Wednesday, August 11, 2004

Metaphysical Materialism


There has been something about Ayn Rand that has bothered me, that, until now, I haven't been able to put my finger on it. Her philosophy is what I would call Metaphysical Materialism, which contends that Man(kind) in all his techno-materialistic ethical splendor has finally reached the culmination of evolutionary development. You a’re not going to find a more refined evolutionary manifestation because we have reached the zenith of maturation. That the billions of years that it took the handmaidens of evolution to turn a "lesser god" into a "perfected ape" were well-spent. And like a new car shining in splendor on the showroom floor, you can't get any better than this!

For me, this thinking leads to an existential malaise, because it circles or confines everything within the boundaries of this physical universe. . . a universe processed and viewed through the disposable thought patterns of this perfected ape. Where's the Source? Who drew-up the Plans for this objective universe? Where, then, is the subjective universe? What was going on before the beginning of time? What was the consciousness that initiated the big bang thinking that triggered the creation of this magnificent chaos?

Like accountants with too much time on their hands, Ayn Rand and Carl Marx waxed rhapsodic about the grandiosity of finitism, and how neatly everything fit into their well-ordered patterns. And like Darwin, Spencer et al, Ayn and Carl believed (to paraphrase the dead Door, Jim Morrison) that he who controls the numbers controls the whole shebang. It's not about anything else other than control. Control every commodity on the planet, control the Ecos (management of the house), and control the minds of the masses, and there you have it! You have the “perfect” species in its proper place -- usurping the power and authority of the Creator.

If these "managers" destroy this evolutionary platform (earth) in the process of amassing total control, that's just the chance they will have to take. Isn't risk at the heart of good ole capitalism anyway?

“For how would a man be profited if should gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” If one has no soul to begin with, what’s the problem?!

Separation of church & state


The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution. It stemmed from a personal letter of Thomas Jefferson in which he used the phrase. The Constitution requires that there be no state (government) religion, and simultaneously, that the state (government) does not restrict the free exercise thereof. There's was to be no "American" church as there was an "Anglican" church. Per the Bill of Rights, Amendment I:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There is NOTHING that prohibits the state from being religious and to be so in the context of its natural Judeo-christian tradition (one of its foundational pillars, by the way). The modern notion that this may "offend" some sensible souls who have a different world view, matters not one iota, so long as they aren't forced to adopt a "state religion" as a condition of citizenship and of its privileges. The interdict is there to allow and protect the freedom of worship for OTHER non-Jude-christian religions. NOT to stifle the expression within the halls of the state of the very religion upon which this state drew most of its inspiration.

The core fundamental Truth of this Nation (expressed with an eloquence shadowed by the potential for the gallows) is that our freedoms (endowed by our Creator) are ipso facto instilled in the citizens. These "freedoms" are deemed inalienable (i.e., incapable of being surrendered or transferred). The individual citizen then extends these rights to the individual state in which he/she lives. These states in turn empower the federal government. This is what all of our forefathers fought and died for. The Oath was to the Constitution, not to a federal government
of to a president.

The state/federal government works for us, we do not work for it. Citizens, through their States, created the Federal Government, not the other way around !!! The Bill of Rights, Amendment Ten states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

So, here we have Alabama’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Judge Roy S. Moore struggling for Liberty and his personal faith in God, and the real Constitutional element is ignored by the mainstream. The truth in this situation now is no different than an earlier truth that split our Republic. The War Between The States (American Civil War) was fought for one thing and one thing only: STATE'S RIGHTS ! The current issue with Judge Moore should be framed as an issue of State's Rights. This fight over the Ten Commandments has little to do with religion and EVERYTHING to do with who determines our fate. Are we subjects of the FEDERAL CROWN or are we sovereign citizens within our own sovereign states?

On The Road To Armageddon


There are so many disparate and monumentally discordant factions vying for prominence in the upcoming war with Iraq that one realizes that none of the participants have a clue as to how it will eventually resolve. It is almost impossible to rectify all of the contingencies. You have the neo- conservative’s Pax Americana replete with neotech symbols and Teutonic emblems (reminiscent of you-know-who) ready to clash with the “towel-headed” Muslims. Supporting them in every way are the millions of Armageddonists praying that this war is the war that will see that the Israelis are sufficiently fire-and-brimstoned to warrant the Rapture and Second Coming.

