Monday, November 17, 2008

Rethinking Education

Sir Ken Robinson is a smart guy. He has a view toward education that is shared by many smart people. Below is a video discussing limitations in ways in which we conceive of education. I hope it gets you thinking about what "smart" really is and that it gets you to others' smarts, though it may not take shape in the ways you've been taught to think of intelligence. Frankly, I can only imagine what greater torment Beethoven would have experienced had his worth been reduced to the absurtities of SATs or IQ.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Argentina Coming Full Circle

Folks, I know it is difficult to give a hoot about countries so far away, especially when the Cowboys have lost their quarterback. I know it is even more difficult when speaking upon far away countries involves the "f" word. That's right, finance.

Depending on whom you ask, the present situation is either socialism or fascism. The choice of words probably more reflects political affiliations than any substantive differences. We're witnessing a mass concentration of power, which is being rationalized as "for our own good."

The cases of Argentina and SE Asia are subjects that I like to visit with regularity because they are examples of what global finance has in store for us all. As Americans, you're right to ask what any of this has to do with you. Well, for all that good that America and global capital has been doing for (to) the world, as civilian-killing fighter hero John McCain proclaims, is now coming full circle. We are now about to get IMF-ed royally.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Cosmetic Politics

Here's an interesting clip, which incriminates the Florida electorate. The battle cry has be for us to vote. It doesn't matter if you know what you're voting for, just vote.



With regard to a candidate I can support, I want one who can do the following:

1) Withdrawal from and reparations for Iraq and Afghanistan
2) Revocation of the so-called Patriot Acts
3) Cessation of prison privatization and the so-called war on drugs.
4) The end of farm subsidies with a reallocation of money to fund green agriculture
5) Dismantling the so-called Department of Homeland Security.

Four of the five policies relate to the policing/military fetish that our country rationalizes as being necessary. If you get a chance to see a documentary out there called Fuel, then by all means see it. One of the most interesting things I learned from it is that President Carter reduced energy consumption in the US by 25% during his tenure. That's huge. Regardless of who assumes power, if we push for energy reform we'll have tremendous positive impact on our neighbors and the earth.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Popsicle Index

Catherine Austin-Fitts has a site called Solari.com. Here she explains the Popsicle Index.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Comrade Bush?

Here's the opening sentence from an article discussing S. America's response to the crisis.

CARACAS, Venezuela — They don't call him President Bush in Venezuela anymore. Now he's known as "Comrade."



Now that the US is rapidly nationalizing banks, it is a good time for us to reconsider the reasons why we despise leaders like Hugo Chavez, right? Chavez is the first self-identified indigenous leader of Venezuela. It appears that a significant part of the socialist wave taking place in S. America is informed by Indian pride and values, particularly in Bolivia but throughout the reason. Clearly Indian pride is a threat to peace, democracy, and all that stuff that we've been exporting to places like Vietnam, Iraq, Guatemala, and the Philippines for the past century.

You can read the rest of the article here.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ron Paul on Obama

Here's a little something for the keepers of the faith in the Democratic Party from presidential candidate Ron Paul. I think good Democrats should be concerned about what Senator Paul says here, because it's not very nice and asks for substance over symbolism.

Every smart person knows that at a time of crisis, we can't let substance get in the way of hope. Let's not let the facts about who Obama's largest contributors are get in the way of hoping for change; let's allow ourselves to feel good about voting for a black man, instead of asking the question of how it is a one-time black Senator could miraculously gets legitimacy by appearing on the cover of propaganda instruments like Time Magazine long before the race heated up.

The Rush Limbaugh types have been cracking fun at the messianic regard that Obama receives among his supporters. I detest Limbaugh. He's just another propaganda parrot to dupe alienated and disgruntled whites. Even though these types' solution is to seek refuge in the time-tested American tradition of racism, there's something to what they're saying. Obama supporters are content with "hoping" for "change," holding "faith" that somehow we will be "saved" (can you say born again) by one who by my best estimation has been "chosen" this country's true rulers, i.e., Goldman Sacs, et al.

Senator Paul comes from the ilk of disaffected whites, I know. Nonetheless, like Kuchinich, Nader, and Cynthia McKinney, he's actually telling the truth.


Monday, October 6, 2008

Money, Politics, and Forclosures

I'm posting a few links here that you may find informative. The first is an interview with Timothy Canova, law professor at Chapman U. here in So. Cal. This is an MP3 recording. Professor Canova's perspectives on the history of money are instructive here.

The second article I'll quote from and allow for you to decide whether it's worth exploring further.

The principal technique employed in the US is to get people so busy that they don't have time to think about anything, and it is important to remember that with one person, one vote, this doesn't have to be everyone, just the majority. Thus, both men and women are encouraged to work long hours and coerced into accepting work with virtually no vacation time, and a sizable proportion of their free time is eaten up by bureaucratic concerns, such as paying bills etc. With what little time they have left they are often too fatigued to do much else and end up doing something like watching a movie. The long working hours and lack of vacation time also mean more profits for the politicians' pals and associates in the business world. Another technique involves what is called atomization in order to undermine the sense of community and the empowerment that a sense of community brings. This is achieved again through distraction, the principal weapon being the television, but also trivia such as video games.

A simple example of the way this works would be a person choosing to stay home and play a video game rather than going to have a chat with a neighbour. Still another important technique employed is obfuscation - making it hard for ordinary citizens to connect them with particular actions by acting as a group or through intermediaries. Perhaps the greatest factor contributing to the concentration of power and impending end of democracy in the US however is comfort. The majority of citizens have lived comfortable, affluent lives for many decades. This has led to unquestioning trust in politicians and a "leave it to them" attitude. Many people have more important things to do than keep tabs on what their politicians are up to, such as watching the ball game, drinking with their pals or going to the racetrack. The attitude has also been cultivated amongst all classes of society that "money talks" and "might is right".


The entire article can be read here.

Finally, here's a more personal look at the impact of foreclosures here in So Cal. The foreclosed home is probably of a Korean family judging from the rice cooker and Korean ramen box filled with junk on the kitchen counter, as well as the Christian cross in the bedroom. Although those affected have been presented have having primarily black and brown faces, there's little doubt that this is an equal opportunity disaster, even for model minorities.

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Sensible Proposition: Smart Voters Only

Folks, after considerable thought, I regrettably have decided that stupid people shouldn't vote. Again, I come to this decision regrettably, but I've come to realize that our democracy depends on it.

There could be lot's of ways to determine an individuals stupidity: we could go by SAT scores; we could use IQ; we may even consider family history. It seems to me that these are relatively arbitrary measures of one's smarts. I believe a flat smart standard should be applied that is based purely on income. After all, there are plenty of individuals with high test scores who don't have any money. Now in all honesty, of what good is such intelligence if it cannot be converted into the objective basis of existence: money? Clearly, none at all. Money-making is the only true measure of smarts.

But how much money makes one among the ranks of the smart? This is where our social engineers will have to think hard, but I would estimate that an annal income of one million or a net worth of over 5 million should be the starting point.

Of course, stupid people will probably take exception to this proposition, but we cannot pander to lowest common denominator. This pandering is what has got us in the position we're in today. Some may argue that such a proposition is elitist, but if smart and elitism are synonymous then so be it. We'll let the philosophers decide, but we people of action cannot idly sit by why the morons have their benighted way.

