Let us then, oh brothers
revive the pen which burns
away the lie that smothers
all our great laboring earns:
come, for we yet shall conquer
conquer, as we must
visions, moaning that haunt Her*
specters of truth and of lust
old, vain fools, who roll our bones
gamble are we or exercise
and falling 7’s or worse to who owns
our broken lots which we despise
men of the world wherefore sow
those fields now that ye are laid low;
re-educated thyselves, affix anew
all of value hitherto ye knew
the quantity is unimportant
for the means were always lacking
making sullen thy deportment
rough the sea, the state-ship tacking…
thus the movement kept on the defensive
]its claim on the world left to the submissive
the shadow of god it haunts us still
and yet, our children mayhap distill
from the Ghost a supreme will
no ill can sicken nor Want could kill.

*America

Hack your way into the all-kernel
Creative, discharge your energy stores
For whatever you Are - you Were eternal;
There is nothing an attentive Mind ignores.

you must realize and you must explain to others until they realize, that the mainstream media, the so-called fourth estate is a dead institution. Like the Legislative, Judicial and Executive this fourth and vital branch of government has been hijacked by private interests and no longer serves the people or the public weal.

Therefore it is absolutely Key to realize one important fact: You are the fourth estate, every man woman and child in this nation, it is up to you to raise and carry forth the banner.

This is true of Congress as well. It is up to you, every last one of you to move forward and raise the banner because it has fallen. Because their ethical sensibilities and cultural validity have been destroyed they dropped the ball, they cannot move the ball down the field, they are, in fact, merely working for the opposing team: they have become agents of a certain species of global Tyranny which we might call global corporatism or more properly, supranationalistic fascism.

Rush the Congress, I need 435 of you to stand and fight, I need the logistical support structures for those 435 and I need the rest of you to man the ramparts of the fourth estate! Don’t you see this is Our time, we are all Logan 7 and Jessica 6 now and you had better run, runners I say to you the battle is joined - everywhere there is a fight to be had, the creation of a new culture is our life’s work now and from 9-11 truth to nanotechnology we have ground to take and a war to win. A war we cannot shirk, a war we cannot afford to lose for the future of our very species hangs in the balance!

Environment versus genetic predisposition, is there any doubt that ultimately its like 90% conditioning? I tend to favor the school of operant conditioning as a framework for behaviorism - while there are an exceptional few who tend to do what perhaps their genes suggest, it seems to me that the environment of the individual is paramount.

What is our criminal justice system today if it is not a pit into which we throw the wretched of the earth? The one’s whom our machine-society finds no use for, the one’s who are so systemically crippled with regard to their behavior that we can find no recourse but to incarcerate them? Was not the stated goal of our criminal justice system penalization, does it make sense under any other dynamism? Is warehousing people an acceptable methodology for treating of one’s fellow humans? Or is that merely a weak ass excuse of a solution for a society which makes people useful and then uses them up when dealing with those whom it cannot form into round pegs for round holes or who are so broken with regard to their acceptable operational parameters that we must sequester them out rightly?

But ask yourself if penalization or, more properly, Reform is being achieved by the system. Recidivism rates alone across the board as well as a statistical breakdown of population, income and educational access against incarceration or arrest rates indicates that my suggestion about environment is accurate. And yet there is still so much debate! One might ask why there is any debate at all, but allow me to dispel that myth immediately: there is still debate because it is forcibly injected by a culture of domination for which the criminal justice system, precisely in its current form, is the surest hedge and whip against an unruly populace.

What is needed for the criminal in the vast majority of cases is a change of climate, a change of condition and a change of company. But in most cases this approach is adopted far too late in the life of a person and is therefore inefficient. Would that we saw it as our duty to take care of Every Human Being Born, we might avoid the glut of crime. And yet the people accept the forced insinuations, like mind control subjects that passively accept the forced injection of psychological arguments that hold no water. Well, I’m not going to leave you alone, you’ve got to get mad.

One might suggest that there is a tendency to ruin people of a certain type, an intentional system of ruination aimed at those who m ay one day pose a threat.

But enough digression, my goal is to get you to gentle thy disposition, to accept all humans as being part of your tribe and yet to reject the form of globalization put forth by corporate capitalism. Capitalism is just a system, and some form of it must exist yet for we are not sophisticated enough to do away with it, just as some form of metaphysics must exist yet for we are not strong enough on the average to do away with the psychological need for gods and afterworlds. Even I, a quantum dualist, have some faith in a unified field whereby one might argue the existence of a sort of “over mind” that could be likenable to the concept deity.

