New East India Company

There have been marauding bodies and tribes of trading corporatists, relatively independent of nations, since before the East India Company, before the Mongol hordes, before Eric the Red, before the first shipping companies, before the caravans of the Silk Road, before Abraham. These marauding companies have both enriched and vexed established communities and nations. To cohere, they have always had their extra-national codes and customs, leading eventually to the law of the sea and the law merchant. Such extra-national "law" has always been unreliable when great riches and power beckon for being easily pirated against immediate weak resistence. Thus, marauding corporations have time and again brought down established cultures and nations. One does not engage in "free and fair trade" with Vikings, privateers, or pirates --- even when they come as Janus faced lawyers and priests.

.

Human nature is such that "small government and open private trade" are simply not talismen for any self respecting culture that desires to sustain itself. A nation without foresight and means to protect itself against privateering insinuations of corporatists who do not share its values is little more than a child with an attractive lollipop. The sad thing is that foreign corporations tend so easily to recruit apologists and enablers from within the cultures and nations upon which they intend to prey.  Injecting that mindset into populations at large is the prelude to successful privateering.

.

Indeed, growing brains are easy to groom and groove to represent apologies for subjective self interest as if such apologies represented common objective truths. Just look at how easily Islam converts desire not to be beheaded into zealous defense of the faith. But this easy susceptibility of the brain is hardly confined to Islam. Rather, it permeates every field of human endeavor where skilled traders and trainers acquire financing and power over sheeple for the dispensation of bribes and threats and pleasures and pains.  The insidious root from which branches are springing forth for strangling the American ideal consists in the failure of the Founders to ensure adequate checks and balances against dangerous entanglements with foreign privateering corporatists.   Now, a shadow of the East India Company, the NWO, has returned with vengeance, to re-colonize and re-enserf America.  Meanwhile, the people at large are so divided and duped that most do not see that the Dim Party is merely the hireling of the establishment Rino Party.  Each thinks the solution to all its problems is to cut off the head of the other, never realizing that they are two heads of the same Beast.  And so we go, quarreling all the while we are being corralled.
.
*******
.

However faithful the geezering among middle class Americans, they will remain impotent to coordinate against their enemy until they are willing to raise fingers to identify their enemy. The enemy is not a mere abstraction. The enemy is the palpable evil that abides and expands in the nature of each of us. Among those who, by cutthroat competition, become major owners and directors of foreign corporations, how many are supposed to refrain from the cutthroat acquisition, division, and rule of the little people?

.

Should we blindly trust those who are raised on cutthroat competion, who have acquired oligarchic control over major media outlets, to make such outlets nurture society's views to become other than those views that are hedged to the owners' material advantage? What does the "open society" of the NWO look like? Does it not look like a society of largely open borders and easily manipulated or erased cultures? For the "open society" NWO of establishment corporatists, are not nations just precincts of convenience for the indoctrination and summoning of serfs and soldiers?

.

Until the American middle class commits to measures to tax or reduce the political grip of the new corporate mafia order, all talk about preserving America's national culture is idleness. Meanwhile, middle class Rinos and middle class Dinos are cheered to beat each other up, to the jolly entertainment of the new owners.

 

Podes of an Encompassing Black Hole

.

Suppose there abides an all defining, vectorizing, and conserving black hole, with a pode and antipode. From one direction of its vectoring its antipode absorbs and permits no escape of all mass and light that fall too close to its domain. Out the other direction its pode emits all mass and light and permits no return. Apart from its inference, no creation of it can ever consciously communicate its complete quality or potential to any other creation. It cannot in itself be measured, for all measure of space, time, matter and energy is its inferior derivative, not its definer. It may be inferred to conserve, from the alpha to the omega. But it cannot be inferred how much range its outbursting must encompass before it must be called back. Within itself, its potential cannot be inferred or tested by a derivative mortal. A mortal fascinated with math and empiricism may assume present perceptions offer clues to the all defining black hole (ADBH). A mortal may assume that present measures of its expression are indicative of limits of its potential expression. Such assumption may lead to useful tinkering for a narrow bandwidth of space and time, and it may entertain a mortal during his occupation of beingness. But only false hubris would lead such a mortal to presume he had defined the limits of his definer.