Now before one concludes that my thinking is out of line, I content that this is precisely what happened this week when Congress voted for the bailout. The smart people, that would be all the governors of European banks and the heads of Wall St, insisted that Congress and Senate not fall prey to the stupid masses by listening to them.


Individuals working for Wall Street finance, insurance and real estate companies and the companies’ political action committees have contributed more than $47 million to the campaigns of Senator Obama (three of top five sources) and Senator McCain (top five sources), both of whom voted for the bailout.

More to the point, Wall Street has contributed more than $1.1 billion dollars to congressional candidates since 2002. Nine of the top ten House recipients of Wall Street largesse, who each received an average of $1.5 million, are on the financial oversight and taxation committees.

Even more telling, the bipartisan Congressional "leaders" most responsible for pushing the bailout through Congress, Senators Dodd and Gregg and Representatives Frank and Blunt have taken almost $20 million from Wall Street sources during the last 20 years. Dodd recently received $6 million in contributions during his presidential primary campaign, and Frank has collected $720,000 this year.


You can go here for more. The fact is that Congress does precisely this.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Derivatives: Bigger than Sub-prime Mortgages

Folks,

Here's a bit of a discussion on this important topic of derivatives and why you need to call your congress person and tell them to vote NO. It's an MP3 file.

Here.

The role of Buffet here is important, but I'd be interested in what others believe what the trends are given his recent purchases. Buffett On Derivatives: 'A Fool's Game' is an article written a year and a-half ago quoting the sage himself.

We need to be clear that the problem is much larger than sub-prime mortgages, which is the principle way that this story is being spun. People's stock portfolios rose in the 90s and 2000s, but no one seemed to ask why and how as jobs flowed overseas and most rural and industrial America became ghost towns. Those who remained wrapped themselves in a bloody flag, meth labs, and Nascar.

The tranquilizing effects of "entertainment" also ensnared the cynical sophisticates of the urban meccas. They had been to college and believed that they as Americans were beyond reproach. Never mind that the militarization they intended for the world became a karmic noose that tightened progressively with each collateral mistake, with each uranium bullet, with each refugee, and hollow claims for "human rights." Of course they were hollow, every one knows you put your money where your mouth is and everyone's money is still in Ratheon and Goldman.

Well, now that it's becoming increasing apparent that this model may not actually be in their best interest, the question becomes what is the best solution? First is to stop funding "them", and reallocating these resources in ways that increase revenue within communities as opposed to centralizing it in the hands of corportists.

The Shock Doctrine has been getting some coverage from the media. In it you'll find a discussion of how the current situation resembles happenings in S. America over the last 20 years. I feel I've belabored the point about SE Asia and Argentina, but these were lies I saw unfold before my eyes and affected people I know. The arrogance from Sorros to Bush to Clinton to Rubin to Summers to Greenspan to NPR to Wall St. Journal to NYT, all the glib disregard!

Catherine Austin-Fitts runs a site called Solari, which analogizes Wall St. to a parasite draining from the "host"-- Main St. As a Wharton graduate and one who has worked in both Republican and Democratic administrations, few have her insider expertise and smarts. Here.

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

# 25 Bush’s Real Problem with Eliot Spitzer

Here's an article that you may find interesting given the present situation:


Spitzer had become increasingly public in blaming the Bush administration for the subprime crisis. He testified in mid-February before the US House of Representatives Financial Services subcommittee and later that day, in a national CNBC interview, laid blame squarely on the administration for creating an environment ripe for predatory lenders.


Go here for the whole story.

Wonder why Obama and McCain are both supporting this welfare for Greenspan and company?

we have a campaign of personalities and platitudes. There is a race candidate, a gender candidate and a tortured veteran candidate, each talking about change in America, national security, freedom, and the American way. The candidates are running with support of political parties so deeply embedded with the military industrial complex, the health insurance companies, Wall Street, and corporate media that it is undeterminable where the board rooms separate from the state rooms.


The whole article here.

Folks, the Bush administration hasn't gotten anything right so far, how is Obama thinking he's going to change anything by going along with this horrible payoff? Either he doesn't understand the issues or his largest contributor is Goldman Sachs. Hmm.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Sunday, September 21, 2008

The Unreal Dr. Bjorn Nordenstrom

Orthodoxy in medicine is an area that seems to have come under increasing scrutiny. The quacks and mountebanks who typically challenge biomedical or more precisely biochemical hegemony are increasingly being joined by heretics within the biomedical ranks itself.

Any system of thought is comprised of more than rational processes. One must consider that interests coalesce around these systems that translate into careers, stocks, institutions, equipment, and perhaps most important, beliefs. Thought systems, consequently, take forms that make thought "real." That which lacks systems of interests to give form to thought is "unreal."

The phenomenon of the orthodox becoming unorthodox and vice verse is long. In recent history, the work of three-time Nobel laureate Linus Pauling comes to mind. I can't help but appreciate the vilely unorthodox positions of prestigious National Academy of Science and Berkeley professor Peter Duesberg and independently minded Nobel laureate '92 Kerry Mullis on AIDS. Boy, if I hadn't heard that Canadian Broadcasting Company's program As It Happens, I would have never thunk it.

Anyway, in doing some reading on ions and acupuncture, I happened across a Dr. Nordenstrom, a Swede, whom you'll learn is of impeccable credentials, who has brazenly chosen to pursue electrically based therapies for tumors, instead of adhering to the biochemical dogma. One interesting observation about Nordenstrom and the other two: the brilliance that made them excel within real thought systems is the brilliance that made them vanish into the unreal.

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Mammon

Mammon. I don't think I ran across this word till my mid twenties when I read Lewis Lapham's Money and Class in America. Suffice it to say, the word has struck a chord within. The week's events in the stock market have been glorious. At least from the trenches or perches (it's America so you can choose, no?), it looks as though the cracks in the facade of dollar imperialism are becoming much more glaring.

Beyond the wanting of more, most people haven't an inkling about money. This is the definition of mammon. Oh sure there's the scrimping and primping, the credits and the debits, but just the thought that money is a concept is likely to raise eyebrows in opprobrium. Sacrilege to the mammonist comes in varied forms. Taxes is one of them, especially when it comes in the form of aid to poor mothers, but not when in the form of .56 cents on the dollar that adds to nearly 1 trillion dollars to the military.

We'll leave the discussion about productive expenditures for another day. For the moment, a "crisis" is being used to foist yet more welfare for bankers. Here's a way to do something.



Taking Back October 7th

One Chance to "Save America"

How to Save the Day with Private Sector Coinvestment

The first thing you need to understand is that any media reference to the Resolution Trust Corp's bailout of the Savings and Loan mess is a deliberate misleading of American public opinion so that our collective life savings can be hijacked by the bankers cabal.

The key difference to keep in mind is this: In the case of the RTC, when the assets were rolled up and resold, the main players went out of business. In the flim-flam now being pulled on the American public, the main players will not only stay in business, they will make new fortunes paid for with your tax dollars.

Oh, and if you think this stinks, that's the smell of greed.

Now how to fix it? There is a very simple way - and I would urge you to write something along the lines in an email to your federal elected representatives:

---

Dear (elected official):

I am writing to demand that any bailout of investment bank include a mandatory requirement for private co-investment.

