("RAM").........Red Alert Moderates

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Political Gayness and Soros' Open Society

No gay gene has been identified. However, fecundity in females may relate to homosexuality having been expressed in the maternal line. And children adopted into gay marriages may be more open to homoerotic relationships and may be more likely to adopt non-heterosexual identities.

That said, I doubt science can prove what causes or "makes" much of anything. It can and does show strong correlations -- that can, through feedback with our "participatory will," be manipulated. I suspect homosexuality is not "caused" by any one thing, but correlates with an interplay among genetics, hormonal activity, and environmental influences (culture).

Moreover, I suspect becoming a "Proud Gay" correlates politically with becoming an anti-American globalist. So, do such globalists "have no choice"? On that account, ought Americans just to give up their borders, so there can "be peace"? Why is George Soros' Open Society such a big promoter of gay marriage?

***********************

It's true, as robotics replaces human labor, that means alternative to (or in aid of) the marketplace will have to be found to make politically viable distributions based on "merit."

However, as Progs recognize that the marketplace will no longer, by itself, be sufficient to steer allocations, they must also recognize that the same applies to the marketplace internationally. When elitists say the marketplace cannot much longer apply nationally, but can much longer apply internationally, they're talking out of both sides of their mouth. They're finally and clearly showing their true colors: They WANT elitist rule over the masses in everything that can be made a subject of material trade. They aren't bothered by a worldwide caliphate, so long as they imagine it can be made subordinant to a worldwide syndicate of elitists.

In effect, they're arguing that the freedom and dignity of Americans must be sacrificed to the lowest common denominator of invading third-world fascist societies. They would purport authority to trade what has been bled for by their betters in exchange for hand-me-downs, free stuff, and safe spaces. No thanks!

It's Elitists that doe not understand. Or care. Globalism is the flip side of worldwide enserfment to elitists. Presently, by the Fed's signifying and assertion of power to buy (international) corporate debt, it is signifying that elites can, by hook or crook, cinch the masses more and more under their control -- anytime they want -- regardless of which face of the Prog Uniparty happens to be in favor. Even without law. Simply with executive elitist diktat. Very neat and gay.

In this, elitists expect to succeed, and are working feverishly to spread lies and disinformation to help ensure they do. And Never Trumpers are helping them. Shame!

If bending masses worldwide to elitist rule is not a problem and affront to basic human dignity, then Orwell rules, and words mean nothing. How did they squeeze the empathy out of you for the dignity of your fellow human beings?

If elitist diktat were really about "free trade," as opposed to lies about the "greatest good for the greatest number," it would not require 10,000 word bills and treaties. What is prosperity without freedom? Answer: A bawdyhouse for pigs, some of whom are "more equal" than others.

Friday, August 19, 2016

One Thing v. No Thing

Of the Trinity: If there were One Thing, with no potential to be any other thing, then its creative potential would be no more than if there were No Thing.

Muslim brains are choked between One Thing and No Thing.

If your brain were similarly choked, you also might be full of rage upon encountering other beings that displayed actual and superior reasoning capacity. Having been warped since infancy to "believe" you had answers, you might find the very existence of independent-minded beings an unpardonable reminder of your inferiority, and thus a raw affront.

Sort of reminds me of perpetually infantilized Progs. No wonder they make common cause with one another! At this point, it's not likely we will with reason turn them into allies.

******

Perverted Faith v. No Faith:

Our Neo-Colonialists and Imperialists are trying to dupe people to believe that erasing borders will erase colonialism. Actually, it will erase republics, and in their stead it will install the NWO of international elitist colonial syndicalism. Masses of the world: Give up your republics and Inherit your cheap wages and servitude to monsters!

No "outcome" is desired, other than cauldrons for continuously stirring up and burning off elitist driven divisions and animosities. That's how you sell arms, undermine republics, arrange kickbacks to buy politicians, and signal to other oligarchs how they can do the same to farm people. This is Hedge Fund Management 101: How to play and use the people like crash dummies.

Obama Ilk are the Neo Colonialists (mass people farmers) to replace the Olde Colonialists they pretend to despise! Our Prez is a strutting phony and a liar! He doesn't want his Rainbow Coalition to be made equal. He wants to use it to intimidate, plunder, and rule. These are the New Goosestepping Fascists, in all their infantilized and Gay Glory. They won't know where or when to stop until enough people are finally outraged enough to stand athwart and holler,Stop! Unfortunately, it will probably be bloody to get to that point. And beyond.

Monday, August 15, 2016

AS IF (Speed of Light)

AS IF

Must each perspective of consciousness rationalize as if chronologies among the presentations of forms are protected, regardless of whether such protection is true? If not, how could we either know or ratonalize? If forms are not in themselves real, how can we prove that by assuming what would be the case if they were in themselves real?

If any substance could be perceived to travel faster than the speed of light, would it not necessarily alter the chronological experiences and perceptions of information that we receive, process, interpret, and rationalize, from each perspective? Out of such dissonance, could we still rationalize common or shared experience or interpretations? Do we rationalize just enough to hang onto a sense of identity, while otherwise remaining necessarily dissonant with regard to individually creative unfoldings? Does each newly rationalized explanation suck with it its own train of dissonance?

Perhaps what is real and determinative in itself is not merely the interactions among substantive forms, but must include such reconciling rationalizations among perspectives of consciousness that happen to share a common range of possibilities. Perhaps we cannot make harmonic sense out of feedback with our senses without a trinitarian flux among consciousness, substance, and information. Even though we can never measure that trinitarian flux in itself as a whole.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

ECO-POLITICS

The Prog/LGBT/Atheist/Elitist argument seems to be that some ineffable, immeasurable (spiritual) basis abides for authenticating the values of collectivistic hedonism, but not for authenticating the values of those who preach that each of us who longs for freedom, dignity, and property as an individual should do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Elitists who want to rule collectives under force of government hate when individuals prefer to rule themselves under love of spirituality. Like pre-Reformation priests, "scientific" elitists don't like for the lower masses to presume to think (and pray) for themselves. So they insult Christians for their spiritual faith, even as they pretend (falsely) not to indulge any faith (elitist based socialism) of their own.
So why do Elitist Socialists (ES) expressly denounce Christians, but not Muslims? Several reasons. For one, many ES are metrosexualized, androgynous cowards who fear the violent reputation of Muslims. For another, Muslims, like ES, tend to be socialists, but they remain apart and unassimilated -- so they seem to be a less significant threat to ES. But there is a main reason. The main reason is that ES want to ally with Muslims to tear down Christianity. Thereafter, they imagine Marxism or Scientific Socialism, if forceful enough, will have the resources to defeat Islam, if needed.
ES laugh at affronts by Islam against civilized Christians, by telling Christians that their religion is "no better." That is indicative of the moral bankruptcy of ES. ES, instead of lording that their God is greater, lord that their (so called) "scientific moraliy" is better. And they are as willing as Muslims to consign the rest of the world to hellfire to prove it.
ES are morally numbed by their mincing worship of elitist-led hedonism. That is why they are so proud ("gay") and willing to groom, profane, and abuse children. The fact that ES are willing to give Muslims license to impose horror on much of the world, even the West, is indicative of how hollow and uncaring ES, apart from their NWO cause, really are. If convenient to their cause, there is nothing of innocence or Christianity that ES, like most collectivized mobs, would hesitate to degrade or burn. In that, they compete for the apex of evil.

