How I Know I'm Going To Heaven When I Die

 

The root word of “public” is the Latin “publicus,” which means, “Of the state. Ordinary. Common.” In essence, everyday people, ordinary Joe and Jessica Blows, the vast majority of us sad sack, filthy commoners BELONG to the state. That’s what our owners and overlords mean when they call us the “public.” It's not to be confused with the word "publican," however. In Biblical times publicans were tax collectors and thought of themselves, and rightly so, as the scum of the earth. They were the ones who collected all the money from the "public." And since they were pretty much freelancers, it was a very difficult racket in which to remain honest. But even at that, the exorbitant tax rate charged by the publicans who even considered themselves lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut, was somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-10% from my research. In a nutshell, the "public" worked and paid for practically everything they got from the government even though what they got from the government benefitted the rich more. I don't think I need to include, but I will, that the rich paid zilch. That hasn't changed much has it? In fact even today, when we the public pay FAR more than 5-10% tax, a smart guy like Peter Zeihan writes off a smarter guy like Bernie Sanders, whose main platform is getting the rich to pay more taxes, as a "religious leader" with a "cult following."  Just look at this "religious extremism" for example: In the richest country in the world while experiencing record corporate profits, if you work 40 hours a week you shouldn't have to live in poverty. I guess I'm a member of THAT cult.

But speaking of Bible times, let me wax Biblical on yo asses for a bit. A good buddy of mine recently drew my attention to an interesting Bible story from the book of Daniel. Chapter 4 actually. It’s a tale about King Nebuchadnezzar, (who I have known as NEBBAH since boyhood) who dreams of a beautiful, gigantic tree that gives shade to all animals, feeds all of mankind, and the fowls of the earth nest in its branches. Behold a watcher, and a holy one came down from heaven and announced that this was no good. Cut it down, they ordered, chase away the beasts and birds and scatter the fruit. Then, oddly, comes verse 17 which says, “ This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.”

For my Atheist friends I hasten to add that the "most High," who is said to have ultimate authority here, is just some person, being or entity these mysterious watchers and holy ones blame everything on. We're expected to believe them, but ultimately left with the choice of whether or not to put our faith in Him/Her/It.

Now in the Bible nobody can interpret this dream except Daniel. But I reckon, at the risk of being blasphemous, I’ll give it a whirl. I would interpret the “watcher” to be a member of government and the “holy one” to be a banker of some sort. Probably a member of a central bank or the World Bank. They are our owners and are as close to holy as we have on the earth. Them and the IMF. The watchers/government are known as “the state.” That’s who we belong to, and they are our handlers, the ones who deal with us riff-raff directly. They report to the bankers who control all the resources that we work to produce. They can’t have us eating for free from any glorious, giant tree or we won’t have to work to make them rich and powerful. So they chop it down, hoard the fruit and wood for themselves and maintain the norm.

The most High must be God. Hence the capital H. Now this may conflict with many a theory/belief/mental certainty of a merciful and kind God, but so do kids getting cancer, telemarketing, and mosquitos so bear with me. What does it say in the verse? The intent of the lumberjacking and produce hoarding was to drive home the point to the living (that’s us worms) that God rules the kingdom of men (Earth) and purposely gives control to who(m) He desires – the basest of men. Let me repeat that because I had to hear it again when my buddy said it to me. God wants the scumbags of the earth to be the ones in control. Not TOTAL control of course, that’s God’s, but he sets up the dregs of the planet, I mean the soul-sucked, amoral, puppy-killing, automatic rebilling, Ponzi scheming, home loan shorting, disaster-profiteering, cheat-their-own-mother fuckers of this world… those are the vermin GOD sets up as our owners.

This fits into my theory that the only hell is where we are right now. It’s all about contrast. There can be no light without the contrast of darkness and how could we believe that death (whatever it holds that Hamlet and I aren’t brave enough to shuffle off our mortal coils and find out) is preferable to life without some pretty crappy earthly shit to serve as contrast? Death, even if it’s nothing, is going to be some kind of heaven if you ask me! The longer I live the more mornings start off with, “Dammit! Didn’t die peacefully in my sleep again. Well I guess I’ll just do this for another day…”

Now before you get all worried that I’m suicidal, or even a pessimist, let me assure you that it is quite the opposite. The other day I said to my Mom, "Well I guess I'll apply to a few more jobs so they can ignore me." She said, "Gads! You're not a very positive thinker, are you?" (Yes, my Mom said "gads") I replied, "Au contraire ma mere. My positivity is that which keeps me trying and failing." My optimism has always been what has kept me in good supply of failure and disappointment. Maybe I'd be a happier person if I just thought more negatively and gave up more often. Think on that a spell. 

