I made this very short video around seven this evening...
It was too beautiful to resist...
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Monday, August 29, 2011
NovaVox Within
I see the distant land that I seek now. Having chased so many mirages, and gotten to know them well, the outline of this future land is suddenly sharp enough to be perceived. It hangs in a violet haze just above the horizon.
The perspective I hold in my mind right now is of the mountain climber who simply knew how to hang on, while earth around his mountain sank away. I am not yet at the summit. The peek lies somewhere off in that distant and future land. I scale the spine of this part of monolith's spine. When I reach the top of this region, I will do the sobering march of the Knife's Edge...my Katahdin dance.
It is the day after Irene - the non-hurricane - but a blustery, fall-like crispness penetrates the air. All the rain has been dried up by the wind; tears leaving only imprints, desiccated impressions...
Autumn is on it's leisurely way. Leaves are blowing in little whirlwinds and then gathering in the low spots. Portland is quiet and peaceful, seemingly having been cleansed from a hard night of drinking, after a long day of waiting in the wind. When Iwallked home last night the power lines were buzzing. Thick cables were straining with a power on the inside that is crying to be free.
It is this energy, that is beginning to burst its seems. Light is pouring through the tiny cracks in what I have accepted as "here." I must admit to myself that it is so much more... It is also "Now." My denial of the higher ground; the futile and sentimental need to have things remain the same - at the material level - is receding from my life. There is no escape from the Light Storm that is coming, when the last bit of the concrete dam(n) fails utterly. But I don't want to escape anyway. Precious... fleeting, fickle, unreal, draining... time. Energy is filling time. The transformation from matter into spirit (the most Primal energy) IS the escape.
We are currently only "aware" of one kind of energy in the universe: physical/material release of the bound-up power in the nucleus of the atom. To let the beast off of its material leash is an awesome spectacle to behold. Take a plutonium implosion and add in some very clever focusing of that fission reaction to actually fuse hydrogen, increasing the yield of the subsequent nuclear explosion by a factor of three; from the kiloton range, into the megaton range. This is energy too (fission is powerful and fusion is even more powerful), of course, but even as impressive as nuclear energy is, it pales in comparison to the power of the mind that controls it--pre/post-nuclear. It is the mind-over-matter and the spirit-over-mind...
This being said, the energy I am beginning to see is made of something that humans have refused to contemplate on mass-social levels. And it has barely been able to keep the less-powerful (nuclear) beast hooked to its rusting lease. It is on this mountain-side that I have become aware of a way to even the equation.
Even if it is only in my own life, the energy of the Nova within is allowing me to transform along with it. It took (and will continue to take) this long, long walk, along the natural but uncertain shores of what we've left behind for me to re-gather the still-important aspects for myself and, I pray, for others too. I seem to be one of many now who need to shed the dead-skin of an antiquated vision. I keep running into "the others" who cling to the same cliff. And they agree, if we are all doing it at the same time individually, surely we can do it even more effectively, together.
Old things are passing away.
Behold, all is becoming New.
Because I am with my friends in spirit, I truly feel for the friendless, the voiceless. They line the walls, stairways and alleys of my path. But they speak to me. Somehow that is good enough for them; stewing in the juices of a cauldron of desolation and separation. These homeless, mentally ill, physiologically addicted kings and queens; they are in hell, but somehow closer to heaven.
I can't go that far--suffering in silence. That is not my destination. But I can bring their story to you. And I can TRY to bring you to them. And - God willing - in that process the energy of souls "becoming new" will be released...from both sides of the social spectrum. Unfurling this flower of Light takes the water of cooperation, soaking into the rich, well composted soil of experience, but can only be aerated by a signifiant measure of courage, on everyone's part.
Soon I embark on what should be a new business. But it is likley I will continue to struggle with doubt and a definite lack of material resources, until it is set in motion. I promise you this though: given the monetary chance of this potential to give back to my world, I will not fail to throw myself into the process. And if it is not to be, so be it not. Only a sudden and unexpected event of some kind will stop me. You know the way these things work. When one is finally fueled up and ready to drive forward, it is usually the blind turn that spells any sudden and/or tragic stop. But, again, that is not my concern. If the sign is missing, the turn will inevitably still come no matter how diligent I am, and, frankly, I know now that would simply be another means of escape--perhaps, the most merciful kind. So, I am not afraid.
