The many, many followers of this blog may have noticed that posts have been fewer recently even though Covid has kept me close to my computer and I am now officially on staycation. I really SHOULD be posting more, so in an effort to right that wrong, here comes my second post in two days.
I'm also curious to see if the lack of spacing between paragraphs continues. If you had a bit of trouble with my last post, I apologize. It's annoying and it has come and gone a few times before. There seems to be nothing that I can do about it. But hopefully this post it will disappear.
Here's a video that makes a few suggestions on replacement statues for the statues of Americans who fought for the south and slavery that were put up in parks for public viewing. Now, ahem, while most erections for public viewing in parks, or anywhere for that matter, are not good ideas, the point that statues honouring treasonous killers of their countrymen just might be a bad idea, is a valid one.
And since saying, "I get my history from books, not statues," could be an argument for either removing them or keeping them, maybe replacement is the better tactic. As covered in several previous posts, modern day plutocrats are revered for making untold amounts of money off the sweat of their fellow man/woman, but there is a difference between them and slavery proponents of the past: they still haven't killed anyone in a civil war to maintain the situation (although I hope and think that day is coming). You could mount a very good case, and many have, (perhaps the best being Noam Chomsky) that every war was at least in part plutocrats killing people to maintain their power, but there haven't yet been the civil wars we need to unseat them. YET. I'd better post something to back THAT up...
How about just listing past presidents of the United States and the wars they have supported. Surely not all of them are guilty! Are they? Ummm…
And which of these presidents does NOT have statues, airports, monuments, libraries, schools etc., etc., named after him? So, it could be argued very effectively that the good ole U.S. of A. has made a veritable habit of honouring and memorializing bloodthirsty warmongers. Why attack just the monuments to the civil war? Sigh... Is it any wonder the United States is overwhelmingly considered the nation that is the largest threat to mankind? Although you'll never hear that from the media/propaganda controlled by them.
But let's narrow things down to statues, and possible replacement statues, related to slavery. If, for nothing else, in the interest of brevity. And for that same reason, I will only suggest one, though there could be many statues of this one person used as replacement statues all over the US. His name was Cassius Clay.
NO! Not THAT one! There are already lots of statues of him. Although Ali's former name WAS Cassius Clay, I'd go as far as to say he wasn't half the badass the Cassius Clay I'm referring to was! Intrigued??? Read (and watch) on, my friend...
Muhammed Ali, when asked about changing his name, referred to Cassius Clay as his "slave name." That leads me to believe maybe even HE hadn't heard of the guy I'm about to tell you about. While there is no doubt he did a great deal to help the civil rights movement in America, his influence probably wasn't as great or heroic as Cassius Clay's. Ali refused to fight in Vietnam stating that white people at home in America were his enemy. When referring to the Viet Cong, he said, "Shoot them for what? They never called me 'nigger.'" But that was just the beginning of his list of struggles black folks regularly suffered at the hands of their own fellow Americans. Cassius Clay was a white American, but he wouldn't have done those things to Muhammed Ali either, so I don't think he'd have had a quarrel with his namesake. Although, it would have been a blockbuster of a fight!
Cassius Marcellus Clay was a wealthy, white planter from Kentucky and a Republican political minister to Russia and Cuba. You just, you COULDN'T start from a worse place to get a civil rights activist to make a statue of! But why not watch instead of read?
The Lion of White Hall? What kind of badass grew up in a house with a name? Well just look at the lean and hungry look on yond Cassius. He might not have that look because he wanted to stab his buddy in the back though. Maybe cut off an ear or nose, or gauge out some eyes, or stab someone in the FRONT all while having a bullet lodged in his chest, but...
Have you ever seen a statue of this man? Why the frig not? Let me ask you this: have you seen a statue of anyone more worthy of a statue? This is yet another example of how selective public knowledge is. A guy KILLED HIMSELF rather than face him in a duel! A war hero, killer of criminals even at the ripe old age of 89, survivor or more duels than any other American, and the guy who might have convinced Lincoln to enact emancipation. That should warrant a statue right there! But he also donated the land for Berea College to be built on.
