...during those years, too. How could I have been so stupid to let all that happen to me and then to do it to myself?
Search This Blog
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
My fake life- 1992-1996
I can this period my fake life because I was in full denial about my growing mental problems. Unable to cope with what would be diagnosed as my Bipolar Disorder and very chronic OCD, I crafted a fake life with a fake future for myself during those years, one marked by rampant psychiatric drug use and abuse and the lie that it had "fixed me" and that I wasn't crazy. In short, I popped pills and went about my business, only caring if I felt okay/not depressed and completely unconcerned with diagnoses and actually trying to fix problems. I'm so adrift during those years, completely unable to cope with my growing disability, which would become overwhelming, and convincing myself I can have a normal life like everyone else. Hey, I had just some depression and anxiety! Give me some anti-depressants and benzos and I'm good to go! I'm normal! That's how I lied to myself. In my defense, I also got some terrible advice from my GP (who I resent to this day) and I came to identify with my symptoms. The anti-depressants cycled the mania I didn't know I had into overdrive. One misdiagnosis later and I was convinced I was some sort of god, that I was a superior being. Hey, my GP said those crazy thoughts I was having were really me and my brain is telling me I'm a god so I must be a god!! I was also manipulated by a drug addicted mother which kept me a drug addict for those four years. I look back on it it now and it's hell on Earth. I'm trapped in a dark, manic dead zone, like a permanent mixed episode. I can't help but be resentful as i was failed by everyone during the most important time of my life, when it was time for me to go out into the world and have a life. I resent my mother for her endless meddling and manipulating. Think Hillary Clinton trying to keep someone on her team and that's my lying mother. My Dad didn't understand and quit when my Mom left him. He even had a girlfriend and went to her kid's hockey games while rejecting me. It clear to me this little kid was a sports replacement now that I was done playing baseball in HS. Darkness and anger and depression. Only started getting better after my seizure and near death experience in 1996. I was woken up. I've long since accepted my problems and I'm permanently on meds now. I hate those years so much and I hate several of the people in my life during those years so much.
Wednesday, January 11, 2023
How we define "Good" and "Evil"
There are two different ways we look at the ideas of good and evil. The first is an irrational, illogical ideology based on our own biases. We consider ourselves good and anyone we don't like evil, regardless of behaviors. This is all too common in the American Republic. Millions of Americans see themselves as good and Donald Trump as evil for no other reason then they don't like the guy. What they do and what he does is irrelevant. He's just bad and they're just good just because. Obviously, that view of good and evil is thoughtless and irrelevant. It's good and bad as black and white regardless of other factors. It's brainless "either/or" with nothing else in it. The second way is the proper way of looking at such concepts, as being catch all categories for certain traits. When we think of good, we think of various qualities that can be shoved into the term. Good means responsible, giving, just to the less fortunate, honest, helpful, non-abusive, etc. Evil includes things like murder, rape, manipulation, lying, etc. The levels of Hell in Dante's Inferno is a great example of how to separate the traits considered evil into various tiers. I feel what a person is labelled (if we can use that term) depends on how much of each quality they have, keeping in mind that the vast majority of human activity is based on just regular behaviors not included in either category. There's no good or evil way to go to the grocery store. As humans, we go because we need food. There's no good or evil to it (unless we describe the meeting of our basic needs as good. The flip side of that can be seeing overindulgence in our basic needs as being evil.) Such labelling is like various points on a spectrum. The more positive qualities we have, the farther towards good we go. The more negative, the farther we go towards evil. It's much easier to condemn a person as evil based on one trait. An unrepentant murderer can be considered evil, even if he or she is almost saintly in every other way. It's much tougher to qualify a person as good based on one quality. Just because a person is extremely giving or nice or helpful doesn't mean they're good if they're also an abusive liar. We have much greater standards for people being good. They need A LOT of good qualities to be on that list. We frequently hear someone being built up as good then someone who knows them chimes in, "Yeah, but they lie all the time." Thus, they stop becoming good in our perception because we rarely use the term "less good." We don't say a person is good but they're less good than others, though there are some colorful expressions intelligent people use occasionally. I'm reminded of Frederick Douglass calling Abe Lincoln, "A first rate second rate man," a perfect way of saying he's a good man but only to a point. He's "sort of" good. There's also a comedic expression going around by the American establishment that the US "isn't as bad" as other nations. We're bad, we're just not as bad! 😄 So what a proper thinker sees as good and evil is involved with much thought and depth. It's frequently stated simply but it's actually complicated and involves multiple insights. That separates it from the borderline personality view of good and evil, the "anti-Donald Trump" way of looking at it. When discussing these ideas, if our goal is to learn anything, we have to make sure we know who we're speaking to, as some will understand good vs. evil in one of the two ways illustrated. The "we're just good and they're just bad" perception that dominates modern politics leads to nothing, while the philosophical and intellectual way of looking at it can bear much fruit. Thanks for reading!