.

Apart from empirically assumptive tinkering, what else may a mortal mind test, as by experiments and intuitions flickering within the mind? May a mortal reasonably come to assume any quality, either about the ADBH or about THAT which may inspire the quality of expression that unfolds and feeds back to it? May the ADBH itself be intuited to be a derivative, as an expression of a holistic and consciously appreciative Guide? May one concept reasonably represent an unknown but limiting potential or objective nature of the ADBH, while another concept reasonably represents that which appreciates and guides the unfolding quality and conscious character of its subjective expressiveness?
.
As to range:  There need not be either a big crunch or a big bang.  There may simply be a big conservation between pode and antipode.  For all a mortal can know, given that mortal perceptions of space-time-matter-energy are derivatively inferior, such pode and antipode may be inferentially experienced as if consisting of innumerable bits and iterative representations of antipode collectors, even though all were representations of a single, unifying pode.  Or there may abide quantitatively innumerable podes of emission, connected qualitatively as a singularity, which we find convenient to interpret as if of a single big bang.
 

OF THE EXPERIENCE OF TWINS

.

OF THE EXPERIENCE OF TWINS:

.

No mortal can measure any matter, or, more generally, quantifiable substance, except in its relational aspects. For mortals, there is no measurable experience of matter-in-itself. Even so, the relationally-shared quantifiability of mass must relate to some kind of mathematically-related and conserved world, which has been adopted for purposes of messaging among perspectives of consciousness that share a common, originating binding.

.

It must be that matter is aged only in reference to a point of origin and transport --- either in relation to point of view of a perspective of consciousness or in relation to a frame of originating reference that is shared in common by all relating perspectives of consciousness. Thus, our shared universe seems to have an age, even though no two perspectives will experience NOWNESS in exactly the same way.

.

What avails the space-time relational aging of substance that is measurable by mortals is not mere acceleration from an arbitrary and material point, but acceleration of a point of view of imagination. Relative to each point of view, there is a favored point of perspective, i.e., a point of such perspective's origin. However, that point no longer exists in measurable, quantifiable space-time. Rather, it remains only as a point of Imagination, for imaging conceptualization of space-time. Thus, a point of view can be accelerated forward in a vector of space-time, but not backward. Each point of view has no choice but to expand outward in space-time from the point of original binding to existentially measurable experience.

.

Light (EMR) is defined so it cannot vector back to its originator's origin. The origin point that is common to all vectors is not amenable of illumination by any single vector of light. The Origin Point may be conceptualized as a dark, inner sphere, back to which the geometry of space-time allows no light to vector. It is more like an anti-black hole than a black hole. Were it a black hole, light could not escape from it. As an anti-black-hole, no light can go into it. Against the Origin Point, perhaps there abides a perpetual NOWNESS, "outside of our time," to which no mortal can access. Thus, there seems to abide an inferred, intuited dimension that is the originating reconciler of measurable experiences of vectoring, which no particular perspective or measurer can vector back to.

.

How can it be that no two mortals experience nowness as unfolding at exactly the same rate? After all, they seem to be able to clock and measure differences in their relative experiences of time and distance. How can it be that twins would ever experience differential rates in aging, merely because they happened to engage in different rates of acceleration against a common base of reference? Suppose they are in parallel rocket ships. One of the ships passes too close to a gravitational sink and is wildly accelerated. A substantial time later, it depletes the last of its fuel to escape and return to its twin ship. One ship will have aged differently from the other. But how does either ship determine which one was captured by a local gravity sink to be either accelerated or decelerated? When I see myself pulling rapidly away from a twin, how do I know whether I am accelerating or the twin is accelerating? Rate of fuel burn would not answer for a gravity sink, at least, not until the sink is resisted. So, is the answer determined in respect of relative mass travel, relative gravitational frame, something else, or some combination? Could the determination have something to do with the speed of each twin in respect of the twins' common point of origin? So, even if the common point of origin may not be able to be returned to (no river flows past the same point twice?), may it be conceptually inferred by, among other things, measuring the rate of variation in aging?