*********************

Wanted: Someone to wade through the fires of hell to save the ungrateful, the disrespectful, and the despicable. Someone willing to change the diapers of 25-55 year old infant socialists that have been trained to deem it hateful to profile or be judgmental against believers in the most truly horrific. Someone to redeem and show a better way to those who hate the good and love the bad, who would otherwise smile blissfully to bend and be beheaded.

*********************

The political parties are realigning as adult Americans v. childish and grubering Globalists. Autonomous Human Beings v. Automaton Pleasure Widgets.

*********************

The typical Elitist Socialist's faith is in Pagan Gaia, whose priests are knowitall noseinair whineyboys. They are quick to bring out the whine of racist, xenophobe, blah blah. To hear them, they don't hate. They just want to run everyone's life, and they hate when others prefer not to abide by their silly pc or regulations. I detest childish incompetents presuming they or their lying leaders ought to be running my life. They need to go join a mosque or peddle their nonsense elsewhere. Preferably beyond Pluto.

Do you have faith in progressively pursuing better governance under programs laid out by educated elites? If no, then as an atheist, you have no point. If yes, then that is faith, however demented. Nothing in empiricism can prove the moral legitimacy of such faith. No real adult needs to have that explained.

I don't dance and spin. Atheists do act on faith. So the lot of them peddle bs. That is self evident. It takes a dunce educated beyond the power of his intellect not to see it.

What is self evident does not need to be proven, nor can it be proven It just is. That which defines cannot itself be defined. Rather, it is inextricably interwoven in the cosmos, to be empathetically intuited by all who can remove blinders. But you have to remove the blinders you have allowed to be forged for yourself. You either see that, or you don't. Trillions of words could be wasted on it. If atheists' wastage of words does not constitute its own kind of faith, however, demented, then faith has no meaning. I can't fix that for you.

The power of dunces is more in their conditioned feelings than in any intelligent reasoning. I have little time for them. Once I see a person tends to militant atheistic socialistic fascism, I just don't have the patience to try to "save" them. Go and save yourself.

All I ask is that you not oppress or regulate me based on your unintelligible "feelings" about "fairness." If you lack faith in the innate freedom and dignity of individuals apart from the central appratus of knowitall elitists, go social-justice-warrior-jihad to someone else. I don't buy what you're selling. Be gone.

*************

Push come to shove, I doubt you have much of a clue what you are. Clue: To try to tolerate everything, including that which does not tolerate yourself, is to nullify yourself.

In case you have not noticed, there are millions of people bent on agglomerating power that would not tolerate your position. Examples: Knowitall socialists, jihadi Muslims, militant atheists, treacherous oligarchic crony corporatists, phony priests, phony "moral scientists." If you stand for nothing, you fall for everything.

The test for what I stand for is based on this concern: What system of checks, balances, and moral forums is needed to establish, defend, and nourish decent civilization that will accord freedom, dignity, opportunity, and property to individuals, and that will limit such freedom only where needed to preclude individuals from putting the survival of such system in peril?

That test, in specific applications, is not amenable of scientifically detailed prescription. Rather, it depends on the inspired competency of a liberty-literate people of good will and good faith. But you say you lack faith, so not much is expected from you.

****************

I tend to identify with people who are not elitist socialists, regardless of how they like to label themselves. Provided they are not elitist fascists or traitors to the representative republic. Of them, it tends to be a minor point to me whether or not they want to admit they take their own leaps of faith. Unless, that is, they are giving aid and comfort to the knowitall militant atheists who do exist and do want to impose their own kind of grinding rule or who do want to invite into our borders those cultures that are bent to destroy us.

Provided their atheism is where they are in their own personal journey, that is one thing. I was once there myself. But when they advocate for the general destruction of religious faith, that is another thing altogether.
In many respects, I appreciate the wit of the Four Horsemen. Where I think they go off the beam is where they (especially Sam Harris) cross over from science to "moral science." I think that is a giant camel nose advance for elitist diktat. But for that, my appreciation of the "Old One" may not be that far removed from theirs.

*************
I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want and I don't hate them for it. What I don't respect and what I do hate is when they act on their religion or belief system in ways that undermine the freedom and dignity of others. If I see their purpose is to undermine the freedom and dignity of others or of the legal system of our country, then I don't want to invite them in. They can believe what they want, make of their own country what they will, but I do not want them to be undermining the system, documents, and laws that define my country.

You say you support the Constitution. To a lot of socialists and SJW people, that does not mean much because they tend to find whatever they want to find in the Constitution.

But if there are principles in the Constitution to which you truly adhere, then ask yourself why. Is it because those principles are scientifically and empirically proven true in nature? Is it because you have been indoctrinated so to adhere? Or is it because you have weighed the concerns and sought in good faith to determine whether, when, and how you should or should not support the Constitution? If so, how do you come by that process of weighing in good faith, if not in feedback respect for something of the cosmos that speaks to your fundamental intuition and empathy?

Do you understand how hard it is to restore a land of freedom once freedom is lost, either by being conquered or by inviting parasites to come and take it? A lot of people have bled and sweated to provide your freedom. What would give you or anyone else the "moral right" to sell it out to a mess of parasites for a mess of pottage, in a way that would harm the progeny of those who bled and sweated for it?

*****************

Liberals come in two flavors: Corrupt amd incompetent. As such, they want everyone to be either a people farper or a people farmee. They hate the very idea of any land where people by and large are competent to do for themselves. The vey existence of such a land is an affront to their assurances to their captives in lands of socialism, communism, and Islamism.

Similarly, realms where Christianity flourishes, at least where distinctions are held between voluntary charity and governmental force, are affronts to wannabe people farmers and farmees. This is why they and their cronies work so hard to infest every institution to try to bring down every independent, representative republic.

This is why they call you names, like nationalist, thumper, Trumper, phobe, redneck, racist, misogynist, privileged, colonialist, etc. As to racism, misogyny, special privileges, etc, those tend to abide far more with liberals, progs, radical gays, socialists, fascists, communists, feminazis, femimen, militant atheists, and jihadis than with ordinary Americans. They should be sent back to their cribs and told: Bite it!