Increasing energy, decreasing the significance of time with the grandeur of Now-consciousness, exteriorizing the soul, living more simply and eliminating the desire for "things," getting to know the ways of nature - as well as the other members of the human family, valuing hope, honoring reality, being instructed from within, expanding awareness, fighting for unity, while preserving diversity ...and... all the while, becoming more and more immune to disappointment... I WILL.
The Portland Public Library just opened and I have to move on...again. In the morning sunshine I notice the sound of two gold coins clink together in my pocket. And I smile for a moment as Iwallk on...
The perspective I hold in my mind right now is of the mountain climber who simply knew how to hang on, while earth around his mountain sank away. I am not yet at the summit. The peek lies somewhere off in that distant and future land. I scale the spine of this part of monolith's spine. When I reach the top of this region, I will do the sobering march of the Knife's Edge...my Katahdin dance.
It is the day after Irene - the non-hurricane - but a blustery, fall-like crispness penetrates the air. All the rain has been dried up by the wind; tears leaving only imprints, desiccated impressions...
Autumn is on it's leisurely way. Leaves are blowing in little whirlwinds and then gathering in the low spots. Portland is quiet and peaceful, seemingly having been cleansed from a hard night of drinking, after a long day of waiting in the wind. When Iwallked home last night the power lines were buzzing. Thick cables were straining with a power on the inside that is crying to be free.
It is this energy, that is beginning to burst its seems. Light is pouring through the tiny cracks in what I have accepted as "here." I must admit to myself that it is so much more... It is also "Now." My denial of the higher ground; the futile and sentimental need to have things remain the same - at the material level - is receding from my life. There is no escape from the Light Storm that is coming, when the last bit of the concrete dam(n) fails utterly. But I don't want to escape anyway. Precious... fleeting, fickle, unreal, draining... time. Energy is filling time. The transformation from matter into spirit (the most Primal energy) IS the escape.
We are currently only "aware" of one kind of energy in the universe: physical/material release of the bound-up power in the nucleus of the atom. To let the beast off of its material leash is an awesome spectacle to behold. Take a plutonium implosion and add in some very clever focusing of that fission reaction to actually fuse hydrogen, increasing the yield of the subsequent nuclear explosion by a factor of three; from the kiloton range, into the megaton range. This is energy too (fission is powerful and fusion is even more powerful), of course, but even as impressive as nuclear energy is, it pales in comparison to the power of the mind that controls it--pre/post-nuclear. It is the mind-over-matter and the spirit-over-mind...
This being said, the energy I am beginning to see is made of something that humans have refused to contemplate on mass-social levels. And it has barely been able to keep the less-powerful (nuclear) beast hooked to its rusting lease. It is on this mountain-side that I have become aware of a way to even the equation.
Even if it is only in my own life, the energy of the Nova within is allowing me to transform along with it. It took (and will continue to take) this long, long walk, along the natural but uncertain shores of what we've left behind for me to re-gather the still-important aspects for myself and, I pray, for others too. I seem to be one of many now who need to shed the dead-skin of an antiquated vision. I keep running into "the others" who cling to the same cliff. And they agree, if we are all doing it at the same time individually, surely we can do it even more effectively, together.
Behold, all is becoming New.
Because I am with my friends in spirit, I truly feel for the friendless, the voiceless. They line the walls, stairways and alleys of my path. But they speak to me. Somehow that is good enough for them; stewing in the juices of a cauldron of desolation and separation. These homeless, mentally ill, physiologically addicted kings and queens; they are in hell, but somehow closer to heaven.
I can't go that far--suffering in silence. That is not my destination. But I can bring their story to you. And I can TRY to bring you to them. And - God willing - in that process the energy of souls "becoming new" will be released...from both sides of the social spectrum. Unfurling this flower of Light takes the water of cooperation, soaking into the rich, well composted soil of experience, but can only be aerated by a signifiant measure of courage, on everyone's part.
