Sunday, December 12, 2010

Annual Anti Santa Blurb

I am going to say it up front. I know this makes me un-American. But I hate Santa Clause. Not for religious reason (which is common but nonsensical). I have no religion. But for so many other reasons.

This is a huge issue for me. I think that we in the US do not put enough merit in the psychological dysfunction caused by the propagation of this lie. A child looks to their parents for not only verbal but physical and exemplary instruction as well. At the core of this truth is the feeling of security. Trust in other human beings is directly related to how mentally healthy we are in social environments. This includes work, relationship, and public exposure. If we come to know our parents will lie and/ or stretch the truth to us, our very foundation of interpersonal relationships becomes uncertain and anxious.

By the time we reach adulthood we seem to have suppressed how important Santa and the Easter Bunny are to many of us as kids. Mainly because when we find out, we feel silly and embarrassed. (I believe Freud said the minds ultimate goal to deal with discomfort is repression.) But I assure you that a 3 to 6,7,8 yrs old that fat old man is a very real and serious role model. This is further instigated by parents who use Satan Clause as an enforcer of morals, values, and behaviors. “If you don’t behave, Santa will not bring you presents.” (This reeks of Pavlov) These children are not being “nice” and not “naughty” for some fictitious fantasy. What happen deep in the subconscious when they find out the guy who they didn’t lie, cheat, beat their sister up, listened to their parents for is a lie.

Then, on top of that, these fairytales are conjoined with religious events. The entity that instructs many people and children alike about moral and values is tied to this masquerade. How does the mind process the hypocrisies? I learned at 6 in an overheard conversation between my parents. My next thought was “If Santa isn’t real, The Easter Bunny isn’t real, then who is the Jesus guy? He doesn’t even bring me anything. Why should I look up to him?” I have been an agnostic since 6 yrs old.

At the very least, it throws the juvenile mind into a spin of doubt and confusion with not certainty where it is going to end. He are seeing so many mental health problem dealing with insecurities. How can we not make the connection between the promotion of Christmas to a materialistic event and the loss of trust that leads to anxiety, depression, borderline, manic, and like dysfunctions?

Why do your children have to believe presents come from elves, reindeer, and bunnies? Why can’t they believe they are the reward for your hard work? Why do they have to be good for Santa? Why can’t they be good because you said so? We humans do only things that we find most pleasure in. Why do so many of us find pleasure in vehemently propagating this rouse? The looks of horrified parents when I tell them that my daughter knows Santa isn’t any more real then Tinkerbelle or Mickey Mouse is priceless. The look can only be described as horror. I am some kind of a monster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlo1kldHjF8

Saturday, November 6, 2010

Chasing the tail of a dogma

A friend of mine took me to task. Calling me “Dogmatic” in my arguments. (Dogmatic - Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.) I guess it could be viewed that way. The perception from my postion is that I am not that bright of a bulb. Many of the concepts I discuss are strictly “Rational” aka “Logical”. They are ideas that I assume by 6th grade most of us have been exposed to and had to have passed a test on things like basic math and social studies. I guess if I am in fact dogmatic, it’s due to my naivety. I have a belief that everybody can use a calculator, do simple multiplication, and understand simple psychology.

It turns out “Dogmatic” is a relative term. For example I can walk up to one of our resident mentally handicapped janitorial personal and say “water is made up of 3 atoms, of which 2 are hydrogen and one is oxygen.” Dogmatic. To him this would be unproven and seem awfully arrogant and authoritative. The average person over the age of 14 would think I was stupid for even feeling the need to make such and assertion. A few, might have even taken chemistry and adequately had it proven to them. Just as I can say, “John McCain or Sarah Palin are complete morons with no more skills for a community leadership role then one of our mentally challenged janitors. Further, Obama is not a Muslim.” To some that would be “dogmatic”. To others this would be obvious with out questions. To a few there might be some valid research to come to this conclusion. All that matters is that there are more voting representatives from the later groups then mentally handicapped group. If not, then a movement to either educate members who find it difficult to see past easy marketing scare tactics or discouragement or bar them from having a vote. (Discouragement. You have to take a simple test proving your ability to understand components of government work. Maybe basic rational skills.)

I guess what frustrates me is it should be profound, “feel” authoritative, or be unproven that continuing out activities with out regard to consequences is destructive and unsustainable. It shouldn’t be an “assertion” to a listener that ignorance begets more ignorance. I shouldn’t take a renowned physics professor to point out that the US has become a gluttonous, self centered, external blind society who collectively have no concern for the future.