Sunday, December 18, 2022
Was Trump vs. the Establishment America's Gracchi Moment?
As I re-watch Garrett Fagan's Teaching Company lecture series on the History of Ancient Rome, I can't help but see parallels between the situation which started the downfall of the Roman Republic beginning in 133 BC with the election to Tribune of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus and the political situation starting with the ascension of Donald Trump through the year 2022. Was Trump a modern day Tiberius Gracchus?
Though experiencing the typical bumps in the road of any growing Republic, the Roman Republic had largely avoided any major internal crisis through to the 2nd century BC. That changed when Tiberius Gracchus was elected as one of two Tribunes in the Tribal Assembly of the Plebs (common people) in 133 BC. A member of a family of the highest prestige, I see Tiberius Gracchus as a man with a Caesarian view of his own importance. Namely, a man at the top of the social order destined to change everything by his actions. I think his motives are beyond reproach. Land reform in Rome was desperately needed as the rich bought up the land of poorer farmers, most of whom spent enormous amounts of time away from home in the Roman legions. As those now landless men increasingly became members of the poor collecting in Rome, something needed to be done to change the situation, even if it meant taking a certain amount of land from the rich and giving it back to the farmers. This should not be seen as "Communist." It should be seen as the rectification of a major problem started by the greedy, greed which traditional Roman patriotism wouldn't have created in the first place as any rich patricians wouldn't have bought up the land of those who served their country militarily, leaving those people essentially homeless upon their return to Rome. As Tiberius grew more aggressive in trying to make this necessary reform happen, the Roman Senate, bound by their own traditions apart from the masses, moved to squash it by manipulating Gracchus' Tribunal colleague into vetoing his proposals. At this point, tradition and policy take over as the Senate digs in and Tiberius, through his role as a Tribune, destroys precedent and has his colleague in the Tribal Assembly, who offered the veto, removed. Tiberius breaks further tradition by running for Tribune for an unprecedented third time. The Senate's response these tradition breaking actions? Making up a reason why Gracchus wanted to be a dictator and eventually killing him and his followers.
SO MUCH of that drama has repeated itself, granted in slightly different ways, with populist "man of the people" Trump opposing the American establishment, namely Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat controlled House and the Democrat controlled Senate with the collaboration of Neocon Mitch McConnell and his cabal of associates including Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn and Mitt Romney.
So where are the parallels? The first upset in American political history is the rise of Andrew Jackson, a man greatly opposed by both the Founding generation and the then establishment led by people like House Majority Leader Henry Clay. Jackson, in Trump-like fashion, became a populist hero, earning the undying support of millions of Americans and riding that popularity to victory in, essentially, three elections (the one in 1824 was notoriously stolen from him.) So, early on, we have a precedent of a populist like Gracchus and later Trump throwing a monkey wrench into the plans of the then establishment. What follows is the Age of Jackson, where (white male) America spreads to the West Coast and rises as a world power.
At this point, I'm largely going to gloss over the Civil War. Yes, it is THE great political upheaval in American history but it is very different than the situations between Jackson/Trump and the Founders/Clay/Pelosi and McConnell. Northern and Southern America had become two different civilizations by 1861, separated along the lines by slavery and other vast cultural differences. The war was fought after the South seceded and became its own country, therefore that conflict can be seen as a war between two different nations. Neither the Confederacy nor the Union were bound by any laws to support the other side at that point. So we move on past this point.
