Saturday, June 27, 2015

Gay Marriage- fust another addiction fed, another step towards remining children


 Quick Post. 


 Another Loss For Collectivism
I have mentioned this before and this only validates it. There is a war waging among the species known as "human". The "individualist" who think their only existence is to maximize their own personal happiness and minimize their own personal pain. They trust nobody but themselves, live only for today. Polluting the world, consuming it's resources, and making zero advances toward preserving the human race is a hallmark. They drive nearly all of the global climate change, all while complaining about it. They have no connection to the past (no honor for their father and mother) and no connection to their future (treating their kids like puppies that they don't want anymore once the attention that they get from them and the "cuteness" wears off. Sending them earlier and earlier to public conditioning and thinking the little things they do is enough. Absolving themselves from how the child turns out as an adult.). Things like divorce, adultery, and of course "same sex marriage" are common. Because they are only driven by their own self preserving needs. On the other side is the collectivist. Those that believe they are only a bit part in the long and deep history of humanity. Those that believe the sum of all our parts should be more than the individual. Those that understand that "some" must endure pain and even death so that this "organism" known as the human race and live on and maybe even reach the stars one day. Some must restrain their quest for pleasure for the good of the community. This is a idea that every single living thing understands except humans. Collectivist have a strong connection to their elders taking care of them at home, listening to them, learning from their wisdom and appreciating their contributions. Their children are their most cherished resources. Things like "family honor" , tribal pride, and appreciation for their successes is a stable of collectivism. Every child is expected to bring in new members. Parents often arrange unions bases upon the honor and integrity of the potential mates parents. (These unions have been shown to be happier and longer lasting than those of "chance". ) This battle continues today. The quest for human longevity lost ground today for more consumption, more addiction and more individualism. This didn't happen over night. People today can not change who they are, but we have to ask the question of when we want to "turn back" to start being "good parents" again. As a parent, I can tell you that I say "no" far more often than I say "yes". but my yes's are appreciated much more. Governments elected by individualist are like dinner plans being made for a family of 6 with 3 totters being set by equal vote. A diet of ice cream and gummy bears can not be maintained, though you will live. As a father of a young daughter, I cringe at the examples, the voices outside of my own, my daughter has on the topics of sex, drugs and violence. My message already seemed like a "whisper upon a big gay parade scream.

Humans Telling Nature She is Wrong

Well, To my knowledge, while in the history of man, two men nor two women have had sex in an attempt to conceive. Bill never looked at Ted and said, we should make a baby. If they did, they didn't understand the science behind it. So anytime sex is engaged in, without the attempt to conceive a child, it is "sex strictly for pleasure."

Nature is a force that we can circumvent, but not without negative consequences in the long run. passing on the understanding of those consequences is the job of the "tribal leaders" and the policies they embrace. Sociologist believe nature developed the "orgasm" in men to get them "addicted" to that source for pleasure. This kept them around to protect the pregnant mother and then to raise the child. The rest of the tribe put social pressures on the male to make sure that he had anxiety about going to another source for sex. thus the condemning of rape, prostitution, bestiality, and adultery. became part of every philosophical doctrine. In some tribes, if you kill a warrior, you would inherit the responsibility of taking care of his wife and kids. Nature and natural progression has always tied healthy sustainable communities to controlling sex for pleasure. In recent times they have tied the female orgasm directly to the region of the brain where "trust" is generated. This lead sociologist to believe that it was a "reward" for picking a good father who they trust will stick around. This is the reason why nature developed sex.


There Is What Is Said By The Speaker And The Million Different Meanings  To The Listeners.

Every policy has two "meanings", two "messages". There is the meaning or message to the individual. Then there is the one that the example sets. This is true of gun policy as it is for policies on "sex for pleasure" as it is on drug use to make you "happy". Since this administration has taken office, they have been like bad parents unable to tell their whining children "no". If you were 15 and your parents and "the government" walked in on you having sex, the parents would say "no" the government would say, "it's your right." If your parents walked in on your smoking crack, your parents would say, "no", the government would say, "it's your right". If your parents walked in on you playing with a gun, your parents would say, "no". the government would say, "it's your right". Who has your best interest at heart. Who wants you to just keep feeding them your patriotism?
And that is about all I have to say about the Supreme Court Ruling. I and my family have our own addictions to deal with. This didn't make the future seem any brighter.