.

TWINS: When one twin perceives himself as being traveled along an inertial frame, away from the other, what determines which one will "really" be seen to have aged more at such time and place that they come back together?

.

Were a person in a space suit to be turning in space, with no detectable bodies around, mass would still be detectable. Pulling arms in would cause spinning to proceed faster or slower, as for a spinning ice skater. Thus, angular momentum and mass remain measurable. Notice, however, that relative angular momentum is also conceptually measurable and comparable among twins who shared a common origin. So: Is the "cause" of differential aging to be attributed to different experiences of mass of substance? Or is the cause to be attributed to different experiences in respect of a commonly inferred origin of perceptual experience? In other words, is the cause objective or subjective? Or does the answer to that query depend on one's purpose as well as one's point of view and context of reference?

.
 

Ordered Liberty

.

Many rights, such as those set forth in the Bill of Rights, are so basic to sustainable human freedom and dignity that no panel of faux experts ought to be empowered to take them on caprice. That is not to say that an individual, by bad choices, ought not himself be able to forfeit his rights. Treason should cause forfeiture of life. Robbery should cause forfeiture of liberty and the right to carry arms. Felonious activity should cause forfeture of voting rights. Drunk driving should cause forfeiture of driving privileges. Failure to pay taxes should cause forfeiture of the right to vote on bills affecting taxes. Becoming a nuisance in public by repeated appearances of being drunk while driving or walking about on public travelways should cause limited forfeiture of one's right to be in and about such public uses. In each such case, the forfeiture would be brought about by an individual's own bad choices, not by a faux expert panel. Sustainable liberty is ordered liberty, not libertine license.

 

Causation and Responsibility

Of Causation and Responsibility: A notion of socially moral responsibility makes little sense unless individuals are reasonably accorded the freedom and dignity to think for themselves. There is no morality or virtue in simply performing rote details for which one is chained so as not to deviate. In considering notions of Responsibility and Causation, it can be interesting to watch Literalists, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Atheists, and Scientists try to rationalize ways to save or improve America, without respecting the superiority of a caring, inviting, reconciling God. They seem prone to take some material, maybe a Higgs boson or a writing on a piece of paper, like a Constitution or a Bible, and then try to rationalize from it, and it alone, all causation for a system of moral guidance for a nation or world. Does the Higgs boson "cause" expression of mass, or does the expression of mass "cause" the Higgs boson? Given a world of continuous, unprecedented, unexpected change, can any static interpretation of any writing on any piece of paper show the single, absolute, literal, best way to address each newly unfolding event? How can the Source of causation and moral judgement be reasonably conceptualized as being vested in any Being other than a caring, inviting, Reconciler? Without a conception of a Reconciler, how can inanimate words in themselves, on any piece of paper, carry any causation or moral guidance for the future? How is moral responsibility carried forward through the generations? Well, by free-thinking individuals, raised in families, that accord reasoned respect for a caring and inviting Reconcilier. How is moral responsibility not carried forward? By destroying families and surrendering freedom to predators who rule collectives under pretense of being infallible mouthpieces for God or Nature.

.

There is a complication:  What to do about the mass of people who decline to take moral responsibility to think for themselves, who do not want responsibility, who want a leader to take responsibility from their shoulders, even in exchange for becoming little more than beasts of burden?  Free thinkers may be conceptualized in two ways:  One kind would want to teach people as much as reasonably possible to take responsibility for themselves.  The other kind would simply want to use people who want to be used.  The moral advantage is to the first kind.  The financial advantage is to the second kind.

