is now associated with college women who dress like prostitutes and say, "Don't touch me." and "Don't look at me." It is now associated with self-victimizing women in burkas who defend genital mutilation as culturally appropriate. It is now associated with men who hate themselves so much that they have themselves castrated. It is now associated with women who hate themselves so much they have total mastectomies. And, most sadly, it is now associated with confused gay men and lesbian women who have embraced all these causes as sacrosanct at the expense of their own dignity and sub-cultural legacy. 

Saturday, February 25, 2017

WHY THE HYSTERIA?


An example of  an hysterical idealist when faced with rationality.

I say this repeatedly, but some people seem to miss it every time. I did not vote for Donald Trump. And, I resent being blamed for Hillary Clinton's defeat by her bourgeois harpies because I voted for the other female candidate and her African-American running mate. Stick that in your Liberal pipe and smoke it. Talk about hysteria! Many wailing Liberals probably didn't even realize that another woman and an African-American on The Left were running in the presidential race. They were so obsessed with winning that they (oops) forgot about their much touted principles: Things like peace, environmentalism, freedom of speech. 

YouTube hosts a huge confederacy of dunces, mixed in with some amazingly intelligent people. If you wish to see a full spectrum of human mental function and dysfunction, browse around. Don't just go with the algorithm-generated recommendations. That algorithmic indoctrination  is contributing to the mass insanity around politics in this country right now. If you follow the algorithms, you can be wound up in a cocoon of one-sided propaganda on any issue that you wish to explore. Unless you regularly buck against the algorithms with a manual search occasionally, your mind can get really twisted. You'll end up acting and thinking like PewDiePie. Heavens forfend! One of him is more than enough. 

Back to the Trump hysteria. CNN and the New York Times have had their feelings hurt. Boo hoo. I get it. It isn't enough that they are adulated by the Liberal elite. Bill Maher has a new punching bag. After George W. Bush, his previous mockery gold mine, Bill had to tone it down for eight years, despite his previous incarnation in a show called Politically Incorrect. I can understand his over-the-top riffing on The Donald. I understand the outrage of middle-class and middle-aged coastal women who are especially traumatized. Not only did they experience rejection of pant-suited Hillary vicariously, but they were confronted with the simple fact that they are a dying breed, in part due to the policies of the Democrats and their seduction by centrist economics. I get that too.

What I don't get is the absolute bat-shit-crazy rhetoric among some allegedly educated young Americans. If I hear comparisons between Trump and Hitler for eight years, I may start to throw things. This is so absurd that it qualifies at this point in time as paranoia. Like it or not, Donald Trump is a constitutionally valid president who is participating in a constitutionally valid government of a constitutional republic. If he stops being that, the constitutionally valid impeachment process will kick in. Believe me, I lived through the election of 2000. The lesson I learned is simple: Constitutional republics are not always just, peaceful or responsive to all the electorate. I myself would prefer a technologically enhanced social democracy. Think of Estonia as trying to approach that ideal.

The current state of Liberal hysteria is like scratching a mosquito bite. It simply makes it itch more and swell more. It does not alter the course of your body's absorption of the toxins. In fact, it may impede it. Meanwhile, it just makes it look worse than it is. Or it causes an infection of the self-inflicted scratches, which can turn into septicemia and kill you. Solution: Stop scratching, dab some vinegar on it and be patient. It will go away. Time heals all wounds and wounds all heels. 

I do not think the media are invested in helping. In fact, this hysteria is good business for them on two levels. They are owned by globalists (anti-nationalists) who will get richer than they already are off the ads they can sell on pages laced with venom and fear-mongering. And, the owners can also further their agenda of dissembling any trace of populist input into government so they can eventually rule through parliaments like the EU Parliament and the United Nations. These "parliaments" are actually luxurious clubs for oligarch-sponsored professional politicians. They are neither democratic nor egalitarian. Our own U.S. Congress is morphing into a similar body. The House of Representatives, once the bulwark against elitist rule, is rapidly being filled with career politicians who are getting rich and living large in their positions. 

Hysteria is useless. Those of you who are screaming madly have the same opportunity to engage with the electoral system as the smug Trumpets. Many of you, it seems, supported Bernie Sanders. My own prejudices make me most sympathetic to your outrage. After all, you were stabbed in the back by Hillary's trolls in the Democratic Party and also by Bernie himself who eventually rolled over and supported Hillary. But you were all more the fools for believing that Sanders, a career politician, would do anything else. Look at what Elizabeth Warren is turning into. 

