START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
Jun 21, 2010

What we learned in the Empathy Group is that people who lack the necessary neurological constructs for collaboration will attempt control to gain resources because they cannot create them; they will also resort to endless strategies to take from others and present themselves as something they are not.

This situation is so prevalent in society that it has formed society's control structure and that structure has been given a name: the oligarchy.  It is describled nearly precisely in Plato's republic and it is the basis for control in our civilization--police enforcement, corporate managment, judicial officials, politicians--and especially medicine: doctors and the medical and hospital industries that now absorb approximately half our money.

We termed the neurological defect "emotional communication dysfunction."  People with the dysfunction cannot collaborate in the normal way becasue they cannot connect using the emotional communication paths that humans and many higher mammals have.  Because of this, they cannot directly sense the pain they inflict on others, and further, they cannot coceive of the long-term effects of their actions.  This is a handicap in normal society, but society has been changed by them, as they can be intelligent, and they can cooperate to solve their problems, allowing them to obtain what they cannot create by trickery and force.  With time their cooperation became organization allowing groups of these dysfunctional people to gain control over large components of society.

For the West, the development of societal templates such as Plato's Republic, was a locus for their control, as Plato and his followers are credited for the basis of Western Civilization.  At the highest levels, Plato's elite, the dysfunction is complete; there is no human empathy, and the system is operated purely mechanically with only affectations to normal humanity allowed to create a thin, yet effective, pretense to humanity.  This is medically described as Aspergers  In the middle layers of the template is the guardian class; dysfunctional people whose inhumanity is part-time; they have hybridized diseases: bi-polar.  Some of the time they are humane and can connect with the mass of normal people, and sometimes they cannot and their disassociation allows them to be inhumane.  Without expert knowledge of these dysfunctions, a normal average person is easily confused by the changes, and hence the value of the part-time inhumane to the oligarchic structure.

OCD is another related dysfunction; those with it drive the system recklessly so that it can grow fast enough to offset the waste caused by its inefficiency: gambling is obsessive compulsion; Capital is obsessive consumption.

ADD also appears to be an oligarchic component, though its use to the structure is less obvious.  Possibly the random nature of the attention deficit mind mimics the random changes to DNA that drive evolution.  It may introduce the only form of creativity internally available to the oligarchy, as the oligarchy has to obtain all of its ingenuity from the normal mass of people; people the oligarchs cannot trust because of all they have done.

The oligarchy has continually leveraged technological evolution to expand its control to offset the natural enlightenment of a continually modernizing humanity.  Today the annexation of technology is so complete that entire Information Society is skewed to obscure the mentally dysfunctional reality of humanity's controling elite.  The oligarchy has corrupted morality by confusing its meanings to focus society on a singular task of empowering the empathically defective, what is often called "the high-functioning autistic."  Initially these misconceptions were forced on the native and natural by the Roman Church; now even socialists work to convert sadistic children into future leaders and healers.

The oligarchy is ancient in its core, but as adaptable as a virus on it's surface.  in the post-Aparheid era, even its capital component has adapted to using anti-bias as a tool for the benefit of the patholigically-biased elite by forcing the misconception that the further expansion of their control, what they call governance, and along with it, exponentially increasing rates of natural exploitation, will benefit the mass of normal humans.  Of course it has not as it has never done so before; the moral fabric of natural society if further torn apart as the planet is moved exponentially closer to environmental collapse.

The most recent strategy of using anti-hate as a weapon of hate against anyone or any group that attempts to resist oligarchy's inhumanity.  It followed the successful destruction of the last the slavery societies, South Africa, when democratic peoples effectively politically forced South Africa's economic isolation causing Apartheid's collapse.

Other biased groups preceded Capital's conversion pure hate to a hybridized anti-hate hate; the most biased group of all, Feminists, successfully converted the struggle for equality in democracy to equality in the oligarchy; these women were the only of the socially rebellious to benefit from the global expansion of Capital.  The Western oligarchy has internally incorporated equality within their structure and for themselves in a way that allows it to bond with oligarchic structures from regions that were former competitors.  But the peoples of these regions are forced into feirce combat for  resources made increasingly scarce by Capital's continuing growth; and any complaints from the lower productive levels can be dismissed as racism.  In their minds, they can plausibly deny their bias with the most absurd rationale; they and only they deserve to be elite, as only they are unbiased.  Of course the normal average person, upon hearing that, will obviously think them insane, but will be frustrated as the oligarchy has now, more than ever, dominant control over all of valid humanity.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted: Jun 21, 2010 3:34pm
Dec 17, 2008

Empathy Action Group (CLICK)

I am forcing the change in the Empathy group; I have not done all the perpetration work that I hoped, but I can wait no longer.

Our group has passed its second anniversary, and has experienced radical growth; we have fleshed out what is probably the most important issue of all feeling beings: empathy. I think the most important lesson from our learning is to focus on emotional communication as the tool of positive change, and leave behind most of the thought, because thought is not necessarily feeling.

It has been a great two years. I have reactivated nearly all of the threads and the discussions are some of the most valuable in the world.

Empathy Action is Action Research guided by Empathy, or more accurately, Emotional Communication. Following the model developed in the Katrina group (CLICK), we will try to find a few important and deep rooted and focused causes. With Empathy, these efforts should reach out to all the people of America and the world because they focus on all their personal benefits. And because we have demonstrated empathy, they can feel confidence in what we are asking for; even those who themselves lack empathy; who have no functioning emotional communication neurons.

  • Animal related causes
  • Wide group interaction -- with whole nations, continents and even the world
  • Information Society support: highly technical
  • Energy as part of the world economy, and important to polar bears * Nuturition, housing, and the other basics
  • Psychological and theraputic reality: showing people that they need to feel the effects they have on others

The empathy model, my next area of writing is here at the Wikiversity (CLICK)

The framework is good, a good start. There is a discussion page there, and sub-set pages can be created to contain the action projects.