As you know, the current plan proposed by the Treasury - and now being rushed through approval is designed as follows:

  • Financial Institution with 'bad paper' will be able to sell their paper to the government.

  • The government will then sell this paper to other investors at whatever discount they need to in order to 'keep the system alive'.

  • The buyers of this paper from the government have no incentive to bid up prices because the farther the asset valuation falls, the more money the bankers will make.

  • Ultimately, the public will fund the difference between the current valuation of the instruments and however low these same investment bankers can drop their bids.

Obviously, this is an absurdity because under Game Theory, the lower the bids are when the government sells, the higher the yields on these debt instruments.

What's worse, an instrument sold my one firm, such as hypothetically Goldman Sachs (or more likely the Goldman Sachs Asset Management group) could ultimately be purchased from the government bailout agency purchased by Morgan Stanley. At the same time, a hypothetical Morgan Stanley\asset sold to the government could ultimately be picked up - dirt cheap - by the same Goldman group selling their hypothetical paper.

To my way of thinking, this "bailout" is a flim-flam deal. The investment "banksters" could 'wash the paper and take the spread' as things are presently proposed. As a Taxpayer, I am appalled and demand a better solution.

Is there an alternative? Of course!

Write and enforce a new provision requiring that any sales of government purchased instruments to private firms retain a minimum 90% public participation. Thus, when the [toxic waste] bonds are resold by the government, the tax paying public which is footing the bill would be compensated for its risk. Give the paper vultures compensation with a small 1-3 basis point spiff for managing the public's side of the deal.

The new deal structure would look like this:

  • Financial Institution with 'bad paper' will still be able to sell their paper to the government.

  • But because the government will sell only a maximum 10% private share (the rest being the public's skin in the game) the markdowns would likely be less.

  • The public would retain a 90% ownership position. Thus any profits made by the paper vultures would be diluted 10:1 and the public compensated for its risk.

  • In this way, the public would make back much of its initial cost and the debt load on the American financial system would be lessened dramatically - reducing the ultimate cost of the bailout dramatically.

As you can readily see, this approach - let's call it Private Sector Coinvestment - will work very well, although now that the investment bankers have "seen the green" in the form of the rudimentary "bailout plan" which is nothing short of a banker's coup d'état, will scream bloody murder when a rational and money saving plan is proposed.

It all comes down to whether you represent the interest of the People, or the interests of the Bankers who began their theft of the American economy in 1913, but that's another story.

As a vote in your district, I beseech you to look out for the interests of the American Taxpayer and honor the intent of the Framers to defend and protect this Great Nation.

Sincerely,

(share this freely)

---



Sunday, August 24, 2008

Reconsidering "Our" Interests

I've got a friend who's very gung-ho for Obama. We had a good
talk yesterday about empire. It was very edifying for us both, because for me
besides the lack of transparency in the voting process (Bush won neither
election see http://velvetrevolution.us), I consider the matter of empire the center point of the election.

I won't get into the boring details. I have voiced my displeasure with Condi
and Powell (the latter being one whom I believe would be a MUCH better VP
candidate than the dude from Delaware) and do so every chance I get. This is because I would like to see better from black officials... but hey they're human too. So they've actually been really helpful in allowing me to rid myself of any projections that are more a product of me than of them and their personal career aspirations and
obligations.

The thing is that I am not a fan of American empire, and I actually have
mistakenly believed that black Americans should axiomatically understand the
reasons why. But this isn't realistic. As my friend stated, "every second of
every day, someone is trying to get what we've [read: Americans] got." and "it
ain't easy being a superpower, but somebody has to be it" and "if others were
in our position, they'd do the same."

I conceded that he probably had a good point, though I largely disagree with
each of these statements, particularly "their wanting what we have," believing
rather that "we" want what they have and use whatever means to acquire it.
However, if his reasoning is correct (not by moral or spiritual measures but by
virtue of most people thinking similarly), then I see no reason why a non-colored (identified) person would consider the Democratic nominee. After all, a significant aspect of what "is had" is concentrated in the hands of very few, largely white individuals. If my friend's viewpoint is correct, that is the "we" interests are construed in national terms, it is quite plausible that many whites construe this we/nation concept in racial terms. The national angst around immigration most certainly reflects some of this thinking.

I would contend that the notion of "we" needs to be reconsidered, nationally
and globally, identifying interests much in the way Jesus instructed us. Thus,
more war for Afghanistan isn't so Jesusly, and I don't think that Jeremiah
(Wright or Biblical) would disagree. "We" haven't any interest in war and a
budget that off-the-bat allocates .56 on the dollar for war is planting seeds
of a most unsavory fruit. No significant presidential candidate has raised the
empire issue since Jesse Jackson in '87, no doubt because "we" have been convinced that our interests rest in empire. Both candidates endorse empire, only differing in the means by which to administer it. As I told my friend whether you get the pig (the Republican) or the pig wearing lipstick (the Democrat), they're both pigs-- just not kosher.

Here's an article entitled Biden, Iraq and Obama's Betrayal from the think tank organized by the Institute for Policy Studies that shares a similar perspective. Individuals who support the choice of Biden are in most cases ignorant of his record or engaged in the type of doublethink that would make George Orwell proud.

Again, as my last post articulated, the mechanisms that drive political behavior are non-rational, emanating from a place in the brain where primate territoriality reigns. Most who vote will have already decided on which territory to defend irrespective of policy. It doesn't have to be this way, but the overall political process seeks to appeal to this easily activated behavior. Obama is drinking the Kool Aid by believing that he can both appeal to higher order thinking to vote for a non-entirely white candidate, while simultaneously appealing to mean instincts, proposing that he can carry forth the fraudulent war on terror better than McCain. If I were one who truly believed in the American empire and its war on terror, my "instincts" would tell me that McCain is a better candidate. Holding that neither empire nor the so-called war on terror are globally sustainable postures, I alternatively hold that Obama is no candidate at all.

Monday, June 23, 2008

Idols of Convention

A heretic is one who refuses to genuflect before the idols of convention. Though heresy is usually perceived as occurring in religious contexts, that toward which we hold religious zeal does not have to be religion at all. In fact, profanities can only be lodged toward that which we hold as true and dear, and in our post-modern age truth increasingly has little to do with religion.

Of course, we've come up with truths to replace the church and there have been heretics to make trouble. Consider, for instance, the blasphemous nature of Robert Anton Wilson's statement below:

" Democracy has been less than a total success--and the intellectuals' half-shamed cynicism about democracy is justified--to the extent that traditional society did not need, could not use, and in many ways discouraged the development of high verbal ('rational') skill in the majority of the population. That is, concretely, most people are not encouraged to be very smart, and are rather heavily programmed to be comparatively stupid. Such programming is what is needed to fit them into most traditional jobs. Their bio-survival circuitry works as well as that of most animals, their emotional-territorial circuitry is typically primate and they have little third-circuit 'mind' to verbalize (rationalize) with. Naturally, they usually vote for the charlatan who can activate primitive bio-survival fears and territorial ('patriotic') pugnacity. The intellectual looks at the dismal results and continues to believe in "democracy" only by an act of Blind Faith similar to the way beliefs in Catholicism or Communism or snake-worship are maintained.