If you are young and energetic, the cure for your hysteria is simple. Get off your butt, put your phone down and get to a headquarters of a politician in your federal representation district whose principles seem palatable to you. Do not buy a black outfit and waste your energy studying methods for flushing tear gas or pepper spray from your eyes. Antifa may seem cool or chic, but it will not effect the change you desire. It will simply keep the counterproductive cycle revving up. If you like to march and draw things on placards, do so peacefully and openly with your head held high. Nothing wrong with that. And, you may find that you are less hysterical and more motivated to do something constructive instead of just getting more hysterical or straining your voice to no avail. 

Thursday, February 23, 2017

NEW OLD BUBBLE


News comes from the elite of the Democratic Party. A raging battle rages over the corpse of the party's once laudable mission. Special interests have replaced the party's concern for Average Joe and Jane in the U.S.A..

The blatant corruption of Hillary Clinton and Debbie Wasserman Schultz in the last election when they colluded to torpedo Bernie Sanders speaks volumes about the Democratic Party elite. The putting up of a militaristic hawk for POTUS who took millions from the global sponsor of Islamic terrorism totally eroded any posture of moral superiority in the DNC. Given that corruption of our national electoral process by the Saudi Arabians, not the Russians, is there any question why Keith Ellison, one of two Muslims in Congress, is in the top tier of candidates to lead that party going forward?

The Democrats are the party of the Regressive Left, the nanny brigade, the welfare-state lovers, who wish to collect from it but not pay into it by actually working for a living. "Sure!" they yell, "Bring in everyone who shows up at a border or an airport! How dare you vet people? How dare you enforce the law on our streets? How dare you practice skeptical judgment on anything?" These welfare enthusiasts are not limited to housing projects. They thrive on Wall Street as well. The Democrats became the party of white-collar welfare in the last eight years of a Democratic administration.

The specter of the Bilderberg globalists, personified by George Soros, hangs over the Democrats in the opened eyes of the working class and dying middle class. The obsession of Democrats with sanctuary cities, pro-Islamic rhetoric, undermining the rule of law by promoting every narcissistic cry of victimhood, currying favor with Hollywood, and demonizing anyone who stands up for more traditional American values, like free speech, has killed its appeal with American workers, the people who get up every morning and get on with it. Yes, those people are the taxpayers who feel ripped off and condescended to by the federal, state and local governments they pay for. 

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

STOP STIGMATIZING GAY MEN.


The recent uproar in payback media against Milo Yiannopoulos, the gay provocateur and free-speech advocate, comes unsurprisingly after Milo's national cable-TV appearance on Bill Maher's Real Time show on HBO. I have to congratulate Bill Maher for being true to his stated commitment to free speech and diversity of ideas. However, the same dark reactionary forces who would gladly undermine Bill Maher, if he were not a popular national voice of Liberals with a bully pulpit, have decided to single out a gay man who dresses and speaks provocatively in the abrasive tradition of Lenny Bruce.

An edited video of a stoner talk show from the internet was released by The Reagan Battalion, a Center-Right PAC which backed independent Evan McMullin for U.S. President in the last election. Evan McMullin is a former CIA operative, investment banker, a former Republican-Party consultant and Mormon, born in Utah. He is anti-gay-marriage and anti-choice. He has been vocal against Donald Trump after losing his own bid to become U.S. President without any previous elected government experience. In fact, he has proposed a popular movement to remove the elected President Trump from office. It is unclear to me how he plans to do this without sparking a populist revolution with himself at the head of some mob. Perhaps his tactic with Milo is a preview of how he plans to demean President Trump out of office. 

The spurious attack on Yiannopoulos' personal character with inference that he is a pedophile or pro-pedophilia is frankly reminiscent of McCarthyism, that peculiar Congressional madness of the 1950's in which Ronald Reagan himself reveled. McCarthy was homosexual, closeted, Roman Catholic and a Democrat. He vented his insane fear of Communism by victimizing U.S. citizens, many of them Jewish, who supported Leftist ideals. Perhaps Evan McMullin is a reincarnation of Joseph McCarthy who died in 1957.

