Month: August 2013

Im sitting here, wondering how best to marshall and oeganize my energies to defeat the materialistic paradigm, and all the profoundly bad–entropic–consequences which flow from it, and I want. somebody to ask, someone to show me the way. Then it occurs to me that someone has to have the ideas. If it is not me, it must be someone else( inrealitu, of course, many someones, or so I hope), and the price THAT person will pay will also be solitude, and the necessity of learning to accept ambiguity, and to adapt behavior to feedback; to learn, to try again, snd again accept doubt and uncertainty as a necessary consequence of doing the thing right.

I was talking with a couple of Moldovan women tonight, here on what amounts to work/study in the United States. They are both going to be sad when they leave. I think those of us who are free and prosperous forget how unfree and poor much of the world is. I asked about Mafia, and they said the government is the mafia. They are corrupt. We forget in America that the world over many opportunities only go to people who belong to certain groups.

This was the same thing an African cab driver told me. I want to say he was from Eritrea, but I can’t recall for certain. What I do recall is that most jobs were only available to a certain group. Those who were not members of that group were subjected to racism much worse than that visited on Southern blacks during the worst of Jim Crow. For his part, he loved how in America anyone willing to work hard could get ahead.

That is absolutely, categorically not true to this very day in much of the world. It is sickening to me, in those rare occasions when I allow myself to think about it, how awful insults are which the Left levels against what is in nearly all respects the most humane, decent nation ever to bless the planet. It is our very compassion and humanity which they wield as weapons against us. This is evil.

I was apparently mistaken in claiming that Hasting’s car engine was found behind the car. It is still a very odd thing how far from the crash site it was found. Here is what appears to me to be a good treatment of the topic: http://metabunk.org/threads/debunked-michael-hastings-crash-engine-found-north-of-crash-going-south.1964/

Today, an intrepid San Diego reporter reported that current CIA-chief Brennan was the target of Michael Hastings before he was killed in very suspicious circumstances. To my mind, the salient piece of information is that even though he was allegedly killed when his car collided at high speed with a tree, his engine was BEHIND the car by a hundred feet or more. To state the obvious: objects in motion tend to stay in motion. This is a basic principle of inertia learned by most high school students.

The allegation is that Brennan, while employed as a “counter-terrorism” czar was apparently engaged in the suppression of free speech. The use of the alleged threat of terrorism has in my view proven a very useful tool in the shrinking of civil liberties. It has allowed a metastasizing State to take away basic rights right in front of us, and has gotten a pass even from alleged conservatives, since it is “for our own protection”. Yet, as I have shown, Tower 7 MUST have been brought down with explosives, which makes the standard narrative of 9/11 simply untenable, and the involvement of would-be totalitarians a near-certainty.

Now, the link is gone. I can’t access it. It was here: http://www.sandiego6.com/story/cia-director-brennan-confirmed-as-reporter-michael-hastings-next-target-20130812

This nation is falling into a Fascist dictatorship as I write. The Left loves Obama because he can’t do any wrong because he is an apparently articulate half Negro. The right lets him get away with Constitutional abuses because they are cowards, and because they still buy this nonsense about terrorism, and the nonsense about the drug war–which also facilitated the initial development of a surveillance State, and relaxed rules regarding search and seizure. Our enemies live on Wall Street. They live in high priced luxury suites, and influence policy nearly at will.

Whoever you are, keep speaking. You will be silenced when speech is no longer possible. We are still far from that point. Don’t be a coward. This war is far from over.

One point only: any argument that the requirement to prove you are registered to vote is “racist” is ipso facto racist, because it is claiming that black people, in particular, are too STUPID to do the things the rest of us take for granted. In my view there is no other way to look at this. There is no ambiguity. I am, to be clear, not claiming this to be the case. I think black people can and should be held to the same standards as whites. It is the NAACP that is making this argument.

I want to make one point only: no secrety order, no gag order, no requirement to remain silent is legal if it is intended EITHER to cover up patently illegal activities, or the full transparency required by law for all governmental agencies. Even if an activity is not illegal, per se, all governmental activites–including all military activities–are to done in the open at some level of security clearance. Any act to cover anything up for political purposes is ILLEGAL, and whistleblowers for that reason alone should be immune from prosecution. Congress: fight some offense, you cowardly pieces of shit. Go find the people who know something and protect them.