I am not running for public office. My sphere of influence goes not further who will suffer to listen to me rant. Occasionally, somebody reads this blog. But other then that, I am just a person, a man, a father with fears and anxieties about the future for his offspring. My attempt to change the world one set of ears at a time is a futile task. But it at least makes me feel like I am trying, not just sitting on my hands because I fear social backlash.

The mathematics of energy consumption and population growth (part 1 of 8)

Lots of people say they are politically in the “middle” but normally inside of 2 min. you can see they clearly are not. If you can watch this video and claim you are either conservative/ republican or liberal/ democrat then there is no point in conversing on political issues. They are BOTH WRONG. “Drill baby drill” is as dangerous and damming as welfare and social services unconditionally. (There are 8 oparts with the next part qued once the previous part finishes.)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY&feature=channel

The mathematics of energy consumption and population growth (part 1 of 8)

Sunday, September 12, 2010

The Human System Blog is up

The Human System blog is up and going. The layout and concepts are in their infancy. But it gives you something to aid in your pursuit to both vomit and laugh at the same time.

Humansystem.wordpress.com

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Unsustainable In Every Way

This is going to be a nice "lead out" / "Lead in" post to a new blog I am going to be starting in the future. This site was supposed to be dedicated to more global and political issues and solutions. However, I often end up writing about more then just such issues and how affect us generally on a political scale, but also more personally. I have learned a lot about what "makes us tic" as humans in the past year. It was another layer of the onion. I think a different venue will be in order to offer these ideas. I think it will be titled "The Human System”. The two web sites together I believe will be combined to one day wrote the book I seemed to have been born to write.

I have always known the reality of sustainability and its role, but a few years back, me and a friend were sharing beers and he put the concept together in a few sentences for me. What isn't sustainable isn't natural. What isn't natural, will either deplete, fade into extinction, or crumble under its own weight. Look around us. What will you participate in today that “isn’t natural”? If you are reading this, then the first one that should come to mind is the computer, internet, and electricity. Is your home heated or cooled? Did you catapult yourself down the road today at speeds far exceeding a “terminal velocity”? All of these things require the taking of resources with out giving back.


Our unsustainable behavior doesn’t just stop at our consumption of natural resources. It occurs with regard to our economics, population, and socialization as well. We really seem to collectively have no “Future sense” or vision. Everything is about right here, right now what is going to make me feel good. “There is no tomorrow, there was no yesterday. I trust nobody but myself and that is all that matters. I deserve mine as much if not more then the next guy, and I am going to take it before he does.” And of course my favorite and the mother of all, “I know it is bad for me, but I do it anyway because it makes me feel good.” We have become a “borderline society” thatDr. Kreisman and Hal Stratus predicted that we would back in the 70’s and early 80’s. It is unbelievable the things we think we can't live without. Even more unbelievable is that which we think we can't live with. But don't worry there is a pill for that.


Economically we use money that we haven’t even earned yet. Many of us feel “we will die before we actually get our debts paid off” and that is a good thing. “its not our fault we didn't have the money to pay for the things we 'needed'. Our government has let this counterfeit financial resource flood the market. Then to make maters worse we ship our real money off to foreign economies. They have consumed all of that and are now forced to accept our fictitious “credit” money. This can not sustain. It is unnatural to any economic structure. We have already seen it start to crumble. What is worse are the people who ignorantly benefited from this “feel good today” mentality are now crying for the government to “bail them out”. While it was credit and financial lending institutes that caused this problem, the government saw the biggest problem as being the fact that “banks have no money to lend”!! There wasn’t (and still isn’t) anything rational coming out of their mouths. What was offered seemed to be geared towards what to say to please the most voters. Again we see consumption with out replacement.


Our population is outpacing “natural” and healthy growth. I remember growing up people saying things like, “there is plenty of land in this country”. This statement completely ignores the reality that it takes more then just space to maintain a life form. More then that, it takes more then just existence to have a life. Great, our new farming techniques can feed 10 times as many people as we used to. So, technically we could accept 10 times as many people into our geographical borders. But what are these new citizens going to do? We don't need them to farm. As we make up stuff for them to do, and they become capable of having offspring, what are these offspring to do? Then there is the waste each of us produce, the space that we require, and the things that separate that grey line between life and actually living. Yes, the vast majority of us have the ability to have a child, but it is not a “God Given” right to do so when we don't know how we are going to sustain and enlighten that child.

Oh the things I will get in trouble for, called a “socialist” over, and condemned for if I were ruling this mess. One would be the encouragement of birth control for ever citizen. Also the submittable of a “business plan” for every child born. How do you plan on paying for the nourishment, shelter, and clothing of the child? Who is actually going to be raising the child, you or the government? How many hours per week do you plan on spending with the child during the first 6 yrs of life?