Soon I embark on what should be a new business. But it is likley I will continue to struggle with doubt and a definite lack of material resources, until it is set in motion. I promise you this though: given the monetary chance of this potential to give back to my world, I will not fail to throw myself into the process. And if it is not to be, so be it not. Only a sudden and unexpected event of some kind will stop me. You know the way these things work. When one is finally fueled up and ready to drive forward, it is usually the blind turn that spells any sudden and/or tragic stop. But, again, that is not my concern. If the sign is missing, the turn will inevitably still come no matter how diligent I am, and, frankly, I know now that would simply be another means of escape--perhaps, the most merciful kind. So, I am not afraid.
Increasing energy, decreasing the significance of time with the grandeur of Now-consciousness, exteriorizing the soul, living more simply and eliminating the desire for "things," getting to know the ways of nature - as well as the other members of the human family, valuing hope, honoring reality, being instructed from within, expanding awareness, fighting for unity, while preserving diversity ...and... all the while, becoming more and more immune to disappointment... I WILL.
The Portland Public Library just opened and I have to move on...again. In the morning sunshine I notice the sound of two gold coins clink together in my pocket. And I smile for a moment as Iwallk on...
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Iwallk Irene
Irene wasn't such a bad girl. She was pretty tame compared to storms I've seen in the past. In the afternoon I walked around and filmed a little bit her effect. I edited it at Mill Creek McDonald's because they have an outlet and WiFi.
Until about an hour ago (it is 8:00 pm as I write this) some of the lights in Kightville were off. And there was a big emergency "something" (didn't seem to be a fire, or collapse, or accident...) that must have happened down there, because a ladder truck, a fire ambulance and a regular ambulance went screaming by, down Waterman Drive. [Sorry I misspelled "powerlines."]
The following is the video I made--such as it is. Nothing real dramatic, but I could certainly feel the power of the storm above me. The tide was dead low and clouds were really whipping by about 100 feet up. But on the shore where I was walking, it was relatively calm. The wind was the most prominent aspect. Even this morning it didn't rain that much. After I publish this I will return back down to Wright Park and see if the tide is coming back in very much.
Enjoy!
Until about an hour ago (it is 8:00 pm as I write this) some of the lights in Kightville were off. And there was a big emergency "something" (didn't seem to be a fire, or collapse, or accident...) that must have happened down there, because a ladder truck, a fire ambulance and a regular ambulance went screaming by, down Waterman Drive. [Sorry I misspelled "powerlines."]
The following is the video I made--such as it is. Nothing real dramatic, but I could certainly feel the power of the storm above me. The tide was dead low and clouds were really whipping by about 100 feet up. But on the shore where I was walking, it was relatively calm. The wind was the most prominent aspect. Even this morning it didn't rain that much. After I publish this I will return back down to Wright Park and see if the tide is coming back in very much.
Enjoy!
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
The Happiness Economy - Part 2
OK. So, what do I mean about "happiness" and what does it have to do with the idea of transforming economics?
The cleric, Richard Cumberland (1631–1718) introduced the idea that, as humans, we have a natural right to the "pursuit of our own happiness." Around the same time, John Locke (1632-1704), the so-called "Father of Liberalism," expanded upon this as a Baconian scholar. In his 1693 Essay Concerning Human Understanding he says that "the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness." Eighty-three years later, as we all know, Thomas Jefferson, with the help of Ben Franklin and others, wrote the Declaration of Independence, and one of the most famous sentences ever written (my emphasis): "We hold these truths to be self-evident [Franklin's contribution], that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
These guys were not hedonists. They were not "pleasure seekers," although they did enjoy themselves when they could. That was the point. Mostly, though, they were deists and rationalists. And when Franklin changed Jefferson's wording to reflect their view that the right to happiness was "self-evident," it expressed so simply what philosophers had on their minds during the Enlightenment (the 18th Century--aka "the Age of Reason"). After Newton and Leibniz (both, philosophers AND mathematicians) simultaneously discovered the calculus and showed that everything we see in nature can be described by an extremely accurate form of mathematics - simplifying the old method of using the less accurate trigonometry of the Greeks - a rational God seemed to emerge from nature. The Western world was waking up after 1500 years heavy handed religious rule over all behavior. They saw secular government as the liberator of mankind (except for their own slaves of course), and planned to make "the American experiment" a catalyst for reform and a model for all future governments.