So, who among the readers of this post can imagine a more worthy man of whom to build a statue? Why, I'd like to see his lean and hungry visage chiseled into a mountain somewhere! What do you reckon?
Have a gander at this. It's an article from January 2020 that suggests a minimum 22 thousand dollar income for Canadians to end poverty and shrink inequality. The article makes clear that it will come at a cost. 134-637 bill. That's quite a range! Immediately the right wingers start with their "free money" complaints. "Take money from the supposedly hard-working rich and give it to the supposedly lazy poor." But that's not the way things are in Canada. Has it ever been that way? If people are genuinely concerned with the dispensation of free money, Evelyn Forget, a University of Manitoba prof. interviewed for the article points out,
“But what this report also shows, is that we give people free money all the time through the tax system in ways that aren’t really very efficient,” she said.
“We say we want to do something about poverty. And yet we give away $122 billion worth of tax expenditures every year to people who aren’t anywhere close to the poverty line. This report says it’s time to have that conversation.”The report defines a basic income as “an unconditional cash transfer from government to individuals to enable everyone to meet their basic needs, participate in society and live with dignity, regardless of work status.” That 22 grand is after taxes, by the way, and is based on a lot of numbers crunched by StatsCan in their Social Policy Simulation Database and Model. If the top 10% of earners see their disposable incomes drop by an average of 8.5% to pay for the added equality in the country, the obvious questions should be, what do they get for it and is it worth it? But MY first question was, "What about the hundreds of billions Canadian rich people have hidden in overseas tax shelters?" My second was, "And what about the tens of billions in taxes corporations routinely dodge every year?" If the CRA sacked up and collected on just what they KNOW ABOUT, while cancelling the 122 billion mentioned above, the 8.5% could be significantly lowered. At any rate, rich Canadians will be able to clearly see what they are getting for their taxes. The instance of most crime will significantly drop immediately since crime is undoubtedly income-based. The enrichment of the lower and middle classes, who are not going to invest the money or save it, will also be an immediately visible impact increasing the economy, jobs, and, yes, increasing the incomes of those rich probably enough or MORE than enough to offset that 8.5% extra tax payment. How long have the poor been promised that if the rich were given tax breaks, surely some would trickle down? Well if we could find a government with the minerals to try this, for once the rich would be promised that if the lower and middle classes were given tax breaks, surely some would trickle UP! Only difference being, some WOULD trickle up. So the rich win yet again! The system is rigged in their favour. Nonetheless, this way everybody would be happy! In short, it'd be a nicer, healthier, wealthier and happier Canada. Well worth it, no? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this to happen. It's the simplest and the best solution, but it's the least likely to happen.Now, just in case you've forgotten, Canada's CERB payments are 2000 bucks a month. After taxes, that'd work out to about 22 grand a year. This is what it costs to live a life of dignity in Canada. That's why the number was chosen. If this just became a permanent thing, to help all Canadians live lives of dignity, It really wouldn't hurt the rich that much. But as I said, this is terribly unlikely to happen. There is already speculation as to how Canada is going to have a hard time digging itself out of this "Covid hole." The Central Bank of Canada, which is a complete sham, newly appointed mouthpiece, Tiff Macklem assures us that Canada is in a deep hole and it will take a long time to recover. He says the Central Bank will keep its interest rates low, 0.25%, to "help." Well as we SHOULD know but don't seem to, this will only help investors. The rich. For everyone else, this just raises inflation and there will be NO employers who won't use this disaster as an excuse to freeze or even LOWER wages, so that's one way the little guy is gonna get fucked. Here's how THAT works.Statistics Canada also noted that foreign investors bought $49 billion in
Canadian securities in April, the largest monthly purchase on record. You can bank on May, June and July being similar because low interest makes money cheaper. The rich, who can GET loans, are investing more. They're not worried about Covid19. But like Tiff Macklem, they're already starting to PRETEND to be. Another way low interest rates screw the poor and working class.My point is, in these times when people are trying to rush us back to work saying things like workers are getting lazy and the economy is in dire straights, don't believe a word of it. This is the rich people trying to talk their way out of paying their fair share. And they've been highly successful in Canada to this point. There's no reason Canadians shouldn't expect prices to go up, wages to go down and probably a new tax to be added to pay for the CERB. In short, a not so healthy and wealthy, more miserable Canada. But Canadians have become accustomed to this sort of treatment. We are the Uncle Toms of taxation. We've become what Frederick Douglass calls "restive" in our national ability to put up with crap from our government, mostly in the form of taxation. We've accepted the "hedonic treadmill of consumerism" like good little lab rats. But we're still human and I have a feeling if things get too bad, maybe these Covid days will yet be a blessing. Maybe they will mark a turning of the tide for us in Canada.