I read this article in an article on Scientism by Steven Pinker in the New Republic. .My issue is simple: he has conflated speculation–unexamined paradigms–with Science outright. Our best evidence is that the mind and brain are severable. This evidence is empirical and scientifically repeatable. It belongs within the realm of what is called science, but it will not be included by mediocre and haughty minds like his.

Our best evidence is that the universe is interactive, that it specifically interacts with our minds; that we in some measure cocreate what is called reality. Mediocre and haughty intellects refuse to examine the implications of this idea. They assume because it is convenient for them that whatever they are studying is “out there”, and not “in here”. They assume their minds can someone be objective, when our best evidence is that this is a fanstastical notion, every bit as irrational as the belief that Christ occupies the host.

These people frustrate me, because they lie constantly while proclaiming their love of truth. If they were willing to examine ALL the evidence on all topics which has been produced honestly–take as one example the evidence for Remote Viewing–then they could be called scientists. This would be a most excellent thing.

I have among other things often thought that morality itself is a matter for science–not in the sense of studying neurons, but in studying the correspondance between cognitive inputs and behavioral outputs, and affective health and well being. Buddhism is scientific, in a formal way, at least in its premises and many of its practices.

Until honesty prevails, though, such people are merely clever technicians: of words or experiment, it doesn’t matter. They don’t warrant much respect, nor does the worldview which arises from their demonstrably wrong empirical assumptions. There is no room in science for assumptions. There is simply empirical and non-empirical. They live in the realm of the non-empirical, while claiming the contrary. This makes them hypocrites of the worst sort.

One of the greatest propaganda victories of our recent history is the idea that when two ideas seemingly oppose one another, that the “true truth” is “somewhere in the middle”. This is a patent falsehood. If I stipulate that gravity operates at 9.8 meters squared per second, and you claim it is 5 meters, the truth is not about 7.5.

But practically, in public dialoguq, leftwing radicals get away with this constantly. What they do, to be clear, is abuse the goodwill of honest people to make lies plausible. They take everything that works in America–our fundamental honesty, decency, concern with doing “the right thing–and pervert it in the interests of an insane appetite for power, the only good they know.

What I would propose here is that truth is more like the bullseye on a dart board, and various guesses best understood as relatively closer or farther from the center. Now, it can happen that two guesses are equidistant from the center, but on opposite sides. This is the ONLY case where the idea that the truth is somewhere in the middle would be true. Most of the time, different guesses would share many common accurate ideas, but differ both in the exact details of their mistakes and their accuracies.

To further complicate this idea, but bring it closer to my view of reality, imagine both the guesses and the truth they are trying to approximate as being little swirls of smoke, in constant rotation, and drifting here and there, sometimes dramatically. What is an accurate truth today could become quite wrong tomorrow. What was actual racism in the past is in almost all cases today a simple concern with truth, the future, and common decency.

And when speaking of moral truths, they are based upon the ideals actually in place. The present America cannot be judged by its past ideals. If one wants, as an example, to look at our treatment of the Indians, one must also look at the activities of all other nations at that time, and the ideals informing them. One must look at the Belgian Congo, and Rhodesia. One must look at the slave states of the Islamic world, and the serfdom of Russian peasants.

If one studies actual American history, and compares it to the world, the simple fact is that our nation has been by far the most principled, idealistic nation in human history, even if we have often failed to adhere to our ideals. The point is that these ideals can be invoked, and people CARE. That is how leftist propaganda operates: it uses words with high meaning content to Americans to trick them, and is thus most effective precisely on those people who LEAST need to be upping the moral ante. One can’t use the propaganda used here in Russia. One can’t use it in China. One can’t use it in the Middle East, or any Islamist nation. One can’t use it in most of Africa, where tribal loyalties continue to make the most vicious sorts of racism and social exclusion ubiquitous.

The truth of a moral intention is its sincerity. Do you actually want to improve the world? That is good. However, as I state over and over and over: you are NOT sincere–you are a sanctimonious asshole–if your actions are not constantly rconciled with the actual OUTCOMES of the ideas you espouse.

If you claim to oppose racism, but persistently assume as a matter of course that black people are inferior, then you are worse than open racists. You are worse than the KKK, who were at least open about their aims.

What has been the effect of half a century of what is called “compassion” by the thoroughly disingenuous? Hell. That, has been the outcome. Detroit. East St. Louis. East Palo Alto. Philadelphia. Trayvon Martin.