I grew up with consciousness of my own homosexuality in working-class America of the 1950's and 1960's. My mother was a first-generation Russian-American. My father's mother was descended from a Jewish family which converted to Catholicism to avoid Prussian persecution in the 19th century. Listening daily to hatred of Russians, hatred of Jews and hatred of homosexuals in all aspects of media and society has shaped my view of the world. It certainly has given me radar to perceive a real creep when I see one. My radar goes off with a blast whenever I see Evan McMullin sanctimoniously railing against Donald Trump. I am fairly certain that time will tell his true story.

I have published some statistics above from the U.S. Department of Justice website. Why? The Reagan Battalion's obvious attempt to use ignorant prejudice against gay men to silence Milo Yiannopoulos is aimed at an age-old erroneous assumption among the ignorant that gay men are all sexual predators. I grew up around this ignorant prejudice.  

My decent, devoutly Catholic father, who blushed at the word "sex" and never used a word of profanity, warned me about homosexual predators in the first grade. He actually took me to a local alley and said, "If a man ever tries to pull you into an alley like this, never go with him. Run away. And never let a man take off your clothes." This conversation totally puzzled me at the time. A few years later, my father stopped our car in our city's shopping district. He pointed out a man walking along the sidewalk. "See that! Never talk to anyone like that!" Again, I had no clue what he was talking about. Later, when I was years older, I saw the man and realized he was a local hairdresser. 

In light of today's LGBTQ+ sensibilities, my father was paranoid. And his hateful indoctrination of his homosexual child could be considered child abuse. He was trying to teach me to be self-loathing, in other words. Luckily for me, other people in my childhood provided me with the antidote to this mental poison. 

The 2012 U.S. D.O.J. statistics at the top of this essay (click on it to enlarge) tell us something interesting. Of the 1,800,000 adolescents sexually abused in the U.S. in this sample, only 324,000 (18%) were boys. 1,440,000 (82%) were girls. In other words, heterosexual pedophilia is a far larger problem than gay-male pedophilia by the numbers of victims (4.4 times greater). But gay pedophilia remains a powerful red herring in politics and religion. It is a surefire method to demean or devalue an opponent ... just the inference that that gay male opponent 'supports' pedophilia is enough to gather sharks. Ask John Podesta, Dennis Hastert or Barney Frank.

(Note: The statistics cited are not broken down by declared sexual preference or gender of perpetrator. These variables would most likely increase the ratio of heterosexual-bisexual sex crimes against underage males vs. homosexual male sex crimes against underage males. In other words, even fewer cases may well be classified accurately as gay male pedophilia.)

I am 67 years old. I was never sexually approached by an adult homosexual male when I was a child. As an adult, I have never sexually approached anyone under legal age for sex. Yet I have endured the indignity of being told to stay away from the children of my own family members after I came out as a young gay man. I taught high school for two years in the early 1970's. I later saw one of my better students ten years later in a gay bar. He exclaimed, "Mr. Creeden, what are you doing here?" I laughed, but I also saw that his Catholic indoctrination had left its mark. 

I think Milo Yiannopoulos is a poor standard-bearer for most gay men by any measure. He is no more representative of all gay men than the loony self-loathing gay men who fawn over man-hating feminists and Muslims. That bunch are overly representative of us in gay politics and mainstream media. They are sell-outs to the globalist agenda. They do not realize how dispensable they will become when the global elite have managed to subvert nation-based democracy in favor of global totalitarian oligarchy. But, Milo Yiannopoulos does not deserve to be tarred and feathered with ancient prejudice against gay men which is founded in myth and sexual repression. I would see him openly debated and proven wrong in some of his views. That is the way to gain support in a truly civilized society.

Addendum, 02.21.2017: Milo Yiannopoulos held a press conference today. He apologized for offense to fellow pedophilia victims who may have been offended by his remarks in the released videos. He admitted to saying things off the cuff which were irresponsible. However, he asserted clearly that he had not and would never condone nor advocate for pedophiles. Frankly, as a gay man, I feel his apology more than satisfied any doubt that he was indeed misunderstood. Nonetheless, the fact still remains that the attempt at smearing his reputation was a deliberate political act, perpetrated by people who are not concerned for victims of pedophiles or the damage their act could cause to the general perception of gay men by the public. If Milo were a heterosexual celebrity in a similar circumstance, I suspect the mainstream press would have dealt with the story very differently, if at all.