December 27, 2009

Looking forward by looking back



On June 4, 2003, I wrote:
It starts like this, I suppose. A blank page waiting to be filled with mild musings, wild flights of fancy, and everything in between.

People start blogs for any number of reasons, some rational, some not. The last couple of years millions of people have started up a blog with the firm conviction that if they could just find the right tone, they could become rich without ever leaving the comfort of their livingroom. That is not why I started mine.

Back in 2003 I was a very active member of an online writing community called, "stories.com". I wrote then for the same reason I write now, I cannot do anything else. Like an addict returning to their poison of choice, if I go more than a few days without writing down my thoughts I start to twitch, my brain gets foggy, and my personality shifts into a dark territory frequented by Mr. Hyde who for his part sometimes seems to be my very close cousin. When I do take the time write, my thoughts become more coherent, my mood brightens, and the world around me breathes a sigh of relief. As long as I find time to write, I'm a pretty nice guy and people enjoy having me around.

Mostly.

This is post 134 for the year 2009. That is important because it turns out that I also wrote 134 posts during the period from June 4, 2003 to December 25, 2008. This year has been so difficult for me emotionally and spiritually that I have been forced to feed my addiction as often in 12 months as I did in the five and a half years that came before. So what happened in 2009 that made it such a tumultuous year for me?

For starters, my sons reached a point where they no longer needed my constant attention. Finally given time to pause, I lifted my head and I looked at the world around me only to discover I no longer recognized it. Call me overly dramatic if you like, but a dark evil has descended on modern America, and no, I do not mean the color of President Obama's mulatto skin.

On January 1, 2009, as I contemplated the year ahead, I wrote this:
The last fifty years has seen the United States of America moving steadily and irresolutely into slavery to selfish passions. Once we are enslaved to our own passions, we will need a dictatorial, oppressive government to prevent us from destroying one another utterly and completely. The kind of "change" Barack Obama has promised to bring us cannot come from the Oval Office. No matter how hard he tries, Obama cannot save us from ourselves. The only person who can save us from ourselves is Jesus Christ.

You know what the most annoying aspect of the prophecy game is? It's this, when you try to prophesy, you fail and then when you speculate mindlessly, sometimes you wind up prophesying. From the moment I saw the plane hit the second tower on 9/11, I knew in the depths of my heart that the only person who would truly profit from this event would be President George W. Bush. After he passed the Patriot Act I woke up everyday wondering if today would be the day he declared Martial Law and disbanded Congress. He had many opportunities, but he never followed through on the groundwork he laid with that one act. To my dying day I will never understand why. Every decision he made, every executive order he signed, laid one more brick on the crypt of American freedom but he never bothered to hang the door.

And then Barack Obama came along promising change and I felt so relieved I was almost giddy.

Then Barack Obama became President Barack Obama and only one month later I was beginning to see unmistakable evidence of rampant collectivism in his czars, his executive orders, and his international posturings. Within a single month I went from an enthusiastic fan to a suspicious critic. And now, as 2009 draws to a close and Bush's foundation not only remains in place but has been dramatically strengthened, I wake up every morning wondering if today will be the day that President Barack Obama declares Martial Law and disbands Congress.

If the current House and Senate bills are successfully joined and healthcare reform as envisioned by the current administration passes, America will have become a dictatorship in all but name. Next will come "social justice" regulations intended to create a "happier, healthier society" and "corporate honesty regulations" intended to prevent any company in America from dismissing unqualified, unwilling, apathetic workers, "who really need their jobs". By the end of 2010 there will be so much internal chaos that it would take a supreme act of conscience and ethics for President Obama not to resort to martial law in an effort to restore order. Personally, I don't believe he has the ethical fortitude to let the system unwind on its own.

To my mind the only question that remains is if the past six years have been a clear demonstration of complete and utter incompetence in American politicians or if all of this is some kind of master plan fully intended to destroy the current Constitutional Republic (or what remains of it) in order to erect something new.

I wish I could believe it was incompetence. I really do. Sadly, I still have enough respect for American politicians to believe that someone, somewhere knows exactly what they are doing. I do not know who the puppetmaster is, it might even be President Obama himself, but the coherency of their actions and the consistency of the result clearly demonstrates that nothing this administration has implemented has been accidental or incompetent. Someone is taking apart the Constitution line by line and they are so convinced of their own invulnerability that they are doing it right in front of us.

There is a major election next November. There is one last chance for the American people to remind everyone in Washington that this is our country, we are in charge, their job is to represent our wishes, and not to impose their own utopian vision of what our nation should be.

268 posts in six and half years, half of those in the past year alone. Yes, I'm scared. I know that ultimately everything unfolds according to God's plan, but given the choice, I would much rather redeem America than watch it collapse.

The only problem is I'm pretty sure my personal choice has nothing to do with it.


December 25, 2009

Holy Days and holidays




It is five o'clock on Christmas morning and I am not feeling very merry. I pray Christmas is being enjoyed in your house, wherever that might be.

About 2500 years ago the Great King of Assyria, Sumer, and Akkad released two groups of people six months apart with orders to return to their homeland and rebuild their national temple. The first group drove off native herdsman who had begun using the ruined temple site as summer pasture, retrieved the corner stones and lintel blocks, and laid the foundation for the most southern wall. The native herdsman, helped by the soldiers of a local king, raided the building site and suffered a humiliating defeat. Shortly after the battle the second group arrived.