All of this leads to an unsustainable social structure. We don't know our neighbors, we don't care to. We have laws set up to ensure that getting to know them comes with great risk. When you do get to know them. It becomes a pissing match. Who has the most, biggest, shiniest stuff. We waste valuable resources to water grass. So it can grow bright green, and we can pull out our petro burning mowers and chop it down.


We don't even know our own family. Going through the divorce recently my ex's sister was on the stand. My attorney asked her sister, “you say you know your sister. What did you talk about?” her sister said, “raising kids. How our family is doing. You know sister stuff.” My attorney, “so you didn't know she had a drinking problem, you didn't know she was unhappy in her situation, you didn't know she was using drugs, you didn't know she hated her life growing up and considered herself to be 'the black sheep', you didn't know......” and my lawyer went on to spell out a lot of things that had come out that you should know about your family members. We don't even talk to those we are supposedly closest to. If you are going to sustain a functional society, there must be easy flow of communication. Now we have developed this great tool for doing it, and we just turned it into a way to meet up with old flings, gamble, and pleasure ourselves.

So religion will save us and our morality right? This is where our culture will gain its moral compass. Right it people are being lead to cults, then the “valid” religions are headed by greedy hypocrites using the money for their own pleasure. The biggest religion in the world has had a 20 plus year struggle defending the fact its ranks are plagued with child molesters. I can say I once had the pleasure of getting chastised about eating meat on Friday during lent from a soul that was in the process of divorcing me. “Umm, errrr, let's check the hand book on this one. Up here is it, I happen to have the 'Ten Commandments' tabbed. Eating meat on Friday..... Eating meat on Friday.... Nope, not mentioned.” Its all good though. Because most of us already assume from birth that we are dammed to hell, so why bother trying to right our wrongs. We'll just pass this dammdation on down to the next generation so we won't be so lonely in hell.


WE CAN NOT CONTINUE WITH THE WAY WE HAVE CONDUCTED OURSELVES FOR THE PAST 75 TO 100 YEARS. It is unsustainable behavior. It will erode and eventually collapse all we have come to value upon us. We do have some inalienable rights. But destroying the world in this child like fashion is not one of them. As each generation passes it will get harder to understand why this seemingly obvious point is factual. “But we deserve....”

"Mom's gonna Fix it all soon, Mom's coming 'round to put it back the way it aught to beeeee." (Tool, Aenima)

Friday, July 16, 2010

Oil Spill: Responsibility and Sensibility

Alright, it has been too long. I hope to pick up the thread a little more regularly.

So even in my attempt to avoid the news, a few issues you just can’t ignore. The BP oil leak is the biggest one. With my contempt for our persistence on this practice without any real movement towards discontinuation is certainly not hidden in these posts. An event like this one just frustrates me further.

That said, I have to shake my head that when it happened and the world seems to have been surprised. My initial reaction was, “well no shit”. It was bound to happen. Yes the chances were miniscule, but real all the same. I think what did take me by surprise was that there was no contingency plan to quickly reduce the impact.

In my day to day, we have to often make decisions that could potentially impact thousands of lives. Now the actual chances are often very minuscule. However, that doesn’t stop us from having a “risk assessment” meeting where these risks are assessed. An approach to minimize those risks and a contingency plan in case the worst case scenario should occur are developed. There are events that happen on a regular basis that a meeting isn’t needed but the results of the initial assessment are attached and understood. Much like these oil platforms are scattered around the world and the process has become common.

I am just beside myself that there was no plan to address this potential danger and the factions of the government that license these companies to do this didn’t require one. But it isn’t hard to see how that much money clouds the judgment to require such formalities.

I am not amazed at the publics reaction. However, it is clueless and ignorant as usual in these types of situation. Everybody is in an uproar over this spill. But, really what is the other option. Buying our oil from other countries? Only drilling in shallower more manageable beds? This would drive the price of an American gallon of gasoline sky high. That of course would choke our economy and cause everybody to think the sitting president was not doing their job to the best interest of the voting public. So that same public that is now collectively in an uproar over the oil spill would instead be throwing their voting interest behind the candidate that screamed "Drill baby drill". The president had to “show” more openly his contempt for that incident. Because Americans can only believe you are angry if they see you making irrational and non functional body movements.

So what was the way to avoid this catastrophe should have been avoided? The most obvious action should have been that every license awarded to drill was awarded to contractor who had a proven contingency plan in order to stop any leak. But that would have been seen as congress impeding business.

This situation epitomizes the trait of a free enterprise/ democratic society that is both its greatest asset and most dangerous fault. When we have a problem that needs solved, there is great inspiration to find a solution. However, as that solution becomes common, acceptable, and cheap, better solutions have a nearly impossible task of entering the market. We all know "green energy" is a great substitute and at least will reduce the impact that fossil fuels put on our environment, safety, and economy. Yet, it is "too expensive" to use such technology. In a system not driven by financial reward, benefit of the community would drive solutions.