Ultimately Empathy Action needs to be framed as Emotional Communication as that is what empathy really is, as empathy is about the connections between us, even the connections we feel within ourselves.

Empathy Model

The action aspect will be based on the success of the Katrina support group now known as "Katrina, Remembered" and the writing I developed from our success for my degree in Information Technology that looked closely at the action research model. There are links on the group page, and I will create a library of all our writing after I work on the Empathy Model page.

The basic idea is to focus the efforts of the group along the lines of the psycho- and sociological model we have been developing here in this group. With a few but important and wide-reaching causes developed based on highly accurate information aimed, almost as a weapon, a the policy makers of the world on behalf of the greater good.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted: Dec 17, 2008 4:04pm
Sep 24, 2008

This morning I woke up with the entire pathetic American scenario in my mind, and I feel I should spill the whole thing to flesh out my ideas about Obama.

I have noticed that Obama and McCain have switched hats.  Obama claims to the people's candidate, but McCain alone opposes the present corporate corruption situation.

I was originally going to start an effort to look at McCain's possible mental problems.  My issue with McCain's brain is that Kissinger created the policies during Viet Nam that put him in the Hanoi prison, making him a true hero, and Kissinger a traitor of the worst kind.  McCain has not absorbed the fact that system he serves (this is no way a nation) sent him to prison, and he still supports that system.

As a initiating act of globalism and free trade with the highly un-free Chinese Communist government, Kissinger had Nixon order bombers away from the "SAM," or surface to air missile sites that were shooting down the B-52 bombers.  Putting aside your feelings about the bombing of civilians during Viet Nam, Kissinger made a strategic move so damaging to the US war effort that he may be the most damaging traitor in the history of warfare.

Getting back to the present-day economy:

McCain's response to our economic problems is that the economic system is defective, and that if it is indeed a free market, then let the market kill the present system -- which sends jobs overseas and with it our money, and attempts to get the money back  by building real-estate developments, probably for foreigners.

The globalist idea, matured probably in the mid-90s, was to destroy America's, and other first world nations', assets by shipping all their key industries to two specific "developing" nations: China and India.

As I pointed out in my McCain criticism, that idea seems to go back to at least 1969 when Kissinger moved to protect the Chinese technicians operating the "SAM," or surface to air missile sites in near Hanoi by having Nixon order the Air Force away from them.  This is a key act of treachery during wartime, and even at this late date begs investigation.

This move was obviously motivated by a desire to open China to global trade for which Nixon gets credit.  But by using the knowledge we have developed in this group, I think Nixon is easy to understand: he was a cesspool of paranoia and deceit; he was anti-empathic and psychotic.  Kissinger on the other hand was, or is, purely anti-empathic: a savant.

During the 90s American know-who blossomed as we built the "new economy," an economy built on clean knowledge from a myramid of small corporations connected, ultimately, by the Internet using the XML web language, which is a simplified version of the ultimately useful "complex structure." Complexity became simplified, and we were at the top of our American game, and we were moral.  We could using these systems bring all the business damaged from corruption from around the world to the US virtually, and handle global business in a purely paternalistic way using our well-designed society.  Our society, if you recall, was initially built in the one-room school house, and promoted the most effective of social, and religious moralities, with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Sure we had problems, and we know exactly what they were: poor quality control and a dominating military/industrial complex.  We were pioneering manufacturers and built all the best machinery, but lacked quality control for our "durable goods" output, especially in cars.  Ultimately that problem was solved, and it was not a huge problem.  Local mechanics could fix the few problems of the otherwise excellent durable goods.

The other problem, the military/industrial complex lives with us today, and is a key component of our off-shore adventurism, and can be blamed in part for our senseless destruction of the nation of Iraq: Saddam Hussein was on his way out, and looking for safe-have somewhere, anywhere.  And our enemy that was the justification for the invasion of Iraq, Bin Laden, comes from a family that is economically and emotionally close to our nation's present leading family, the Bushes.

Perhaps because we had been at peace all these years, we had a chance to build a meaningful economy in the "new economy."  Fueling it was the recent invention, or perhaps implementation, of what we use now for nearly all our communication: the Internet.

At the point of the turn of the Millennium we were the number one nation, and far ahead of whichever nation was in second place.

Three months later, there was a correction in the stock market, then called the technology market: not an unusual event especially after huge growth.  Think of a growing economy as a settling volcano; the fundamentals of the technology economy were solidly constructed scientific and technical knowledge.

This correction was excaberated  by the Federal Reserve chief, Alan Greenspan, who timed increases in the credit rates given to banks to stave the new economy of its necessary life-blood: research and development funds. I should note here that Greenspan and Kissinger are similar men, and socially close.

Another event struck at the heart of the "new economy:" the terror attack on the World Trade Center building on September 11th, 2001.  That building had been a prime meeting place of the developers of a new kind of technology development: free software.  Often called open source, free software extended the socialist concepts of mutualism into e-mutualism which thrived in and empowered the technology market economy.

The "new economy" was truly unique, and it was deliberately destroyed by a variety of disparate forces.  I remember an interview with a high-ranking equities trader, where this trader outlined the plan; all American assets in the forms of jobs and cash would be sent to other countries; in turn foreigners made newly wealthy with American hard earned cash would come the the US and buy real estate sold in the form of "sub divisions."  That would make both the foreigners rich and American land owners rich.  And apparently this is precisely what happened, and the obvious stupidity of this plan is what has us presently in greatest financial trouble since the Great Depression.  We stand here as Amerca's stupidly with our "pants down," while foreign interests continue to financially rape us at the behest of our national leaders, nearly all of them -- except, oddly, McCain.  He proposes letting the whole rotting system sink into the cesspool it has created for itself.