These men were students of science and nature, and believers in an un-wrathful Deity who ran the universe in a well-thought-out way. It was suddenly apparent, for the first time since the Eleusinin Mystery cults, that human beings were meant to be free to explore their world with mind and body, and only this could lead directly to "true and solid happiness." Even the Bible, which has a paucity of information about secular happiness was re-examined for its role in life. The word "blessed" in Jesus' beautiful "Sermon on the Mount" can be interchanged with "happiness"...
It was recognized that the moral lessons for individuals put forward by Jesus himself (rather than the oppressive churches that grew up to MISrepresent him), could fit perfectly with the ideas of guiltless scientific exploration and philosophical ("philosophy" being a unifier of religion and science) enjoyment of the world around us.
Today, the emphasis put forward by political and economic forces in this country, and thus around the world, focuses almost entirely on the "Life" and "Liberty" aspects of the thinkers of Enlightenment. "Happiness" has been marginalized as a fluffy afterthought. However, the subsequent Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States are meant to more clearly define and categorize civil and criminal law in regards to all three fundamental natural rights. And that NEEDS to be remembered.
I'm going to take a side road now for the rest of this post to highlight the problems with drug prohibition law--specifically cannabis policy, since that is what I have learned the most about when it comes to the abuse of our constitutional rights and the restrictions placed on our right to pursue happiness.
In the last 42 years, several significant rights have been curtailed to fight what was originally Richard Nixon's "War on Drugs." What was touted as a healthful social policy was, in hindsight, just a deflection away from the Vietnam War problems. And since the "evil," "leftist" counter culture were being so vocal about their ojection to the war in Southeast Asia - and heavily into cannabis use at that time - what better way to discredit them? The Drug Enforcement Agency (or, DEA - also formed by Nixon - himself, a criminal: see The Watergate Story - in 1969), now has the authority to violate our self-evident rights, like the 14th Amendment, which states clearly...
Statements B and C, have been found to be indisputably inaccurate...
A 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report: Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, says about the cannabinoids in cannabis, on page 4 [my bold and underline]...
Even though this prohibition was not the result of popular action, but by rather morally conservative political factions, any police officer is ALWAYS considered to be "reasonable" in his search for the substance. Though he needs "reasonable suspicion" to search your house, his NOSE is often his only "objective" way of suspecting the presence of cannabis. And because HE is a police officer and YOU are not, a whole bunch of other violations and abuses of power can then be exercised in his desire for your prosecution. He is motivated by the need to meet arrest quotas for such "drug offenses" and his department feeds at the trough of federal funding especially assigned for this purpose. He has every reason to make sure you are found "guilty," once he starts the process. It often begins with the violation of your Miranda Rights. Here is an explanation for the intention of Miranda Rights, in case you've ever wondered...
The typical Miranda warning is as follows...
But if/when you are coerced into potentially incriminating yourself at the scene, it can be a short trip to a full search of you and your belongings. Saying the wrong thing can set you up for "reasonable suspicion." The problem is that (again) a police officer may say that you forfeited your Miranda Rights and agreed, through a facial expression or other affirmative gesture, to the search. There is precedent for this in California. If you have a chance check out the interview with Attorney Eric Hart at the Psychedelic Salon Podcast, you can get an idea of why this happens. The point being: Whether you are hiding something or not, you must specifically, but civilly, say to the officer that he does "not have permission to search" your house, automobile or person. Otherwise, even a simple gesture can be invented or "interpreted" to justify the search.
The English lawyer, Sir William Garrow (1760–1840) developed the idea of (my emphasis) the "presumption of innocence," a notion that is not found in the Constituion, but is accepted internationally. This requires that the "burden of proof" be placed upon law enforcement, rather than the accused. Yet, many times, instead, there is an assumption by law enforcement that you are guilty until proven innocent, leading to the potential permanent seizure of your cash and/or property, even if you are never prosecuted for any crime (my underlines), as in this instance...
So, what does all of this have to do with "The Happiness Economy"? Well, first of all the DEA is a great example of an entrenched, para-military (remember the submerged male instinct?) organization that receives huge amounts of money from the Federal Government. This amount has increased steadily. Consider the following...