Thursday, June 18, 2015

NPR:Now Pedophile Friendly


Demystifying and Disarming NPR’s Passive-Aggressive Reporting  
I used to be such an advocate, believer, and appreciator of National Public Radio. I don’t know whether it was me, NPR, or (as I suspect) a combination of both has changed over the past decade. I have become aware of how their soft spoken, passive-aggressive , forceful manipulation of social issues has become more than just socially irresponsible, but even dangerous. I wrote in the past their technique of presenting “behaviors” as if they are biologically the same as skin color or disabilities and use pseudoscience to affirm their inaccurate assertions. For example, “Abortion” is presented as a natural biological process, like nothing can be done about it, and thus a “right”. They refuse to consider that the behavior of becoming pregnant with a child you don’t want is completely avoidable and the consequences is the result of behavior that should be condemned, not rectified. NPR, is a publicly funded (though very little public funds these days) entity that should not have a bias away from facts and science. And while the public funds are, today, a small amount of the budget, NPR does not exist today if it were not “built” by the people in its infancy. Much like liberals would say about a corporation, “you didn’t build it on your own.” So they have a responsibility to represent the entire public. Which is why I was so moved to lividness when I heard not one, but a few trending stories lately. The push to make pedophilia accepted as something that is “not in the control of the perpetrator” and even as if they are “sufferers” of an affliction. I know this is a huge “charge” and I had better be able to back it up. 

Lacking any sense of commitment and no longer “baffled” by their technique, I listen to NPR with the same air of skepticism as I do FOX. Most people listen to a news report expecting to be informed by an authority on facts, but when you know to look for it, you can easily spot when you are being pushed an agenda and sold opinions as facts. In the past, social issues that are far from harmless, but open to debate amongst adults. Legalization of pot, drone strikes, global climate change, governmental condoning of sex for pleasure, illegal immigration, and poverty are some of these issues. But when they turned their agenda towards accepting pedophilia as a behavior deserving compassion I lost it. 

 
A Quick Overview of Psychology of Acceptance  
The psychology goes like this, the first time you hear or witness something shocking, it is scary, causes reason to divert attention, and you far more clearly understand the dangers. The more you experience an idea, the more you experience “extinction” and the less aware of the negative effect you become. Some things this is good. For example, growing up in an entirely white town and area of the country, up until I got into high school, the only dark skinned people I knew were on TV. So my image was skewed and biased towards the negative traits of “black people”. The more I got to know more people of different colored skins, the more I realized that we were not too different. My fear and bias disappeared.

Cognitive dissonance cannot be overcome by shoving a complete opposing idea down the throat of a person who holds a completely differ belief. It is even harder when the idea you are trying to indoctrinate them with is not founded in reality or something concrete that cannot be denied. They will shut down, withdraw, and your message might as well be told “to a wall”. What pretty much has to be done is finding similarities to the person you are trying to convince and the perception you are trying to convince them of. If they see these similarities, they will be shown to be a hypocrite. So they will desire to adjust their belief system. Then manipulate those likenesses softly until they can accept the new reality. Marketing to adults is based upon this. This is why products are always compared to “the leading brand”. This is the approach every politician uses to convince you that he is “just like you” while the other guy is “one of them”. If you can relate to some things that are the same, you can accept that there are differences. (Deeper than this post is the threat analysis mechanisms in the psyche that have to be rectified with new information.)
To be noted, this is a tool of our psyche, it is neither a good nor bad trait. For example, meeting people who say, “I love you” to their family members might be strange to those who didn’t grow up with it, but it is a good thing. It is a trait you want to pass down to your children. However, the Cleveland 3 girls that were kidnapped and raped every day of their lives, accepted this as a reality, and became accustomed to it. But this is not something they would want to pass down to their children as normal.