Stevenson, McGovern and other darlings of the intelligentsia were speaking to the third circuit, which is not very highly developed in most domesticated primates yet. Eisenhower in his Father way, and Nixon in his bullying Big Brother way, knew how to push the right Second-Circuit emotional-territorial buttons to get a lot of primates to follow them."

Unfortunately, it's rare that democracy gets likened to snake worship. Say something to most people about the dubious merits of electoral politics as a vehicle for significant change and you might as well say Lake Wobegone is fictional or that apple pie isn't American.

When such heresies rattle the cage of religiosity, invocation of the saints and their self-affirming statements is usually the first resort. "Well as Saint Churchill says, 'Democracy isn't perfect but it's the best we have,' " becomes the incantation of the democracy devotee. The correctness of the quotation is hardly the point here, rather it is the belief, so spurned by the religion skeptic, that performs an identical faith-like function. Belief in "democracy" has the same selective basis in reality as the pork-eating fundamentalist who proclaims homosexuality "an abomination".

No one is without beliefs. Since the rise of the bourgeoisie (around the time of Martin Luther 1483-15346 and Descartes 1596-1650), intellectuals have pertinaciously sought to shuck off of anything that smacks of the church, in the errant belief that it is only the church that is the domain of belief-oriented sentiments that should be greeted with skepticism. Consequently, popular atheistic social intellectuals marshal evidence to show that religion is a particularly pernicious form of fanaticism, for which national democracy is the panacea (except in cases where national democrats oppose the colonial superstructure, see H. Chavez, Iran, and Indonesia ).

Well everyone has their sacred cow. No? Depending on whom you ask, no doubt, you're going to hear how some cows are more sacred than others. The Christian defenders will trumpet the "Call of God" to murder and maim, while the Shintoist murders and pillages in the name of "the eternal tradition." The Capitalist will torture with preemptive altruism, while the Colonialist will take up his burden by slaughtering the hopelessly benighted. Of course, the Animist will kill because of the "evil eye" or other such "forces."

Religion apologists observe that nationalism has killed far more people than religion ever has. This seems a somewhat disingenuous argument, because there have been many more people living in the nationalist era than in the religious era. If you're wondering when the religious era existed, we're essentially talking about the time before people had sugar in their apple pie, before Columbus.

As Woody Allen reminds us, one is never at the top of one's game when on the defensive. The religion apologists appear to be in a similar predicament, otherwise they would parry their detractors with a more systematic critique of some of the logical shortcomings of nihlo-materialism and its idols, particularly consumerism and "efficiency".

It doesn't matter. We all have idols. Understanding the psychological aspects of idolatry gives us some way to understand how religion or nationalism function as only nominally different emanations of the same brain phenomenon. The elegance of Wilson's Eight Circuit Model of Consciousness is that we can avoid engaging in the deadend debates about which is better: nationalism or theocracy; racism or linguisticism; materialism or spiritualism. Whenever such comparisons occur, the territorial needs of the second circuit, that part of the brain that is identical in other primates, is being served.

The defense of territory, whether conceptual or physical, is a non-rational phenomenon, meaning behaviors motivated from the second circuit do not involve thought; it is only performing the function of establishing dominance or submission. It is the realm of posture and as Wilson essentially states fear and safety seeking.

This is why American cultural prohibitions against speaking politics and religion are so uncannily profound: no amount of talking can change feelings that run much deeper than the rational mind. Of course, religion adherents make no claims about the rationality of their beliefs, but the democrat believes that his system is born of reason. Nothing could be further from the truth, otherwise one would be able to speak upon his political positions, particularly in the company of those who disagree, without fear of ostracism, disdain, emotive display or other reactions reflective of animals that run in packs.

This does not mean that one's political decisions by matter of course are sub-rational. It only indicates a strong tendency toward irrationality that savvy superstructures exploit to their benefit. These very same entities understand that the greatest tool at their disposal is the individual fear of being outside the pack, i.e., unconventional. As such, whether the papacy or the contemporary voting charade, superstructures are careful to construct idols, much as Aaron's golden calf, that affirm convention.



Monday, June 16, 2008

Food: Not for Spectators

People who know me are aware that I'm a bit of a food enthusiast. From my time at Pastabilities, a gourmet purveyor of fresh pasta for the local restaurants in Ann Arbor to the thorough gustatory schooling I received on numerous occasions in China, I have come to appreciate the art form of food above all others. There's something more meaningful about art that requires more than idle spectatorship.

I primarily like participating in food when I travel. If Thailand didn't have rockin' food I don't think I'd be much for visiting it, and I wonder just how much Los Angeles' food keeps me here. After all, we have Thaitown, Koreatown, Little Tokyo, Tokyotown, Monterrey Park, Chinatown, Little Saigon... a veritable universe of some of the best eats in the world.

When it comes to national cuisines, I always feel a twinge of guilt when communing with my French friends (I know I should tap it out but other issues appear more pressing). Anyway, the guilt stems from feeling that I should be on the French food bandwagon as much as the French, if that's possible. It seems much of the world, and certainly the Chinese have bought into the French food mystique, but I just don't know what's wrong with me. Can anything really top the spicy fish soups of Thailand? DISCLOSURE: I know a French woman and she is perhaps the best cook I've ever known, though I quake imagining the umbrage my New York crew would take with such an admission.

Let's catch our breaths, shall we?



There are different things that I like about different places' food, but I'm not eating out much less lately. Sure, expense matters but when it comes down to it quality matters more, and it's rare that a restaurant can do better than I with simple fresh ingredients. When I came back from Thailand, I realized how horribly dead my diet was. I was eating too much frozen, packaged stuff. There's a certain convenience to such stuff, but it leaves an unsatisfied feeling that makes me eat more when it is not quantity my body craves but quality.

There is an energetic zing to the restaurant food of Thailand. Thai food culture is partly interesting because people by and large do not prepare food themselves. Perhaps it has to do with the complexity of making the sauces and curries, but in any case, unless one is looking to roll in a fancy restaurant, prepared food is cheap, delicious, and fresh.

Freshness is noticeable when you get the opportunity to eat primarily locally grown food. Unless you live in California that opportunity isn't happening much and probably not in proportions necessary to make any difference health-wise. That's what's great about being in places like Thailand and China, getting the right proportions is easy and inexpensive. I understand that until very recently things were like that in France as well.

I regularly procure my vegetables from Hmong. They're the only ones who grow all the fabulous greens eaten in China. Besides the Hmong table, there aren't many Asian farmers to speak of, though there are a few Japanese who sell what everybody else sells: spinach, squash, avocados. There is, however, one Japanese couple that hock a delectable variety of concord-type grape, called Kyoho (the wiki translation here might be a little off. The second character å³° means mountain peak not just mountain), which becomes available in mid-September.

Chinese of China are avowed meat eaters, but they know more than a thing or two about eating greens. I don't mean beans and rice, corn or potatoes, limas or beets, or even cabbage. I mean real live greens: bok choi, hom choi (Cantonese), gai lan (Cantonese), collards, broccoli, turnip, gai bai sen (Viet), chard and spinich. Prices have gone up a little less than 25% from recent robust action in the oil futures, but still the quality and prices are much more competitive than what you'll find in grocery stores. This is quite different from the farmer's markets in the DC area, where you'll pay pretty pennies or in Dallas, which doesn't have much variety.