If there's anyone more quotable than Bertrand Russell, with the possible exception of Oscar Wilde, I don't know who it might be. He (Bertrand) won a Nobel Prize in 1950 and I'd like to offer some fascinating points from his acceptance speech as food for thought. These observations of his, you'll find, despite being 70 years old, are quite timely.Russell posits that man, unlike lab rats or other animals, has some desires that are "infinite" or cannot be fully gratified. It may not be disagreeing with this statement to say that I believe not only CAN man learn to subdue urges of gratification, but we must in order to deserve titles like "civilized," or "gentlemen." I think he's saying the urges will never completely go away. He lists four of them in an order that I believe has changed since 1950, but are as follows: acquisitiveness, rivalry, vanity, and love of power. I believe the first, which Russell considers the weakest of the four, has risen to the top to be at least equal to the love of power or stronger.
Hendrix may not have invented this quote, but he's probably WAAAY cooler than the person who did! I believe the opposite to be true and so probably does Bertrand Russell. This is a bit confusing. While there are those who don't mind us fighting each other, these people, a very few, very powerful people, want peace. Peace between us and them that is. So I am sure Russell would agree with me that it is more accurate to say, "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, there will be violent revolt that leads to peace." We'll get to that. Russell says that man will gladly and cheerfully face impoverishment to secure a rival's ruin. I dunno if this is any longer the case. In fact, nowadays it is said that the best way to annoy your enemies is to let them see you succeed. Money pretty much equals success in the minds of the majority as we can tell by all the cultures that revere the rich knowing full well how they came by their ill-gotten gains. He says that what vanity needs to satisfy its "look at me!!!" impulse is glory, and it's easy to have glory without power. Again, maybe not as easy as in 1950. I think that acquisitiveness has longsince overcome vanity though it must be said that one must think incredibly highly of oneself to not be embarrassed at being a multi-millionaire. A billionaire? What kind of swollen ego do you need to believe you DESERVE to be a billionaire? But there have always been these narcissistic egomaniacs who believe they are that much better than others. Mental weaklings, but revered in spite of THAT by most cultures as well.The love of power is where it gets very topical. Russell says this is especially the vice of energetic men. This was in 1950 so let's just assume all his "men" and "man" meant women as well. No matter how despised, you gotta admit that a lot of filthy rich people had to work awfully hard. Even Donald Giant Douche Trump is said to only sleep 4 hours a night. This, I imagine, is because boredom doesn't keep him in bed. We'll come back to that too."The causal efficacy of love of power is out of all proportion to its frequency." This explains how the shit rises to the top. Energetic people who love power can put a lot of hours into making sure they get it. This energy may come, paradoxically, from the flight from boredom, which leads to too much excitement, which causes desensitization, undermines the health, and dulls the palate for all types of pleasure... causing boredom. This explains why the rich and powerful are so very often complaining about being bored and are now pharmaceutically fleeing it. Bertrand Russell stated that, "...at least half the sins of mankind are caused by the fear of it." (boredom)A certain power for enduring boredom is essential to a happy life. This is one of the things that should be taught to the young. Russell, like a Taoist or Buddhist, believed that only in an atmosphere of quiet can true joy live. He coined the term "fruitful monotony" which invites inventiveness and imaginative play in children. Passive pleasures should be kept to a minimum. Children should extract pleasures from their environments through some effort