*******************
You can label IT as you like, but it is what it is, and there is no good reason to believe it is much at all like the way Allah is described. Nor that it has as its purpose to impose perpetual hellfire on the spirits or bodies of all who fail to live up any of the injunctions as set out in the Koran. Nor that it wants women to be second class citizens, infidels to be slaughtered, of girls to be mutilated. Nothing of the cosmos or good sense makes any of that virtuous or sensible.
Edit: Nor can PC make it virtuous, sensible, or even tolerable.

Will someone who thinks it can be done please clarify the differences between moderate Shia and immoderate Shia, and between radical Sunni and non-radical Sunni?
Frankly, the whole idea of a Frankenstein God that gets his rocks off by sending people to hellfire for failing to acknowledge bs stories about him, even though he made them that way in the first place, is disgusting to every mind that is not sick. Yes, I do mean to infer that Proggies are sick in the head.
Apparently, Allah, playing with dollies, deliberately made some so ugly he could jolly himself by burning them forever, over and over. Is he mad because Mrs. God shamed him? What's his problem, anyway? What is there about this obscene "religion" among men who wear dresses that entitles it to the PC protection of fascists who want to pretend to have manners?

For Pagan Elitists, ethics is a cover tale told by idiots. What really matters is making a killing --- and making sure to pay the right people.
The more Elitist Socialists (and SJW's) twist gov to "help" us, the more they injure us. Let charities do charity. Let gov set rules. But let gov stay away from new charities unless the nation is in peril. We need to stop confusing force with charity.

Forget methane trapped in frozen ground. Think about political favors trapped in secretive banks, and elitism trapped in corruption. In politicians, crap floats faster than methane seeps. Hillary's up to her eyeballs in it.

Wanted: Someone to wade through the fires of hell to save the ungrateful, the disrespectful, and the despicable. Someone willing to change the diapers of 25-55 year old infant socialists that have been trained to deem it hateful to profile or be judgmental against believers in the most truly horrific. Someone to redeem and show a better way to those who hate the good and love the bad, who would otherwise smile blissfully to bend and be beheaded.

The political parties are realigning as adult Americans v. childish and grubering Globalists. Autonomous Human Beings v. Automaton Pleasure Widgets.

For what non- circular reason do you deem the Constitution entitled to respect? Do you have one? Do you have faith that there is one?

I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want and I don't hate them for it. What I don't respect and what I do hate is when they act on their religion or belief system in ways that undermine the freedom and dignity of others. If I see their purpose is to undermine the freedom and dignity of others or of the legal system of our country, then I don't want to invite them in. They can believe what they want, make of their own country what they will, but I do not want them to be undermining the system, documents, and laws that define my country.
You say you support the Constitution. To a lot of socialists and SJW people, that does not mean much because they tend to find whatever they want to find in the Constitution.
But if there are principles in the Constitution to which you truly adhere, then ask yourself why. Is it because those principles are scientifically and empirically proven true in nature? Is it because you have been indoctrinated so to adhere? Or is it because you have weighed the concerns and sought in good faith to determine whether, when, and how you should or should not support the Constitution? If so, how do you come by that process of weighing in good faith, if not in feedback respect for something of the cosmos that speaks to your fundamental intuition and empathy?
Do you understand how hard it is to restore a land of freedom once freedom is lost, either by being conquered or by inviting parasites to come and take it? A lot of people have bled and sweated to provide your freedom. What would give you or anyone else the "moral right" to sell it out to a mess of parasites for a mess of pottage, in a way that would harm the progeny of those who bled and sweated for it?

I tend to identify with people who are not elitist socialists, regardless of how they like to label themselves. Provided they are not elitist fascists or traitors to the representative republic. Of them, it tends to be a minor point to me whether or not they want to admit they take their own leaps of faith. Unless, that is, they are giving aid and comfort to the knowitall militant atheists who do exist and do want to impose their own kind of grinding rule or who do want to invite into our borders those cultures that are bent to destroy us. Provided their atheism is where they are in their own personal journey, that is one thing. I was once there myself. But when they advocate for the general destruction of religious faith, that is another thing altogether.
In many respects, I appreciate the wit of the Four Horsemen. Where I think they go off the beam is where they (especially Sam Harris) cross over from science to "moral science." I think that is a giant camel nose advance for elitist diktat. But for that, my appreciation of the "Old One" may not be that far removed from theirs.

Hubristic Elistist Socialists who want to impose bs regulations against the little people, who just want to be left alone to assimilate their own appreciation of the moral universe, need to be smacked around enough to understand their "help" is not wanted.

The test for what I stand for is based on this concern: What system of checks, balances, and moral forums is needed to establish, defend, and nourish decent civilization that will accord freedom, dignity, opportunity, and property to individuals, and that will limit such freedom only where needed to preclude individuals from putting the survival of such system in peril?
That test, in specific applications, is not amenable of scientifically detailed prescription. Rather, it depends on the inspired competency of a liberty-literate people of good will and good faith. But you say you lack faith, so not much is expected from you.

Do you have faith in progressively pursuing better governance under programs laid out by educated elites? If no, then as an atheist, you have no point. If yes, then that is faith, however demented. Nothing in empiricism can prove the moral legitimacy of such faith. No real adult needs to have that explained.
I don't dance and spin. Atheists do act on faith. So the lot of them peddle bs. That is self evident. It takes a dunce educated beyond the power of his intellect not to see it.
What is self evident does not need to be proven, nor can it be proven. It just is. That which defines cannot itself be defined. Rather, it is inextricably interwoven in the cosmos, to be empathetically intuited by all who can remove blinders. But you have to remove the blinders you have allowed to be forged for yourself. You either see that, or you don't. Trillions of words could be wasted on it. If atheists' wastage of words does not constitute its own kind of faith, however, demented, then faith has no meaning. I can't fix that for you.
The power of dunces is more in their conditioned feelings than in any intelligent reasoning. I have little time for them. Once I see a person tends to militant atheistic socialistic fascism, I just don't have the patience to try to "save" them. Go and save yourself.
All I ask is that you not oppress or regulate me based on your unintelligible "feelings" about "fairness." If you lack faith in the innate freedom and dignity of individuals apart from the central appratus of knowitall elitists, go social-justice-warrior-jihad to someone else. I don't buy what you're selling. Be gone.

Grey eminences are fascist busybodies. They come in flavors of crony corporatists, socialists, communists, and new central idealists. They don't much like trusting the little folk to think or do for themselves. Instead, they want to mold the little people to serve their ideal of a "more perfect state." That is their own kind of religion. As someone who prefers mostly to think and do for himself, I loathe them and the religion they ride in on.