Racism plays deeply into this globalist scenario, as does the "big lie."  The globalist system gradually evolved from the Empire-based colonial system; it was not an instant creation such as the "new economy."  Colonialism was pure extension of the Roman capital system, where a military force would extend tendrils all over the "known world" creating what Lewis Mumford called a "diffuse tribute collection system."  Slavery and environmental resource exploitation were the basis of they "collection system" and today only the word slavery had changed.  Slavery today is called human resource exploitation, and is described as a good thing leveraging the misconception that violent competition strengthens organisms, derived from the purely bogus concept of "social Darwinism."

Slavery here in the US is closely related to racism, so it would by bias to say that human resource exploitation would not be racism.  The present "sub division" based housing economy that is in so much trouble was based on the purest of racist principles.  Huge numbers of Latin Americans were imported in the the US illegally, just as had happened to Blacks during the slavery period of the US.  Unlike the Blacks slaves, who were naively tribal and particularly rebellious, the Latin Americans are considered ideal for resource exploitation by their exploiters.  This slavery-type business, not surprisingly, is exceedingly illegal, where the illegal workers can expect to spend months in prison before being deported.  The corruption of this system is such that no corporate executive has ever seen a day in jail for this form of slavery.

The racism of globalism is not limited to the industries that import and then exploit illegal labor; from the Greek-owned shiny stainless steel "diners," where each imported ethnicity has its dominating or menial role, to the mass of imported Black maids tending to the lily-white children of New York's globalist elite, all we see is stratification based on race.

But the "big lie" has been so well implemented that any criticism of this system is met with accusations of racism, even though at its core is the timeless culture of racism.  Through globalism the culture of racism has been united through what globalists call a multi-culture.  This shows the psychological basis of racism: the bias of each nation's dominating elite.

So at this point in the American decline we see America's first Black presidential candidate seeking to bail-out and further support a purely racist system: the system which put his ancestors in chains.  At least half of the slaves brought to America died during the voyage from Africa.

To deepen the irony, his opponent McCain seeks to let this monster die, yet he seeks to destroy us by implementing the military strategies of Hitler, Napoleon and others: he promises to wave the "big stick" indefinitely, having US forces invade nearly every perceived enemy stretching its forces so thin that a military collapse will be immense within years.  The Racism plays deeply into this globalist scenario, as does the "big lie."  The globalist system gradually evolved from the Empire-based colonial system; it was not an instant creation such as the "new economy."  Colonialism was pure extension of the Roman capital system, where a military force would extend tendrils all over the "known world" creating what Lewis Mumford called a "diffuse tribute collection system."  Slavery and environmental resource exploitation were the basis of they "collection system" and today only the word slavery had changed.  Slavery today is called human resource exploitation, and is described as a good thing leveraging the misconception that violent competition strengthens organisms, derived from the purely bogus concept of "social Darwinism."

Slavery here in the US is closely related to racism, so it would by bias to say that human resource exploitation would not be racism.  The present "sub division" based housing economy that is in so much trouble was based on the purest of racist principles.  Huge numbers of Latin Americans were imported in the the US illegally, just as had happened to Blacks during the slavery period of the US.  Unlike the Blacks, who were particularly rebellious, the Latin Americans are considered ideal for resource exploitation by their exploiters.  This slavery-type business, not surprisingly, is exceedingly illegal, where the illegal workers can expect to spend months in prison before being deported.  The corruption of this system is such that no corporate executive has ever seen a day in jail for this form of slavery.

The racism of globalism is not limited to the industries that import and then exploit illegal labor; from the Greek-owned shiny stainless steel "diners," where each culture has its dominant or menial role, to the mass of imported Black maids tending to the lily-white children of New York's globalist elite, all we see is stratification based on race.

But the "big lie" has been so well implemented that any criticism of this system is met with accusations of racism, even though at its core is the timeless culture of racism.  Through globalism the culture of racism has been united through what globalists call a multi-culture.  This shows the psychological basis of racism: the bias of each nation's elite, and the exploitation of its poor.  Today the elite's of every nation are united in this process of exploitation, and hence racism, and their biggest supporter and best hope for unending domination is the Black American running for president.

So at this point in the American decline we see America's first Black presidential candidate seeking to bail-out and further support a purely racist system: the system which put his ancestors in chains.  At least half of the slaves brought to America died during the voyage from Africa.

To deepen the irony, Obama's opponent McCain seeks to let this monster die, yet he seeks to destroy us by implementing the military strategies of Hitler, Napoleon and others: he promises to wave the "big stick" indefinitely, having US forces invade nearly every perceived enemy stretching its forces so thin that a military collapse will be imminent and within a few short years.  Perhaps McCain plans to use the Nuke, as in Peter Seller's Dr Strangelove.

Either way it is starting to look like we will "owned" by hostile nations, at least two of which are considered allies: India and China.

Communist China's role in the American collapse is obvious and well discussed.  It is also directly felt by those Americans who lost their good and more manufacturing jobs.  India's role is less discussed but also obvious to anyone who has lost a technology job, or who has spoken to the "lucky" Indians given American technical customer support positions seemingly purely for the purpose of insulting Americans: this can hardly be a coincidence.

This is the unnatural decay, or perhaps de-evolution, of the moral evolution of our manufacturing culture.

I would so much like to discuss the ancient evils of India's elite: the descendants of the invading Aryans.  But that is outside the scope of this diatribe.  Also I would like to describe the Latin American invasion fueled by the highly damaging drug Cocaine, which comprises half the Latin American economy.  Just as the present global economic invasion, this "minor" invasion was at the behest of the American "powers that be:"  the CIA and the Republican party both attempted to recoil from their disastrous and suicidal Viet Nam war.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags:
Posted: Sep 24, 2008 9:41am
Feb 26, 2008


I have been looking carefully at police behavior lately -- through the corners of my eyes of course.