 
NPR: National Pedophilia Radio 
As I am driving home the a few nights back, I was paralyzed with jaw dropped and locked as I hear an NPR program (that I care not to advertise for) doing a story on a movie festival award winning (I think documentary) about a dude who “Struggles with wanting to have sex with children”. The show was “This American Life”, but I will not link to it here. I refuse to give it credence. The subject of the movie claims he has never acted on his addiction. The reality is that in most cases, If he had done such a socially rejected offense, he wouldn't be able to admit it to himself. “Everybody in jail is innocent”. What incentive has he to admit that he did? He would have repressed it. But, let us give him the benefit of the doubt. The benefit that this dude “Adam” had not (yet) acted upon his impulse was the assertion. The story was focused on how great it was that he was getting help. During the entire story, even the therapist they described going to, not a single person pointed out the obvious. That tis dude, as some very young age, had been molested. That was the problem here. Through all the sappy music and empathetic silences, it wasn't mentioned even once as the result as this kid’s current state was the result of this egregious act being performed upon him. But that would have sent a contradictory message. What if his offender we also “suffering” from the pedophilia affliction? And NPR’s logic would come crashing down. In fact their logic and narrative about abortion, homosexuality, obesity, drug addiction would have all come crashing down. Since the liberal narrative is that somehow these afflictions are genetic and there is nothing that the people who have these feelings can do about them. 

Being pretty busy these days with some personal, physical type projects going on, I didn’t have time to write this right away. The very next day, on the way home, I was again listening to NPR. And there again was another story. Another justification of pedophilia!! This was about men, who as kids, were deemed “sex offenders”. They were now adults and complaining that they hadn’t did anything of the sort since they were under 18. Guess what? Most people have never done it at all. This is life, sometimes we do things as kids that effect our whole lives. Would you say this if they had murdered somebody in cold blood? If the kid wants a place to “blame” look to his parents. They obviously didn’t instruct you better. But study after study shows the disadvantages that are caused to children who are sexually assaulted at teen and pre-teen ages. Where is the story of the person that these kids assaulted? The depression, anxiety, the problems with relationships, the acts of disruptive behavior that is caused by the trauma this poor “victimized pedophile” caused? That is a life sentence for many of them. There is a case to be made that they would have been better off if you murdered them, at least the pain and suffering would have ended.


The Process Of Normalization
So if we could go back just 20 or 30 years, our ideals about drugs, sex and violence were much more stringent. The question is, “why”? Too many people will blame religion. The truth is religion is created from truths. It is often created to answer hard question in a simplistic and irrational way. It is hard to explain, even today with our advanced knowledge, the way “social environment” affects each and every one of us. What I will post is how Empathy is our strongest manipulation tool. If we can make ourselves seem the victims, we can get more people to believe our plight and protect our actions than if we are say, bragging. (Humble bragging is the least effective.) We, as a race are predisposed to follow “The golden Rule”. We can admit that there are behaviors that deserve ridicule of the society. As a general rule, society chastise behaviors that can cost the “Tribe” resources unequally and based on one’s own selfish desires. Sex when you can’t take care of offspring or it causes disease to spread is one. Drugs, as they cause people to be unproductive, distracted, and irresponsible with their energy. Violence, as it can rob the tribe of a needed member and cause waves of unrest. All of them are a sign of an emotionally disturbed member of the group. Because we live in such an artificial environment, that can’t be sustained, we don’t feel the direct effects of bad behaviors. That is where the danger lies.

First, somebody being shunned or punished for bad behavior is seen by others who don’t know the story as being “victimized”. The next phase is a group of people who have been shunned for the same bad behavior form a minority. Now this minority group is being victimized and they are larger and more vocal. They get supporters. This causes some to overreact and worse, people who don’t understand why the behavior is damaging to society start using irrational arguments. When religion is used to invalidate a bad behavior, with the discrediting of the religion (or some traditional philosophy), it becomes “credit” for the case to accept the bad behavior as “normal”. It shouldn’t, both are invalid premises, but it does. Often times they will break apart the bigger social dysfunction and say, Well this type of violation is different than that type. People often don’t realize they are on a slippery slope until they are sliding down the hill. “And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air – however slight – lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.” ― William O. Douglas

Pedophilia is part of the dysfunction caused by a society addicted to sex. Sex is the cheapest, easiest, more accessible drug we have. But it is the most devastating. Like food and water, we need to partake in it to survive as a race. But the danger of addiction and all the unhealthy and inhumane behaviors that come with it are always prevalent. How long before we start letting sex offenders off because “they can’t help themselves” . How long before the sexual abuser is on some talk show telling the world how they can’t help themselves, that is it “genetic” and we should feel pity for them.
If you are up for it, go seek out the story of “Adam” who was addicted to child porn, and the story they did about it on NPR. It made me sick to my stomach. The fact that they could “humanize” these monsters. You might be the type to think I am making much of this now, but look at how we thought about sex drugs and violence in the past compared to now. Imaging if we could remove “sex for pleasure” form our society as a “thought experiment”. What problem would go away. Pedophilia would be one of them.