Beingness in purposeful feedback is. It does not need what you call your faith to be. It just is. It abides beyond your proof, logic, or faith. You can rationalize that however you like, but you cannot make it not so.

You fight your fight and I'll fight me. -- Doug Keershaw.

*********************

Trump: "Those who are guests in our country that are preaching hate will be asked to return home immediately."

With that statement, Trump grabbed the jugular of the main concern of Metro-Femi-Lefties, even though they themselves have been incompetent to state it.

That statement makes sense under our documents of foundational liberty --- provided Trump means to protect the safety of minorities, Muslims, and Gays, but not to eviscerate the First Amendment to do so.

It is one thing to express concern for protecting such minorities. It is another to make them superior. Thus far, minorities and their metro-hubristic elitists have sought to enact national provisions to guarantee protection of self esteem. Thus, they have sought to hobble everyone else with regulations against "hate speech," cultural assimilation, and white privilege. Instead, they have sought to establish special minority privilege and to provide for special reparations and affirmative action. This program has been their Trojan Horse for destroying and rendering meaningless (fundamentally changing) the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Once elected, Trump ought to advocate for Immigration policies for preseving a liberty-literate citizenry. Not an anti-liberty electorate of Metro-Femi-Lefties and knowitall Elitist Socialists. For too long, Lefties have been blind to the main consequence of their anti-First Amendment stance, which is this: To justify feel-good limitations on freedom of expression and enterprise is to promote elitist authoritarians. To promote elitist authoritarians is to grease the way for Islamists, Communists, Sociopaths, and People Farmers.

The more the Cattle People allow themselves to be persuaded to compromise the First Amendment, the more they are reduced to tender veal for the owners of the means of persuasion (media, movies, academia, etc.). That Femi Lefties tend unwittingly to vounteer for the ovens is indicated by their support for all the measures that have done so much destruction to inner-city families. Metro-Femi-Lefties might be forgiven for knowing not what they have been doing to America and its innocent progeny. They cannot be forgiven for caring not what they do.

Economic Shell Game

A shell game that commonly pollutes logics of individual versus group economics relates to slips between wholes and parts. Between those who play within the system and those who play above it. Between those to whom the law applies and those to whom the law does not apply. The twilight zone of international relations among crony corporatists.

Economic trade between societies organized as nations can never be "free," because each trading nation will always seek to advantage its economic controllers by influencing the politics of all other traders.

The U.S.'s economic controllers are not the people, but the people-farming cronies that treat people, politicians, and even governments as commoditities. They are quite amenable of selling out the people, nation, and its resources for corruptly laundered personal profit. The same applies to the despotic gangs that rule foreign nations, especially third world nations.

As a nation, our ordinary citizens are not benefitting, politically, by our trade policies -- regardless of whether one calls those policies free or fair. Rather, as a nation, our troops and workers who bled and sweated to defend our country are put under the thumbs of crony corporatists bent on selling them out. The consequence, worldwide, is a movement to reduce the masses to the lowest common status of desperate serf laborers. In this, those who run our major political parties are united.

The economic wealth that does accrue to ordinary Americans tends to come more from inheriting the work of people killed and replaced by abuse and war than from increases in efficiency brought on by "division of labor." The U.S., from sea to shining sea, has little need of most labor or resources from other parts of the world. To a large extent, what trickles down to ordinary Americans is a consequence of the dollar being the world's reserve currency. Other nations presently have little choice but to work for the dollar -- even though Americans nowadays produce mostly fluff. That, however, will soon leach out, like a back-washing tsunami. By then, most of our cronies will have found their safe harbors and islands.

Cronies, on the other hand, need one another to keep rolling their schemes for laundering political favors -- the consequence of which tends to be to hollow out the jobs and resources of their fellow countrymen -- the ones who actually bled and sweated to build and defend the nation.

"Free trade" tends to be a shell game by which cronies who rule above the game pick the pockets of individuals who play within the game. (They even inspire followers among unionists and homies by promising "free stuff." They own the ghetto people, because they own both major political parties and all significant institutions of political persuasion.)

The ordinary rules simply aren't applied to well connected cronies, and likely never will be. If Americans want to be "free," they will need periodically to overturn the tables of the crony money masters. (Water the tree of liberty.) Otherwise, no representative republic can long survive the cronies that will buy and sell its politicians and their "laws" as if they were little more than the devil's commodities. The biggest threat to the republic is the lack of effective spiritual and formal checks against the influence laundering of faith-breaching cronies.

By itself, no flat tax against crony consumptions can ever be effective to impede their snowballing agglomerations of political influence, that will always tend to the destruction of republics.

******************

Socialists love Big Brother. However, the Bill of Rights is concerned with the freedom and dignity of individuals within States. To maximize individual freedom of thought, expression, and enterprise, provided it is not tolerated to destroy the freedom of thought, expression, and enterprise of others. Islam, like socialism, trades with the devil by destroying freedom in phony trade for safe spaces for the hiveminded.

There is no freedom among Muslims in Islam to express disbelief. That will cost you your head. There is little freedom in socialism to go against the line of the ruling party. That will get you an ice pick in the head, as Trotsky found out. There is no honest dealing in the Dem Party, as those who believed in Debbie Wasserman Schultz found out.

Islam, communism, radical socialism, and militant atheism are all intolerant of non-believers. For them, "progress" is the spreading of their intolerance. Those who believe in human freedom and dignity too often and too short sightedly condemn themselves by being so tolerant that they tolerate that which means to destroy them -- whether immediately or by a thousand cuts. Hive minds lack the freedom that is essential to mend them. Once sufficiently in power, the hive-borg kills freedom, relentlessly and permanently. Once enough voters elect to be ruled by despotic elitists who promise they will be benign, they forfeit their dignity and become reduced to subhuman status. That kind of socialism becomes a big-brother religion for subhumans.

People will work for themselves, their families, their significant others, and to improve their property. They will not long work for others if they can find ways to bilk the system. Socialists never learn this. People who use gov property do not respect such property -- even when socialists try to force such respect by lining up and shooting offenders in order to make examples. Elites are human beings, not angels. To give them the kind of unlimited power over others that socialists lean to, unmoderated by religious like faith, is to corrupt them, absolutely.

If socialists have any "red lines" they would enforce against the degradation of humanity and its children, what are they? They have none. Define your red lines and your non-religious science that proves them, that defend the innocence of children. You have none. You would replace the love of parents with the diktat of soulless statists, and then sell children for their body parts.