and creativity. Not through Ipads.Imagine what he'd think of modern man walking down the street transfixed by a glowing rectangle in his hand. He'd call them a generation of little men unduly divorced from the slow processes of nature, in whom every vital impulse slowly withers, as though they were cut flowers in a vase. Cut flowers in a vase. Uncle Toms. The "restive." It's exactly what a very few, very powerful people who run things and basically own us want. Domestication. It makes us easier to earn from. Getting back to Canada, you're gonna start hearing all kinds of propaganda, I mean news stories, about how much money has been lost by this company and that. You're gonna be asked to return to work long before it's safe because every minute you're out of the ratrace, you are closer to self-actualization. Violent self-actualization. Embrace the boredom of Covid19. Use it to learn about yourself and your environment. Maybe to break free of the chronically futile "hedonic treadmill of consumerism." You're gonna hear how the country is suffering, and it's true, but not the rich. They're doing fine. And they're right now, as they are wont to do, planning a barrage of belly-aching that will make you feel it's your patriotic duty to tighten your belts and save the economy. Really, they are the only ones who can do that. And it wouldn't be hard and they wouldn't even lose money. But because of 4 symptoms of their pathological lunacy, they don't want it that way. And they hafta get what they want. Even though it is never enough. If I may, I'm going to choose a name for this pathology. I'll call it Jaggerian Lucritis. It only affects those Lucritians who have way too much filthy lucre and much like Mick Jagger, they can't get no satisfaction. Boo hoo…In closing, I'd like to offer an alternate solution that, believe it or not, was offered by the great Bertrand Russell himself. "Civilized life has grown altogether too tame, and, if it is to be stable, it must provide harmless outlets for the impulses which our remote ancestors satisfied in hunting... I think every big town should contain artificial waterfalls that people could descend in very fragile canoes, and they should contain bathing pools full of mechanical sharks. Any person found advocating a preventive war should be condemned to two hours a day with these ingenious monsters. More seriously, pains should be taken to provide constructive outlets for the love of excitement. Nothing in the world is more exciting than a moment of sudden discovery or invention, and many more people are capable of experiencing such moments than is sometimes thought." Words for any teacher to live by. I mean possibly without the sharks. And the canoes. Though canoeing is good, just not over waterfalls. But for tyrants and megalomaniacal CEO's and politicians, yeah, the waterfalls and shaky canoes and sharks. Especially the sharks. Maybe with lasers on their heads.
I was drinking a Caesar one evening. This being a drink more common to Canada, I'll explain in case you haven't tried one. It's vodka with tomato juice, W... sauce, Tabasco sauce and spices. The rim is sometimes wet with lime then dipped in salt or spice, but mine wasn't like that. I had found some Clamato and mixed that with seasoned salt, pepper, W sauce (I can't spell Worchesterfieldshustershire) and, of course, vodka. I lamented the fact that I didn't have Tabasco, but it was not bad without it. I had the W sauce, but no T sauce. That'll tell you how much heat I like on my food.
At any rate, there is one extra ingredient almost always found in a proper Caesar: a celery stick. I like the celery so my Caesar had two. As the Caesar level in my glass lowered, the celery sticks got shorter. About 3/4 of the way through, I picked up one of the celery sticks and the other stuck to it momentarily as I raised them both out of the glass. The second celery stick came unstuck and splashed back into the liquid, which was perilously close to my face at the time. As my luck would have it, a splash of Caesar went under my glasses and directly into my left eye. Tomato juice! Pepper! Salt! Right in the eye! Man did it smart for a while!