I appreciate the good things we have as part of our hellish existence on our hellish planet. If not for those things I WOULD be suicidal and if I kill myself before I suffer some more, it’ll make death less of a heaven, won’t it? The contrast won’t be as extreme. It’s not like I’m making this up! It’s a Buddhist concept I’ve been struggling with for a while. It’s also Biblical if you read closely and don’t try to convince yourself that the moral of the Bible is “the good guys win.” That ain't the book I read. There will be trials and tribulations. The Buddhists tell us we must figure out how to take joy in our suffering. The Princess Bride tells us that life IS suffering and anyone who tells you different is selling something. And trying to become one of those "holy ones" or "watchers" probably.

We are all afforded enough love, friendship, sleeping in, music, cartoons, alcohol, naps, board games, food, strawberry/rhubarb pie, sports and other pleasures in life to keep us from offing ourselves and flying too swiftly to that undiscovered country from whence no man returns and not getting sufficient contrast for it to be considered heaven. Those who are truly good people should suffer enough to welcome death. Those who are in control on earth and don’t want to die will find a well deserved hell in death. Now I don’t know if that ratio works perfectly for everyone or not, but it’s a nice thing to cling to in hard times.

So let me tell you a few of the recent things that have increased the contrast and improved the concept of death for me so much that I believe I’m going to heaven when I die. That’s part of the reason for this blog. And let’s face it, reading about the hellish bits of our shared human experience is more fun anyway. After all, who was the protagonist of Paradise Lost?

The blinding bureaucracy of Canada. I am trying to become a citizen of my own country again. How is that even something I need to do? Doing so requires an unconscionable amount of paperwork! This includes a good deal of superfluous and just plain stupid paperwork. And it would be kinda nice if it were only paperwork. But with the advent of the computer age, our government (watchers) have complicated our lives by adding webpages and computers that are nothing of not undependable for anything that doesn't involve the transfer of money from citizens to our government.

I wrote, and then RE-wrote the learner's test for my driver's license and couldn't believe some of the questions that were so obviously included not to keep the streets safe but to make people fail the test. I've seen this in the ESL world, particularly in IELTS, where testers put these highly questionable questions in tests and every time test takers get them wrong their power-tripping heads swell a little more thinking they are superior in their English abilities to these people studying it as their second, third or extra language of some number. Sad human beings. In the learner's test there was a question about when school zone speed limits are in effect. In the book it said from 8-5 on school days. I WROTE in the book while studying, "What about at night?" Same thing for playground zones (dawn to dusk). So I got a question that asked when school zone speed limits are in effect. I chose from 8-5 and got it wrong. The correct answer was "all day" or "at all times" or something like that. Then there was the 

sign. Does it mean construction zone ahead or construction zone begins ahead? It actually means there's a crew working ahead and/or a zone with people working BEGINS ahead. I don't know how important the difference is. Not enough to make things one iota safer for anyone. Shouldn't that be the point of these tests? Not how many pass or fail? It's almost like they're doing the age old, tried and false bell curving. With driver's exams. Before I move on to the actual road test, an annoying little aside that will make death a little more like heaven to me: I got the school zone question on my second try at the test and confidently chose the "at all times" answer. I was told that the correct response was from 8-5 on school days. I got the same question "wrong" twice! Now, there is no way I can prove any of this because people are not allowed to use their phones while writing the test. So you just have to take my word for it. Convenient for the power-tripping, swelled-headed test administers, isn't it? Makes me look like a conspiracy theorist.