One of the things I came to appreciate in China for the first time was dinner parties. Back in the 90s when Beijingers were still riding bicycles, we always found ways to gather for excellent food and stories. Next to locality, spices are the most important part of a dish, especially when you want to wow guests with something they haven't tried before. Sure, often plain greens are just what the doctor ordered. Sometimes a little garlic is in order. Other times, it's really a matter of going for the artistic gusto. That's when I like to get my boy Dhiraj's spices to vaingloriously create "my own" dish.



Contrary to my unorthodox nature, I've done no experimenting with the "Gobi" pack because the curry with cauliflower (or broccoli) is so dynamite that I know there's no improving upon perfection. The blend has citrusy high notes that I have never experienced with any Indian cuisine, yet it's dynamically balanced by roasted cumin. Friends who've had a change to try it out, always ask me about it. Among the other blends, I find the shrimp pack highly conducive to experimentation. The other day, I stir-fried some broccoli, adding the Goa Shrimp pack with udon, shoyu, ginger, and a little fish. Yowzaa!!

Saturday, June 7, 2008

Orthodox Economics

Most of you probably won't read this article because, if you're like me, just the mere mention of the "e" work excites such intense bleary-eyed blahs, that you'd much rather move on to find out the latest on Brittney or Obama.

Mind you, whenever I think of economics and finance, I get this "let me crawl to my hole because economists do calculus so much better than I" feeling that I just don't want to be bothered. Admitted, their reasoning skills go beyond that of the common mortal more concerned with whom the Pistons are going to pick up next season than with say, the relationship between international trade agreements and the deluge of economic refugees from Latin America.

Yep, financiers and economists are very "critical thinkers," just about as critical as most journalists for whatever Times or Journal of your choosing. Basically, they're critical about what they're supposed to be critical, for as long as it is permissible to be critical. Some may call this a criticality of convenience, which doesn't account for much, but it sure is "smart" if you wanna keep your job and keep everyone impressed with how astute you are for spouting the cliche du jour.

Remember how they waxed euphoric about Argentina's economy, which had pegged to the dollar in the early 90s, before they crashed it and went in to buy everything on discount? Do you remember how the rhetoric by the very same critical minds shifted overnight? Sure you don't, but I bet you remember the outrage over Janet Jackson's tit during Superbowl half-time. Admit it, tits are more interesting than economics.

Remember the praises for South East Asia (wherever that's supposed to be, because if isn't France or UK does it really matter anyway?), before the currency crisis initiated by George Soros-- whose name is still a bad word in Thailand? Do you remember what the critical crickets started chirping about "crony capitalism" and "transparency?" Never mind about the lives that were destroyed for the sake of buying things on the cheap.

I had the pleasure of eating dinner last month with an interesting collection of individuals. A very wealthy septuagenarian English couple (house in a fancy part of LA, flat in Paris, and cottage in Dampngloomfordshire, England) who blamed the Americans for the fall of colonialism--a development, by reckoning of the lively vocalizations of the wife, which definitely did not benefit Africa. Yes. They'd lived throughout Western and Southern Africa as well.

Among a few Frenchies, there was an Ivorean (a country so unimportant that he took it upon himself to right the situation by emigrating to Paris) in his 20s engaged to the daughter of the Parisian woman of the house. He is an engineer, with an engineer's analytical qualities: the kind of qualities that has him handling international accounts and thinking critically about the things he should be critical for as long as it is permissible. Despite the language difficulties (boor that I am for refusing to learn any European language), I was dazzled with his assessment of post-colonial Africa. He may have never read Fanon, Nkruma, or Ngugi, but he must have certainly been hip to the French version of critical publications like the Economist. The dazzle? Corruption. African leaders are corrupt and that's why the continent is mired in the problems it is. Again, there was a language gap, so the sexy French word du jour for "crony capitalism," which he no doubt knew, would have been lost upon me anyway.

If you haven't already fallen asleep, then I'm sure it's because you're still wondering when I'm going to get back to to the real critical issues, i.e., Superbowl obscenity, with a few illustrations. I understand and I'll try to indulge you if you just cut me a bit of slack while I explore the offal topic of cause-and-effect.

Even though the smart people know that what Rev. Wright said was "reprehensible, offensive, and downright unpatriotic," a similar conclusion is drawn by Chalmers Johnson in Blowback. The colonials, and by that I mean the normal everyday "innocent" people who support colonial ventures in the name of "protecting our freedom" (read: our wealth vis-a-vis their misery), shriek (not Shrek but that movie sure was entertaining wasn't it) and howl when the chickens of theft, chaos, and death come home to roost. Somehow, bombing the hell out of Cambodians, Panamanians, and Iraqis (to name but a fraction, remember my calculus is no good), is irreproachable. It is questionable whether the laws of cause-and-effect concur.



Many lefties conclude that several "isms" are motivating factors, particularly racism, for global economic policy. But if you disregard discrepancies in educational funding, prison sentencing, prison populations, capital executions, Guantanamo, life-expectancy, and intentionally accidental bombing of civilian targets, you really find that race has nothing to do with it. Furthermore, beyond the overall inappropriateness of applying race analysis under any circumstances, such spurious viewpoints would do little to explain what happened to Argentina, which unless the smart people didn't get the memo, is the most European country of the Americas, certainly Latin America.

Beyond this, the sentimental simpers of race-cardists would hardly explain formation of institutions such as the World Bank and IMF, which were primarily created to help the 3rd World. Sure, John Perkins' tell-all Confessions of an Economic Hit Man provides some convincing detail of global economic structure and dominance, but isn't it more than a bit fantastical to assume that all countries should be of equal footing economically? Isn't it human nature that those on the top strategize to stay there? And in the long run isn't this best for the world, even if they don't know it? After all, could you imagine the mayhem of a truly democratically structured United Nations that did not funnel important decisions of life and death to the Security Counsel, where aside from the token rotating members, the permanent member-states (colonial powers) ensure progress?



But the point here is not about the 3rd world; it's already been established that it doesn't really matter. In fact, even the people of the 3rd World (don't the smart people say "developing world" why am I being so insensitive) know that it doesn't matter, otherwise they wouldn't be clamoring to relocate to Toronto, Miami, Manchester, or Lion. Right? Proof positive that we've got it figured out. It has nothing to do with the "hit" they've been taking for the past 500 years, right?



Anyway, we need to continue to pursue this cause-and-effect thread, because if race hegemony isn't the motivating factor, then we might guess that some of the same "capital freeing" policies that have been applied in the 3rd World will eventually hit home, er I mean the home of the racially inoculated. In other words, if it is possible to apply the law of science that "for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction," then it is scientific to conclude that those opposites have a little reacting to do here in the "civilized world." It doesn't seem unreasonable that one such reaction is immigration, but whether that will fully account for bombs in the name of freedom is up for the historians and historical revisionist to decide.