In the Muslim world, various factions are positioning and grooming themselves to be the Saladin incarnate or the next imam for a billion or so believers. They are salivating at the possibility of immense collateral damage to the Iraqis to justify their Jihad to end all Jihads. The Bush administration's fixation on Saddam seems to have blinded it to the possibility that Usama might be perversely encouraging America in this war. The administration and Al Qaeda both have a purpose for invading Iraq, and both want a regime change.

"Both talk about "liberating" the Arab people, but Usama's vision is apocalyptic, but so also is the Rapturists, who can’t wait for Armageddon either. Usama wants the Middle East — Israel and the Arab monarchies — to go up in flames. By Zionizing our battle with Iraq and promising an anti-American theocracy, he hopes to radicalize recruits for a jihad against an American occupation of Arab land." Usama's own fanaticism was forged by foreign occupations — the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan and American forces stationed in Saudi Arabia.

What is deeply troubling is the inordinately shrill cacophony of “prayer”, blaring out from the minds and hearts of Christians, Muslims and Jews alike, all imploring the One God to bless their own personal Armageddon agenda. Meanwhile the Pope and the various other factions of sane humans are praying for the cosmic commodity of Peace to be place like a cold cloth on the heads of all of these warmongers.

The PNAC’s Secret (Pax Americana)
- The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) -

In September 2000, before the election and one year before the attack on America, the PNAC released a report entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” The report is a blueprint for an American “empire” and goes a long way in explaining the Bush “National Defense Strategy.” Membership in the PNAC is overflowing with the usual neo-conservative suspects: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and various upper-staff bigwigs.

The members are basically the talking heads for the sprawling, voracious, military- industrial complex which has constituted anything but free enterprise from its very inception during World War II. These are the great arms firms which have managed to slough off much of the normal risk of doing business in a genuine market, passing on many of their excessive costs to the taxpayers while still realizing extraordinary rates of return on investment.

“At no time in history has the international security order been as conducive to American interests and ideals,” the report says. “The challenge of this coming century is to preserve and enhance this ‘American Peace.’” The report promotes escalating world-wide military bases including an increased presence in the Middle East.

The report calls for control of the world’s energy resources and the targeting of Iraq to achieve our goals because “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”

To create the environment to achieve these objectives, the report says that what America needs is “some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like Pearl Harbor.” The people who wrote the PNAC report make their intentions very clear. These people are now in power and with the “event” they needed to kick things off, i.e., the 9/11 attacks.

The CIA’s former head of counterintelligence, Vincent Cannistraro, has said, “Basically, cooked information is working its way into high-level pronouncements and there’s a lot of unhappiness about it in intelligence, especially among analysts at the CIA.”

World War Armageddon

Conjoined at the hip with these neocons are the “dispensationalists,” who spun off from the ranks of Christian Fundamentalism to a more radical cult status of Armageddonists. The book and movie phenomena, LEFT BEHIND, is a good portrayal of this “philosophy.” These are ultra-fundamentalists who mimic their Muslim counterparts quite well, as noted by the Washington Post calling this belief "Christian jihadism," to indicate the followers determination to drive their country into World War Armageddon.

There are millions of people praying daily that modern day Israel be utterly annihilated at the great battle of Armageddon – signaling the End of History and the Return of Christ the King. According to the "Dispensationalists", what’s left of Israel will take the place of the Church on earth, and a new "dispensation" (or era) will be inaugurated, as mankind approaches the "End Times." Millions of Americans pine for a nuclear Armageddon because it will fulfill their "prophecies." Somewhat schizophrenically, while ignoring the national interests of their own country, they have become a potent political force in the U.S., and practically dominate the Republican party.

These days, the partnership is benefitting from the sense of a mutual enemy: Islam. The Rev. Jerry Falwell, who has said Islam "teaches hate," went further on "60 Minutes" when he asserted, "I think Muhammad was a terrorist."

A grim comedy of mutual condescension

Evangelicals fervently support Israel for theological reasons of their own, based on a literal reading of the Book of Revelation that entwines the Jewish commonwealth with the Apocalypse and Second Coming. As Mr. Falwell instructs: "You and I know that there's not going to be any real peace in the Middle East until one day the Lord Jesus Christ sits on the throne of David in Jerusalem."

When the Rapture comes, they grouse, the holy alliance between Christians and Jews will suddenly become unholy, with Christians levitating and Jews left behind to deal with the Antichrist, plagues, sores, boils, frogs and locusts from the "bottomless pit," each with a human face, horse's body, scorpion's tail and a sting that torments for five months.

"This is a grim comedy of mutual condescension," says Leon Wieseltier, the Jewish scholar and literary editor of The New Republic. "The evangelical Christians condescend to the Jews by offering their support before they convert or kill them. And the conservative Jews condescend to Christians by accepting their support while believing that their eschatology is nonsense. This is a fine example of the political exploitation of religion."