So when you see them hauling away an outspoken youth, who has been arrested for saying things that people do not want to hear, remember he is your son or brother. When you see a person commit an act of barbarous inhumanity, remember they are yet human, and reflect on the nature and condition of our civilization that has produced that person before you jump to the conclusion (as if there were a mat with squares on it that you could Jump to) that they are broken and useless. Ask yourself how the pot was fired, and before you doubt the clay, the composition of its substance ask yourself if it is perhaps not the handling of the potter or the structure of the kiln in which it was fired.

In every western country the story is the same, but in Europe it is clear that what started as a humble commodity organization was ratcheted up into a dictatorship. But hang on, this isn’t your grandfather’s dictatorship, no this is a certain plutocratic technocracy disguised as “democracy” which as we all know is the buzzword for “ok form of government”. But let us then hearken back to a time when this word was understood for what it truly means, mob rule, let us be clear that in both name and substance a democracy is a flawed institution in a highly specialized society. Not since the ancient greek polis have we seen a level and degree of social organization which allowed for this sort of concept to have some meaning and even then the republic was preferable. Yet here we are in 2009 almost and we still have not answered the platonic riddle enshrined in his dialog The Republic: namely, how do we create good governors.

Let me suggest, as I often have, that at some point the process of governance can be computerized. That while it may not be possible to create noble, wise and beneficent politicians, it may be possible for scrubby hackers and lovers of freedom and justice to code them. Why should this be possible? Because, the logistical framework for the creation and sustentation of a politician is vastly different than that of a programmers application; moreover, the code is a digital construct and can be patched, it can be open-source and a human being, even at their most enlightened and scientific cannot employ so readily the insights of the many. Indeed one could not hope for a more direct form of representation than for any programmer to be able to adjust the coding of a computer model which represents civilization and its inhabitants in some context.

Does this mean we can totally replace government by machines? Of course not! But it does suggest that we can utilize machines to satisfy the ancient paradox “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” to a certain extent. The great trap here is the same one we find ourselves in today, and it is twofold, I shall endeavor to explain these two terrifying aspects.

The inherent inaccuracy of all models and willingness to treat those models as fact and not a mere representation of some phenomenology is a dangerous problem.

Firstly, there is the tendency to use a model or system of modeling and to accept its results when that system itself is incomplete, or more precisely when that system is incomplete with regard to the probability of it accurately modeling the underlying phenomenology. This is like the global warming swindle, in that one uses a series of models that are flawed because the data being fed into the database from which the model is generated are limited and the structuring of the procurement itself has been tampered with in order to yield results desired by people who have the power to do so and who wish to do so for the sake of some political, commercial or cultural agenda. This practice has almost ruined data modeling in the political sphere, one need look no further than an instrument t like the FICO score for other examples of abhorrent modeling systems and how they are dangerous and inept tools in the wrong hands. Again we face at the front end of this systems based approach the very problem of who will watch the watchers, it is clear that if the programming of such systems is not open-source it will invariably be skewed in favor of some or other special interests.

The tendency of laziness to do away with the complexity of existence and to pronounce the inherently complex subject known as life as merely another type of machine state.

Secondly, the very existence of such models may lead us at some point to choose them as a cure-all when in fact they are merely a sort of governor for existing and more robust human systems. While one can imagine an artilect tasked with the job of managing our civilization and doing a marvelous job, we cannot simply turn over the reigns of human destiny to a hive-mind supercomputer and expect all of our problems to be solved without anyone even having to program it beyond the incipient algorithms. While this approach may satisfy a very large role and can become for us a tool against human corruption it cannot ever be seen as the solution to the entire problem, for on the day we have surrendered to a machine state the destiny of our species we, ourselves, have become machines. This view is adopted more and more I feel, and transhumanism as a culture is symptomatic of a physiological misunderstanding: the organic is seen as a machine, in the end this leads to man as a synthetic commodity within a discrete system, when in fact this is the very opposite of what organic life is – it is in fact, an abomination and profanity of what it means to be human and not just human, it is a profanity of what it means to be Alive. Make no mistake, behind this perspective is some sick desire to undermine the very concept of Life. That is a great danger, that we might suspend Life itself as a concept and pronounce the universe to be a machine! What an absurd piece of folly and how perfectly modern that would be!