The local king sent a emissary to the Great King of Assyria, Sumer, and Akkad claiming the people rebuilding the temple where in fact, fortifying the site with the intention of rebelling against their patron king and re-establishing an ancient, evil kingdom that had wrecked great havoc in the land, forcing the father of the current Great King to launch the original invasion that had destroyed the temple in the first place.

In response, the Great King of Assyria, Sumer, and Akkad sent more money, additional building materials, and a third group of people.

And so it was that the Second Temple was built and the Kingdom of Israel re-established in the area of Jerusalem. The stories of Ezekiel and Nehemiah both preserved this event for two thousand years after the rest of the world had forgotten it ever took place. It was not until the discovery of the palace of Cyrus in the mid-nineteenth century that the biblical "myth" was proven to have been a real, genuine, verifiable historic fact. Which is ironic when you consider that for Jews and Christians alike there was never any doubt about how the Temple of Jesus' time had come to built upon the ruins of the much larger, much grander temple originally built by Solomon.

Christmas is much more than a religious holiday. True, down through the years it has taken on the trappings of paganism, commercialism, and fictional speculation, but none of that changes the simple reality of Christmas. This holy day is the celebration of God, the Creator of the Universe, taking on the limitations of humanity in order to speak to us directly. He was forced to take this step because for three thousand years our civilizations had grown less and less humane until we had reached a point where civil liberties were the privilege of a small wealthy elite while the majority of people spent their entire lives producing the food, buildings, furnishings, and other luxuries this wealthy elite "needed" to survive.

It took three hundred years for his message to be heard. And once it was heard, once the wealthy elite accepted the message of the carpenter's son, it took less than a generation for the message to become so perverted that it became the justification for the existence of the wealthy elite rather than the condemnation of their privileged status.

God Almighty walked among us. He did not walk as a king, prince, general, or merchant. He wore coarse wool and linen and surrounded himself with prostitutes, tax collectors, and poor fisherman. He did this intentionally. He chose his mother, chose his father, chose the city of his birth, announced everything well ahead of time, and appeared right on schedule.

In response we tortured him, nailed him to a wooden cross, and left him to die in the heat of the Judean high desert.

Our need to preserve the status quo was so strong that we ignored him for another three hundred years, but the poor people of the world remembered. His story was preserved by farmers, soldiers, fisherman, craftspeople, housewives, prostitutes, and wandering beggers.

And now, once again, we find ourselves in a world driven by greed and ambition. For a little while, from 1776 to about 1910, a ray of sunshine as strong as the Jewish people rebuilding their temple shone upon the world and reminded it that there was a higher calling. The United States of America, a country founded by merchants, farmers, craftspeople, and wild mountainmen, grew to be a stong guiding light of moral and ethical certainty. We demonstrated with the undeniable strength of economic and political success that a nation can be built on the foundation of common people who are allowed to keep the rewards of their labor. We became the wealth that drove the entire global economy, the ethics that dictated global ideals, and the military power that kept the machine rolling.

Communism nearly destroyed us but we proved the superiority of honest, free-market capitalism by driving the communists into bankruptcy.

Now, once again, the world sits at a crisis point. Those who believe in a single economic elite piloting a world ship dedicated to the preservation of an economic underclass that they can exploit for labor, food, and sexual favors have once again risen to the helm. This did not happen overnight, nor did it happen in a complete vacuum. It took a full century for the elitists and collectivists to regain economic and political control of the world. Sadly, the rest of us helped them along in countless ways. By insisting on cheap products instead of products made by ethical companies, by voting for politicians who passed out government funds to their friends and families, and by preferring a self-indulgent lifestyle of endless parties to a life of hard work and honest toil, we gave these people our stamp of approval and put them back in power.

The bills have come due. Our failure to practice good oversight of local and national politicians, our greed, our assuming that government tills were bottomless and open to all, has brought us to the cliff edge of national collapse. It is too late to stop the party now. We are headed over the edge. We are in a state of full ruination. Next year, perhaps the year after, the United States of America will die. Whatever replaces it might use the same name, but it will not be the same nation.

Remember, The Great King of Assyria, Sumer, and Akkad ruled none of those nations. He ruled everything from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean, but his servants chose his daily clothes, his wives dictated who came to his chambers seeking pregnancy, his cabinet told him how to run his country, and his generals decided which battles to fight and which to ignore. The one thing he could do, he did do. He gained permission from his local priesthood to send captured peoples from a dozen surrounding countries back to their native lands to rebuild their home temples and shrines. One of those people were the ancient Jews. Even in this, he was almost denied. It was only after he convinced the local priests that having additional gods and goddesses looking out for the welfare of the nation would not reduce their political power that the local priests agreed to his request.

This is the kind of society the elitists want to build. They crave a captive prince with absolute power who they can control, and through that control, exploit the people and resources of the entire world. The next two years is our last chance to prevent them. This Christmas, like the Jews who accompanied Ezekiel and Nehemiah during the first Passover back in their parent's homeland, I am keeping my weapons close at hand and celebrating with one eye on the horizon.

My "weapons" are not guns and knives, and the "horizon" extends all the way around the globe. I am not saying that civil war is upon us. The war has already been lost. The economic elite have placed their puppets in power and over the next two years those puppets will cobble together a global political system that will enslave you and I. They will do this by promising peace, prosperity, and freedom. Their Christmas present to you is a gilded cage. My Christmas present to you is a key to unlock it.