Meanwhile Back at Home

Many believe that the government’s fast-paced shell game of swiftly changing our concentration from one nut shell to another, is simply a rue. They see this entire scenario as the Orwellian grab of the millennia. If ever you wonder what was going through the minds of the Germans in the 1930s that they “allowed” the ascent of Nazism, simply ask an American what they are thinking today.

The opportunists is this administration have shown that the hand is quicker than the eye, as draconian legislation breezes through the somnolent Congress. According to Rep Ron Paul, "The second Patriot Act is a mirror image of powers that Julius Caesar and Adolf Hitler gave themselves. Whereas the First Patriot Act only gutted the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and seriously damaged the Seventh and the Tenth, the Second Patriot Act reorganizes the entire Federal government as well as many areas of state government under the dictatorial control of the Justice Department, the Office of Homeland Security and the FEMA NORTHCOM military command. The Domestic Security Enhancement Act 2003, also known as the Second Patriot Act is by its very structure the definition of dictatorship.”

God forbid, but it looks as if we might start pining for the “the good old days” of the Clintons. And wouldn’t it be weird, if all of this warring backfires on Bush the younger just as it did on his dad, and we find another Clinton in the White House in 2004?! And take a look now at all of the executive power that she will have at her disposal. . . and can you, or your grandparents for that matter, remember the last time the government ever willingly unwound one of its “programs” ?!

Torturing as Policy


We have an issue to face. As an individual and as a Country, we need to look squarely at the corner in which we have painted ourselves.

The floor we are in the process of refinishing is planked with over two hundred years of Republican Democracy. The paint we used is saturated with over two thousand years of ethical precepts now popularized by the phrase “Judeo-Christian" Ethic.

Yes, there have been incidences of erroneous thinking, resulting in violent episodes in our past -- everything from the displacement and killing of Native Americans to 200 years of slavery from the mid-1600s to 1865—and that's not even counting our actions in Iran, South America and elsewhere in the 20th century.

But, in fairness, America has also done incalculable good in the world, everything from the Marshall Plan after the Second World War to providing an example for the world of free speech, civil rights, the rule of law and a long-lived democracy.

But America now finds itself in the desert. We are being tempted – not with all the riches of the world – but with the “justification” to flatten and neutralize our moral conduct. Winning the War on Terror now seems like such a crucial goal in certain quarters that almost any means may seem justified. If we have to abuse some prisoners in the pursuit of vital intelligence, this argument goes, well, so be it.

But this argument is a fallacy. If in the pursuit of high ideals we use low means we'll be remembered primarily for the low means—just as the iconic images of the U.S. in Iraq are now the photos coming out of Abu Ghraib.

The tempter continually adds fuel to this fire as he senses our waxing and waning. Our ire is stoked with bizarre images of beheading and other atrocities. The disgust, hate and anger generated from these images severs our tie to our divinity. We can be manipulated into almost any abhorrent action if we disconnect from our Source. (See how well the scheme is working?!)

How easy is it then to accept the premise that the end does justify the means, and that we can do evil so that good may come? We will all be asked to choose, or the choice will be made without us. Take care.

Going to War

Going to war
This administration (top-heavy with Houston energy whozits) can go to war over oil without having or even wanting ownership of the attacked nation's oil reserves. Ownership is not the issue. Control of the flow is the issue. Maintaining the strategic status-quo is the issue. These modern-day energy conglomerates have put old man Rockefeller to shame. The US Government forced father John's Standard Oil to break off (some would say mastesize) into Esso and other smaller entities. Today, the hand-in-glove relationship with energy and government is so intertwined that you cannot have one without the other.

To get a clear picture of this, research James Baker, whom Bush recently sent abroad seeking help to reduce Iraq's debt. Does Baker represent the US Government? The Saudis? His other clients? Just look at the cases Baker's Houston-based law firm, Baker Botts, represents. Also take a look at Enron’s political contributions.

We would all be better off -- and less fog-headed -- if these energy people (from the President on up) simply told us the truth; simply said that energy (oil) maintenance has become the job of our government. It has become the mandate of the military to make certain that political instability (present or future) in no way effects the flow of our energy needs. Energy, the military industry, and the bureaucracy now unabashedly determine our political fate.

This rationale should stand on its own merits. We don’t need the pretense of WMDs, terrorists, or bringing “enlightened” government to the hapless natives who happen to walk over all that oil which we have laid claim.