 

Falsity of Financial Talismen

The idea of reducing destructively expensive moral depravity by cutting funding generally would be more appealing were it not for so many wild cards.  One of the more significant wild cards consists in the federal government's having allowed itself to be used to push so much expression of moral and spiritual concern out of the scholastic and public square.  Because libertines have gone so far in that direction, merely reducing the funding of government will not re-right the ship.  Instead of "in God we trust," our currency may as well say, "depravity is our settled consensus."  Feral government doesn't have to be seen to be spending money in order to impose negative mandates (i.e., political correctness, forced toleration among children for lifestyles destructive of human dignity, etc.).  Merely to cut funding is not a strategy for slowing the devil.  Evil has ready currency in many other symbols.  People must once again be made free to discuss their moral concerns in the public square in the language of respect for a Reconciler.  Money is much like other symbols: cutting funding generally is hardly a talisman for reversing all the other symbols of America's turn towards evil.  So long as green eyeshade politicians take money funded legalism as the only symbol that has currency, it becomes hard core misdirection to suggest that evil can be redirected without resorting to money funded legalism (i.e., federal laws).  Feds have funded both the fining and the promotion of tobacco.  Yet, Libertarians would have us believe that Feds should fund only the ejection of spirit based moral concerns, but not the promotion.
.
*****
.
Heritage and Destiny:  Two concepts I find very interesting.  Some people would put the two concepts in one wrapper:  Predeterminism.  There is a parallel debate about the quality or nature of Information and Time:  Is any accumulation of Information ever lost; does any time really exist, except for the present?  Is all the Information there ever will be already extant, so that the past-present-future already exist in a never changing loop of eternal return?  Does God answer prayers, or have all prayers already been determined and answered?  These do not seem to be topics that can be resolved in science.  Perhaps, however, they can be meaningfully addressed in reasoned faith.
.
Even so, hubris of scientists (reductionists of materialism) seems often to stand in the way.  Scientists rightly (and trivially) point out that no ghost can be measured to abide in any machine, and then suppose they have "proved" or said something meaningful.  But of course no ghost can be measured in any machine (or fairies counted on any pin point), for ghosts are immeasurable.  So a more interesting question beckons:  Is there a meaningful way to reason about immeasurable ghosts?
.
Jung reasoned there is.  I purport no Jungian expertise, but I am fascinated by his concept of the "collective unconscious" --- which seems to be his name for God.  I would not take the unconscious as being the opposite of conscious. I would take it as consciousness not yet made aware of itself in any binding to a particular, mortal perspective.  Thus, by definition, the collective unconscious is not measurable to mortals.  We cannot measure its empirical existence, but I think we can meaningfully infer its existence.
.
Consider: Your conscious mind is not consciously aware of what it will think tomorrow, or even in the next instant.  Yet, your thoughts will continue to unfold.  Indeed, some Aspect decides each decision your conscious mind becomes aware of, shortly before you even become aware you have made a decision.  You do not pre-plan your thoughts.  Your thoughts rise to your conscious self awareness.  I think they can be meaningfully inferred to be pushed and pulled there by a qualitative feedback with the reconciling, collective unconscious.  Particularly and materially measurable things do not in themselves exist, apart from attuned apprehension by some form of consciousness, with back and forth feedback (prayer and Will) and unfolding reconciliation between individuated and self aware perspectives and the holistically collective unconscious.
.
I suspect it is in the quality of one's contemporaneous appreciation of his thoughts -- his good faith and good will in contemplative feedback -- by which he participates to influence, and be influenced, regarding how and where the collective unconscious (God) next will lead him.  I also suspect that we tend to become adrift in a sea of despond when we deny the Reconciling Source that is inferred before us.  Entire nations become adrift when their rulers become blind to the Guide that is necessarily inferred before them.  At present, the only star that "guides" America seems to be the gland-based pleasures of libertine hedonists, who misuse scientists as apologists.  Thus, our moral compass has become useless, our heritage of wisdom ridiculed, and the sail for our main mast tattered and torn asunder.