A More Clearer Way Of Seeing It
So as a writer, story teller, journalist, your first question when you decide to do a piece is, “what is my purpose for doing this story. What is it that I want people to “feel” differently about when I am finished telling it. You never tell a story to leave people right where you found them. Even if you are affirming something they already believe, you are attempting to deeper entrench that belief. So what is it that you the writer of this documentary and this NPR piece was trying to “change” in you, the listener? The answer is they wanted you to “feel” more empathetic towards child molesters. This is the same exact approach they took for abortion, homosexuality, single motherhood, pot, and illegal immigration. It starts out with, “hey these people aren’t bad. Many of them are just like you, except this one flaw.” Then they slowly tell more stories until the narrative becomes, “ you are the bad bigot for chastising these people. There are so many of them that it just has to be good and normal.” Which, there are more of them because when people feel comfortable in not to repress of their bad desires, they start to “come out”. Other people with like desires start to associate and attach. This is what is happening here.

*I decided to include the link. I don't see how people can really get a sense of how despicable this is without hearing the piece.  What has this country become that we are on the path of cannibalizing even the youth in our thirst for lust. 

Pedophiles are people too?

Friday, April 3, 2015

I Prefer "Philosophical Freedom" Instead






    I am really interested in the very hypocritical banter around the "religious freedom" laws being introduced.  I would like to start out, right off the bat, that I support the spirit of these laws.  What I do not like is that they are calling them "religious". Too much exposure to the assault on the ridiculous opposing ideals of western Christians.  I think the better term would be philosophical freedom" legislation. Religion, after all, is just organized philosophy that is shared by a group of people.   Likewise, the "meaning of life" since life first sparked on Earth is to pass not only genetic, but philosophical traits to the next generation.  Battles between species and or inside the pack, is one where the strongest get to breed.  This has been the driving force of evolution for humanity for nearly 200,000 years. 

   Like an experiment in "selective attention".   One where the media, and even the bills creators, only focused on one possible application.  I think this is the case here.  The focus is on homosexuals being rejected by some business owners.  But what if I was Buddhist?  What if I don't believe in carrying weapons for self defense. It violates the first precept.  To a Buddhist, to leave the house with a tool designed only to kill, not only designates intent, but to do so contaminates ones mind and invites hostile Karma.  So, welcoming weapons into my place of business would violate my sanctuary.  Since Buddhist believe all actions as well as all speech support their path, their journey.  But not only would I have to deny guns in my establishment, but I would have to deny homosexuality.  The 3rd precept is abstain from sexual misconduct.  This refers to sex just for pleasure. In fact the actual translation is "sensual pleasure" which refers to over indulging in any act without purpose.  So, according to my Buddhist religion, I would be obligated to deny service to people who were requesting it if they were carrying guns or openly displaying homosexual behaviors. I should have the right to support my policy.  Just as any customer has a right to patronize somebody who supports theirs.

     This society in the past, has repressed people solely based upon genetic/ biological traits like skin color, eye shape, gender, and or age.  There is no doubt that this kind of judgment is detrimental to the well being of humanity.  That is not to say that certain roles in life are necessary and should be equally compensated.  If it is a trait that would require surgery for you to change or not to display, then it is clearly biological.  Despite the attempt for more than 40 years to pin some behaviors on biology, they have all failed.  The mere notion that a movement wants to have a behavior designated as "biological" and thus "not a choice" means that we understand that things that are a "choice" are subject to social criticism.  We should  not sit in judgment of things that are not in the control of the individual. 


      Behaviors are created by environmental factors, by the "message" we send people about the pleasure or pain involved with making a decisions.  Today, we still have laws that "reject" behaviors. As extreme as killing and raping, but as debatable as carrying guns, smoking pot, taking drugs, eating too much, selling our bodies, having multiple spouses, acquiring too much, or how we educate out children. We even force people who would otherwise not hold insurance, to do so. 