The US post Civil War is one beginning to integrate its freed slave population into the general populace, a process which, IMO, has irreparably destroyed its civilization, not because integration is unjust (it isn't) but because black and white Americans refuse to get along and that has irrevocably divided the country for good. In short, Americans on both sides of the fence refuse to integrate properly. BUT I DIGRESS from my narrative for that personal opinion! So, other than the bumps in the road of America's racial problems, the American establishment has largely gotten along well enough to lead us into 2015. The Pelosi and McConnell wings oppose each other politically but are generally good friends away from Congress. Politics is often a blood sport but, for most of the 20th Century, firebrands in politics were few and far between and no real Jacksonian level figure had emerged...
...and then a certain gentleman rides down an escalator. At first, the establishment is amused. After all, Trump is a man they know, a man of enormous public voice and power via his wealth, and it's not like he has a chance of actually winning!! He's one of them, the establishment says, and life will continue as smoothly as ever once his sideshow quickly passes. BUT suddenly something happens. Trump, instead of opting to kiss the ring of Mitch McConnell and literally rub elbows with Nancy Pelosi as he does, goes into a completely opposite direction. Trump, like Gracchus, sees problems with America and Trump, like Gracchus, decides to go to the people the establishment ignores, "the masses," as a way of seeking power by bypassing the traditions of the established order. That establishment reacts just as the Roman Senate and the American Senate/House of Henry Clay and Co. reacted. That Trump is a dangerous man to the Republic and must be stopped at all costs. Suddenly, virtually that entire establishment responds like never before in my lifetime (born in 1973.) Politicians on both sides attack and denounce him. The media goes from his fawning toadies to his deadly enemies, making up fake story after fake story in the desperate attempt to stop him, a process beginning in 2016, motoring through the Russia collusion lie and into the present. Trump responds to this like both Tiberius Gracchus and his brother, Gaius Sempronius Gracchus. A blood feud erupts between he and his populists vs. the established order (the Roman Senate/American Congress.) The nightmare scenario is completed in 2016 as Trump wins the Presidential election. Now, as Tiberius Gracchus was an elected official causing trouble for his Senate, Trump is an elected official causing trouble for his Senate/House. Both Tiberius and Gaius (even more extreme and hateful of the Roman Senate than his brother) need to go. There can be no negotiations or peaceful resolutions. The Roman Senate responds by murdering Tiberius Gracchus literally then later murders his brother both politically then literally. The American Senate/House responds by murdering Trump's reputation and public standing, thus murdering him politically. (And, honestly, there also isn't one person in that establishment that didn't want a random American citizen killing Trump literally.) Thousands of followers of both Tiberius and Gaius are also murdered in the Roman Senate's attempt to "cleanse" the political scene. Hundreds of influential voices in the Trump movement are purged on social media and constantly (and often unfairly) attacked in the mainstream press, the mechanisms that hold the keys to public perception in any democracy, thus also murdering them politically. Thus, Trump and the followers of Trump are murdered by the establishment in the eyes of the people, the people being the ones who vote to give others power.
So IMO this is A Gracchi moment in American history. HOWEVER, because of the establishment media's stranglehold on public perception (and that's not hyperbole), there's a better than average chance that the average American won't even see it!! 🤣🤣🤣 Politicians have been burying their misdeeds, ranging from lies and manipulations to worse, for thousands of years. No one did it better than the Romans and the current American establishment is doing its best to emulate that behavior. What the mainstream power establishment (political and media) wants to do is just sweep the Trump years under the rug. The followers of Nancy Pelosi and the Fox News Neocons will eventually just pretend the Trump years didn't happen. In Democrat circles, he'll be a great boogeyman like the constantly invoked Hitler. "We don't talk about that creature or those years" will be the refrain, much like the Emperor Augustus didn't want to talk about his early political years where he proscribed thousands of wealthy Romans, leading to their murders and a seizure of their properties. The Lindsey Graham/Paul Ryan Fox News Republican will also sweep these years under the rug as a "time when we lost the better angels of our nature" and other mountains of self-righteous rhetoric. American textbooks will be manipulated to portray Trump as both Hitler and a Satanic figure. However, what those groups can't sweep under the rug is that the Trump years ACTUALLY happened and no amount of purging from the ranks of American history textbooks can change that. He didn't seize power. He was CHOSEN for it by the people. So why did it all happen and what happens from here? I've stated several times how the traditional establishment feels but there are many who will remember the Trump years fondly as a time when the common man/woman took on the rich, traditional aristocratic oligarchy and actually won for a time.