Whether you believe in Jesus or not, He gave the essence of the spiritual, moral law: Love God, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That is a basis for human freedom and dignity, property rights, individual enterprise, and freedom of thought. Jesus did not send Apostles to demand belief in trade for not having your head cut.

Among decent, thinking people in the West, those two laws have taught intuition and empathy to moderate the Mosaic law. That is why you do not see modern Christians acting like primitive 7th Century islamists. To pretend modern Christianity is comparable to the depravity of Stalinism and Islamism is uninformed nonsense.

To denigrate all religions is also uninformed nonsense. You say you believe in socialism. Is your belief based in insight, intuition, and empathy, or is it based in empirical science? You do not say socialism is per se proven good by science. So you recognize it itself is a religion. Now, if you base it in a spiritual, interpenetrating, perpetual, immeasurable, empathetic, feedback aspect of the cosmos that is beyond empirical proof, then I am partly with you. The difference is this: My idea of "good socialism" (civilization) entails maximal respect for human freedom and dignity, which I would not, without overpowering reason, surrender to immediate gratifications or "safe spaces" for hive minds. I suspect, notwithstanding the abominations of the 20th Century, that socialists suffer from historical illiteracy that renders them excessively vulnerable to phony fallen elitists.

Regarding religious tests: The First Amendment gives the right to the free exercise of religion. In Islam, as in the Mafia, there is no free exercise. Apostasy will get you stoned.

Regarding Article VI, see http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438536/immigration-religious-test-constitution-does-not-ban-vetting-immigrants-religion:

"Of all all the ignorant pronouncements in the 2016 presidential campaign, the dumbest may be that the Constitution forbids a “religious test” in the vetting of immigrants."

"The clause said to be the source of this drivel is found in Article VI. As you’ll no doubt be shocked to learn, it has utterly nothing to do with immigration. The clause states, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”. On its face, the provision is not only inapplicable to immigrants at large, let alone aliens who would like to be immigrants; it does not even apply to the general public. It is strictly limited to public officials — specifically to their fitness to serve in government positions."

Bottom line: Because socialists apparently only read drivel, they only spread drivel. No doubt, however, drivel-spreading, socialistic Progs will find some idiot judge to rule. And why? Why, because Prog phonies have utterly corrupted our demographics.

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Motorcycle Zen

The world unfolds as if something of innate consciousness wanted to entertain a system-simulation of feedback, to test what would assimilate. Maybe even to test the variety of ways in which intution and empathy would rationalize credit to that something or someone. Maybe even to participate in guiding the simulation.

*************

Whatever the quality of the ultimate "thing" out of which all other things are avialed to be quanticized, IT itself is beyond quantification. The only thing that fills that bill for being existentially experienced yet beyond quantifiable measure is the sense of Conscious beingness.

Thus, a reasonable hypothesis would seem to be that the ultimate Source of measurable Substance is no-thing more than Consciousness interfunctioning to express forms (to in-form) that obey math-based sequences and extensions.

This "hypothesis" is not empirically testable, but is based only on direct experience and internal consistency. It is not valuable for pursuing a theory-of-everything to explain everything in ways that are mathematically consistent and empirically testable. Its value is qualitative, not quantitative. Its value is in relating direct experience of Conscioiusness to the appreciation of existentiality. It merely provides shorthand terminology by which people may make reference as they come together in various forums in good faith and good will to seek to assimilate civilizing and meaningful moral values.

****************

There is no ultimately measurable "thing" or "physical" building block out of which appearances are built to unfold consistent in their relations with math-based algorithms and equations. Rather, accumulations of Information, stored as present manifestations of Substance, are coordinated to appear in respect of perspectives of Consciousness.

In-form-ation means no-thing that is not made to appear to potentiality of Consciousness. Information that cannot inform would not "be" Information, but a pre-annihilating absurdity. Substance that cannot store Information would not be Substance, but a pre-annihilating absurdity. The coordinate existentiality of accumulations of past Information and present manifestations of Substance requries the existentiality of a unifying Source of apprehensive perspectives of Consciousness. It does not require that inanimate objects be deemed to contain Consciousness. It requires only appreciation that inanimate objects would not meaningfully appear or abide without coordination and reconciliation, at some level, among perspectives of Consciousness. Without part-icipation with such Source of Consciousness, both Information and Substance would "be" pre-annihilating absurdities.

I do not expect by this observation to lead to measured analysis of the ultimate character of Consciousness. I expect only to label a non-measureable thing that obviously exists to every perspective's sense of beingness, so that it can be legitimately discussed and communicated about. The purpose is to invite civilizing assimilations of intuitions, empathies, and values. I expect only to communicate that a "real" basis for higher mindedness abides and exists. So hedonists may be less conditioned for profit to tolerate the undermining of all attempts to assimilate human decency, dignity, individual responsibility, and freedom. So we can aspire to be human, rather than subhuman.

**************

When a photon strikes a body of mass, the photon imparts some of its Information TO the body of mass, in exchange for receiving some of the Information that is available FROM the body of mass. The photon participates with the exchanging of old I for new I. This changes the state of the Information that is stored with the body of mass. Is the body of mass, in its new state, therefore no longer the same Identity as the old body of mass? As a body of mass, was it ever, really, an identifiable, measurable "thing"? Or was it a "thing" only in respect of its practical aspect, in respect of a math-based meta-system of activated equations? The body of mass will, in main, continue to be a sore of previously accumulated I, plus the new I imparted to it by the photon.

Is the photon "really" an identifiable particle, or a spread out field, or both, or neither? Is it "really" a placeholder for a mathematical transposition that is being reconciled by a meta-Auditor, that is calculably accurate to whatever the level of attention that the Auditor, from any perspective, has capacity to give to it?

**************
As an example of Substance, consider what we take as light. No one has ever actually seen a photon itself. Our idea of a photon pertains to some-measurable-post-manifestation that that was carried and transmitted as Information. As a photon transmits some part of its Information, it reloads other Information. As in a equation, that balances its functions sequentially, chronologically, expansively, and transpositionally. Once it collapses to unload its Information to store it with another receiver, then, as it absorbs and substitutes new Information, does it retain its Identity as the "same" photon?

Until a photon imparts its Information, its specific Identity is unknown. Once it imparts its Information, its substantive Identity has changed (no longer exists). We, as Conscious Observers or Receptive Recorders, experience such a photon by measuring (storing Information concerning) its trace, not by measuring the photon "itself." The Information that was carried by the photon (Energetic Substance) becomes stored in whatever form or book (Material Substance) with which we store it. Moreover, by our Conscious actions, we participate in choosing which photons (and therefore which Information) we wish to avail to become manifest (stored to material Substantive accessibility).