Will you take the key or will you accept the cage?


December 23, 2009

Inherent rights




I have something to say and I don't want to use my Christmas post to say it, so I am going to say it now.

Rights are inherent. You can call them, "unalienable". You can call them, "god-given". You can even call them, "natural". Every label is irrelevant. In the same manner as the rose and duck, rights exist irrespective of any human attempt to define them. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it or see it, the tree has still fallen. Rights exist irrespective of culture, conditioning, education, or ability.

1> You have the right to life.
2> You have the right to ownership.
3> You have the right to defend your life and the things you own.

No one can take these rights away from you. They can punish you for exercising them. They can legislate against them. They can kill you when you stand up to lay claim to them. None of that changes anything. You cannot give these rights away. They are a part and parcel of being human. They are yours from the moment of conception until the moment of death.

Here is the key: you and you alone are responsible for protecting and preserving those rights. Before you can protect them, you must learn the difference between a right, a freedom, and a privilege.

A right: You have the right to life.
A freedom: You deserve the freedom to live your life according to your own values.
A privilege: If you live in a modern, industrialized society based on democratic principles, then you have the privilege of participating in the processes that assist you in defending your rights.

These are not the same. No one can change your right to life. They can limit it, they can kill you, or they can ignore you, but they cannot change the simple fact that if you are alive, you have the right to live. If they do limit your life, or take your life, then they have violated the most fundamental of all inherent rights. This and this alone is why abortion is such a controversy. The unborn child has the right to live, but under current laws the mother has the right to kill her unborn child. Why? Because the mother also has the right to her life and the freedom to live her life as she chooses, therefore, the law has decided that the mother's right to determine her own destiny is, for the moment, greater than the child's right to life.

No. I do not agree with the law. However, it is the law. As long as it remains the law, I will not attempt to force a woman to give birth to a child she does not want. In any conflict of rights the law and prevailing culture must determine priorities. Also, the society in question must have the right to negotiate those priorities in a way that preserves the rights of the majority. Sadly, unborn children will never be a majority and will never have the opportunity to participate in the negotiation. This is a simple reality that we all must accept if we are going to have a reasonable negotiation about whether we will keep the current culture or exchange it for something new.

You have the right to own. That includes land, possessions, resources, and the products of your labor. You have every right to own the things you work for, and no right to anything not earned by your own labor and creativity. If you have the ability to buy land, then you have the right to own private property and to use that property how you see fit up until your use of that land infringes on your neighbor's enjoyment of their private property. Environmental laws, fair-use laws, zoning laws, deed restrictions, and so on, are designed to preserve the rights of your neighbors. When those laws conflict with your intended use, you have the right to negotiate changes. Not to secure changes, but to negotiate changes. It is always possible you will lose the negotiation.

Because you have the right to life and the right to ownership, you also have the right to defend both. After all, neither right is worth anything without the third. The greatest problem, the crisis our world is now facing, is the existence of a culture of elitism which has decided you possess none of these rights. To their way of thinking, you have no rights at all because in their minds, you are not human!

Do you understand this? Behind cap and trade, behind healthcare reform, behind gun and knife control laws, behind laws preserving the rights of criminals over and above the rights of their victims, lies the assumption that you are not human, therefore, you do not have the same rights as the elite. These people honestly believe that because you do not have their education, their wealth, their family history, or their position in society, you are not human.

There is only one person who can change their perception and that person is you.

If you accept the enslavement they are offering you through welfare, nationalized healthcare, nationalized pension plans, union membership, lifetime employment, and so on, then you are reinforcing their perception that you are not human and not in possession of the same inherent rights that they themselves possess.

Fortunately, you can change their perception. However, to do so you will have to make some sacrifices. For starters, you will have to stop watching television and start improving your skills. Find a local community college and take some classes. Find a local technical school and acquire a skill. Take correspondence courses. Stop entertaining yourself and start educating yourself. Dedicate your life to self-improvement and through that self-improvement, demonstrate once and for all that you are unwilling to accept the elitist classification of yourself as something less than human.

As long as you are willing to passively accept their perception, their perception will remain. As long as their perception remains, they will work tirelessly to restrict or remove your inherent rights to life, ownership, and self-defense.

The problem with liberty is that if you have the freedom to succeed, you must also have the freedom to fail. The problem with giving up the freedom to fail is that in order to do so you must also sacrifice the freedom to succeed. Like time and space, liberty and success are co-existent and independent. You must have liberty in order to define success just as you must have time in order to define space. Every loss of liberty limits success, just as loss of time limits perceivable space.

In order to succeed you must fight to preserve your liberty. In order to defend your liberty, you must understand exactly what it is you are defending. Life, ownership, self-defense. These are the core issues. If we sacrifice them, we become slaves.


December 18, 2009

Cameron's "Avatar"




An interstellar mining consortium is seeking to harvest an extremely valuable mineral from a moon circling a distant planet. The moon is named, "Pandora", and it is the home to a race of blue humanoids roughly twice the size of you and I. A botanist is with the mining crew, along with a sizable detachment of heavily armed mercenaries. All this is old territory. Science fiction has dealt in this theme, and in these icons, ever since the middle of the nineteenth century when H.G. Wells divided the future Earth between a peaceful surface race and a violent subterranean one. The one new idea brought to the table is the self-aware Gaia-world which allows the planet itself to take an active and decisive role in the final confrontation.