My conclusion as a college history graduate? The Roman Republic eventually fell and became the Empire, the rule of one, but I don't see it happening in the United States, at least not as a result of Donald Trump. The Romans were male dominated and valued the dictatorial spirit of military conquest and might making right above all else. By its very nature, it was ripe to eventually fall to one man who could defeat all his competitors (Julius Caesar) like a player in a tournament. The American Republic is much more complicated than the Roman Republic due to its integrated racial diversity and the impact of women in power positions. Yes, we have an infuriating aristocratic oligarchy who are, essentially, a cabal of kings and queens that operate in the perceived holistic bubble of being more than one person. Only in the hands of one person is a dictatorship seen. For thousands of years, parliaments of nobles have ruled "non-dictatorships" in the fashion of dictatorial minorities and the reaction of our establishment to Trump proves we're no different. The people elected Trump? SCREW THE PEOPLE! We, the aristocratic few, are in charge. We don't like him so he has to go. Screw what you want! They painted Trump as a dictator but was it so? Was Trump a dictator trying to conquer a wonderful, positive, essentially good establishment (as they claim) or a freedom fighter trying to bring a corrupt Uniparty who largely ignores regular people to account? THAT will be the argument for real historians. The current Joe Biden establishment has fake historians kissing its ass and telling it what it wants to hear but it's all much more complicated than that and real historians will eventually dig into the Trump years like a banquet feast to study how it all went down. IMO, due to media control (and they know it), Donald Trump was A Gracchi moment but it isn't THE Gracchi moment. His time as President proves he wasn't a dictator and the reaction to him was far worse than anything he did. In trying to smear and destroy a man they considered without honor, the traditional power establishment did the most dishonorable things possible.
Thank you for reading this far!
Saturday, November 12, 2022
Why the Church has to reject Secular Materialism NOW
Firstly, I'll just say that there's a definite place for secular humanism, while I completely reject secular materialism. That said, the Church, an institution that MUST exist to meet the SPIRITUAL NEEDS of society, has moved dangerously close to, and in too many cases fused with, secular materialism. I write this post because I just saw old nuns on NBC at a Notre Dame basketball game on IPhones. I'm guessing they weren't doing the work of the Church or the Lord. A minor criticism? Possibly but it's illustrative of the shift in the modern Church from deep thought and the pursuit of spiritual development to one of wanting to be cool with the secular masses. I'm sure the nuns I saw are considered "great nuns" and are very hip and cool with those they speak with, meaning they probably teach the modern secular liberalism that's made globalization so profuse. We already have WAY too much of that. If the Church doesn't go back to its spiritual disciplines sooner rather than later, it's become useless to civil society because it will have ceased to be the alternative its supposed to be.
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
VERY SORRY I wasted my time and emotions on the United States
As the 2022 midterms come to a close and my place in society is once more invalidated and irrelevant, I have to express my final feelings on politics in the United States as being a complete waste of time, thought and emotion. The ancient Romans, even in their Republic, had an illusory system of "democracy" which only existed to favor the very rich and powerful, always in the concept of a super minority of family connections. The regular people suffered and did all the work. Guess what we have in America? The same thing. We have a political Uniparty, essentially their own family power structure, which exists solely to further its own financial and power lusts. Outsiders need not apply, just like they need not have applied thousands of years ago. America sucks. It's always sucked in some capacity and it always will. America is a nation of the Godless, the materialistic, the addicted, the empty and the mentally imbalanced. It's fake "freedom," the "freedom" to detach from reality and live a fantasy where the natural laws of mankind can be ignored and denied to the inevitable detriment to all involved. Reality WILL not be denied. It can't be. It has its effect whether it's acknowledged or not. The United States is fantasy. It's a nation LOADED with problems which its arrogant nature refuses to see or cope with. When we live in the light of reality, we see that the United States is a great enemy. as all elements who choose to live in fantasy in a world where we must acknowledge reality are fated to become. The wealthiest will once again be the only ones who profit while the decent people suffer. The most corrupt people will continue to harm the most innocent. The brainless herd will desperately try to nudge their way into the elite classes to benefit in the useless materialism and the fake security it affords. Just like in ancient Rome, one of the most corrupt "civilized" civilizations in human history. Fake, illusory, savage and vicious. Sorry I tried to save you, America. YOU wasted MY time.