Thus, the existentiality that is expressed with the photon is transposed and fluxed with present Substance, cumulated Information, and participatory Consciousness. That is, the Trinity (Father-present [I am that I am], Holy Ghost-past [comforter], Son-future apprehensive [why hast thou forsaken me]).

**************

I don't know the "reality." I have a conceptualization that seems to me to be as consistent, coherent, and complete as I have been able to ascertain. But I have little doubt that it is not perfect.   If I find a better "explanation," I will phase to it.

By my present conceptualization, there abides a Godhead that consists of a Trinity that correlates with a field, but it is not a measurable field. Rather, it is a field that avails measuring. That is, a math field. The Godhead operates with a math field in a way that fluxes out (qualitating) Consciousness, (measuring) Substance, and (cumulating) In-form-ation.

By my conceptualization, measurable physics is a subordinate derivative. The ultimate "nature" is no-thing but a field of math. It appears to be physical because that is the upshot of reconciling communications among the various perspectives of the Conscious aspect of the unifying Godhead. Because the conscious aspect of the Godhead is of a qualitative (spiritual) character, I cannot empirically prove its nature. Because it is superior to measurable provable nature.

I doubt there is a controlling algorithm for defining the math field with which the Godhead operates that is knowable or appreciable to limited mortals. Still, all that unfolds to our measurement must obey parameters of the math field. Who/what sets the math field? Does the math field itself phase or "expand"? I punt to the Godhead.

What unfolds to measurable experience does so in obedience to maths of chronological and spatial sequences, i.e., "meta-equations." As to whether or how those meta-equations may phase shift, I have little clue.

Yes, events follow chronologies. But I suspect they "circle back." I don't believe in YOLO. And while any perspective is dormant, it would not experience time. So its recurrence may from some perspectives be eons, but only an instant from its perspective. Even though it would seem not to know precise aspects about its previous forms of identity.

I don't believe in free will. I believe in a flux-feedback process that entails reconciliations of part-icipatory will. I do believe in a higher, spiritual, Godhead. I intuit it, and every perspective of it, to be at some layers and levels, always and innately empathetic. To me, that is the root of higher mindedness. Which was much more poetically stated by Jesus, in pronouncing the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule. There is much that is worth discussing, warts and all, in most sacred religious texts. In the Koran, however, there is mostly warts, that are more to be spurned by any decent society that aspires to civilizing freedom and dignity as opposed to subhumanizing mind enslavement.

**********************

Atheists tend to think most Christians believe all the sacred metaphors in the Bible are meant as literal facts instead of as points of discussion. Big delusion.

I suspect, among those with a modicum of education, there are as many delusionaries among atheists as there are among spiritual believers. Moreover, many atheists share in deluded notions about the measurable solidity of all of "reality" and its independence from observations of perspectives of Consciousness. They have little insight regarding an interpenetrating and reconciling aspect of the Observer Effect.

That said, I agree that "physical literalists" that call themselves either athests or believers tend sometimes to be dangerously stunted in their philosophies.

I would conceptualize that the reality of our world appears in concordance with a trinitarian flux of Consciousness, Substance, and Information -- each of which fluxes in back and forth transposition among the others. In essence, an ineffable system of qualitative-quantities that is comprised of no-thing more than webs of math and perspectives of a Mathematician.

From Robert M. Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance:

"[T]he Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of the mountain, or in the petals of a flower."

“You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in.   No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow.   They know it's going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt.”

“Sometimes it's a little better to travel than to arrive”

"[V]erbalized statements about reality are never presumed to be reality itself."

“We have artists with no scientific knowledge and scientists with no artistic knowledge and both with no spiritual sense of gravity at all, and the result is not just bad, it is ghastly.”

**************************
Regarding Robert M. Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance:   An Inquiry Into Values -- I found some good stuff here:    http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/175720-zen-and-the-art-of-motorcycle-maintenance: :)

“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.”

“You look at where you're going and where you are and it never makes sense, but then you look back at where you've been and a pattern seems to emerge.”

“You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They know it's going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt.”

“Sometimes it's a little better to travel than to arrive”

“Is it hard?' Not if you have the right attitudes. Its having the right attitudes thats hard.”

On a cycle the frame is gone. You're completely in contact with it all. You're in the scene, not just watching it anymore, and the sense of presence is overwhelming.”

“We take a handful of sand from the endless landscape of awareness around us and call that handful of sand the world.”

"[N]umbers exist only in the mind. I don't get upset when scientists say that ghosts exist in the mind. it's that only that gets me."

"Your common sense is nothing more than the voices of thousands and thousands of these ghosts from the past.”

If a revolution destroys a systematic government, but the systematic patterns of thought that produced that government are left intact, then those patterns will repeat themselves in the succeeding government. There’s so much talk about the system. And so little understanding.”

"If the machine produces tranquility it's right. If it disturbs you it's wrong until either the machine or your mind is changed.”

“The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of the mountain, or in the petals of a flower. To think otherwise is to demean the Buddha - which is to demean oneself.”

“The real cycle you're working on is a cycle called yourself.”

"[V]erbalized statements about reality are never presumed to be reality itself."

“When analytic thought, the knife, is applied to experience, something is always killed in the process.”

“We have artists with no scientific knowledge and scientists with no artistic knowledge and both with no spiritual sense of gravity at all, and the result is not just bad, it is ghastly.”

“Absence of Quality is the essence of squareness.”

***************

MY OWN MOTORCYCLE ZEN:

A niche will sometmes avail cows to be sucked dry of blood by mosquitos. Every time our legislators enact a re-form, blood thirsty opportunizers twist it.

We live in a time of rapid flux and phase shifts. Even a tactic of frequent turnover and reform may become inadequate to keep predators and parasites under manageable control.

Among predators and parasites, there is little of morality that restrains them. Without a revival of respect for spirit-based morality, the trend towards mass people farms will likely accelerate.

To steer towards a miracle, it would help to keep in mind a Source of miracles. Motorcycle Zen: When I want to steer my motorcycle, I first look to where I want to go. And then the bike goes there. Just ask any cyclist.

***************************

It's hard to say how much of subhuman-crony-communism is due to genetic nature versus cultural nurture. However, it would be unscientific just to assume that none of it is due to genetics.