In every western culture the same trend is on the rise, a political elite conjoined with international, verily, supranational and globalistic corporatism which is oblivious to both the desires of the least powerful humans in the world and the balance of power that would ensure opportunity for all humans to pursuer life, liberty and happiness. That you see in the EU a more naked determinism with regard to this effect of diminution of inherent rights and of life itself should be of great concern to you, whether you live in Beijing or New York: a storm is coming and it is not Our storm. The current financial crisis is an engineered event structure, it did not happen by accident nor by act of a supposed god, it is not as if wheat had stopped growing or that all the cattle died or we suddenly forgot how to make steel and shape it – no, what has happened is that the real owners of this world have set in motion the necessary prerequisites for a global power-grab of unprecedented brutality. What is needed then is precisely what Tarpley has suggested and that is massive political action. UKIP in the UK is a good example but let us go one step further, let us unify the third parties in America and produce a solution to the totalitarianism of the false left/right paradigm which masks a total control of our government. We must admit that we have lost the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our government to a veritable crow’s nest of special interests, whether they are military-industrial, financial or a sort of sick corporatism which is a mockery of the foundational principles of American business.

In every western country the problem is the same and while the solution must be peculiar to the logistical framework of its origin, the solution in many ways has one striking similarity: the decimation of centralized power structures and the tendency towards a more emergent nodal structure. The recapturing of the right to Representation within a political system by the people of this planet in their various civilizations is the great task of our era, if we fail they shall have a New World Order characterized by gross inhumanity – our solution then must be globalization itself. As I have proposed we must beat them to the punch.

America 2.0 a global movement toward a free humanity is a concept which says in short that a bill of human rights must exist which challenges the U.N. because it is a corrupt and highly centralized institution. That emergent and localized control system must supplant the centralized control systems of the entire planet and that ultimately we must network the entire worlds resources together in such a way as to address the very real problems that face our species like environmental degradation and the threat of a massive meteor impact. The systems which exist today merely prolong the danger and introduce new ones, new dangers such as GMO crops replacing naturally evolved strains, the very approach is a condemnation of our agricultural practices, if we were more sophisticated when it comes to everything we could avoid such toxicity! We could be building highly efficient and roboticized agricultural systems which would eliminate the need for chemical pesticides, but we are still taxed by the flux of business cycles and competing markets. Do you really think that an institution like the U.N. will allow us to achieve truly revolutionary leaps in factors of existence such as food production? Or will they merely serve the interests of selfish corporations who seek to dominate food production and not to free it? The same could be said for any of our fundamental needs, whether it is energy, transport or the need to interact with one another in meaningful ways – in every case there stand organizations which would use those needs as means to achieve power and autonomy from that very cycle of needs through the amassing of capital.

Answers Please

Everything you find in the mainstream is a lie, it takes Real effort to learn history 2.0 but it is the most important subject.

You wont get a degree and you will, in all likelihood merely invite scorn and ridicule but the future of our species depends on your rigorous study thereof - and the extent to which you can shatter the conditioning of those around you and open their eyes to it.

The teachers are compartmentalized and themselves educated (conditioned) to treat much of this as innocuous, they have been taught to love control, they wouldn’t be where they are in the vast majority of cases, because the school system is controlled from the top down by systems which punish independent thought and independent teaching.

Subsequently we have a school system that serves to indoctrinate humans into a slave morality which sustains the paradigm of domination.

American History and World History 2.0

and subsequently America 2.0 is the only answer to this schema.

Get busy living or get busy dying.

its important to have such schisms forced, while i disapprove of the policies and the entire agenda that has played out, while i disapprove of the shit-eating culture that is allowed to flourish and i despise the repression of an emergent culture of true value - I think its a good thing in the long run to encounter opposition.

the fundamental technology isn’t beyond the reach of the average man, and hopefully this will give rise to an exodus of some kind toward even freer and more independent structures for the exchange of data.

And this be a lesson to all of us about the heavy hand of big brother, and its dexterity! the way they massaged gently the hypocrisy into our lives, so that to a majority it was undetectable, let us be Vigilant and even intellectually Militant because of this.

This is a war being fought of the sanctity of ideas.

is there anything more sickening than lisa nova?

perhaps only the silencing of brave men and women, or their relegation to anonymity when the people of the world most have need of their ideas.

you either produce a culture capable of maintaining decency or you sign your freedom over to authoritarian rule.

i feel the same way about gun laws, all law has today become a means to try to shore up a lack of culture. what good is the rule of law to us now?

learn to swim is an most excellent philosophy.

expose people to everything and provide structure, throw a child in the pool and be there to make sure he doesnt drown until he learns to swim.

and the same might be said for a great many things in life by analogy.

as landless peasants, whether we know it or not, are conditioned from the day of our birth by the culture around us for what amounts to a slave morality. even those who break the imperial conditioning usually end up co-opted

i think this is The essential understanding because it is the incipient phenomenology of what i mean when i say culture.

in other words, it is a problem of perspective.

many of us have essentially been raised to think we are powerless and when we behold the state of civilization and gnash our teeth we fall into the conditioned response “what can I, a isolated individual Do about it.”

but in truth we can do everything with ease, it is a matter of Feeling and Thinking.