I have taken awhile to post on this. This morning I was glad. I heard a comment that highlights another relative facet of this issue. A lady was on CNN begging President Obamma to reinstate the drilling privileges (lift the ban) on the existing BP oil rigs. This exemplifies the problem and the frustration I have with our culture. “Lady, look out at the ocean, look at what your husband did.” Yet the vast majority of us do not see a connection between what we do as an occupation and its adverse affect on the greater community. We consider the fact that "we are just doing our job" and "following orders" absolves us from responsibility. This kind of mentality has lead to heinous acts of violence and destruction lead against humanity.

This "self entitlement" to employment no matter what the cost is at the core of all I find offensive about our western culture. It was only last year that "roughnecks" were being glamorized with their own TV show. They talked about the dangers to their life and limb. But the guys who did the job were "willing to risk it all to strike 'Black Gold'". The general population are too shallow in the intellectual pool to realize they had made a livelihood off a destructive force. They had for many generations. The money generated allowed more offspring who then needed to rely on the economic revenue of this destructive force. It is a parasites mentality. We all know what happens to both the parasite and the host every time.

Irresponsibility and lack of foresight runs from top to bottom of this issue. But there is just sooo much money involved in ignoring the dangers, impact, and contingencies. Every single one of us who has to pump gas into our vehicles to get to work share some responsibility to that destructive incident in the gulf.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Bush Era Attorneys Give Go Ahead For Extermination Of Villages Were Absolutely Correct.

For those of you who know me or this column you might be shocked at this assertion. Especially when it comes to agreeing with anything the latest Bush administration did. But you are going to have to bear with me while we separate the logic and rational.


Here is the link to the news story if you haven’t read it. http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/archive/2010/02/19/report-bush-lawyer-said-president-could-order-civilians-to-be-massacred.aspx
Basically this guy, John Woo, was one of the culprits that wrote a legal argument in favor of letting the CIA torture prisoners. Now to that end I have found nothing to support any current doctrine. However, during an interview where Woo was questioned about his perspective on presidential powers in regard to the role of “commander in chief”, he was asked if the president “had the right to order the extermination of an entire village”. Woo answered in the affirmative a couple of times.


"What about ordering a village of resistants to be massacred? ... Is that a power that the president could legally—""Yeah," Yoo replied

This statement is absolutely right. Not only is it a correct statement, but precedence has been set long before Curious George Jr. was an itch in his daddy’s pants. At the very least, from the moment we took to the air and started bombing cities, the destruction and extermination of a village has been acceptable. The siege of cities has been accepted tactics of war probably since the beginning of time. The US was forged from the destruction and annihilation of Native American Indian villages.

As an example, the atomic bombs that were dropped on Nagasaki an Hiroshima did not simply destroy military targets and enemy soldiers. Currently we have nuclear weapons pointed at targeted cities around the world. These would surely whip out entire “villages”.

Likewise, I can not be a hypocrite. I have always asserted that the way we should have dealt with Osama Bin Laden and his clan was to not publically acknowledge we suspected him. An intelligence gathering entity should have been activated first. Then a small strike force (preferably dressed in Pakistani attire) should have been sent in to extinguish the threat. We should have denied involvement. Every time one of these camps popped up, the operation should have been repeated. However, in the detailed scheme of things, these “training camps” function like “villages”. Children not even in their teens are being trained and capable of putting up a defense. It may have been necessary to remove them as a threat as well. This is why accurate and complete intelligence is crucial before any activity that takes a human life is implemented.

The reality about this statement is that the context of “exterminating a village” drums up images of soldiers with machine guns going door to door killing all the occupants. The ignorance of human nature sees this as different then a blanket bomb massacring the residents from a distance. The reality is that it isn’t. Maybe on the psyche of the people doing the killing it is different, but the result to the targets are still the same. Heck, bombing might be worse as it is not as thorough.


Now, all that said. “Legal” and “precedential” doesn’t make something “right” or “rational”. I have always said that it is imperative that acts of war or violence must be only used as a measure of last resort. Nothing that the Bush administration did in Iraq (or Afghanistan for that matter) was the acts of last resort. This blog is punctuated with what the ingredients that made up the attacks on 9-11 that should have been considered before it got to that point. Many of the decision made afterwards were unscrupulous and malice as well. The same could or has been said about many other history’s attacks on civilization. The way to avoid the need to “exterminate an entire village” is to understand that which drives men to hate each other.

Counter text

New counter