****************************

Too many good people lack experience to discern that Evil has its worshippers. And history shows that those proponents of Evil often float to high power over others. Good people tend to expect that the exposure of bad actors will lead to their being shunned. Wrong. Among Rainbows, such exposure just helps identify the next leaders they will want to promote.
There are worshippers of Evil. I call them Rainbows only because they fly a rainbow flag. They are many. And they dog whistle to one another, to gain power over sheeple. The reason exposure of bad actions causes Republicans to be actively shunned by Rainbows is because the Rainbows were already primed to look for reasons to shun them! But Rainbows are NOT primed to shun their own. Indeed, they promote the bad actors among themselves. Exposing Hillary to be a demented crony-commie will NOT dissuade them. Eventually, it will attract them. These people are beyond fixing. They will have to be defeated and restrained.
To the extent goodness tends to spread, the demented deviance of Rainbows can be defeated, but only if and when good people wake up to the reality that Rainbows do not share their values concerning human freedom and decency. The cooption of the term "rainbow" by perps, pimps, pedophiles, and people-farmers is just one among many of their affronts to decent good sense.

*****************************

Lefty Religion: Sitting on your fat ass for a hundred years while telling Whitey he is "morally obliged" to make reparations. (Reparations for what? For providing the best nation with the most opportunity on earth?) Lefty Religion is about whining how the "birth lottery" made you a "rainbow," as if the birth lottery had not imposed far heavier weights against billions of sick, lame, blind, slow, and ugly people. Somehow, most of them grow up and learn to take responsibility for themselves. But not the BLM and SJW folk. The explanation: They don't suffer under the BLT religion of the BLM folk.

Everyone has problems. Decency is about learning how to cope with them. Not about learning how to demand reparations from others. Where do reparations end? Should all the sick, lame, blind, slow, and ugly people of the world be entitled to reparations from Black citizens? Enough of this crap!!! https://youtu.be/oKg2FX1OvfA

********************************

I don't t say to trust central gov to launder bribe money. My meaning is that gov that is not allowed to remain benighted COULD help. It could help if, instead of training people to be entitlement-minded, it required them to work for their welfare.
But I agree that most such work should not be done by central gov, because central gov is inherently too corrupt. It tends to float crap, not cream. If (that's a big if) most functions were taken away from central gov and rdistributed to the States, local people would have more local oversight. There would still be corruption, but not on the same scale. Good people may have a better chance to dampen it. Foreign corruption would be less likely to threaten the replacement of the republic as a whole.
IAE, jobs for maintenance of infrastructure would not be done by bureaucrats, but by competing private domestic American contractors. Would you rather have private-enterprising Saudis bidding to take over toll road monopolies? How is private development by foreign corporatists better than local letting of infrastructure jobs to domestic bidders? After all, every dime foreign rentiers make by selling back to our citizens our own national resources would be taken from them by abuse of trust and foreign intrigue.
I doubt you believe abuse by disloyal international crony oligarchs is better than abuse by home-grown gov bureaucrats. What needs to be more appreciated is that there is a rentier-promoting kickback-alliance between mooching international corporatists and faithless treasonous home-grown cronies. Buying and selling pols as if they were commodities has become big international business.
Indeed, the pols that float to the top are now the ones that get the most dollars put in their shorts for doing the best strip teases. For goodness sakes, the nation elected Obama and may elect Hillary! The problem is not gov bad, corporation good. The problem is the agglomerating alliance between central gov and nation-less corporatists.
Just turning over everything to such corporatists would solve nothing. Indeed, oligarchic control over gov is what has put us where we are. Do you think there is magic in international corporatism more so than in local government? Or in distributing welfare without requiring work in trade?

***************

Meme magic. A thought large enough to gain traction with enough minds will manifest in external reality. Confirmation bias works. Successful pols use it to advantage.

***************

Buying into "white privilege" only increases the zeal of race baiters, parasites, and predators. What is this white privilege? Privilege to work, to pay taxes, to shed blood and sweat to defend and build the representative republic, to do the hard work to sustain the nation and human decency, to volunteer to help in community churches and schools and social clubs, to be scapegoated by every loutish lazy socialist and corrupt crony rentier.

I psss on "white privilege" as a meme! The libs who buy into it are metrosexualized weenies. The rapping minorities who whine about it tend to be little more than professional burdens on society. To end "white privilege," think about what causes it.

What causes it are the people who profit from raising it. The arms dealers who foment crisis, war, and unrest. The hedgers who play to make advantages by controlling crises. The pols who depend for reelection on a poor and easily misled class that can never be allowed to grow up or to leave the vote-for-a-living farm. And, of course, the shill and loot leaders, who are often paid by the hedgers and even provided with protest signs. And, of course, the mass of looters and leeches themselves.

What would end white privilege? Round up the crises farmers and/or tax them out of business. Stop the mollycoddling PC. Stop paying heed to distinctions based on bait by hedgers bent on fomenting division. Understand that eveyone carries his/her own cross. That most of the world is far less well off. That the end game for the hedgers is not to raise American minorities, but to reduce the masses worldwide to desperate serfs. Look instead to higher values. To innate morality or to the Godhead. Stop imagining that the world is required to give diddly about your special skin color, lack of talent, misfortune, or ugliness. If you want success, work for it. If you want charity, deserve it. If you want to do good, make a worthwhile business or contribute to a worthwhile charity or church. But STOP with the endlessly more cental Gov, rules, forced redistributions, PC dictatorships, and affronts to good sense and good will and individual freedom of expression and enterprise.

If someone wants to stifle racism, the way to help do that is to stop talking about it and stirring it up. The LAST thing BLM, Progs, Dems, and NWO Cronies want is to dampen racial animosities!!! They OWN racism. They profit from it. They rule by it. They will give it up the same day talentless Muslims give up Sharia law. To give in to people who should long ago have grown beyond infantilism merely because they whine is a form of abuse. It abuses people to lead them to believe they are entitled to demand that the world owes them a living. It is also an abuse of the republic. Stop the abuse!

***********************************

Something that amazes me about some so-called atheists is their lack of insight or appreciation that they DO make leaps of faith that are based more on rationalization-to-desire (pleasure) than on pure reason. Many argue vehemently on behalf of causes, principles, or systems of belief to which they cling in ardor and faith. IOW, they are religious about how much they care about rationalizing their lack of religion. They are religious about the principles they would substitute for the religions of others. Indeed, communist atheists (superior "reasoners"?) were very adamant in their methods of "persuasion."

But these moral and ethical "principles" of atheists tend more to be simple rationalizations for individual preferences, which they often hope to convince (by persuasion if possible, by force if necessary) others to follow, religiously, as if they were innate principles (or applications of principles) of pagan Mother Nature. For example, some Gays want to believe in a Great Gay Mother Nature. That gayness is "natural" (if not beloved by Nature). That appreciation of Gayness should be taught in grade school, to which students should be forcibly exposed.

Some say they are "objective" minded scientists, indifferent to appeals except to pure empiricism or reason. Yet, they care deeply about their lack of caring (i.e., stance of indifference). Some say they base their higher mindedness in reason, apart from notions about religion or God. OK then, justify these higher-minded principles without resorting to any leap of faith. Show me their universailty and their objective derivation. Show me, in pure empiricism or natural reason, divorced from all leaps of faith, why every (or any) society ougtht to adopt such principles. And show your work.