   This existence was created by living entities that could  not "talk". They have a philosophy that pass onto their young by their actions.   Most people who have a child understand that the words they say only embrace a small portion of the lesson they learn.  (Preaching against smoking and drinking has little effect with a beer and a cigarette in your hand.) That doesn't stop just because we are grown. Likewise, the "golden rule" of teaching children also still applies as adults. "Always condone good behavior, Always condemn bad behavior" . I can love a person and many of the things they do, but I should be allowed to demonstrate my opposition to the things I do not.  (I could get into the underlying failure and reason for so much emotional distress in the US being caused by endless mixed messages, but that would be an entire book.)  But believing you have a philosophy worth passing on to your peers and your successors is the very reason we live. Or it should be.  "Environment" is simply a complex network of social "dos" and "don'ts". I should be allowed to teach my child with words and actions, in my own empire, what I do expect and what I don't.  Even inside of a family, there are traits a parent will promote about a family member while discouraging another. Sometimes those lessons are taught ini respect to a family member. We are complex individuals.  Healthy emotional stable people can see the shades of grey in the people in their lives.   It is a crazy borderline type personality  that sees a parent as all good or all evil. 

   How about I put it this  way.  What if I am on my sailboat.  I am in California waters, so it is legal to smoke pot.  What if my young daughter is on board and a friend, all the sudden whips out a joint or a bowl and starts smoking.  Do I not have a right to make them put it out?  What if they start watching porn on the TV I have installed.  Do I not have a right to force them to stop these "behaviors". I certainly believe these are examples I do not want my daughter to deal be exposed to.  I want her to know that I do not approve of them.  So, on my own ship, I should be able to set that example. 

    If I create something, a house, a business, a social group, with my time and effort, I should be able to speak that belief with my whole being.  My physical voice and my action. If the government through law forces me to engage in actions that I do not condone, they take away my guaranteed right to "free speech."  How does the saying go, actions speak louder than words"? 

 Now, obviously there are lines drawn as part of our overall social identity of this society, that certain behaviors that either manipulate children or force harm on anybody are rejected by all but the few who do it.  Even most of them say they don't condone it, but that isn't what their actions say.  But, one thing is clear to me, it is my right as a person, and especially as a father, to speak with my actions, protect my philosophy by making sure all know it, and the government should not stop me. from doing so. THAT is a violation of free speech.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Fast Food, Capitalism, and Illegal Immigration: The Dots That Connect Them.


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/07/25/205547517/where-in-the-world-are-there-no-mcdonalds
It is said that "and army runs on its stomach". This is true of slaves as well. Feed somebody and they will be indebted to you. You have covered one of their basic needs and with the time they don't spend pursuing food, you can guilt them into doing labor for or at least supporting you. (This happens in a microcosm at work.)
So much labor is involved in growing, harvesting, cooking, and bringing food to a table, that it is a core sources of systemic functionality (The reason people work so well together.) that defines a reason humans made it to the top of the chain. What many people who both profess the wonders of global capitalism and then complain about the influx of illegal immigrants into this country don't seem to grasp is the connection between the two in Central and South America. As the US has dumped cheap food on these communities in those areas, a few thing happened. First, the food is high caloric food that expands the physical and psychological "need" for more and more. As the documentary "Food Wars" put it, We are predisposed for gorging ourselves with calories when they are available in preparation for "the winter" but we live in a world where "winter never comes". That feeling is never turned off. However, when once a village or even a family needed a large percentage of their population dedicated to just doing one of the tasks associated with feeding, now a small crew can feed thousands (or billion and billions served) of people. Add to that a reality that the food comes from far far away where much of it is not done by the community, and you have essentially eliminated the functional need for more than 3/4ths the community/ family/ country. (This is the passive aggressive nature of capitalism.)
So what do you do when so many people no longer have lost their function their historic role in society? Send them to work in your dangerous factories for low wages. Break up their families by making it so both mother and father have to work to make ends meet. A place where the kids will not see their parents hard work and only see the meager fruits of their labor. Expose them to the dangers of the influence of the violent drug cartels. Drive the very value of the producers down and then call them lazy, worthless, and beggars when they can not establish a respectful living and lifestyle.
A long time ago, when I had more "conservative" leanings, thinking it to be funny, I used to say, "if you want to take over a country, don't send troops, send McDonald's and Walmarts. In no time they will depend on your hand to feed them." I still "say" it, I just don't think it is funny anymore.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Why College Cost So Much And Tuition Risen So Fast And We Still Pay

There has been lots of talk about the cost of education and how to pay for it these days. Obama has made it part of routine talking points.  It is sure to come up in the election campaigns.  However, nobody is talking about what caused exaggerated tuition increases in the first place.  With my love of the use of analogy to lead the reader to reason, here are two scenarios (one building upon the other) that explain, crudely, what happened.  ( hint, in all the stories in that Bible book, only one type of person made that Jesus character angry enough to take to mild violence.)   Read, enjoy, comment..