This should really not be something worth sharing, and it wouldn't have been if not for the diabolically implanted thought that rambled across my busy brain even while it was working hard to send explosions of pain to my left eye: "I'm sure glad I didn't have Tobasco in this Ceasar!" I was disgusted with myself!
If you are concerned by the title, this is not going to be a post about Wall Street or stocks. All I know about either is that I don't want to know about either. The type of investment I'll be talking about is a kind that we've all made. You might be thinking that you've never made any investments in your life, but you have. A majority of us make them every day. But they're abstract, so the return on investment, ROI, is not measured in money, and is therefore more difficult to assess.
I'm talking about investments we make in ideas, opinions, beliefs, or increasingly often just the people from whom we hear these ideas, opinions and beliefs. Due entirely to social media, it is possible for the average person to observe total strangers aggressively airing their investment portfolios on a daily basis, and to give them some positive or negative ROI. It's fun and it's free!
Well, that's what I used to think too. But I've started to realize that this kind of investment is nothing so new as social media. It's been going on for a very long time. What we used to call "propaganda," we now call "social media." I'm not Winston Smith, folks. I haven't worked for "The Party," or the "Thought Police," but I have heard some Winston Smiths who have risked room 101 to enlighten us all. They tell us what's being done to us, and it makes us angry. We SHOULD be angry! We NEED to be angry! But, to mix literary allusions, we are happy taking our Soma.
The Soma is often in the form of, "That's just conspiracy theory!" Or, "That's fake news." Or, "Take off your tinfoil hat and come down off your soapbox, you whackjob!" As the bad news increases and becomes MORE bad, the world has gotten itself very concerned with deflecting that bad news, whether it's true or not. I'm sure I don't need to post any of the dozens, nay hundreds of examples of memes people post about getting negativity out of their universes or seeing only the positivity they force themselves to see. I've railed from post to post right here about the "well-at-least" mentality I see weakening, not to say domesticating, our species. The beginning of this post was an example. But for a very good illustration of the Svengali-ish, Somafying, de-escalization of our human nature I intend to vilify in this post, here is roving reporter, Walter Sobchak:
"Nothing is fucked here, Dude." Do you ever feel like the Dude? Do you ever feel like there's some Walter trying to talk you down in the face of great negativity by saying, "You're being very un-Dude here!"? I constantly feel this way and rather than mellow out, I go the other way and allow it to piss me off lest I lose the natural instinct of anger the world is trying to suppress. So when the Dude tries his hand at telling someone the same pacifying drivel that worked on him, it's not so successful. That kind of crap is usually not successful on me either. In that way, I'm more like the Big Lebowski in this next clip:
"Nothing is fucked? The goddamned plane has crashed into the mountain!" I mean, say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it's an ethos.
One Lebowski quote too far, no? I got carried away. However, as you will see, it all converges like a KKK Grand Poobah, to a point. And if you'll indulge me one more, I myself dabbled in pacifism once. I have great respect for Ghandi and Jesus, but I fear the problems of our world just don't have time for their approach, if we have time for any. And our greatest enemy is notoriously unreceptive to this approach. As they have always been.
"Feeling themselves harshly and unjustly treated by the home government, your fathers, like men of honesty, and men of spirit, earnestly sought redress. They petitioned and remonstrated; they did so in a decorous, respectful, and loyal manner. Their conduct was wholly unexceptionable. This, however, did not answer the purpose. They saw themselves treated with sovereign indifference, coldness and scorn. Yet they persevered. They were not the men to look back.
As the sheet anchor takes a firmer hold, when the ship is tossed by the storm, so did the cause of your fathers grow stronger, as it breasted the chilling blasts of kingly displeasure. The greatest and best of British statesmen admitted its justice, and the loftiest eloquence of the British Senate came to its support. But, with that blindness which seems to be the unvarying characteristic of tyrants, since Pharaoh and his hosts were drowned in the Red Sea, the British Government persisted in the exactions complained of.