But don't let that stop you from seeing the movie. It is visually stunning, emotionally stirring, and intellectually captivating. The Na'vi are more simian, more violent, and more realistic than their archetype demands, and the greedy corporate raider who commands the mining company outpost is more compassionate, and more trapped between what he must do and what he wants to do, than his archetype is normally allowed to be. All told, this is the most human approach to the problem of exploitation versus preservation that science fiction has ever presented us. This is Heinlein territory, or perhaps Asimov. "Avatar" has the potential to transform the genre in ways we have not seen since the days of post WWII pulp magazines.

It is not, however, the most humane, and that troubles me.

Art creates reality in the same way that reality creates art. The two are locked in a dance of give and take that has been with us since the beginning of self-awareness some 250,000 years ago. "Avatar" is the latest in a long string of stylized cave paintings that reveals our inner world in a consciously vain and narcissistic effort to manipulate the external world. Once again humanity is positioned as the center of creation and when two different human cultures meet, the result is as bloody and violent as ever. I am left heartbroken not at the destruction and death such meetings always produce, but at our own inability to move beyond seeing our individual self as the center of a vast web of interlinked networks whose sole purpose is feeding the ego.

Communism failed, and failed badly. The Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight and China had to take on capitalist economics in order to survive. The people of both Myanmar and North Korea are starving, dressed in rags, and forced to live under the iron hand of a dictator who sees the natural resources of their respective country as his own personal possession. Zimbabwe and Somalia have now joined them, while the rest of Africa struggles to move forward against such widespread corruption that each country defines its neighbor according to the level of graft in daily life. South America is little better, and our "advanced Western society" daily sinks closer to the same depths of corruption and poverty.

"Avatar", after four years of production, is released during the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. This is no accident. Idealism and utopianism still view capitalists as evil and glorify the settled hunter-gather lifestyle as living in perfect harmony with nature rather than as the desperate struggle for survival it really is. James Cameron is going to make a fortune off of this movie and is going to use that fortune to reinforce his own luxurious lifestyle. Radical global warming activists riot in the streets of Copenhagen then return to well-heated, well-lit, well-connected homes that only exist because natural resources have been exploited to build them and are continually exploited to maintain a pleasant warm cocoon against the worst blizzard Copenhagen has seen in decades.

There is no golden past for humanity to return to. The gates of Eden are permanently blocked by the flaming swords of the cherubim. We can only move forward and the only way for us to move forward is to stop viewing our physical and spiritual needs as being locked in competition. We need both the food, warmth, water, and sex that keeps our species alive and the emotional communion of family, friends, and society that keeps us sane. The two cannot be separated and as long as we continue to view them as combatants we will continue to destroy everyone who opposes our desperate struggle to get those needs met.

Our only hope, the only way our children and grandchildren will reach the stars and survive the collapse of our sun, is if we learn to cooperate. The advantage of free market capitalism over communal sharing of resources is that it provides a clear incentive to find that cooperation, reach that balance of exploitation versus preservation, and allow us each the luxury of free time to spend with our friends and families.

The only way for the benefits of a future space-faring commerce to blend seamlessly with the needs of an alien race of hunter-gathers is for us, before we ever leave this planet, to learn to live together. If we cannot live together, then the vision of "Avatar" will never be realized for one reason and one reason only: humanity will self-destruct.

The one thing the climate change alarmists do have right is that our time is limited. We are on a clock, a clock that will not stop counting down no matter what technology we develop to sustain ourselves. It is a matter of billions of years rather than decades, but the clock is still very real, and the outcome very final. Global warming is only one minor symptom. It is not the problem. The real problem is that everything changes, including the sun, including the earth, including our view of ourselves. There is no utopian past, and there is no utopian future. The time has come to wake up from our daydream and work together. Not because of some collective need for peace and tranquility, but because the longer we dwell in narcissistic hypocrisy the closer we come to the day our sun goes nova.

It's not about environmental preservation versus capitalist exploitation. It's about a finite pool of natural resources and a very real cataclysmic end that could occur in as little as a few million generations. One day the world will end and if we have not freed ourselves from the bonds of this Earth then humanity will end with it.


December 16, 2009

A declaration of war against you




Update, 12/17/09:

According to several sources, including "The Hill", the story that someone in the administration had threatened to close Offut Air Force Base is nothing more than a baseless rumor intentionally started by an unnamed staff worker. To quote The Hill, "Nelson said he knows the source of that rumor, suggesting that Republicans would be red-faced if details of the source of the rumor came out."

Alright, since the "source" in the original story was unnamed, I suppose it is only fair to give equal credence to Senator Ben Nelson himself, the alleged object of the original threat. I hope the good Senator is being truthful, for all our sakes.

-----------------------------------------
Original post from 12/16/09:

There are three military bases the United States defense cannot operate without: Offut Air Force Base, Cheyenne Mountain, and Langley Air Force Base. Defense of the continental United States depends upon the ability to move intelligence and battlefield information between these three bases. Systems are in place to allow the loss of one of the three in time of war, provided the internal population (you and I) has not been subverted and provided the integrity of the Canadian and Mexican borders is intact. Should the population rebel, or the borders be breeched, command and control shifts immediately to NORTHCOM, based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs.