Short Post: Are our emotions spiritual or physical?
Spiritual. In my experience, our emotions are spiritual and eternal. They go way beyond the physical. They're as close as we get to God, which is encapsulated in the idea that "God is Love." Our emotions are not scientific. Our emotions are not disposable like our physical bodies. When we die, our emotions do not cease like our physical bodies as our emotions are not guttural and instinctive. Our emotions are our souls and make up who we really are in the ether of eternity. We cease to be physical people. We never cease to be emotional beings.
Is Mathematics hard reality like science or creatively conceptual like poetry?
Just watched a neat philosophy lecture on Pythagoras and it made me think of mathematics. We all know science is physical reality. It's tangible. something we can feel. It has mass. It has a cause and effect impact of us and your world. Mathematics is intellectual and at least perceived as in the galaxy of scientific reality but is it really? If a piece of wood is at a right angle, we know the wood is real but how are we to analyze its right angle? Abstract thinkers (as they were back in the day) came up with a thought process that this piece of wood had a certain bend to it and that numbers, merely ways of counting physical objects, could be applied to this bend but was seeing a bend in the wood necessary at all? Why would we need to conceptualize this angle in the first place? It's a hunk of wood and has the laws of physical science behind it. We MUST acknowledge it's a hunk of wood. It can be in our way. It can hit us over the head. It has a potential impact outside ourselves we can't deny. But must we acknowledge mathematics? Nothing about the wood or ourselves changes if we don't see the wood is at a right angle. Physical reality goes on whether we see it or not. In that way, is mathematics a necessary application in the real world at all? If we didn't conceptualize math, with all its intricate calculations, would we be the worse off for it?
In that way, I see math as being a bit like poetry. Like the poetry of beautiful things. We experience beautiful things like flowers in the real world because they have mass like the block of wood. We then think of ways we can creatively express what we're seeing in an aesthetic way. We apply it to our emotions. in contrast, we apply the idea of a right angle in a block of wood with pure intellect, largely free of the emotions. We can get emotional over a right angle but it seems rather silly! While it's virtually impossible to create good poetry about a flower without some sort of emotional aesthetic. In that way, mathematics can be seen as emotionless poetry, intellectually creative yet devoid of any need for an emotional connection. Mathematics is often very important for creating a sense of order in our lives which helps makes our existence bearable in a technical fashion. It's a facilitator of problem solving. However, if all we need to do is see the block of wood as just a hard, physical object devoid of shape and we need not use our emotions to conceptualize it, is mathematics even necessary to our existence as the acknowledgement of the physical and the emotional are? Food for thought!
Monday, January 11, 2021
My Spiritual Views
As no one reads my blog anymore, this is pretty much for me.
I grew up a Catholic and I went from believing it definitely to being more questioning to being agnostic to being a complete disbeliever. Certain experiences (like a near death one) have opened my eyes to the idea of spirit, specifically the "great beyond" as it were.
Combination of views and philosophies:
As I've grown, as my senses have been blown wide open and I've largely separated from the social distractions that come from organized religions, I've studied different views and I've become a combination of humanism and ancient tenets and philosophies.