The madness of this course, we believe, is admitted now, even by England; but we fear the lesson is wholly lost on our present ruler.
Oppression makes a wise man mad. Your fathers were wise men, and if they did not go mad, they became restive under this treatment. They felt themselves the victims of grievous wrongs, wholly incurable in their colonial capacity. With brave men there is always a remedy for oppression. Just here, the idea of a total separation of the colonies from the crown was born! It was a startling idea, much more so, than we, at this distance of time, regard it. The timid and the prudent (as has been intimated) of that day, were, of course, shocked and alarmed by it.
Such people lived then, had lived before, and will, probably, ever have a place on this planet; and their course, in respect to any great change, (no matter how great the good to be attained, or the wrong to be redressed by it), may be calculated with as much precision as can be the course of the stars. They hate all changes, but silver, gold and copper change! Of this sort of change they are always strongly in favor." Frederick Douglass
This is a quote from the speech, "What To The Slave Is The Fourth Of July?" Oppression makes wise men mad. In both meanings of the word. Angry, and crazy with anger. If they are not wise, they become RESTIVE under this treatment.
Folks, he was talking about slavery and there were slaves who just got used to being slaves. Surely THEY were some of the "well-at-least" est people of all time! "I have an owner who takes all the money for the work I do, I'm not free, can't marry who I want, my kids are taken away from me, I'm regularly raped and beaten, I'm not even considered human, but at least I can sing!" Uncle Toms made wise, rebellious slaves so angry, they made up a name for them. The slave owners spun a different tale telling their slaves that they had it great! And the slaves submitted to it like a drug. Like Soma. Nothing is fucked here slaves. You're being veeery un-Dude!
But the wise knew that something was fucked! They knew the goddamned plane had crashed into the mountain! And they got MAD, as Frederick Douglass says. And they united with like-minded non-slaves and revolted. Violently! And it worked... sort of. At least it worked better than pacifist actions would have. Did I just go all "well-at-least" on your asses? Dammit! Well, there was revolution. There was independence and a civil war. And things changed a great deal, specifically for the slaves. It was attained through violence as was the independence of the very nation only 76 years before Douglass's speech. In the highly quotable words of Margaret Mead, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
Unfortunately, there was a limit to the change. The traditional limitation that Douglass calls the unvarying characteristic of tyrants that goes all the way back to the Pharoah oppressing the Jews of Egypt 34 or 3500 years ago. Money, possession, ownership of property and the greed and corruption that comes along with the power it yields. It is no easy match for VIOLENT opposition, let alone passive resistance.
Let me give you one more fascinating example that ties in very nicely to what I'm talking about:
It's well worth it! It's 17 minutes you can afford. Trust me.
"He had crushed the German labour movement and for that the property-owning classes were willing to forgive him almost anything. Both Left and Right concurred in the very shallow notion that National Socialism was merely a version of Conservatism." Orwell, a socialist, might well have argued, "Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, but at least it's an ethos!"
You can easily guess how the author of "1984" could have actually gotten inspiration from Hitler for his book that was released only 9 years later. Hitler was in many ways Big Brother. But the main point of his write-up is the fascinating point. We are violent by nature. In a lot of ways, denying that nature and suppressing violence denotes virtuous behavior. As in the example of slavery above, as well as the suppression of Hitler in WWII, using that violence to overcome evil can also be a virtue.