Today I saw two cars pulled over just now in the in pouring rain in Highland. Both cars had their driver's side doors open, both drivers were standing behind their cars getting soaked, and both police officers were leaning inside the cars looking around.

Quite frankly, as I learn more about the functions of the human, especially with respect to neurology and morality, I find it difficult to believe that humans are "basically criminal," as this kind of enforcement would imply. So these two attempts at search and seizure would then not only be rights violations, but immoral acts, as I believe a warrants or "cause" is necessary for searches.

Because of what I have learned about neurology, I have suspicions about the neural "facilities" of these officers. Do they have the ability to understand that what they are doing is wrong, not from a legal or "psychotic" perspective, but from an empathic perspective? It appears extremely likely to me that these police may have defective, or perhaps disconnected, empathic neurons: specifically spindle and mirror cells.

If this is so, then it would also seem likely that the "system" for recruiting and training police is promoting people who are lacking these key human neurons; If this is the case, then the police may be largely defective. To extend this idea further, investigators lacking the mirror neuron should have almost no way to determine if a suspect is lying as people known to be missing this neuron are easily fooled.

In my experience, this is as bad as I have seen things-- our state enforcement officials here seem determined to hurt people, possibly more so than in other states. Why? Are the officials likewise missing key neurons? In the very near future these neurons will be visible to magnetic scanning equipment.

I am not too worried about the police myself in this regard. As a former trucker, I am exceedingly careful about speed limits, lights, turns, and intersections, so I don't expect to get pulled over myself. And if I do, I know how to act -- really friendly !!

Here is a debate on this very subject here on care2: Police_brutality_mentality_CLICK
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , ,
Posted: Feb 26, 2008 3:24pm
Feb 13, 2008
American Suicide, Part Two: UN hypocrisy

I visited the UN head quarters with some friends from out of town recently; I found many other things on display there that disturbed me significantly. So much so, I can no longer see the UN as a peace-keeping organization, but a significant source for the world most important problems; it is now a puppet organization for the global anti-empathic, those who seek, through their sickness, continued pain for this planet.

When I entered the main hall, where the sputnik hangs and the pendulum swings, I was confronted with a huge display showing the results of global warming, specifically the melting of antarctic ice. In the display were photographs of an ice sculpture built in the UN garden this last December; of course it melted in this unusually warm weather. Also visible was an exhibit commemorating Al Gore's Nobel peace prize for his public global warming effort.

But when I walked into the bookstore, the first thing I noticed was a prominently displayed copy of "The World is Flat," a book that describes how free-market global capitalism is saving the world specifically by fleecing of the American people of their jobs and savings for the benefit of the Indian Hindu upper caste and the Chinese communist party. "The World is Flat" won an award from the dominant free market bank, Goldman Sacs, for its author is Thomas Friedman, a New York Times writer. (Please note these names.)

With further browsing I found that the UN's official economic books all promote trade liberalization, another term for global capitalism, as the only route to world peace. Free market liberalism, or global capital if you prefer, describes only a system of uncontrolled resource exploitation, generally starting with energy resources. The free trade marketeers describe uncontrolled resource exploitation as a kind of human right. The destruction resulting from uncontrolled resource exploitation is hence described as beneficial as it creates for people wealth: economic expansion. Since capital freedom can be rationalized as a right, and since rights are natural, the resulting destruction -- the destruction of the planet and with it the human race -- is a "natural" result of human evolution in free marketeers' perverted view.

Not limiting its anti-empathy to environmental resource destruction, the UN, in alliance with the global capital, promotes not only natural resource exploitation, but the exploitation of every resource, especially the human resource. When capital seeks to exploit a resource, or "develop it" as it says, local communities, often tribally native, are destroyed and the destroyed community's residents are usually forced into urban ghettos to suffer; their natural environment having been stolen -- annexed for development -- or made uninhabitable and unsurvivable. Capital further rationalizes the pain it inflicts by yet another perversion; suffering behaviorally alters those who are suffering; the suffering themselves learn to exploit to succeed, just as capital does. Ultimately the exploitation of the suffering is self-destructive: drugs and prostitution, where prostitution is something, of course, that capital has historically enjoyed.

Also most prominently in the front of the bookstore is a UN text promoting the humanization of the digital age: more hypocrisy. It was, in fact, a UN resolution that effectively removed "freedom of information" as a human right from the UN charter when UN delegates voted to halt the flow of the Internet information across international borders, or frontiers. Interestingly, it was an alliance between Microsoft, through the nation of Australia, and various terror nations that ultimately nullified knowledge and information communication as a human rights. (It may also be important to note here the involvement of the nation of Australia, an nation that has recently rivaled the US by destroying its tribally native cultures.)

The UN is a consortia of nations, and each of these nations is controlled by a single dominant culture whose elite exploits dominated cultures within each respective nation. Historically in the US the dominant culture has been "White" and historically its elite has practiced slavery, promoting its notorious "White racist" misinformation (from Joel Spring). If all nations are socially structured in similar ways -- it is biased, and hence unscientific, to think otherwise -- the UN can therefore only be a meeting of the elite of each of these dominant cultures; cultures of various skin colors dress customs, but mentally similar -- to the KKK. These cultural elitists meeting in a peaceful and communicative environment cannot help but join around their common goal, the uncontrolled exploitation of resources, to create globalization.

Knowing the nature of the elite, and also dominant cultures, it seems reasonable that there would be a controlling culture within this unified globally dominant body that calls itself the "multiculture." The interests of this controlling dominant culture would then become an axis, or purpose, for its specific needs. Since we know resource exploitation is the singular goal of each of these dominant and elite cultures, and that capital as incredible amounts of investment cash is necessary to initiate significant resource exploitation in the contemporary global environment, we can assume that lion's share of control should go to culture with the strongest capital struture. We find more clues in the UN bookstore, texts on free market liberalization written by New Yorkers working in New York and being funded by the Goldman Sacs global bank, also head-quartered in New York.