Roman Stoicism:
All intelligent people eventually "figure out" religion, meaning realize a lot of stuff in religious stories is made up to prove points and build a common mythology. Nothing wrong with that at all but, if we're searching for spiritual truth, more aesthetically pleasing than helpful. So, a seeker of truth turns to more thoughtful, intellectual concepts in searching for truth and that means studying other "religious" ideas and classical philosophy. I love the ideas of ancient philosophers the most because they lived in times where there were fewer mental and emotional distractions, therefore their insights are a bit more clear headed. I love the later Germans and Brits but there's SO much for them to consider that they become SO complicated! Beautifully tough to learn but very cluttered! So I love the ideas of Parmenides and Heraclitus, especially because they're simple, eternal and at the root of perception. "No man steps in the same river twice" is a perfect concept for evolution. Parmenides' view that life and time are eternal and present and that we essentially never go anywhere is a perfect concept of the timeless nature of soul and spirit. In terms of looking at society, I really like Roman Stoicism, maybe because I love old Roman history and because it's a more masculine view I can connect with. That all things happen for a reason, even the horrible things, that we can't comprehend is a great thought process for letting go, for trusting in life and the processes of life. Without such concepts, we try to control everything and we can't get through a day without being overwhelmed by the horrors of the world, especially in today's social media climate. Which leads me to the next idea I've come to embrace.
Taoism - "The Way"
Roman Stoicism is a great way to learn to let go of trying to change what cannot be changed in the physical world. Taoism is then a great direction on a new direction to go in, namely getting in touch with the rhythms of the universe and ourselves, the metaphysical, the eternal, the spirit beyond the world. It eliminates the distractions of the physical and allows for clear contemplation of the ideas of God and the universe, which then leads to the question of why we're on Earth and where we go when we're done. Also if there's any purpose we have, if there's anything we need to do on this planet and why we're here. I find that being in touch with the natural order of the universe, not the disorder of the physical world, purifies my thought and thus my spirit to a certain extent. If I ponder what is good, I ponder what is good and bad in me, what I need to work on, bad traits I need to eliminate, etc. It's spiritual work, not material work, which can carry all sorts of poisons with it. Even evil men have jobs, as they say! It's learning to go with the flow of the eternal and NOT the flow of society. I used to go with the flow of society and I lost a lot of ground doing so. In trying to navigate the world, I became a mouthpiece for the current, as we see so many people do, especially in the media. "What's happening now?! Because whatever is happening now is good! I need the latest device to be cool, etc!" You become lost, easily willing to not rock the boat in order to get along. After a time, you look at yourself and you just feel weak. You have no purpose. You live and fight for nothing. Maybe you have nice surroundings and a nice job because you get along but, take those away, and what do you have? Just an empty shell that needs the illusions and distractions of the physical world to be able to function mentally and emotionally. That emptiness leads to such pain, which is why people seek faith and spiritually in the first place. I'm proof positive that material pursuits and success, no matter what the cost, is ultimately a dead end, and no addiction or pleasure in the world can heal the disconnect from what is truly universal. Spirit is depth and soul and happiness. Being at one with the universe is peace.
Neo-Platonism:
That said, being one with the eternal, the Nous, is one of the top ideas of Neo-Platonism which I've come to embrace. For me, we no doubt become one with the Nous, the universal concept of what is considered God, when we die as we no longer have a physical body to stop us. I kind of see The Way as God coming to us. I see Neo-Platonism as us going to God. The former is finding peace in the physical world by conceiving oneness with God. The latter is actually being in his arms, which I feel is a very loving thing. We become good when we're associated with good, when we're connected with good. The physical grounds us in pain and the progressive corruption of human desires. The spirit, the soul within, is free from such things. Merge our souls in eternal love, goodness and happiness and we have a place we will never leave. We will have arrived.
Friday, June 5, 2020
People Currently Responsible for the Current Race Violence in America
Here are the people currently involved in and leading the current violence. There are a lot of them which leads to a perfect storm shit show.
1. Older liberals/Democrats who desperately want to get rid of Donald Trump and believe discord and violence is the way to do it. They're the worst of the worst. They're the old guard Democrats like the Nancy Pelosis and the Charles Schumers. They know exactly what they're doing and they don't care if the country burns because they think one man is literally Satan.
2. Black people/liberals who legitimately believe white people are hunting them on a daily basis. I feel bad for some of them and some of them are just paranoid and uneducated. The latter are abused and used by the liberals in No. 1 to do their dirty work for them. I see people like Chris Cuomo as being in this group.
3. Liberal/Communist/Feminist/Anarchist Media who are only interested in achieving their social gains. The feminists at rags like the New York Times fit this group. Combined with No, 1, these people are the lowest of the low because they relish the violence and egg it on simply to stop a President whose very existence has dominated their emotions for four years. People like Don Lemon are in both No. 2 and No. 3.