Are you with me here? The only reason in time of war that command and control shifts to Peterson Air Force Base is if the borders have been violated and the battle front is now located inside the forty-eight continental United States. So when I find this, "Whitehouse Threatens to Close Offut Air Force Base" only a few days after I stumble across this, "Obama Orders Troops to Prepare for Civil War", I get very worried.

In truth, I dismissed the EU Times article the day I read it. I did post it on Facebook and send it to my mailing list, but not because I felt it was credible. I only made people aware of it because I felt it presented an interesting scenario, not a realistic one. However, when a few days later Pres. Obama's administration threatens to close one of the three most important bases for dealing with external threats, a move which would by definition automatically shift strategic command to the base responsible for an internal threat, then I have to ask what the hell is going on at the Whitehouse?

The closure of Offut Air Force Base, even just the ability to imagine it, is a direct and overt admittance that the only threat the current administration is concerned about is you and I! This is far more than an attempt to coerce a senator into supporting an unpopular bill. This is nothing less than a full declaration of war against an internal enemey, and since our borders have not been breeched, the only possible internal enemy is the people of the United States themselves!

In short, the Whitehouse has now officially declared war on you. What are you going to do about it?


December 11, 2009

At last, the great American novel!


Every now and again a novel comes along that defines a particular time and age far more accurately than any treatise on sociology or philosophy can ever achieve. This is the power of well-written fiction. Such a novel has the potential to show us a picture of ourselves far more realistic than any academic work can display. Good fiction reaches deep inside the hearts and minds of real people and reveals their deepest held secrets far more effectively than psychology.

Charles Dickens, for example, was a master of this. "Great Expectations", "A Christmas Carole", and "David Copperfield" reveal both the glory and the ignominy of the human condition at the cusp of the industrial age in England, especially in London.

On this side of the Atlantic, defining "the great American novel" has presented an enigma for many scholars. Earnest Hemingway comes close in many of his works while William Faulkner at his best hits just off-target, but both writers leave far too much unsaid about how their characters arrived at a given crisis. Even worse, they do not begin to touch on what makes Americans different from their European, African, and Asian cousins. They fail to define the qualities of American culture that make it supremely and unmistakably American. Theodore Dreiser hints at the unique qualities of the American dream, but never clarifies why that dream is any different than the impossible yearnings of a Chinese peasant farmer, an Ethiopian herdsman, or a Peruvian tribesman.

My favorite novel of all time, Robert Heinlein's "Glory Road", probably comes closer to describing the essential American character than any classic work of American literature. Caught up in an impossible scenario of exotic travels through space and time is a confused American veteran fresh out of Vietnam in an era when most Americans could not find Vietnam on a map. The character approaches each and every wildly exotic encounter with bravado, gusto, and a streak of insecurity that will not leave him no matter how great his successes. The only thing keeping this work off the list of classics is its impossible and speculative setting that crisscrosses the universe as casually as you and I cross the street.

This, then, is the heart of the matter: What is the "great American novel"? Is it even possible to write such a beast? How does one capture the diversity and dynamism of a class-based society that is essentially classless? How does one reveal the freedom and struggle of climbing the social ladder without resorting to cynicism and sociopathy? Can a simple human writer ever bring to the pages of a single novel both the horrible prejudices and overwhelming charity of a nation so diverse and so dynamic that scholars praise it, ridicule it, and endlessly describe it, but never, ever come close to defining it? Perhaps the greatest oxymoron of all time is the creation of an academic curriculum called, "American studies". How does one study a society with no kings, no princes, no dictators, and no nobility? Can we even call this beast a "civilization" at all, let alone write a story so revealing that Americans of all races, sub-cultures, and families will find themselves on the pages? Maybe not and maybe there has never been a "great American novel" for precisely this reason.

And no, Kerouac's "On the Road" does not qualify. Kerouac speaks for a single generation of spoiled, middle-class American youth who even to this day have failed to define their own sense of integrity and ethics. The most defining feature of Kerouac's generation is their abandonment of what it means to be American and their embracing of the ego-centric self-indulgence that has long characterized entrenched economic and social elites throughout history. They remain an anomaly and an aberration. They are not "American" except in birth. Their personal values reflect a distorted and perverse misinterpretation of European aristocracy and nothing more. Their failure to even attempt to understand the values of their society, a failure that is vividly and lovingly described by Kerouac, is the very same rot and decay that is right now destroying the greatest culture that has ever existed. America is dying because Kerouac's parasitic generation is killing it.

There is, however, a glimmer of hope. Someone has stepped up with a novel that hits at the very heart of what it means to be American. Whether your ancestors arrived here across the land bridge with Asia, in the worsted cloth of evangelicals seeking a Biblical utopia, shackled in the holds of Dutch slave ships, or as refugees from the brutal and fiery collapse of ancient societies throughout the world, the promise of emotional and spiritual redemption along with the surety of being able to profit directly from your own sense of enterprise is what makes you American. For now, and perhaps for only a short while in the future, this freedom to create your own definition of success is what makes you unique in all the world.