I submit there abides higher mindedness, but it is not justified in pure science or logic. Rather, it is justified, if at all, in the direct qualitative experience and sense of being that is innate at some level to every perspective of consciousness. But I also submit that such cannot be proved or quanticized, apart from direct experience. That is, we each take on a leap of faith that our beingness is (or can be) meaningful and worthwhile. To care about arguing to the contrary is by such action to defeat such contrary argument.

Some atheists argue they can justify a system of morality without resort to "religion" or an innate godliness in beingness. OK then, why and how does a parent or friend teach morality, ethics, or principled empathy to a child? Does the parent say to the child, "There is really no basis for such higher mindedness, apart from self interest?" If so, how does the parent define self, interest, or self interest? Does he say it is ok to hurt others if it is in one's overall greater self interest? Does he try to shape what his child's or friend's (or dupe's) self interest should be? Or to shape or condition what his child's sense of responsibility to family, friends, nation, humanity, planet, or beingness should be?

A problem with atheists, such as communist atheists, is that they often want to take over the force of the government and use it to force conformity in "principles" among the masses. But these "principles" are always the self-justifying principles of the controlling, ruling class. So their "natural principles" get made into governmentally forced rule. They make the state the new religion, the freedom and dignity of each citizen be dammmmed! Their new ("reasonable") religion becomes: "Thou shall have no gods before thee -- except Gov" (or the reasoned droppings of its paid shills)(or in the cases of fascist Muslims -- MoonAllah, or in the case of Greenies -- Mother Planet.)

So, which "should" prevail, and when: self interest, elitist ruling interest, or social-scientist-unicorn-community-interest? Why "should" such ever be so? Will not every "answer" be a rationalization? As a rationalization, is not every such answer akin to a conditioned religion (using religion in the sense of a ritualized way of approaching things)?

So, what "higher-minded atheist" can really and consistently claim to an entirely unfaithful (anti-religious) "reasoner" about what principles should be accepted as being moral or ethical? Give me an example, and show your work. What are these" principles" that a cocksure atheist should believe should be fit to lay on all of humanity (either by force for their own good or by tricks of persuasion for the "progress" of humanity)? Do they find Mother Nature to have written these "principles" on stone tablets, by lightning? Are these principles innate to beingness? If so, on what faith or "reasoning"?

For myself, I believe moral empathies and principles are innate. That a qualitative aspect about Consciousness is inherently beyond measure, hence spiritual. That a shorthand way to cite the most important principles was taught by Jesus, as the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule. That for any elitist, crony, oligarch, fascist Muslim, atheist, or knowitall Communist to attempt by force to condemn and replace the traditional or religious mores, parables, and metaphors of every individual is -- EVIL.

***********************

In main, I think I agree. :)

Light/energy, insofar as they are measurable to any present observer or recorder, are Substance.

But light/energy/Substance does not express or create by itself. It carries a history (cumulation of In-form-ation) and its "collapse" into a form for being sensed as either particle or wave (field) depends on its interfunctioning with an observer or recorder (Conscious Observer Effect).

At a deep level, all that is measurable as Substance (space, time, matter, energy) depends on an inter-flux with Information and Consciousness. And insofar as anything is measurable, it must conform to an interfunctioning web of transposing equations, i.e., a Math Field.

An animating Mathematician (Consciousness) expresses all that it measures subject to the Math Field with which if works.

What the Godhead expresses fluxes as Consciousness, Substance, and Information. Representations of what was Substance in the past have now been fluxed and cumulated into Information. What is the Information concerning the past is presently carried by energy or stored with matter. IAE, the carried Information does not manifest (collapse or reconcile) as Substance without some layer or level of part-icipatory Consciousness.

Within themselves, none of the aspects of C,S, or I is causal. Rather, what is "caused" to be expressed in each and every sequence or instance is the unfolding and reconciled upshot of a process of part-icipatory feedback that entails all three.

Depending on a tinkerer's practical purposes, he can operate from an assumption that any one of the three is "primary." But I doubt that any grand explanatory scheme can ever establish that any one of the three is "really" primary.

The Burlesque of People Farming

People-farming crony-elites have contrived by "immigration," "education," and infestation of all institutions of persuasion and force to twist our citizenry so that perhaps 65% are liberty-illiterate, individually incompetent, needful of safe spaces, and just want to trust elites to look out for them. By definition, such a society of industrial-strength stupidifieds cannot be fit for self governance -- except in burlesque or kabuki.

People-farmers have built a system in which most people are fit only to be farmed, and they will become violent if anyone tries to put space between them and their farmers. Given this situation, it is hardly irrational for the remainder of the populace to have the good sense to be "phobic" against bringing in more subhumans that want to be farmed as pleasure pigs and mad dog muslims. If the 35% that do not want to be subhumans do not soon unite, representative republicanism will perish from the earth.

****************

I don't say to trust central gov to launder bribe money. My meaning is that gov that is not allowed to remain benighted COULD help. It could help if, instead of training people to be entitlement-minded, it required them to work for their welfare.

But I agree that most such work should not be done by central gov, because central gov is inherently too corrupt. It tends to float crap, not cream. If (that's a big if) most functions were taken away from central gov and rdistributed to the States, local people would have more local oversight. There would still be corruption, but not on the same scale. Good people may have a better chance to dampen it. Foreign corruption would be less likely to threaten the replacement of the republic as a whole.

IAE, jobs for maintenance of infrastructure would not be done by bureaucrats, but by competing private domestic American contractors. Should we rather have private-enterprising Saudis bidding to take over toll road monopolies? How is private development by foreign corporatists better than local letting of infrastructure jobs to domestic bidders? After all, every dime foreign rentiers make by selling back to our citizens our own national resources would be taken from them by abuse of trust and foreign intrigue.

I doubt we should believe abuse by disloyal international crony oligarchs is better than abuse by home-grown gov bureaucrats. What needs to be more appreciated is that there is a rentier-promoting kickback-alliance between mooching international corporatists and faithless treasonous home-grown cronies. Buying and selling pols as if they were commodities has become big international business.

Indeed, the pols that float to the top are now the ones that get the most dollars put in their shorts for doing the best strip teases. For goodness sakes, the nation elected Obama and may elect Hillary! The problem is not gov bad, corporation good. The problem is the agglomerating alliance between central gov and nation-less corporatists.

Just turning over everything to such corporatists would solve nothing. Indeed, oligarchic control over gov is what has put us where we are. Do you think there is magic in international corporatism more so than in local government? Or in distributing welfare without requiring work in trade?