The first scenario starts with a "producer" who produces this product called "education". His target market it a group called "the people". Because market "value" is set by the equilibrium point  derived from the price "The People" are willing AND able to pay for the "education", the price is set at $5000 per education. (using numbers only as example.) The truth is that The People would be willing to pay more because they believe education has special powers to grant financial stability. But because of income levels and costs of living among The People they are not ABLE to pay more, the Producer can only sell education at 5K. So the question is "Where is the power to value 'education' under this scenario?" A secondary question would be "How much does it cost?" The answer, to me, is clearly in the hands of "The People" and tied rationally to their actual income.

In the second scenario, a "money changer" with extra capital to invest, sees the situation above and devices this plan. He recognizes that people are "willing" to pay more, and with time he can squeeze that extra out of them.  He approaches the "Producer" of the "education" and says, "how would you like to double the amount you can get for each of your educations? The only caveat is that while there are currently 100 "The People" consuming your Education per cycle, next cycle you will only be able to serve 90. But you were getting $50,000 per cycle, you will now get $90,000 per cycle. You will be able to lay off staff and a few other fixed costs with the reduced overhead. Of course the Producer wants to boost his income. But he explains "$5000 is market value, I can not get anymore. I have tried to raise my prices in the past and people did not buy." The money changer says, "leave that to me. Just raise your rates to double." The money change then approaches The People a few days later, who have been informed of the increase in price of Education. He, passing himself off as a "good guy" says, "I have good news. I will pay for 90 of you the $10,000 to purchase Education. In return I only ask that you pay me back $15,000 over then next 10 yrs and not until after you get out of school." Now The People are in competition with each other for a product that may or may not have the value they believe it to. They, caught in this competitive market ignore the many things that could happen. They could fail, they could die, they could become disabled, and other life events, and still owe the money changer. The question is the same, "Where is the power in this new scenario?" The Producer COULD choose not to raise his rates and make more money. But in a capitalist market, that is unlikely and if he did, somebody else will take advantage of them.  The People, believing they need Education for themselves, their kids, and all they love for safety and stability feel trapped. They, wanting to maximize potential for their and their children's future, feel inclined to buy this education at any cost.

  The message of this experiment is that the control over the economy was taken from "The People". It was taken from them by the deliberate method of the "money changers".  While the reality is that many bankers and "investors" are not so deliberate in their intent, the result is still the same.  Good intention have paved the way to places best left untraveled before.  Anyway you care to view it, the real power is with the Money changer. AND THAT is the problem with many economic issues in this country. The people with the money, in a very passive way, hold growing control over those who do not.

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Here are the LAP New Year “Revolutions”





  Being this a advocacy for political change blog, It is only fitting that I set some points for change that I would like to see us work towards in the coming years.

A Different Type Of Marriage Authorized 
1) It is time to marry the ideas on the "Declaration of Independence" and the "Constitution".   It is time to acknowledge that the document that men looked at and agreed it was worth risking their lives for, the ones the soldiers of the revolution signed upon committing service, is just as valid and important as the ones politicians in a time of slavery, sexism, racism, and treating natives like animals crafted in a political environment with not much different than exist today and with less than half of the voices we consider to be valid today. What that means is the laws of nature (for which we have discovered much about since 1776) and “God” (for which we have found a lot of flaws in the idea since 1776) should be reassessed and added to the constitution.   The line “Life, Liberty, and Happiness” should be seen as more than just ideas, but considered the “mission statement”/ the “product” for which our legislators are to be guided by.  The statement “that all men are created equal” doesn't mean that they remain that way.  That this is an acknowledgement that we are born “blank slates” and that the things both public and private influence the behaviors of “men” between that birth and their death.  By mentioning this in this context, it means that the community/ government/ policy makers have an obligation to be vigilant of those things that influence the people they become, to make sure they are equally enlightened and therefore free.  The point, in plain English, too many US citizens are born into the inequality associated with poverty and other social ills. Place of birth, method of education, and family environment are all means of creating inequality. An obvious understanding that Paris Hilton has a far great chance at success than a kid born to a crack addicted mother in the projects.  These inequalities make it harder to attain “life, Liberty, and happiness” for all.  