Americans are not Americans because they carry a blue passport or because they were born between Canada and Mexico. Americans are who they are because this is the one society that up to now has guaranteed that if you put forth your best effort and conduct your life on a foundation of honest integrity, you will succeed. This freedom is what we stand to lose. This promise is what Kerouac's generation seeks to deny us. This light in the midst of five thousand years of oppression is the hope so many of us are right now fighting to preserve against the encroachment of globalist scholars, industrialists, and politicians.

The novel is called, "Off-Road". It is written by Stephen E. Wright. If you want to see what America really stands for, if you want to understand exactly what it is that makes America unique, if you want to know why America is the greatest nation that has ever existed, then read this book. "Off-Road" captures the heart of what it means to be American in a way no novel before it has ever done. If the liberal progressive agenda cannot be reversed, then this novel will be the last glimpse we will ever have of what American freedom truly means.




December 09, 2009

This is not "progress"!




Christianity in Modern England (a video)

I am a Christian. I have been a Spirit-filled, Bible-believing, Charismatic, Faith-healing follower of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for over three decades. If an atheist is allowed to deny God, a homosexual is allowed to defame God, and a Muslim nation is allowed to jail or execute Christians, then why is my faith suddenly regarded as "hatred"? This is not "progress"!

The globalists have made great strides in England. Watch carefully events unfolding in that ancient and revered land. England is the "utopia" the globalists are trying to bring. If England is such a great place to live after the implementation of so many "progressive" ideals, then why are so many people angry, disenfranchised, and depressed? Suicide rates are climbing, violence is more commonplace than it was during the Anglo-Saxon wars. Is this really the utopia the progressive agenda promises to bring the rest of us?

Open expression of personal beliefs is not hatred. I believe homosexuality is a perversion, a crime against nature and against God. I do not hate homosexual people. Some of them are wonderful leaders, many of them have been my friends. I neither condone nor embrace their lifestyle, but that does not stop me from treating them with the same respect, dignity, and humanity that I treat everyone.

Christianity is not the enemy of homosexuality. Christianity is not the enemy of progress. Christianity has been the source of progress for the western world for two thousand years. Christianity can continue to lead the way toward a more humane, dignified, and loving society. The globalist agenda of liberal progressivism based on Marxist ideals of godless rationalism that put the individual at the century of creation is not real. It is a mask covering an elitist program to put control of the world's resources in the hands of a mere 5% of the world's population.

Liberal progressivism is not progress. It is aristocratic fascism disguised as rational humanism. It will bring oppression, massive die-offs, enslavement of the majority of the world's population, and a global legal system that condemns 95% of the world's population to a life of small-scale, peasant farming. Is this really the future you want for your children and grandchildren?

When the Rainbow Coalition and its many Marxist brethren talk of a better future for our children, it is very important to remember that homosexuality cannot produce children. When Islamic extremists speak of a more sane, ordered society, it is important to remember that their women are kept like animals and treated like furniture. When global warming fanatics speak of the danger of carbon dioxide, it important to remember that without carbon dioxide our world would be a desert.

These people do not want progress at all. They want to transform you and your children into peasant farmers that they will be free to exploit for slave labor, sexual favors, and cannon fodder.


December 07, 2009

Reality is not a box of chocolates




It is very fashionable in today's world to blame someone else for your problems. If you're a blue collar worker you blame management. If you're a manager you blame labor. Those who work on Wall Street blame the consumer, while the consumer rails against "greedy Wall Street bankers". Democrats blame Republicans for stalling healthcare reform and in a perfect tit-for-tat, Republicans accuse the Democrats of trying to impose socialism. The beneficiaries of our liberal progressive education system accuse big business of destroying the earth, while business leaders accuse the government of over-regulation and excessive taxation.

There certainly is a lot of blame to go around, isn't there? Personally, I blame myself. Over the past three decades I have been too busy raising children, comforting my workaholic wife, and feeding the cat to do much of anything else. I haven't had a job in over a decade, and I cannot remember the last time I filed a tax return. The last time I voted in a major election Ronald Reagan was re-elected to the presidency (and yes, I did vote for him). Now, after two and a half decades in Japan, I'm setting up house in a small county seat in Ohio. I'm plugged back into the local political scene (but just barely), I've bought my first guns, and I'm on a first-name basis with the local bartender. Two letters to the editor were printed in my name, and one of them earned a vitriolic response from someone who disagreed with me.

So last week when I had a chance to attend a small reception at the home of a local resident who is one of three people running for the local seat in the House of Representatives (which happens to be the 16th District), I jumped at it. I've met two of the three and even though what I've seen of the third does not impress me, I'd still like the opportunity to shake his hand and hit him with my usual barrage of tough questions. The important thing today, however, is the reception.

The house of the candidate who hosted the reception is in an upper class neighborhood in the county seat of the next county over. He and his wife both work, but neither one is a doctor, lawyer, banker, or other occupation likely to produce the kind of money needed to buy such a house. I honestly have no idea how they're making their monthly mortgage payment. For all I know the previous owner (who was a very successful local business owner) died and left the house to him in his will, in which case there is no mortgage payment. It is a beautiful house, exactly the kind of house you would expect a congressman to live in, and that's what bothers me.