4. Little shit bag suburban liberals of all races who think being a revolutionist is "cool and fun!" They're the Black Out Tuesday people who think they're street and cool to attack cops and promote protesting. Once this is over, they'll move on to their next "cause." These people are symptoms of the disease. Buzzfeed is the perfect example of this group of annoying little shits.
5. Antifa. The terrorist wing of the Democratic Party. Liars who say they only exist to fight fascism when really they exist to destroy ANYONE who disagrees with them by labeling them fascists whether they are or not. No. 3 defends and protects this group and some are no doubt involved with their activities. No. 3 also believes these people are some sort of heroes when, in truth, they're violent thugs with no real set purpose other than producing fear.
6. Hollywood. Stupid celebrities believing and saying stupid things. The group with arguably the most clout combined with the least competence.
7. Black athletes and their white sycophants. The people with arguably equal clout with Hollywood. Most of the voice of black athletes are from people with CTE or guys closer to Bad Newz Kennelz than they are PETA. But they're black so people think they know what they're talking about. Have a ton of clout with the actual rioters and looters and have been cheering them on the whole way. LeBron James is in this group. Certain black athletes like Colin Kaepernick who grew up well off who suddenly think they're oppressed victims. People who, if they weren't athletes, would be front and center robbing Target Stores. Their white sycophants are the those on networks on ESPN like Colin Cowherd and Skip Bayless who think people like LeBron James are social heroes (insert laughter emoji.) I grew up playing sports and sports culture is black so there's a ton of whining going on by rich black guys who should be praising America for their lives instead of bashing it. Rich whiners included people like Shannon Sharpe, who apparently thinks he speaks for "his people" about shit that happened hundreds of years ago.
8. Black Lives Matter. This is the most interesting group because there are parts of them in all Numbers 1-5. It's a murky term that means different things for different people. Antifa/terrorism is included in it. Well meaning black people who think white people are hunting them for sport. Black people like the 1619 Project so filled with hate and delusion that they don't even believe their hate and violence is hate and violence. Black Karens (to use the term) are in this group and they want to see your President about making white people kneel and bow to them. They're dangerous instigators only interested in satisfying a horribly toxic need for social revenge over their lot in life. Little shit bag liberals who think Black Lives Matter isn't a black panther redo and that it honestly attacks evil racists. Hollywood and black athletes are mouthpieces for it.
9. Legitimate revolutionaries. The deadly people. The truly malevolent force that wants social destruction, no police presence to stop their lust for power and victory over and dominance of white people. The only good cops are dead cops to them. Also the hardcore socialists that want society to burn because it best helps initiate Socialism/Communism. An increasing number of Black Lives Matter members are in this group. They're the 2020 Black Panthers. Murderous sociopaths using tragedy to rape, pillage and plunder. Some of Antifa overlaps here, too.
A lot of elements have to combine in life for a horribly violent catastrophe to occur. The nine examples above are responsible for the current chaos. I'm not talking justice for George Floyd. I'm talking the CURRENT CHAOS.
Tuesday, June 2, 2020
It's Time, America. It's Time for an Enlightened Military Oligarchy to Run this Country
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Monday, August 5, 2019
A critique of American liberal thought
1. Liberals are just as tribal as conservatives, though not in the same way.
Due to the indoctrination of various groups, American liberalism is a looser tribal confederation than the more homogeneous conservatives. Liberals, in their attempts at beating the more racially centralized conservatives, learned some time ago that organizing and indoctrinating different ethnic, sexual and racial groups was their best option. The organizing overwhelmingly comes from white educated liberals, those with education enough to have abstract views of right and wrong in America. The marginalized groups (blacks, gays, etc) are primarily used to being marginalized. That's their American experience. They vote Democrat out of a feeling of necessity because of the perception (and frequent reality) that it's all they can do against people who hate them. This makes for a conglomeration of diversity that isn't exactly unified yet isn't distinct (at least politically.) The more educated, typically white liberals very much want a strong, inclusive group dynamic. They're the ones who preach American ideals like "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses..." They're the main tribal organizers because, as typically self-indulgent, self-righteous Americans, they KNOW in their hearts it's the correct way to go.