Guns, Slaves, and Paranoia
2) It is time to throw out the 2nd amendment for the barbaric, archaic and destructive piece of …… legislation that it is. As pointed out above, we are only granted rights given by either nature or god that make us equal.  Since none of us are born with guns, it is safe to assume neither nature nor god intended us to have them.  They gave us a voice, so it seems freedom of speech makes sense to some extent.  Guns, do not. There is nothing “god given” about a gun. The reason for the 2nd amendment was to that militias could chase slaves down and being them back to slavery.  We ended slavery because it was ludicrous, might as well end the “enforcement” policy that enabled it.  The Buddhist have a philosophy that states basically that “if your mission is one of war, then bring tools of war and close your mind to enemy assault. If your mission is one of peace, then bring tools of peace and open your mind to compromise.” Since we have adopted the mission statement of “domestic tranquility” it means that weapons and paranoia are wrong and even adversarial tools for the goal. Time to start working them out of our society. Deaths, rapes, robbery, intimidation, suicide, and assaults are all negative results of our access to guns. The fact that we, not living in 1776, where a drive across a state line took days and had a risk of life and limb, anymore and the ability to get guns into a "gun free zone" is simpler than an Asian Carp getting into the Great Lakes. Time to wage war on war. 

Lawyers Validating Lawyers Is Like Liars Validating Liars
3) It is time to disband the Supreme Court. The idea of lawyers reviewing the decision of other lawyers seems to be counterproductive. They are going to come up with the most lawyerly decisions.  Which, most of us understand means the highest paid and most self-serving decision.  While separation of church and state is a good idea, and necessary for common good, the combination of science and state is in the best interest of public and future well-being.  In its place, we should establish a board of science and philosophy.  One that addresses policy issues based not on the outdated documents of centuries ago, but of one that considers the most up to date understanding of what brings peace, life, health, and prosperity to the community as a whole.   Using the latest understanding of biology, sociology, psychology, economics, ecology, diplomacy, and physics they access the logic and reasoning behind the intent of each policy.  Individual rights are theirs and theirs alone so long as those rights remain inside the house of the individual and those they are responsible for or answerable to.  When those behaviors spill outside those walls, they must be considered for the full impact that they example plays upon the community as a whole.  If a policy is deemed to be supportive of behavior that inhibits life, liberty, or happiness will gain no public endorsement.  In many cases, that doesn't mean punishment or repercussions for it, just no endorsement.  We understand that screaming “fire” in a crowded theater takes away from liberty and happiness, so should other public proclamations that are not scientifically sound.  Enabling or encouraging individuals to continue bad behaviors, is not in the best interest of the community, certainly not openly. The staple of determining what is dysfunctional or bad behavior should be that if you wouldn't condone your teenager to do it in front of you, then it is something that you know internally that it is wrong.  That sense of "right and wrong" is naturally instilled in most of us by nature or god.  The science and philosophy board is to apply the science to the mission statement on all policies challenged. Lower courts are determined legality of issues.


   I would say that these are big enough for one year.  We will see how much headway we make on them by next New Year.   The core of these “revolutions” are that we acknowledge that it is no longer 1776 any longer.  That we no longer live on self-sustaining family farms and/ or small communities.  We no longer live mostly silent, individual lives, where we were all stay at home parents, passing our philosophy on next generation free from media, school, and ever changing peer groups.  That the effects uncovered by Zimbardo in the “Stanford Prison Experiment” about “group think” has a much more powerful role and influence than it did back then.  The things we say and do in public have a direct effect upon the children of other hard working parents.  When we come to terms with the fact that we now live in a global commune, we can start working to repair the damage denying that reality has caused.


Tuesday, November 12, 2013

What Do We Openly Value In The US? Dispoble Heros?

(This was written to my FB connections.  The message still resonates even without that connection.) 

This post will be by far the most offensive one I have ever written. But most of the people reading my FB posts are friends and family who are stuck with me. That being the case, you can still make donations to buy my a newer 48' Hans Christian. Make donation checks payable to “Foundation for ridding American psyche of cognitive dissonance by casting out logic, reason, and science”.