The "hot spot" of global conflict is at this very moment is the Gaza strip, a tiny region squeezed between Israel and Egypt over populated with Palestinian refugees. It has been isolated by nation of Israel, and the Palestinian people of the Gaza strip survive only by the charity of the United States. Israel seeks to force these Palestinian refugees southward into Egypt by isolating it to the point of starvation so that it can annex it to develop it as a real estate resource. Egypt in turn is forcing the desperate Palestinian refugees back into the Gaza strip, guaranteeing conflict.

When I looked at the display honoring the UN's Peace keeping troops -- surely the UN's most significant contribution -- and Palestine, for all its suffering, was missing from the Peace-keepers' somewhat cryptic world map.

The Palestinian Gaza Strip crisis is nowhere visible in the UN lobby or in its exhibits. Instead visitors are shown displays of the joys of Judaism, and the especially the feminist Judaism. Added to this were my observations in the official book store with their resultant conclusions; they developed for me further clues to explain such obvious bias, and perhaps begin to explain the psychosis of the global capital that the UN seems to understand, yet cannot help but promote.

Part One
America: World's first suicidal nation
Why is "global capital" destroying America?

Global capital is through its policy-making economists destroying the US by shipping US wealth , skills, and assets to other countries, primarily those that most successfully repress their people -- primarily China for manufactured goods and India for services.

Why? I can think of two possible reasons. One is subjugation; someone whats the US to be weak and controllable, for some strategic reason, this would be the historical argument.

Another possible reason is linked to the free-market, a fairly new concept in historical terms; according to free market economics, everyone must pay -- nothing can be free.

The problem for the free marketeers is would be that Americans are the most charitable people in history, or were until the first devastating crash, the tech crash of 2000 that brought economic decline to a depression levels. Everyone I have talked to assumes there will be an equal crash soon based on the housing credit bubble -- but this time American families have no savings to rely on.

This is a good question; this is the first time in history a major power has from within handed over its assets to foreign powers that never even asked for them.

Infiltration ??? Savants ???
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , ,
Posted: Feb 13, 2008 4:09pm
Feb 8, 2008
Why is "global capital" destroying America?

Global capital is through its policy-making economists destroying the US by shipping US wealth , skills, and assets to other countries, primarily those that most successfully repress their people -- primarily China for manufactured goods and India for services.

Why?  I can think of two possible reasons.  One is subjugation; someone whats the US to be weak and controllable, for some strategic reason, this would be the historical argument.

Another possible reason is linked to the free-market, a fairly new concept in historical terms; according to free market economics, everyone must pay -- nothing can be free.

The problem for the free marketeers is would be that Americans are the most charitable people in history, or were until the first devastating crash, the tech crash of 2000 that brought economic decline to a depression levels.  Everyone I have talked to assumes there will be an equal crash soon based on the housing credit bubble -- but this time American families have no savings to rely on.

This is a good question; this is the first time in history a major power has from within handed over its assets to foreign powers that never even asked for them.

Infiltration ???  Savants ???


Visibility: Everyone
Tags:
Posted: Feb 8, 2008 8:35am
Oct 24, 2007
Focus: Indigenous Rights
Action Request: Think About
Location: United States
Nativism: The ultimate misnomer

I have recently learned about "nativism," an area of study that can only be described as "anti-native."

I have created some formal (but yet unreferenced) writing that to initiate action to rename whatever it is that these people are trying to study.

Nativism, from what I have read, says that local peoples will usually attempt to reject new comers, such as immigrants, because they want to protect themselves. Racism is nearly always linked to the native, and the immigrants are invariably described as innocent victims in the literature. Their point is obvious, and I think the Anglo resistance to Irish immigration is the most famous example. That struggle I think is what made the Kennedy presidency so significant.

What got me about nativism is the name; it is derived from the term native, and I think that there is a gross misuse of the word that can only result in pain for Native Americans, who will be perceived as racists, when in fact it was the Europeans that were, and still are, racist.

Since this is written knowing that many people support unlimited immigration, I try to take a cross section in the other direction, showing that problems are caused more by a disruption of the natural evolution, or development, of communities irrespective of their status as citizens or immigrants.

I also try to show that the word is so badly misused that I have become suspicious that there has been some kind of anti-Native conspiracy behind the use of the word, as I have seen with other terms.

Here is the link to the writing, which may keep growing:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddk32zv4_484dwd9xb

Of all the different things I have been reading and writing about, the derivation of the word native to describe "nativism" as racially motivated bias actually keeps me up at night.

It is very interesting to me is how so many terms can be commonly used in nearly opposite ways; the term liberal is an excellent example.  It is used so, well, liberally that even President Bush considers himself a liberal, in that he is liberal towards corporations, and against the presumably greedy government and mean-spirited social activists.  The vast majority of people, of course, see liberal as meaning generous or charitable, and hence socialist in nature -- clearly not Bush doctrine.

Another example is the word "capital," which I am now using in a very fundamental sense to show how our society is an extension of the Roman and Egyptian empires, after Mumford.  I say that "for capitalism, a capital is necessary" as a place to accumulate the wealth derived from other peoples' resources often from very far away. 

Globalism, I am trying to show, is revolutionary only in that it creates cooperation between distant capitals, such as New York and Beijing, and creates new ones, such as Dubai, which is becoming a "recreational capital" like Las Vegas, but factors larger.

These words are fun to play with, but on a less fun note, I have added to my capital concepts "family capital," which I initially derived from thinking about the "feminine genital mutilation," or FGM, situation.  I use this term because the FGM seems to be used to ruin girls' sexuality prevent them from leaving the home causing families to lose an "human asset," or capital.  It shows how capital concepts, especially the cruel ones that empires have, may have roots in the initial family structure.  FGM is most widely practiced in the oldest areas of human habitation: Kenya and the nations of the Horn of Africa.