Okay, speaking of that, I'm going on one of my trundles. I'll return to the road test (probably). However, I had a pile of foreign currency I needed to exchange and from what I could tell it looked like TD would be the best bank to exchange it. It was money left over from trips to Guam, Japan, Thailand, the Philippines, and some Korean cash I had left over. While I was in the bank exchanging it, one other customer came in. He went to the teller beside me and said something about having his account hacked into. Now if you are a regular reader with a good memory, you may recall that I had a TD account hacked into TWICE while I was living in Korea. It was a nightmare to get the bank to believe me at first, then they told me there was no way I could shut down my account from Korea. BOTH times it was the same girl who had opened up a Canadian Tire credit card on MY account. This is something I can't do! I've tried! Anyway, I asked who this person was and if something could be done and the bank seemed more interested in protecting her than my money. So I shut down the account as soon as I got back to Canada. WHILE I WAS THERE, another guy in line at the bank was complaining about having HIS account hacked into! They told him to calm down and took him to a separate room so the other customers wouldn't get wind of how unsafe their money is at TD bank. The chances of my experiencing two security breaches of my own and two other people with the same experiences on the only other two times I went to the bank is a very strong indication of what TD doesn't want its customers to know: Your money isn't safe there! Don't bank there!

So why did I include that? I guess to point out that despite the mountains of bureaucracy every Canadian has in their lives, we don't seem to be good at it yet. I mean except when it comes to us "public" "commoners" giving our money to our "watchers" that is. Which brings me to the road test. On the learner's permit I got April 3rd it said, "Eligible to book a road test on or after April 3rd." So I log onto the website to book a road test and get, "Not currently eligible. You are not currently eligible for any road tests..." So I call and do the requisite telephone gymnastics every government number subjects us to including, whether it's true or not, "We are experiencing larger than usual caller traffic at this time. We hope you packed a lunch and have a book to read. Thank you." Or something like that. So I have to wait until the next working day and go in person to the motor vehicles office and ask what's up. Bear in mind I have a job doing mobile security that is on hold while we all wait for this endless process to be completed. 

So Monday morning I take the bus to the appropriate office, show them the screen I get when I try to book a road test and am told there is nothing they can do. I book the learner's test, I take the learner's test, I do the road test at this office, but I don't book the road test there? That's right, I was told, you will need to call this number and I'm handed a card. So I call the number and am told that the next available road test in Trail, where I've been practicing and am familiar with the roads, is in August. However, there is an opening in Nelson for April 11th. Well I don't know if Art or Mom will go all the way to Nelson with me to take this road test, but I tell them to book it anyway since I can always cancel. I call my good friend Tami, who is largely responsible for getting me the job I have waiting for this hoop-jumping to end, and she says she'll let me use her car. Tami to the rescue!... or so I thought. 

The day of the test arrives. The weather is rainy. The only time I can get to Castlegar to meet with Tami and drive to Nelson with her leaves us barely enough time to get there before the 11:05 test time. So I will have no time to get used to the new car or the new city. But I think back to the other two road tests I've taken and the 30+ years of safe driving I've done and foolishly believe I should be okay. 

We arrive at 10:45 or something like that. Tami even asked if I wanted to practice a bit. But I figured it'd be good to check in and make sure they know I'm there. So we did. I was asked if I was there to do my road test and when I said I was they put me to the side of the main line-up with a young guy who also said he was there for his road test. I asked the lady who separated us where the washroom was and she went behind the counter, got a key, led me to the door and unlocked it for me. So after taking a leak I stood over to the side where I was placed and waited. And waited. It was probably 11:30 or later by the time another lady called my name and took me to a wicket where she sat at a computer and took my details (and my money). She then told me I had a late fee of 25 bucks added to the usual 50-dollar fee. She also said the examiner might not be available at all. She looked behind her and then went to another office and fetched - guess who - the bathroom key lady. She comes out and gives me a flustered look like I was greatly inconveniencing her and says, "Is there any reason why you're late?" 

Well of course I reminded her of the fact that she opened the can for me WELL before my appointment time, but still she and the other lady looked as though they were weighing the options. Should we allow this guy to test, remove the late fee, or just be bitches? As if they were doing me a huge favour they decided to remove the late fee and the examiner decided to do her job. So we went out to get into Tami's car. By now the weather was atrocious! It was a freezing rain with some pretty strong winds and just a hundred feet up the mountains it was snowing. She tells me to go get into the car and unlock the passenger door while she waits. So I got in and was fumbling with the controls on the driver's door trying to figure out how to unlock the passenger side when she came up to the door, tried it and almost screamed, "Hurry up! Let me in! It's freezing out here!" 