Four rooms of the house were open to the guests of the reception, including the library. In the livingroom was a beautiful Christmas tree all done up in a white theme. Then I looked more closely. There were about a dozen ornaments on the tree with pictures of the Whitehouse (yes, that one, the one in Washington D.C. where the president lives). On a table near the tree was Sarah Palin's book, "Going Rogue". In the library were books of presidential memoirs, presidential thoughts, the scribblings of JFK, and a biography of Abraham Lincoln. Books on pop psychology stood next to Bibles, and a first edition "Little Women" kept intimate company with a collection of "Great Wartime Speeches". Beyond a single ancient title by Thomas L. Friedman, there were no books on economics. A "Dummies" guide to legal documents stood next to a reprint of Blackstone's, "Commentaries on the Laws of England", and of the two the "Dummies" guide was the only one showing any sign of use. Presidential portraits framed the library.

Okay, so he has ambition. This is America, after all, and at least in theory any citizen who has lived in the country for at least seventeen years and is at least thirty-five years old is free to run for the highest office in the land.

And on his official website, the candidate in question has this to say:

"This campaign is about freedom...freedom from excessive taxation, out-of-control government spending and job-killing government regulations.

The future belongs to those who recognize that prosperity has never been delivered by the heavy hands of government, but it is always created by men and women who understand the combined force of freedom, personal responsibility and hard work. Our economic prosperity depends on you and me, and our commitment to doing what we know is right."

I am not a psychologist. I am not a sociologist. I am an avid reader and although I have read many books on both psychology and sociology, I am not a trained professional. When I walk through a person's house I read the environment the same way I read a book. I am looking for clues to what this person believes and how far they are willing to go to defend that belief. I am also looking to see how much of their belief system is firmly grounded in the real world of hardworking laborers, managers, bankers, and craftspeople. A congressional representative stands for an entire constituency. That constituency includes people from all walks of life and every single one of them is entitled to equal representation. A congressional representative who only stands for gay rights, gun rights, healthcare, or even lower taxes is not truly representative of their district. If a person does not intimately understand both the richest and the poorest, then they will not be able to fairly represent either extreme, let alone the middle.

I came away from the cocktail party deeply impressed with his sincerity. I also came away deeply disappointed at his lack of depth. I am not a professional analyst of any kind, so many people will happily dismiss my opinion on what does and does not make a person an effective congressional representative. I have observed the system from the outside for over two decades and to me, it looks like the system is coming apart at the seams. Now that I am back in America, meeting people, visiting their houses, and discussing issues important to me as a voter, I am struck by something that has always bothered me about American culture. We have this tendency to glorify ignorance (Forest Gump) and greed (Gordon Gekko), while getting ourselves deeply worked up over irrelevancies (American Idol), then we turn around and ignore real problems (Fair Finance) affecting our friends and neighbors.

The time has come for all of us to stop blaming the rest of the world for our problems. When reality does not meet our expectations, then the problem is not reality and it is our expectations that must change. We must each individually ground our expectations in reality and then we must move forward to change circumstances around us in ways that will help serve everyone. I'm not saying individuals must sacrifice themselves for the common good, nor should the common good ever be sacrificed for the benefit of one individual or one group of individuals. What I am saying is that if we are going to fix this mess we find ourselves in (rising unemployment, impossible deficits at all levels of government, nighttime streets ruled by drug gangs), then we must first take responsibility for our own individual life and that responsibility starts with making an honest effort to come to a realistic understanding of the world around us.

In short, turn off American idol and spend some time reading books on history, economics, and law. Susan Boyle is not important. It does not matter how deeply she disturbed Simon Cowell, her voice will not help lower your taxes by passing the kind of healthcare reform we do need (H.R. 4038 and H.R. 4039), and her country charm will not prevent the Senate from enslaving us to China by passing the woefully misnamed "American Clean Energy and Security Act".

You and I must do our homework. We must also demand our representatives do their homework, and then we must hold them accountable for their mistakes. Our future depends on having competent people in Congress and we cannot achieve this if we are not competent ourselves.


December 01, 2009

Bah Humbug 2009




This morning at breakfast my sister asked my father what he would like for Christmas. My father began running down a long list of items he needed to keep his favorite hobby going, then a list of items he needed to do small handiman-type jobs around the house, then onto more expensive tools that would be nice to have but which he had no particular use for at this time. Today is also my father's birthday. He is 71 years old.

Somewhere along the line I lost sight of the magic of the holiday season. I don't ask for gifts anymore, haven't for at least a score of years. Since I am in America and will be here for the holiday season, I bought the members of my family Visa pre-paid debit cards with an amount large enough to buy themselves each a pretty nice present, or a dinner at a pretty good restaurant, or anything they felt they needed. If someone gives me a similar present I will thank them politely but it won't really give me the same thrill it gives others.

I guess the problem is I don't really need anything anymore. Once our new house is finished and I move in I'll be busy writing, doing landscaping, and so on. I'm looking forward to having a couple years on my own while my wife finishes up her business in Tokyo and our two boys get started on their adult lives. I suppose if someone gives me a Christmas present of items for the new house I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I don't feel any need to ask for anything. Given time I'm certain everything will work out just fine, even if the current world economy completely collapses. Anything I cannot buy I can find a way to make. Anything I can neither buy nor make, I can find a substitute for.

You see, I have spent twenty-five years in the middle of Tokyo. Being surrounded by crowds twenty-four hours a days, seven days a week, three hundred sixty-five days a year has soured my opinion of humanity. Watching tens of millions of people scrambling around looking for ways to destroy one another in order to rise to the top of the heap has left me unable to see any "magic" in humanity, let alone in the holidays they celebrate.