By simply rejecting the that premise, by rejecting the systematization of wealth as codified by capital we are able to banish its omnipotence - the real test is getting a majority of humans to change their values thusly.

it is all very simple to begin the great work with which we are tasked: hicks’ formula here makes sense “No effort, no work, no job, no savings and money, a choice, right now, between fear and love.”

but i would argue the notion of choice, this seems our destiny.

Every individual is a potential investment.

The rulers of this world have for thousands of years understood this concept far better than has the “average man” and thus the preponderance of fortune via sustained aggregation of capital and influence. The “wretched of the earth” often view their own offspring as wretched and codify in them this perspective, the evolution of a slave morality is indispensable to a ruling class autocracy and we must be aware of the naked determinism. It is enough therefore for me to suggest to you who read this that a popular culture which stands in opposition to this movement (a movement which constitutes the whole of our history as a species) is possible, a culture which would, and in fact can, smash the entire apparatus of global corporatism. The understanding that the universe is indeed an integral system should suggest to us that all human beings are an investment to us. Can we protect the benefits and notion of the family while achieving the realization of unity?

Both are possible, both are necessary. We must maintain the system of the family and strengthen it and we must also create a world culture in which all humans come to see other humans as being indispensable members of their own family – the human family. This may be to some a dangerous diversion into theory and debate which merely opens the door to further globalization, but I must say as I often do that we must walk a razor’s edge if we are to move forward. We must be vigilant against the culture of global corporatism while seeking to create a true global culture: we are faced with a terrible dilemma, if we do nothing we shall have a new world order designed by Malthusians, if we attempt to produce an alternative design it will be under constant assault from those very forces who will try to co-opt it and create a managed form of their own design thereby.

The richest and most powerful have the greatest ability to enhance their investments. With each passing generation the sustainability of personal empire increases and its only attritional opposition forces that up the form of the exceptional who manage to break their imperial conditioning and wriggle through the mud of this world onto dry land. In many cases these individuals are essentially co-opted by the very system of domination they might overthrow; moreover, as time passes and the system of global domination evolves the possibility for escaping from this further management diminishes. You may wake up but you are still a prisoner, forced to plow the fields of your masters and faced with the impregnability of the systems they control.

This dynamic has produced the information war, the war of ideas: this process has been going on for thousands of years.

The battle has changed but the field remains the minds of mankind. You have been persuaded that thoughts and feelings are not material substances by the very people who utilize them for the purpose of sustaining empire. It is enough to become angry, the whole nut of the problem is dissent.
The parameterization is clear: we must identify those individuals and institutions and reject them; we must invest in one another. The evolution of such a system of organized dissent is what the “left” in American politics is thematically supposed to be. I might say that in fact there is no left per se, that a left only coalesces as a sort of homeopathic response mechanism to cultural infections that become too severe. The essential problem here then is that the body politic itself (the electorate) has become cancerous, it has been made cancerous by design so as to eliminate the threat of immunological responses.

To be continued

what is rational for the individual is not rational for the external system is a logical fallacy perpetrated by individuals who adopt a view of existence which is flawed.

the individual is a misnomer, the universe is one giant integral system, quantum mechanics informs us directly of this principle.

the problem is cultural, a world where everything is owned and therefore responsibility is regulated by self-interest will result in totalitarianism.

and yet there seems to be no other solution and thus the progression of the modern world as a whole toward precisely that: ownership.

but it is a misplaced hope to think that by some miraculous mechanism of self-interest a sustainable or acceptable model (to my standards or perhaps yours) should be produced thereby.

one can, therefore, only speculate that such an ordering would be preferable and it seems reasonable that despite the consequences it is preferable.

hey wont pollute the river because they own it in most cases, they have a vested self-interest to maintain, what is to them, an acceptable condition. but their definition of acceptable can vary from case to case.

whats more, they can now deprive the whole of society from the natural use of the river as a means for transit etc.

the initial concept of government is that the People own the river, the problem is that rather than the people benefiting materially as a whole…

from the ownership of the river they are in fact taxed because our government is ill-constituted and corrupt.

what if every citizen obtained a given sum of revenue from the ownership of a river? then you would have popular interest in the river motivated by market principles. but how to achieve that is the goal of government.

this is generally not possible because people exploit power for self-advantage.

without producing a culture, it is impossible to resolve any such dilemma.

the very difficult task is to produce a culture which is aware, acutely aware of such issues and has a non-monetary vested interest and the desire to defend the condition of various systems.

i think such organizations can emerge now with IT at this state, the problem is they are obstructed from active roles in policy creation, their role in policy creation often fails to consider the totality of the market, and ultimately: the existence of external markets and competition itself.