Godless Morlochs

Imagine a worldwide matrix in which most social wealth, political influence, and military prowess is in the hands of 1/10th of 1 percent of the population. Ask: What kind of people (name branding birds) self select to rise to such height, and what are they willing to do to preserve or enhance their standing? To what Source that is higher than themselves do they commit their lives and sacred honor? Anything? Anything?

.

Consider how familial institutions are being destroyed (Queen Elizabeth now promoting gay marriage) and how nations are being erased (amnesty being repackaged and restuffed) and replaced by syndicates of areas of influence. Consider the relative influence that the lower, middle, and high middle classes have with politicians, versus the influence of stratospheric funders of politicians and hirers of the hierarchy. Behind the posturing for the pawns and little people, what, really, are the interests that are being bartered?

.

Is it not obvious that nations are being erased, familial institutions are being destroyed, and ordinary people are being reduced to sheep and leveled to beasts of burden, as 99.9 percent of the population are being waylaid by regime schools, consumer advertising, and political propaganda? Every day now, the news shows more consolidation of power among people with the morality of morlochs, and more destruction of every institutional bulwark that could sustain decent human values. Meanwhile, middle class Repubtards and lower class Libtards follow the lead of essentially non-politically affiliated, godlessly amoral, morloch funders.

 

Pre-Determinism

A culture or nation cannot establish a supportable framework of principles while it remains without will to be intolerant of anything. A culture, to remain a culture, must establish capacity to recognize for itself that which is morally right from that which is wrong. A culture that would avail and preserve decent human freedom and dignity needs to assimilate a moral philosophy or theosophy that does not bend over to tolerate such deviance as would undermine human freedom and dignity. It is by promoting misguided tolerance under an unthinking banner of "diversity" that paganists, militant atheists, disloyal crony corporatists, militant homosexuals, muslims, and destroyers of marriages and families are destroying and enserfing America. To salvage America, to salvage human freedom and dignity, churches must focus more on that which is helpful to the cause and less on dogma that is so often irrelevant, dissonant, meaningless, or destructive of respect for the building blocks of a society that would entrust human freedom and dignity under an inviting, caring, and guiding God (or Source of decency).

.

A society that seeks to endure needs to assimilate around broad contours for a philosophy concerning what is right versus wrong. Such a society can either entrust such determinations to trusted elites, or it can entrust such determinations to adults who have grown up with, and bonded their identities to, such philosophy. The first way leads to collectivist societies that entrust little liberty to the mass of citizens, and instead tends to rule the details of their lives under arbitrary regulations. The second way avails more freedom to families and their heads, to learn from their own experiences and insights. That is, the second way accords the masses with more freedom and dignity. For the second way, household heads are in need of guidance, not in need of dogma that tells them their every thought and action has been "predetermined" by some meta function --- either of God or Nature. Nor does science, logic, or good faith necessarily support such dogma.

.

If God needs man and man needs God, for what sensible, good, logical, or empirical reason should one need the other, but only a wind up toy? The way human history has thus far unfolded, the wind-up-toy (pre-deterministic) way of thinking seems to drive both fundie religionists and militant atheists. I ask: If the goal is an America that avails decent respect for the freedom and dignity of individual citizens, then why should dogmatists (whether religious or atheistic) insist that only their way of thinking about fundamental aspects of beingness should be accepted as "objective," "logical," "intelligent," "scientific," "archeologically supported," "proved by prophets," or "non-blasphemous?"

.

Except perhaps as "ommm," no single word conveys meaning unless applied in a relational context with other words. To convey meaning as The Word, God conveys logos to mortals in context. No single word --- not even "truth," "justice," "cause," or "determine" --- conveys meaning by itself, absent a context and a recipient.