The term "Nativism" is to me an emergency case of confused terminology because the term is critically needed by social science at this very moment to describe tribal native cultures and their ways. 

Native cultures are both more vulnerable and more valuable than ever.  Among things, they have the hereditary keys to symbiotic living with the environment, and they also have the psychological and social knowledge that society needs to re-weave its fabric.  From my reading, most social science knowledge derives from the study of tribal natives: Margret Mead and Ruth Benedict.  Constructivism nearly entirely relies on tribal natives for its cornerstone concept: the "community of knowledge."

To show how inappropriate the use of the term "nativist" is, I am trying to bring attention to a cited example that describes a fight between Chinese and Irish railroad workers.  Just as the Union Railroad met the Pacific Railroad, two workforces got into a battle, in which the Irish apparently beat the Chinese.  Because both these groups were living in constantly moving boxcars, it is hard to imagine either of them being native.  And I think that because the Irish won, giving them the appearance of greater aggressiveness, they were labeled the "natives," and hence predatory racists.

I think that the two rails met in California** , as the Union Railroad had a much easier time crossing the prairies, so that would make the actual scene where the two work gangs fought the land that should have been entitled to Ishi the last of the Yahi, whose tribe that was exterminated by immigrants.  Ishi's biography is one of the saddest stories in literature.

**Note: Scratch that.  I now recall that they met at Promontory Point, Utah, but my mistake provides a good example. I will have to reword it.

The citing of the gang fight in nativist literature shows that nativism most commonly describes conflicts between populations trying to take control of land that was not only stolen from genuine natives, but also stolen from the public domain -- everybody.  This, to me, is shameful all around, and tells me that humanity really needs to rethink its validity, and needs to do this thinking before it is too late.

When describing natives in the truest sense, I have found it is necessary to describe them as "tribal natives" to show their social arrangements, and most important, their connection to the land, and in some cases the ocean.

This evolutionary connection to the land is where social scientists can find the values to get past the social and environmental problems that humanity now facing, where nearly every scientist who has looked at our future is predicting a cataclysmic breakdown of the environment, and humanity with it.  This was the motive behind  my empathy studies, where I use evolutionary concepts of empathy to show a psychological human connection to animals that is represented by native spirituality.  My view contradicts the common perception of natives as forest predators.  I have since accumulated information that shows a natural native tendency to a vegetarian diet when the environment allows -- natives consider animals to be their friends and in some cases intermediaries to God.  This idea that goes a long way to explain the rapid success of animal domestication, where two animals, and perhaps three, have become part of humanity: the dog, cat, and horse.  A third animal, the house mouse, also supports the concept in an indirect way.

My personal experiences with natives, be they tribal or simply locals descendant of immigrants, have always been positive and welcoming, with the single exception being certain Southern states.  In those cases, the bias against me is easily explainable in terms of the Northern atrocities during the Civil War, such as the burning of Atlanta, and the influence of the KKK.  From my perspective, the KKK is a colonial organization that is so anti-native as to be barely American despite what Klansmen may say about themselves.  I have also found that Americans will commonly claim native descent if they can, even if it only exists in their imaginations.

Blacks are special in native terms because they are tribal natives brought to the New World who successfully retained their tribal heritages to go on to create, or at least greatly influence, all the world's popular music forms.  Blacks mixed quickly with the local tribal natives (the terminology gets longer) to create the Creole culture.  In Jamaica, tribal Blacks formed the Maroon, or Rasta, mountain culture, which is considered to be genuinely African when compared to African native tribes. 

Blacks and Natives also mixed easily with working class Whites when and where it was allowed, such as in New Orleans before the Louisiana Purchase.  This implies to me that working class Whites may have preserved their own tribal native tendencies during the thousands of years of capital domination.

I am trying to show with Black culture that tribal natives don't necessarily have to be locally native to be genuinely native.  Another example of tribalism is the hippie culture that expresses itself at the Rainbow Gatherings -- tribal nativism can derive from non-native, or colonial, immigration, and still be genuinely native, even according to many "genuine" Natives.

From all this I derive a single divide: capital vs. native tribal.  And to me this divide dates back to the time when our capital culture was invented, the Roman era.   To me, the perversion of the word "liberal" by the "free market" writers makes me suspicious that crucial meanings are being deliberately twisted to lead entire areas of thought in the wrong direction, towards environmental and social catastrophe.

Whether or not the use of the root word "native" in "nativist" has been a deliberate perversion of language for reasons of bias may be impossible to prove, but it's use is dangerously misleading.  I believe the use of the term may increase the hurting of the local poor cultures who are often displaced and hence disintegrated by mass immigrations simply because of misconceptions that this misuse of language may create. 

Since the term is usually used in this way mostly in colleges and universities, young and impressionable social scientists may become biased against local cultures in favor of immigrant populations in policy making environments, believing that locals are predisposed to racism.  From the constructivist perspective, local populations may need protection from immigrant waves.  Each time a local culture is quashed (for any reason), there is a resulting loss of community of knowledge, and hence social and psychological stability which will ultimately cost more in the capital sense than is gained from the perceived benefits of increased human capital through mass immigration.

For much of this writing I am using personal experiences, and for much of my tribal native thinking I am using my imagination as I walk through the forests, as I know that the accumulated native knowledge has been consistently suppressed.  For specific Roman information I am reading Will Durant because I know he is a strong proponent of Roman culture, yet he does not hide its barbarity.  He says that the cruelty of Rome was somehow a necessary component of the creation of our present day classical culture, a conclusion I disagree with.  But because Durant and I disagree on many things, there is no chance of bias on our part; concepts that we do agree on are strengthened by factors.  For that very same reason I try to be careful with Humanist conclusions.  Since I agree with Humanists nearly always, concepts that we share that seem obvious to us may actually be unsupported, and hence unproved assumptions.



Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted: Oct 24, 2007 3:22pm
Oct 5, 2007

Radical Empathy Group, please join


Writing about how society is deliberately unemphatic and how it is de-evolving humanity.

We have in society what is called "limited empathy," which is often described as the ability to do things to other people so as to allow one to make money. An example would be a landlord evicting a poor tenant for not having money; a lack of empathy would defiantly benefit a slumlord.

The single most important trait of empathy is eye contact. When people communicate, their bodies synchronize and large amounts of emotional information are exchanged beyond the character-based, or "digital," information in the language of conversation. Eye contact is where the majority of emotional information is exchanged, and hence the empathic communication neurons are called mirror cells.

In terms of our behaviors is very hard to generalize about empathy except in cases of obvious cruelty. For me, the obvious test is eye contact, but for a therapist, say working in a prison, the test is in "reaching" somebody -- helping them become grounded.

People are pulled away from nature by society, so that the rich can harvest it, or her, and people are disconnected even from their bodies, as how the Catholic church convinces women that their bodies are "dirty" -- a major focus of the feminist movement as I was growing up.

The empathic revolution is about re-connecting all the components that society has pulled apart. Genetics play only a general role in the empathic equation; my feeling is that the majority of heinous crimes are committed by people who lack empathy, but people without empathy don't necessarily commit heinous crimes. In fact, in my experience, people who lack empathy adhere excessively to the "rules" of society because they are unable to make value judgments themselves.

This is why I say ethics are "cognitive imprints," and exist for the benefit of people who lack empathic facilities.

In society we have structure and structure is not human, and therefore structure cannot have empathy; this is another example of "limited empathy." Because structure lacks empathy, then it tends to self-replicate by promoting people who lack empathy. As structures get bigger and bigger, and resemble a pyramidal shape, as a generality the tops of structures becoms less and less connected to their bottoms, the operators at the top have less and less empathy for the masses of people at the bottom.

Clearly the present president of the US, Bush, lacks empathy and illustrates this generalization.

What I think is that we are dealing with a reproductive "tendency" -- a feature of evolution that in the case of society is often called de-evolution. As society becomes more and more structural, the structure itself rewards the less empathic in an attempt to replicate itself, and encourages "limited empathy" people to reproduce faster than empathic people. In the end, society will become less and less empathic and more robot-like.

To me the actual proof of this de-evolution, or devolution, is the melting of the ice caps. Humanity as a whole cannot prevent itself from destroying the planet it lives on, and will very likely act as a suicidal parasite.

That is the challenge that we are attempt to face here in these discussions; how can we increase levels of empathy so as to get humanity to care enough to stop its predicted self-destruction.

Besides the empathy group, I also started a group to discuss PeTA and the accusations that came to it of being a mass euthanizer of stray pets: PeTA: the unbiased discussion. The conclusion of the group is there there is definitely something wrong with Ingrid Newkirk; she tells us in her own words: she enjoys euthanizing animals. She said of feral cats that they are better off killed with an injection than living in the wild. She said that pit bulls -- English Staffordshire terriers -- are killing machines and helped create law all over the country that resulted in the euthanization of many, many pets.

She operates with thought in the absence of feeling. She "rationalizes" her actions, a process which means to most people "making excuses for bad behaviors." This is the basic idea behind ethics as a mental system, and as a system, ethics seem to work well most of the time.

But it is in an important minority of decisions that the ethical process collapses, and rationalization becomes the basis of extreme suffering such as the invasion of Iraq and the planned invasion of Iran. (Both these invasions seem to be promoted by a "rationalized" desire to promote an ancient religion at the expense of world peace, millions of lives, and the sovereignty of the United States.)

What we have in ethics as rational thought is thinking without feeling, and thinking without feeling is anti-empathic; that in the end will kill us all. We have to feel aggressively to counteract this crisis and combat anti-empathy.

The beauty behind empathy, is that since empathy is based mostly on eye contact, we can unite simply by using eye contact, and the unempathic will never be the wiser: what they don't know won't hurt them.
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , ,
Posted: Oct 5, 2007 7:07am
Aug 27, 2007
Focus: Corporate Responsibility
Action Request: Boycott
Location: United States
Once again, Care2 is advertising Microsoft software.  I complained before, and the avertising disappeared; now it is back, but this time disguised as charity.

Microsoft is both corrupt and stupid:

I say it is corrupt because microsoft is in control of control itself. 

If you understand that control structures in our "civilized" society are the structures that kill and make people poor, then you can see why a decentralization of the computer industry, along with the adaption of free, and superior, software will allow people to control their own lives.

Microsoft, like most wealthy operations (and people), practices false charity. False charity is the cover-up by the wealthy to make them appear generous, when it is greed that made them rich (Lewis Mumford: Technics and Civilization)

The reason Gates is involved in AIDS research is that AIDS and all other diseases will be cured with bio-molecular computer modeling.

I say that microsoft is stupid because XP is the MOST INEFFECTIVE operating system available today for love or money, and cannot calculate itself out of its own hole, then there is ZERO chance that Microsoft software will do the modeling.

Microsoft and Gates combine stupidity and corruption by dedicating themselves bribing AIDS research foundations into using only Microsoft software, and hence Gates is directly responsible for the continued spread of AIDS, and all other disease.

Because Care2 Inc, is in on this scam, I think we need to look at Care2 Inc for what it really is, fantastically well constructed false charity.

We need to learn to USE Care2 for our benefit, and we should be preparing to depart it when the time is right.