Since The Yang Zhu is just another way of saying heretically inclined, it is interesting to note what appears to be a thawing in the reception toward heretical economic views, particularly in the UK. It seems that this receptivity has much less to do with any innate English sensibilities (though I must confess that to put English and sensible together strikes me as tautological) than with the crunch that the smart economists and financiers have begun exacting upon the erstwhile English middle class in the fashion that seemed darned humanitarian when exacted against the 3rd World. But as they say, what's good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. Thus, a new critical view or more precisely a new receptivity toward critical views of global economics is emerging. The tendency has been for leftist malcontents to play the race card, but greed and it's off-shoot entitlement are probably more responsible. Whether this new-found receptivity reaches the 3rd World probably depends on our ability to recognize 3rd World humanity, but didn't we already establish that this would be akin to enabling atavism, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to move here and get what we got in the first place? Right?

Gods of Greed
Nassim Nicholas Taleb: the prophet of boom and doom



Wednesday, June 4, 2008

RAW On Orthodox Medicine

I've just finished writing a project that uses Robert Anton Wilson's Eight Circuit Model of Human Consciousness along with EFT to clear core issues that block our innate human potential.

Triumphantly, I decided to do a bit of a word search to see what RAW devotees might be here in Los Angeles. I turned up this article, which I'm sharing in whole because it's so doggone funny.

Enjoy...

Evading Dogmatic Medicine
by Robert Anton Wilson
written for Smart Basics IntelliScope

Everybody has their own special nightmare, their private version of living in a Kafka novel. Some worry that they might fall through a timewarp and land in the hands of the Gestapo or the KGB. Others live in perpetual anxiety about an IRS audit. In New York and New Jersey, most people have an acute terror about accidentally saying or doing something that annoys the Mafia. Californians dread losing their temper and thereby appearing "unmellow," which they evidently believe might lead to their getting deported back to the U.S. mainland.

I, too, have always had a personal horror: the concept of becoming hospitalized while in the United States and thus falling into the hands of the American Medical Association. Fortunately, at the age of sixty, I have managed to avoid this terrifying experience all my life-and hence really only know about the Horror through the pathetic stories told by friends who have actually spent time in American hospitals. These tales sound much like the stories of others I know, survivors of the Holocaust, with one additional misery often included at the end: after "liberation" and escape back to normal non-nightmare life, the butchers go on pursuing you, until you have lost everything in your savings account and gone through bankruptcy court.

How have I evaded the Dr. A.M.A. House of Blood? I don't know, really. Maybe I just got born with some especially good genes. (Materialists would like that explanation.) Or maybe I have an Ally, an occult or extraterrestrial Protector. (New Agers would love that one.) Personally, I see no special reason to believe either of these charming notions. I tend to suspect that I slid easily through the `40s and `50s-years of prostate cancers, lung cancers, rectum cancers, heart attacks, strokes, and other miscellaneous unpleasantnesses for most males -because I started doing acid (ascorbic acid: megadoses of vitamin C) at around the age of 37. I had heard Dr. Linus Pauling lecture on that marvelous substance, and I figured Dr. Pauling's ideas deserved a fair trial because (1) the A.M.A. immediately denounced vitamin C therapy violently- always a good sign that somebody has discovered something important; and (2) Dr. Pauling already had two Nobel prizes, so I could hardly consider him an idiot.

23 years later, I continue to take megadoses of ascorbic. Despite a number of bad habits during most of those years--including smoking and bad diet--I have not only stayed out of hospitals, but have also never had a cold in all that time, while people all around me often sniff, snivel and slide down the slippery slope from the common cold to the major flu or even pneumonia. I noted this "magical" immunity especially during my six years in Dublin, Ireland, a city located (I must tell you because most Americans don't seem to know) further north than almost all of Canada. Irish wits describe the Celtic climate as "nine months of winter and three months of bloody awful weather.")

My total freedom from head colds especially impresses me, since almost everybody except us "vitamin nuts" gets a few colds a year. But, of course, one can explain this by invoking the almighty Genes or the occult Allies (or maybe even the marvelous Coincidence, that supernatural entity that always seems to banish or at least disempower all inconvenient data.)

Over the years I have tried to learn more about vitamins, nutrients, and health. Since the federal government currently holds to the view that the First Amendment does not permit controversies in this area, I must write with great caution throughout this article, so I remind you again that you can dismiss everything here by invoking Genes, occult Allies, or maybe good old panchrestomathal Coincidence. I started using PERSONAL RADICAL SHIELD and CHOLINE COOLER about six years ago.
The PRS contains as much vitamin C as I think I need, plus many other goodies, and the CHOLINE COOLER has ingredients that often have appeared beneficial in laboratory tests (which conservative M.D.s still dispute, of course.)

While living in Los Angeles a few years ago, I went for a medical checkup. The doctor I chose had an orthodox M.D. but also used "alternative," holistic, and even Chinese medical techniques, whenever they seemed appropriate. At the end of the exam, he asked me what vitamins and minerals I took regularly. I told him, and he had never heard of PERSONAL RADICAL SHIELD. He asked to see a bottle, to read the contents, so I came back the next day and left an empty bottle with his nurse. He called me that evening. "That has everything you need," he said. Well, now, I begin to suspect that not all doctors share the dominant allopathic bias against nutritional and vitamin data. It just seems that way because the allopathic Fundamentalists make a lot a noise and try to pretend they represent the whole medical profession.

He asked me what vitamins and minerals I took regularly. Of course, PERSONAL RADICAL SHIELD and CHOLINE COOLER have not helped prevent all health problems. (I never thought they would.) For a while, I had high blood pressure and my Los Angeles doctor put me on heavy doses of allopathic medicines, which he warned me would have some bad side-effects. He also urged several changes in lifestyle, including breaking the smoking addiction, avoiding red meat, and exercising daily, which
would help me get back to normal blood pressure without increasing dependence on the medications. Blood pressure dropped slowly back to normal over a period of nearly two years--but meanwhile I suffered various side effects of the drugs, including lethargy, tired eyes, inability to concentrate, decreased work output, and uncharacteristic depression.

Gradually the doctor decreased the heavy allopathic medicines (which lower your blood pressure in much the same way as getting hit on the head and staying in bed does)--and all these distressing symptoms went away. My energy came back, I regularly work a full day again without drowsing, and I feel happy again.

One month ago, in Soquel--a small burg on the Central California coast, where I now live--I again went in for a checkup. As usual, I picked an M.D. with training also in alternative medicine. After the checkup (in which blood pressure and other vital signs appeared normal, as they have all this year), the doctor said, "You ought to take a few vitamins and nutrients, to stay in good shape." "What do you recommend?" I asked. "For general health, PERSONAL RADICAL SHIELD," he said. And in your case, I think CHOLINE COOLER will prove helpful."

I have continued the changes in lifestyle (i.e., I still avoid smoking and red meat, and I continue exercising, when I remember that I should) and blood pressure now remains normal without the heavy medications. I suspect the CHOLINE COOLER has helped a good deal in my recovery from the loss of concentration and loss of work energy which the allopathic chemicals induced. My doctor thinks so, too--but then again, such opinions always need a disclaimer in this country, where the First Amendment still remains suspended and no citizen may safely question A.M.A. dogma.

I therefore disclaim my possible errors and heresies one more time: maybe we should attribute all this to Genes, or Occult powers, or Coincidence. Meanwhile, I seem in damned good shape for a man of my age, and not even the most conservative "experts" could seriously argue that my vitamins and nutrients have done me any harm. And I doubt that anyone could claim, with a straight face, that equal doses of allopathic drugs, taken for an equal period of time, would do no harm to mind, memory, sexuality, or general energy.