Ok, do me a favor. Look over your FB feed for the past 48 hours. Look upon it not as yourself, but as an outsider to this country. Judge what you see to be an extension of the things we value. “What do Americans value above all else?” Judge the people that get mentioned or pictures posted by the reason they are mentioned. (Hint, a lot of pics of soldiers that last couple of days.) Judge their job not by the warm emotional feelings associated with the term, but by the job description.. I'll give you a second to go do that...... OK, what would an outsider see about about US society and its values? Would they see it value its engineers and their dedication to advancing life saving technology? Would they seen scientist valued for expanding our understanding of the world and reality. Would an outsider see us commending the dedication of a doctor, who sacrificed 12 yrs of his life to , not getting drunk and foreign countries and buying hookers with his buddies, but endless boring study, labor, and constant threat of failure. For a few years the doctor even works for free! When he is done he has a bill bigger than the 3 times the cost of most of our houses. Do you see that in your FB feed? How about fire fighters or police officers who run toward danger with a mission to bring everybody out alive, no matter who they are? How about the teachers. We contribute DNA to create our children's bodies, but they contribute knowledge and enlightenment that creates their personality. Often in a teacher is a life raft in a sea of malice, bullying, and of social Darwinism that exist in the hallways of our public schools. When was that last time you saw somebody post a picture of “My Teacher”. How about the factory worker, a good one, who is a iconic example of dedication and hard work. Ideas are great, but you need somebody to make them a reality. How about the architect and carpenters who build these things where all your great memories are made. As a government employee maintaining a very important information system, I save lives every day. We have a < 0% acceptance of loss. So it is mundane and hardly seems worth is on most days to take care of the backup system to the backup system. We have only the safest NAS in the world to kind of reflect our efforts. 

Here is why this is so important to me that I risk public and family ridicule. “You all”, and the commune (aka community) are all purveyors of a massage that is creating my daughter's personality whether I want you to or not. Already she knows “Michigan sucks” and “The Steelers suck”. I didn't teach her that. Social forces taught her that. She doesn't even know what it means. She now has a predisposition against Michigan. What if a school or a job later in life calls her that way. Yes the subconscious it that powerful, especially to those who believe it isn't. The people reading this post are very close to me and thus her. I want my daughter to value education, technology, science, hard work, dedication, all human life (enemies included), non-violence, and independent thinking for herself. I want her to reject blind faith and “patriotism”. But she will never go to a football game and hear, “Let's have all the psychological researchers stand up! We thank you for teaching us about ourselves. To move towards a more peaceful and enlightened society.” She will never be at church and hear, “Let's pray today that the engineers that are working on life saving tissue and organ replacements are safe and successful.”. In our society she will never witness those traits I value being publicly highlighted. It is rare we see things like life long commitments, nonviolent sacrifice, or compassion honored in grand format. “The parade to commemorate the people who never got divorced.” We all seek social acceptance (well except maybe me. Blame it on my ADD... sail.), and we all look to mimic those we see getting it. So I need, feel obliged for the success of Cecelia’s growth, to chastise the US as a society. You are threatening to misguide my daughter. Stop it. I know this is a losing battle, but I have never fought any other kind.

Here is a truth about a capitalist society. If you create something, it cost money. If something cost, you now have a vested interest in using it. We have to be able to justify the cost, to get an ROI. Often times we seek to make sure our investment is justified. If that investment is your son or daughter's life, you seek even more intently. So if you create a soldier, you have a vested interest in creating an army. If you create an army, you have a vested interest in going to war. If you have people paying you and you are just sitting around, people start to wonder why they are paying you. (Ask any of my prvious and current bosses.) The reality is that if we spent as much on creating doctors and hospitals to combat health problems, we would save millions of American lives each decade and solved nearly every physical and emotional ailment. If we spent half the money we do on defense on training engineers and scientist, we would have our energy problems sustainably solved and be working on a way to reach another planet. Instead we train soldiers, build armies, and facilitate war, then claim we are a peaceful “Christian” nation. Then we honor the mess we made as if it were something unavoidable.
OK, like I said, all those who think, “This dude should get out of this country if he doesn't like this one!” (Thus missing the point but, oh well). Send me a message. I will tell you where you can post the donations to. I am currently $996,345 short of the money I need to get the boat and stock it to get underway. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCsH1g5ZESk

Counter text

New counter