Chuck Palahniak has written about this phenomenon at length and far more entertainingly. You may have read his book or seen the movie "Fight Club." I agree with Orwell. I see this as a very real part of MY nature. I also agree with most of what the narrator in the video above says although I'm not sure about his characterization of Orwell as the greatest prophet atheism has ever produced. The books behind him reveal that he just might have slightly Christian-supporting opinions. I also think he strays into the conservative, churchy side of what to do with this fascinating tidbit. I don't think we should concentrate on the small struggles that we are engaging in both worldwide and in the US. I think there is a Marvel worthy villain that we need to focus our innate violence on and conquer. Who or what is that villain? It's in the review! It's in Frederick Douglass too! But we constantly and Pavlovically ignore it as the narrator does in this video. The property-owning classes were willing to forgive him for anything. Hitler was financed by heavy industrialists who saw him as the man who would smash the Socialists and Communists. Here again is that unvarying characteristic of tyrants. If you want to give that Marvel villain a name, it's Mammon or Richie Rich or Filthy Lucre. Big money is the goddamned plane that has crashed us into the mountain!
Exploitation of the earth and wildlife by greedy corporations is undoubtedly what has caused Covid 19 and many viruses before it, yet we concentrate on vaccines and argue about the virtues of mask wearing. Protection of the "opulent minority" against the majority was the original purpose of American government penned by James Madison back in 1787, and for almost 250 years, it's remained unimpeachable in its performance of precisely that. Do you think other governments differ? The majority of Canadian and American tax is collected upon fraudulent promises that our income taxes would be temporary, but we still bicker about carbon caps and inheritance tax while WE can be charged with tax fraud for not paying this fraudulently levied taxation... and not once since shortly after its perpetration has it been a part of any complicit politician's platform to even review it. The income gap increases, the rich get richer and poor get poorer, yet we call that (as the narrator did) a "booming economy." The prices of everything have risen dramatically while our wages have stagnated or dropped. Yet we mistrust the victims of this plight and revere its manufacturers. Our "leaders" endlessly lie and let us down, yet we vote as dogs salivate whether we're given sustenance or not. The US and Canada (and a lot of other nations) endeavor to perpetuate the oligarchy of the World Bank, Big Business and their political buffers, yet the peons bear our dispossession gracefully and peacefully.
Any of these points alone is enough to make a wise man mad. Taken together, it is inexplicable to me why there are still so very few whispers of revolt worldwide! America and Canada have recently celebrated their country's independence days, rich and poor alike. As peons, though not yet slaves, we can still relate to Frederick Douglass when he wrote, "To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy — a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages."
Is it just that we have really REALLY good Soma? Well, it's time to consider the title. How often on social media do you see someone soundly defeated in an argument not surrender? It's such a common occurrence that it's been given a poker nickname. An apt nickname because it's something that happens frequently in gambling and... you guessed it, investing. Doubling down. I'll go to the teeming well once again. When Trump is doing something stupid, that he KNOWS the majority hates, does he stop and apologize? No. He has OVERINVESTED in his narrative/behavior. So he doubles down. In fact this link actually says he TRIPLES down on his unpopular divisive language.
My assertion is that the majority of the world have accepted our base positions in life and our meagre portions of the proverbial national pies and have expertly transformed our mentalities to accommodate them. We are the domesticated livestock we've been indoctrinated to be. And if we're really not, we've spent far too much time and effort justifying and rationalizing to self-deprogram. I think this is why revolutions are dependent upon the young. However, the young seldom have the wisdom to make them mad, in the Frederick Douglass sense. I think this is why our education is diminishing instead of developing.
As for myself, I hope I never stop pulling for the underdog majority in our epic struggle against our IMF masters. (International Mankind is Fucked) Nooooothing is fucked here Dude. Nothing is fucked.
But I feel myself drawn to the peace and restive state of surrender more every year I live to see all the rage of the world misdirected instead of concentrated on the few who have more than earned it. I wonder if my resistance to change is nothing more than my own personal overinvestment in revolt. Maybe someday, like Bernard Marx of Brave New World, I'll give in and put myself in a zoo where I self-flagellate and starve for the entertainment of the rich. I'm part way there already.
Or maybe I'll triple down and go all Jonathan Swift (A Modest Proposal) and instead of eating poor children, I'll start eating the rich. Low carb, low in sugar, and Atkins approved! Ahhh I'll flip a coin.