Here are some useful links to my writing on the topic:

Why we need Linux -- the alternative to XP_CLICK


and

How to build an effective activist web community_CLICK

also,

Writing about the future of computing_CLICK




Visibility: Everyone
Tags:
Posted: Aug 27, 2007 7:29am
Aug 24, 2007
I was walking along a trail that has been converted from a railroad, and I thought about our probably vegetarian past and I looked around for possible locations for growing things.  What I saw were swamps that had filled with dirt -- the process of
eutrophication -- and formed highly nutrient soils with abundant moisture: perfect for growing.

I am trying to develop concepts about our common and probably vegetarian past  within my own mind and from my own , to re-create ideas about our common and probably largely vegetarian past.  I am attempting to see and feel situations from the perspective of a tribal native myself, and to evolve my thoughts based on the environment as I am perceiving it; an open world where the wild animals were historically our friends.  I am 100% convinced that because in the past nature is our environment, wild animals would have naturally been our friends.  The animals here in my cabin are for the most part each others' friends, as much as they can be considering that the have limited resources to live.



Empathy, Domestic Animals, and Vegetarianism


Empathy along different routes has been the triumph of evolution.  The recent experimental data that shows that empathy has evolved farther in whale species than it has in humans defies the concept that humans are somehow created as superior and controlling beings, either by the hand of fate or God.

The superior concept is empathy; humans can conceivably connect emotionally with animals in ways that may be more meaningful than human connections.  Human empathic relationships with wild animals historically very likely led to the domestication of animals, effectively bringing the wilderness into the home.

All dogs, as an example, are descendant of the wolf, and the dog is among the domestic animals closest to human families.  The capital approach to the idea of domestication is probably that livestock (material assets that are alive) was bred from animals captured by humans.  But the notion that wolves would be captured by humans and held in captive breeding programs defies logic if one accepts common perceptions of wolves.

More likely the natural loyalty of wolves to their families, their natural empathy, enjoined them to human families, and those families over many centuries brought the wolf closer and closer to allow the wolf evolve into a human-friendly animal: the dog.  It seems reasonable then that many if not all of the domesticated animals were brought closer to humanity through their natural empathy, as Darwin described the roots of empathy, and the natural empathy of humans, and domesticated as part of the process of the growth of human society.  The other animal closest to human families, the cat, very likely came to humanity in ways similar to the dog.  Als with the domestication of the wolf into the dog, it is hard to imagine early humans captively breeding the wild cats of Africa into the house cat.  It is far more likely that a relationship grew between the wild cats and the humans possibly based on the agricultural activities of humans.

Along with animals, humans domesticated plants of course, and many of these plants work well to enhance the availability of proteins necessary for human life that are often harvested by killing animals.  By harvesting instead protein rich plants, humans can continue their empathic relationships with their domesticated animals by not having to having to kill them as a form of food, and can continue to keep them as family members.

Most important of these plants is the soy bean; I have hypothesized that the soybean was domesticated from a need not just to supply humanity with necessary proteins, but as an empathic attempt to allow a beneficial relationship between humanity and humanity's domesticated animals.  Historical information about the development of the soybean shows that it has developed in Asia as one might guess, but does not place it in a particular part of Asia.  When meditating on the beauty of the system which created the soybean, one wants to think of the soybean in terms of the growth of the higher and more empathic mentality that forms the basis of the Asian spiritualities the contributed to such humanisms as Buddhism.

Note: this article was inspired by news that the Dalai Lama eats meat; as he said "I am a Buddhist monk, not a vegetarian."  This seems like a blow to Buddhism, but then.. maybe its just they way control structures work, and Buddhism is no exception.
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=2118&pst=799113
Visibility: Everyone
Tags:
Posted: Aug 24, 2007 7:34am

 

 Next >
 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.

Author

John Bessa
, 1
Kingston, NY, USA
Shares by Type:
All (35) | Blog (24) | Alert (7) | Poll (1) | Photo (1) | Message (2)
SHARES FROM JOHN'S NETWORK
Feb
18
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Hello my C2 Family, First let me say Thank You to those of you who have so sweetly fwd my posts. You are SO AWESOME!! I will never forget your help. Anytime I can repay the favour, please tell me. Second, my Submit button has disappeared leaving ...
Feb
16
(0 comments  |  discussions )
My little Valentine, Lily, loves taking pictures. She said "Mom, let's do a Valentines photo shoot, so I can send the pics as cards to our friends" lol.  I can't believe she's 5 yrs old! Looking back at my 1st album of her: "Lilyanna Jane, is cra...
Jan
30
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Holidays 2013/2014
Jan
24
by Ys A.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Coretta Scott King: “We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the w...
Jan
19
(0 comments  |  discussions )
 "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."  (Matthew 5:5)Who are the meek?  I guess it depends who you ask, but I think the meaning implied in the passage above has somehow been lost over the years.  Perhaps that'...
Jan
18
by Ys A.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
author: Ralph Nader An epidemic of sky-rocketing medical costs has afflicted our country and grown to obscene proportions. Medical bills are bloated with waste, redundancy, profiteering, fraud and outrageous over-billing. Much is wrong with the pr...
Jan
12
(0 comments  |  discussions )
  It is said that the eyes are the windows to the soul.  There is much to be said about this.  You can see emotion through the eyes, can you not?  You can often tell if a person is lying or not by looking into their eyes.  Wha...
Jan
11
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Dear Friends & All - I must first of all thank you for all the birthday wishes and Season's greetings and apologise for my not getting back to you sooner but - I have only just be able to get onto the site I do not know what the story was or wh...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
When we are born, we are aware of our spiritual self.  Actually, this is the part of ourselves with which we are most aware!  The body is new.  Wow!  Look at those fingers and toes!  As to the mental aspect of self, we were ha...
Jan
5
(0 comments  |  0 discussions )
I no longer choose to trust the medical system with caring for my health in any significant way.  If I need stitches or an emergency accident occurs.  But for my ongoing health care, no thank you.  I do not believe in their ways. I obj...