And now the Democratic Congress with the backing of a Democratic president is seeking to implement in America the same kind of self-destructive, totally delusional policies that have left a dozen major industrial powers around the world completely bankrupt. Where is the "compassion" in a government-run economy that destroys the motivation of its people? One of the reasons the Japanese people have become so cutthroat in their daily social lives is a deep-seated sense of entitlement that five decades of "social reform" have created in them. I do not want the United States to continue down this road and mimic their "success".

At the end of World War II, liberal-minded social reformers flooded into Japan, each of them utterly convinced that they now had the opportunity to engineer a perfect society. They instituted massive land and wealth redistribution programs, put in place the most comprehensive social welfare programs the world has ever seen, and implemented a mandatory national health insurance program which took wealth from everyone and gave them minimal healthcare in return.

The first thing that happened was massive hyperinflation. All through the fifties and sixties thte Japanese currency lost value, sometimes as much as 300% in one day. All those social welfare programs put so much money into so many hands that the currency could buy nothing. Social unrest ran rampant. Violence became more commonplace than it had been even during the worst periods of Japanese feudalism in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. They outlawed swords, guns, knives, any form of handheld weapon they could imagine, and still the violence spiraled out of control. Finally, they shifted enormous amounts of their national budget into a national police force so large and so extensive that in some neighborhoods there are police boxes every couple of blocks with two to four officers working around the clock.

This is what happens when you create a liberal utopia. Sooner or later you must institute a police state to control the violence. Where does this violence come from? It's simple really. When you provide food, clothing, housing, and healthcare, people have nothing left to work for. Instead, they start looking for ways to express their sense of isolation, their longing for constant love and attention, their need for social recognition. Once the basic needs are met, everyone needs to be regarded as a king. When they do not receive the homage they feel they are entitled to, they get angry.

In Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, once people fulfill biological needs they immediately begin seeking social needs. Social needs are no less desperate, no less painful, than biological needs. The only thing that can suppress any need at any level of the pyramid is either a conscious choice on behalf of the individual to learn to compensate for that need or the existence of an even greater need.

Liberal progressivism is human-centric, secular in nature, and completely focused on social justification of exploitative behavior by a more "enlightened" elite. The core idea of liberal progressivism is that the individual does not know what they need. The only people qualified to provide their needs are the social and economic elite of the political and social order. In the mind of a liberal progressive, the social elite (including but not limited to: actors, professional athletes, lawyers, social workers, bureaucrats and politicians) are "better" than the rest of society and therefore, these "leaders" are responsible for deciding how the rest of us should live. To their mind, their success in their chosen field, especially if that success came through destroying the competition, proves their "fitness" to lead, therefore, the rest of us "deserve" to be exploited.

It is important to note that concepts such as "left", "right", "conservative" and even "liberal", are meaningless. Liberal progressive elitists can claim to be any of these, or even all of them. The one factor that sets apart the liberal progressive is a sincere belief in their own natural superiority. They are elitist to the core. So deeply elitist, in fact, that they honestly believe themselves the humble servants of the rest of us even as they strip us of worldly possessions and force us into positions of subservience to them. If you feel you deserve to be treated better than someone else then you are a liberal progressive. No exceptions. If you feel entitled to ask for anything and everything under the sun in the name of a holiday, a social issue, a personal need, or a personal desire, then you have taken upon yourself an assumption of superiority to the person who you expect to provide that need.

You are entitled to nothing. I am entitled to nothing. No individual anywhere is entitled to anything. If a farmer works all summer to produce fifty thousand bushels of corn, the only person entitled to that corn is the farmer. It does not matter how hungry you are, how hungry the person you are championing is, or how desperate the family you represent is. The farmer planted the corn, tended the corn, took care of the land, harvested the crop, and laid the groundwork for next year. The only person entitled to a share of the farmer's crop is the farmer.

If you want to share in the farmer's crop then what you must do is work for the farmer. Help them plant. Help them harvest. Help them prepare the ground for next year. Help them maintain their buildings and equipment. Cook for them. Clean their barn. Whatever work the farmer tells you to do you must do, because the crop does not belong to you, it belongs to the farmer.

According to the liberal progressive, everyone is entitled to a share of the crop because the farmer must be a compassionate, understanding human being who is willing to share with people around him. If he is not, the people around him are entitled to use whatever violence is necessary to remove the farmer's crop and feed everyone else.

So when someone talks to me about "Christmas spirit" and the only thing they can do is talk about what someone wants or needs, then I say, "bah, humbug!"

If no one around you provides your needs then you alone are responsible for seeing them met. Somewhere along the line Christmas became a season of taking and not a season of giving. As long as people are so selfish, so self-centered, and so immune to the needs of others that the only thing they feel on Christmas morning is disappointment because they don't like the color of the sweater, the brand of the tennis shoes, the power of the computer, or whatever, then I will continue to say, "bah, humbug!"

Christmas is not about the goose in Tiny Tim's pot. Christmas is about the transformation of Ebenezer Scrooge from a selfish old man into a generous employer. As long as liberal progressives feel they are responsible for forcing Ebenezer to give up a goose, they will never understand the real meaning of Christmas, or any other holiday.

It's not about the goose. It's about the transformation of the individual. It's about you learning to put the needs of others before your own.