Copyright: Robert Anton Wilson




Saturday, May 24, 2008

Satiric War Protest

The satirical approach to war protest has a long history. Humor has tremendous utility in matters of life and death, right and wrong. Doesn't it? It possesses a quality that often buffers the pain.

Satire can often be safe. It's certainly a more gentle way to make a point, that when stated directly would be sure to elicit overly defensive responses. That's when done well.

The video below gave me thorough delight, but I was trying to figure out why. A YouTube review of The Flight of the Conchords shows that none of their other songs reference war. Musically gifted comedians, their work nevertheless is typical entertainment.

In atmospheres of political repression, satire is often the only way to be heard. It China for 5000 years there's usually been an atmosphere of political repression, so to speak. As a result, deft forms of opposition are an art form in China. In an area where professors are actually losing their positions for not taking loyalty oaths, we mustn't delude ourselves into believing that one's livelihood is safe voicing serious political opposition.

Concluding that this is a protest song would be a stretch but for the crescendo that builds around military hardware. You be the judge.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

Clearing Bao Gong

Let's set the tone quick with this controversial video by Jamaican messengers Sizzla and Capleton.




Aside from the obviously controversial lyrics that reference Rastafari, Jah and Marcus Garvey, there is even more troubling imagery, in the form of conflict, foreign script, and indecipherable hand signals.

dem waan fi turn it in a cow bwoy town now....

And I seh Ini promote to di highest level
(you better know)
So lets burn dis evil concept
cah we ah seh dis is a destruction to di humanity
so we ah seh
(you better know)
Wanna watch out now
oy
check dis Jah!

[Chorus:]
Jah Jah city, Jah Jah town
dem waan fi turn it in'a cow bwoy town now
unno look yah now
Jah Jah city, Jah Jah town
dem waan fi turn in'a dead man town now
unno look yah now

[Verse 1]
Well Mr. John Crow draw coffin John Brown
we nuh waan no more dead ina town
Mr. Happy got so lucky trigger happy yow
we no waan no more dead body
well Mr. Joe kill quick, we nuh waan no more hit
we nuh waan no more grave an we waan no more casket
well life we promote which is righteousness
Sadam get a lick!
Unno look yah now!

[Repeat Chorus]

[Verse 2]
Dem ah tell me how dem cold
Big forty five
fi shoot down dem brother mold
nuff ah dem seh dem cold like a body north pole
so dem shoot down di young, shoot down di old
shoot down di puss an di dog an di fool
Every weekend dem tek a next payroll
out of man pocket dem shoot out billfold
Dis Marcus Garvey nuff a head haffi go roll
look yah now

[Repeat Chorus]

[Verse 3]
Dem think dem reach di ultimate, yow
but dem reach nowhere yet, oy
dem get caught in in a internet
and society a tell dem dem a intellect
dem promote too much dead
Unno look yah now

[Repeat Chorus]

Ten miles outta di city oy
it ah go get too shitty
warn Mr. John and me go warn Ms. Mitty
warn all di shottah an me go warn all die hitty
nuff a dem seh kill man without pity
Wrong kind of sip me all ah ketch dem ah sippy
True dem licky licky, dem sicky
Rastafari judgement will slew all, yo!

[Repeat Chorus]

Ayyyy...

Send me go trod down ina di east
tell dem fi hold di peace
we nuh waan no more coffin, we nuh waan no more hit
Well life we ah promote fi mek de ghetto youth see't
Life is wha we wish
Unno watch out now

[Repeat Chorus]

Bloody, Bloody....


Amidst the confounding controversy appears a recurrent Capleton intonation, one made only once per song: JUDGMENT!

Alas, this is actually where this narrative begins... with Judgement, not Capleton's in particular but Bao Gong's. You see, in The Yang Zhu first edition there wasn't even any Bao Gong.

Bao who? or maybe I should say, "Bao whom?" to just sound more proper. It's the sound, just ask "George and I" to make sure. Here's Bao Gong's wikki. I first learned of Bao Gong watching TV in Beijing. He's the only Beijing Opera character that I can positively identify, besides the the obviously adorned Monkey King.

Anyway, the link between Capleton and Bao Gong seems remote but for the association being currently spun, and the image of Bao Gong placed high upon the wall behind the pc that regularly plays Capleton. Bao Gong stands forebodingly in resplendent black and gold brocade, with his right arm extended as if to say through a forest of black whiskers: JUDGMENT!

The title of this entry is Clearing Bao Gong. It would have never occurred to me to clear him, but for the very interesting energy treatments I'm currently receiving called Body Talk.

Body Talk is an energy balancing technique that is vast in its clearing scope, much vaster than anything I've learned to incorporate in Chinese medicine. In fact, it seems that a tenet of the technique is that diagnosis is futile and that the best approach to healing is through direct querying of the body through muscle testing.

One of the areas of query is environmental, and it was in this realm that my practitioner asked me about something in the living room that I needed balancing with. I guessed computer (no, cleared that last week), fountain, and then Bao Gong.

I've tapped on Bao Gong in the past. This was not for purposes of tapping him out but rather tapping him in, as an emblem of unwavering courage. At the same time, upon reflection, I can't say that the judgment aspect of Bao Gong was serving me. I knew this on some deep level, but it hadn't occurred to me to clear it. The great thing is that Body Talk turns up a lot of stuff you wouldn't otherwise think about clearing.

This isn't to say I haven't been thinking about judging and engaging in a fair amount of it too. Nina Simone has her views too...



Of course this song speaks to me and would no doubt be a selection from the Church Music chapter of The New Classic of Music (Xin Yue Jing).





It's easy to listen to a song like this and think of easy targets "out there," villains like Hugo Chavez, Slobodan Milosovic, and Mahathir Mohammed, but the real power comes from after clearing all the "out theres" and looks within. That may not be as comfortable as looking "out there" (Didn't Jesus say something about specks in the eyes of others and planks in one's own?), but the benefits to one's conscious awareness will be great.

The yin to the yang of judgment it seems is forgiveness. Instantly, I think of a conversation with a client who spoke of the Christian conflict between Christ the forgiver and God the father (i.e., punisher). The Chinese configuration gives us Guan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy and Bao Gong, a deified personification of judgment. The homophonic nature of Chinese is worth appreciating here because guan yin can also mean "caring for yin," which would be caring for that which juxtaposes yang.

Instead of making flat pronouncements about either judgment or mercy, for each possesses yin and yang aspects depending on the context, tapping through on the feelings, concepts, and images that emerge can be liberating. It doesn't mater whether your judge be the "Lord" of Simone's song and/or Bao Gong. Getting real with negative impressions inhering in one's consciousness is useful because it allows us to recognize how the stuff "out there" that we consistently see is ultimately a projection of our own awareness.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Mercy Street

Today I had a Catholic client so some of the imagery that came to me drew from my own Catholic upbringing.

I guess this where it is good to speak of a tormented past, but that would not be the case. However, rumor has it that there are some suffering Catholics. This is not to say that they suffer because they are Catholic, but somehow they themselves are emotionally not so sure. This gives rise to even more guilt and self-judgment that perpetuates physical maladies.