The problem is that modern American liberal thought is stuck in the past. Listening to liberals today is like listening to a speaker from 1850. To them, slavery and segregation essentially still exist and they're the ones how have to combat it. This outdated thought is very dangerous to America because it ignored progress and teaches a form of learned hopelessness. Thing are bad, always have been bad and always will be bad is the rhetoric. America has made progress in racial matters. Trump being elected doesn't change that. However, the PERCEPTION that has accompanied the election of Trump, fueled by the "mainstream" media, had created the idea that we're just as racist a nation as we were 200 years ago and that is false. Not only is it false, it's dangerously false because it stirs up potentially violent action in the name of falseness. I'm not sure if Democrats at the top are using such rhetoric to keep themselves as unified as they can be or not. I do think they all honestly believe we're as racist now as we were in 1819 and that is without question not the case.
American liberals are in that sick, dark place where rhetoric and practice are near complete opposites. Their preaching is in the typically American style of perfect self-indulgent self-righteousness that affects both sides. "I'm right and you're wrong because I'm going to say all these wonderful things that you do and we don't." For liberals, it was the idea of "When they go low, we go high." After Trump's election, many Democrats went public with their disdain for this idea. They lost an election to a HATED opponent and lost their marbles and principles at the same time. American liberals tend to be driven more by their emotions than their logic. When they get in a downward spiral, this can prove deadly because they don't reason their way out of it. They don't catch their breath and think, "Okay. Calm down. I've got this." They become easy proponents of what's happening now in the arena of rage and hate. That's where American liberals are right now with Donald Trump and the US Presidency. They're full of rage and hate on a daily basis. Whether you consider it righteous or not, it's still very toxic and frightening. The fake "counter balance" is their rhetoric of peace, love and understanding. The reality is that they're movement is peace, love and understanding FOR SOME, which means whoever is in their group. I've read and experienced several comments from LGBT people, for instance, that talk about how they're all about love in one breath then they spew as much hate as you could ever possibly read towards right wing people the next. Apparently, "love" only means their group. Have LGBT people faced hate and discrimination in American history? Definitely. However, claiming they're all about social love when they also spew social hate is hypocritical. I don't mean to pick on the LGBT community. I'm just giving an example as they're in the liberal tribe. Liberals will also throw people under the bus (like mentally ill people) if it fits their agendas on issues like gun control. Hey, I thought you guys were inclusive! Just not towards crazies and white men, apparently (pardon the personal rant.)
3. Liberals are not self-aware.
"Know thyself" and be humble in what you find are ideas lost on the American liberals of 2019. Amazingly, they typically don't see their rather startling level of hypocrisy in attacking people not in their tribe.
More to come later.
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Types of Pride, from Physical to Social
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
The Electrical Man - A Ghostly Halloween Short Story
"Just something slipping off a shelf," she convinced herself. "Probably happens all the time."
Regathering her nerve, she continued with the search. Next was the large area with the metal merchandise trees, a dead forest of steel barely visible in the darkness. In the distance, a small light crackled next to an old, dusty unused storage room. She couldn't stop her mind from spinning. How many monsters have come out of those kinds of places in movies? How many people that meet them are never seen again? The size of the place pressed down upon her, the large swaths of darkness weighing heavily. She stepped towards the storeroom. The light barely shone, almost imperceptible. Too frightened to speak, she quickly backpedaled, fast walking to the center of the warehouse where the large, industrial lights on the ceiling still shone. No, the girl wasn't there. She clearly wasn't there. Joyce crossed to the design staff’s office. Pausing at the entrance way, she saw the white outline of store mannequins. She tried to call Martha’s name but her throat could only reflexively spasm with no words. A rustle. One mannequin head seemed to turn. Another smiled. Another took a step…
With the energy of pure terror, she ran as fast as she could through the office, knocking over two chairs in her path, into the warehouse and then to the lit elevator room. In the distance, she saw the flickering office lights go out. The warehouse lights began flickering like mad then went out one by one. Now crying uncontrollably, she slammed her hand against the elevator button then pounded on the closed doors.