After analyzing the incident on the trip back (with Tami driving) we agreed that maybe because of the weather this lady was hiding in her office and hoping we'd just leave and she wouldn't have to do the road test at all. But I didn't want to wait till July or August. No way! So after seeing my unfamiliarity with the vehicle she starts asking questions like, "Where is the defroster? Where is the registration? Where is the emergency brake?" Tami had shown me the e-brake location, I correctly pointed out the defroster and I told her I assumed the registration and insurance papers were in the glovebox where most people keep them. They were. Unfortunately after that little victory the rain started coming down really hard and I was not sure how to adjust the wiper speed. I saw the examiner take a note. Then she asked me how to turn on the lights if I were to drive into a dark tunnel. I am STILL not sure if I got that answer right. Probably not. She never did ask if the car was mine so I'm sure I got docked a lot for not knowing the vehicle. And okay, the wipers and the lights ARE safety features and CAN make things safer but I'm borrowing a car to take the test. That's never happened before? Or even more nowadays with the Covid backlog? 

I sound like I'm making excuses here but it went on. We're driving up a street and she asks, "What are you hazards here?" I said, "Ummm... there are some barricades where they are doing construction, is that what you mean?" She goes, "The weather, other motorists, trees, parked vehicles, pedestrians, possible animals..." I said something like, "Oh okay, I guess so," and chuckled a bit because (ffs) an earthquake could happen, the brakes could fail, aliens could invade, Elephant Mountain could suddenly blow up like Krakatoa and cover us both in molten lava too! Her hand was a blur furiously jotting down notes now as though she honestly believed I didn't know the things she listed were possible hazards. I dunno, maybe she had not seen my 30 years of clean driving in Canada? Or maybe the examiners don't bother finding out? 

We went up and down hills, through intersections, around the neighbourhood many times... it was well past noon now and the driving was extra hazardous since it was lunch time and despite the weather there were more cars, pedestrians, bikes, animals, wheelchairs, Rascals, skateboards, and I was navigating them all just fine and dandy thank you very much. Then she got me to go out onto the highway. I took the exit at 50 and in order to get into the highway had to check blindspots and everything, but it turned out the exit became a lane. Something I would have known if I'd practiced in Nelson probably. I had also sped up to get to the same speed as traffic on the highway but it turned out that the limit there was 50 and the other drivers were all speeding. I got docked for not wanting to barge into faster moving traffic forcing them to slow down. I mean you could debate that following the speed limit there might have actually constituted more dangerous driving. Then we went back to the downtown area where we'd circled many times already and I guess I did what she was waiting for. I pulled up to a 4-way intersection and my light was green. She told me to turn right. I got part way through the right turn but slowed down to wait for some pedestrians crossing the street. While I waited for them the light turned red. She told me that I failed to stop at the red light before turning right.

Anyway, she finally had enough to fail me so we didn't even do a parallel park. We went back to the lot and she told me to back into a spot. The final straw I guess. Tami's car has a rear window wiper and I couldn't figure out how to get it to work and since the side windows and mirrors were covered in rain, it was a tough thing to park in that spot. But I did it. A bit slowly, but I did it. We sat in that spot and she accusationally went over the mistakes I had made. She added that I had gone 40 in a school zone, the one and ONLY thing she had not pointed out immediately after I did it, which makes me think she just made it up. But again, you can't argue because there is no proof. 

I was unfamiliar with the vehicle, I did not know the city well and hadn't driven in it since I was a teenager, and I was made to feel as uncomfortable as I've ever felt at any exam including ones I hadn't even studied for! This examiner was actually endangering herself and others with her TUDE! I re-write the road test May 8th in Trail where I've practiced driving using Art's car that I am familiar with. I sure hope I get a different examiner but there's a good chance it'll be her again. Won't THAT make some good blog fodder! 

I have worked two weeks at a job as a mobile (driving) security guard and I don't have my security guard license or my driver's license yet. I'm not driving and I can't wear any part of the uniform with the word "security" on it, but here I am toeing the line and obeying the absurd rules and regulations that give us all hellish inconvenience "for our safety and protection." At least 10 years of security experience and 30 years of clean driving mean nothing in the face of the bureaucratic zealots that people the government agencies of Canada. Our "watchers." 

Nebbah, your dream was prophetic!