It doesn't matter what the symptom is. Each individual has strengths and weaknesses. Our weakness can become strengths and strengths weakness depending on the circumstances. For example, a man may be very strong and use his muscularity to earn a decent living. At the same time his body may be so muscularly attuned that emotional imbalances easily get stored in the muscular level causing tightness.

A similar type of yin-yang contextuality exists with personal religious beliefs. Therefore, the phenomenon of internal religious conflict is normal in any living breathing human being not just Catholics. The symbols, icons, and language that give form and meaning to Catholicism are closely associated with Mary. This means that the strength of Mary can also be the source of feelings of guilt and self-judgment, feelings that may be held in the body in the form of diabetes or high blood pressure or through behaviors of vengeful eating or smoking. It doesn't really matter.

Resolving the conflict first requires getting real with its existence. Catharsis flows from first accepting the conflicted emotions at the moment. This where Peter Gabriel's Mercy Street comes in. It's a cathartic vehicle, providing the palpable backdrop for the feelings of Catholic contradiction.

Here are the lyrics to the song, which might otherwise be obscured through music and images:

looking down on empty streets, all she can see
are the dreams all made solid
are the dreams all made real

all of the buildings, all of those cars
were once just a dream
in somebody's head

she pictures the broken glass, she pictures the steam
she pictures a soul
with no leak at the seam

let's take the boat out
wait until darkness
let's take the boat out
wait until darkness comes

nowhere in the corridors of pale green and grey
nowhere in the suburbs
in the cold light of day

there in the midst of it so alive and alone
words support like bone

dreaming of mercy street
wear your inside out
dreaming of mercy
in your daddy's arms again
dreaming of mercy street
'swear they moved that sign
dreaming of mercy
in your daddy's arms

pulling out the papers from the drawers that slide smooth
tugging at the darkness, word upon word

confessing all the secret things in the warm velvet box
to the priest-he's the doctor
he can handle the shocks

dreaming of the tenderness-the tremble in the hips
of kissing Mary's lips

dreaming of mercy street
wear your insides out
dreaming of mercy
in your daddy's arms again
dreaming of mercy street
'swear they moved that sign
looking for mercy
in your daddy's arms

mercy, mercy, looking for mercy
mercy, mercy, looking for mercy

Anne, with her father is out in the boat
riding the water
riding the waves on the sea



The song comes from the album So, thus named, it is reported, as an obnoxious retort to demand that the album title possess a bit more than character than the previously three: Peter Gabriel. Those gems are distinguished by album cover.




Here's the video, which I suggest tapping to.




The Mary image of mercy reminds me of the bodhisattva Guan Yin (Kuan Yin wade-giles), whose name literally means "care sound" and is usually translated as Godess of Mercy. You'll see that the wikki page has her associated with the bodhisattva Avalokitesvara. A bodhisattva (pu sa in Mandarin) is like a saint. They help people in matters of health and fortune.

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Introducing The Yang Zhu

The Yang Zhu is an ancient text attributed to the obscure Chinese philosopher Yang-zhu (alternatively Yang Chu). The difference in the spellings is historical. Old school spelling of Chinese used the Wade-Giles system and Han-yu pinyin is a system developed in the People's Republic era.

The Yang Zhu was one of the many texts lost during the tyrannous rein of the so-called first Emperor Qin Shi Huang (259 BCE – 210 BCE). The movie Hero is a beautiful depiction of his despotic majesty. Those with a yin for history and kung-fu will be delighted to know that it features Jet Li and the directorship of one of China's best, Zhang Yi-mou (Raise the Red Lantern, Ju Dou).


Probably the most important text lost during this period was the classic of music Yue Jing. Music is one of the most splendid of experiences. It's not particularly confined to humans, as one knows who has listened to the song of a cricket, songbird or a brook. I imagine the Yue Jing to be a very powerful book on par with the Yi Jing (I-ching, wade-giles). Maybe this treasure is hidden somewhere in the caves of Dun Huang, but for the past 2,000 years no one's saying.

Anyway, the loss of the Yue Jing is a much bigger deal than the loss of the Yang Zhu when you look at it in perspective because the Yue Jing is one of the ancient Six Classics (Yi Jing, Book of Changes; Shi Jing, Classic of Odes; Li Jing, Classic of Ceremony; Shu Jing, History Classic; and the Chun Qiu, The Spring and Autumn Annals). The classics took a real hit during Qin Shi-huang, having to be reconstructed from memory after his passing.

In case there's any wonder, the classics are a big deal not because Bill Bennett says so, but because Confucius said so. Confucius is a really big deal though I doubt that Bill Bennett ever got around to actually reading the classics that have had a shelf life beyond 500 years. It is such a shame for one so concerned about the perils of moral and cultural relativism.

At least it's fair to say that Bill and I would both agree that book burning by the state apparatus is barbaric by any standards, especially when water-boarding is much more effective. As it is, our opinions yea or nay will hardly change what's already happened... or at least that's the rumor, so we best cut Qin some slack.

It might be good to know, however, that Qin was a maniac who hailed from the rough and ready western part of China where they ride horses and eat a lot of meat. He may have been a maniac but he was no moron to unify a series of feudally entrenched states. It's also a pretty good idea to note that Hitler was a vegetarian, so it's unlikely that Qin's dietary preferences is a satisfactory basis upon which to judge him further. The book burning issue is basis enough for us to feel thoroughly vindicated in our judgments of Qin.

A bit more about Confucius, more precisely Confucians. They're not too fond of Yang-zhu. It's a self-expression thing that they do not seem to be inclined to understand.

Insouciant. That's the word that came to mind when queried on the nature of the updated edition of The Yang Zhu. Not a prancing insouciance, unless of course prancing is called for.

The Yang Zhu is natural reflections on being and the meanings we give to it. It's got a lot of advantages that it didn't have in the Warring States, like flushing toilets, Velcro, immunizations, shag carpet, and... YouTube, to name but a few.
Fertile Ground's My Space Page.



Beyond technological innovation, there have emerged and declined philosophical and expressive universes that may say more about the particular ways we give expression to the human experience than to reflect any bona fide change in its overall makeup.

One of the consistencies between the lost version of the Yang Zhu and its latest incarnation is a firm belief in self-truth, being truthful with oneself, one's being. This is an idea as anathema to God-n-Country Christians as it is to Confucians. I bet they didn't know they shared so much in common. And of course blanket recriminations against Christians is as foolish as invocations of Christ for purposes of imperialist wars.

The point is there are some very serious issues out there and we need to take a stand. In the coming weeks The Yang Zhu will be giving its official endorsement for president... That's a lie... The Yang Zhu is not politically affiliated, though it does have lots of fun exploring the political aspects of good causes.

This is yet another consistency between the old and new The Yang Zhu: there isn't much shying from controversy. This is because The Yang Zhu has an inexorable urge to be self-expressed, especially as it relates to penetrating awareness, which stands in contrast to passive, osmotic thought--aka that which we've been told.

The Yang Zhu holds that the truths of Confucius, the NIH, rational-materialists, wiccans, gaians, Rosicrucians, and NPR are not self-evident. Instead of holding a hypnotic admiration for the whatever imperial raiment, a perspective resembling Lear's fool becomes necessarily more befitting (to think, there wasn't even English let alone Shakespeare at the first publication, of The Yang Zhu that is).