And this money is being spent to fight a losing "war"--everyone knows this! I strongly encourage everyone who reads this post to take an hour or so off and listen very carefully to this lecture by Jonathan Ott: Crimes Against Nature the Civil War Against Drugs. It is BY FAR the most informative, factual, single source I have ever heard on this subject. Download it...study it. You will never be able to defend US drug policy after you understand what Ott presents.
How many other failed programs continually get more and more money, just for failing--with zero hope for success, while their appointed agencies exhibit such extensive corruption, violating natural, civil and even human rights? And no one - including our dear selves, it seems - ever considers raising a real political stink about this fact. Instead, we waste our collective energy running around scratching our heads trying to determine whether we are"liberals" or "conservatives"; Republicans or Democrats. It should be quite clear, though, to rational people, that wasting money is wasting money--no matter which of the Republicrat sides of the isle they associate themselves with. These are OUR tax dollars.
I don't know about you all, but this institutionalized hypocracy does NOT make me happy. Nor, does the fact that whether I'm doing something against the law or not, I can be arrested and detained without cause, searched without warrant and lose all of my property and life savings without conviction.
The economics of this unhappy situation is unsound, patently unfair, highly prejudicial and ultimately facilitates an endless and completely arbitrary hemorrhaging of public money, at a time when we need every last dime just to run the basic infrastructure of the country. Now, combining politics with economics. Just look at prison figures. Over 50% of all incarcerated non-violent prisoners are drug offenders. And it costs $18,000-31,000 per federal prisoner, to hold each of them for only one year. I have never even made $31,000 per year in my life. The most I ever made was at my last job as a supervisor was $30,000 per year. Yet, non-violent drug offenders are costing that much to incarcerate.
Combine all this ridiculousness with fact that the US locks up more of its own citizens than any other First World nation. Drug policy is mainly responsible for this. Yet, illicit drug usage remains the same. If making cannabis illegal is such a brilliant concept why do countries who have decriminalized it (like Holland), have LESS drug use, per capita. And seen over-all, illicit drug use is a non-problem globally. Only 3.3% to 6.1% of the adult population worldwide use illicit drugs. To give some perspect 25% of the adult population uses legal tobacco (a substance that kills around 300,000 people per year in the US alone). Direct use of cannabis has never physiologically killed anyone in 10,000 years. For a surprising and fairly well-balanced report, download: The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime's (UNODC) World Drug Report 2011 (pdf).
The cleric, Richard Cumberland (1631–1718) introduced the idea that, as humans, we have a natural right to the "pursuit of our own happiness." Around the same time, John Locke (1632-1704), the so-called "Father of Liberalism," expanded upon this as a Baconian scholar. In his 1693 Essay Concerning Human Understanding he says that "the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness." Eighty-three years later, as we all know, Thomas Jefferson, with the help of Ben Franklin and others, wrote the Declaration of Independence, and one of the most famous sentences ever written (my emphasis): "We hold these truths to be self-evident [Franklin's contribution], that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
These guys were not hedonists. They were not "pleasure seekers," although they did enjoy themselves when they could. That was the point. Mostly, though, they were deists and rationalists. And when Franklin changed Jefferson's wording to reflect their view that the right to happiness was "self-evident," it expressed so simply what philosophers had on their minds during the Enlightenment (the 18th Century--aka "the Age of Reason"). After Newton and Leibniz (both, philosophers AND mathematicians) simultaneously discovered the calculus and showed that everything we see in nature can be described by an extremely accurate form of mathematics - simplifying the old method of using the less accurate trigonometry of the Greeks - a rational God seemed to emerge from nature. The Western world was waking up after 1500 years heavy handed religious rule over all behavior. They saw secular government as the liberator of mankind (except for their own slaves of course), and planned to make "the American experiment" a catalyst for reform and a model for all future governments.
These men were students of science and nature, and believers in an un-wrathful Deity who ran the universe in a well-thought-out way. It was suddenly apparent, for the first time since the Eleusinin Mystery cults, that human beings were meant to be free to explore their world with mind and body, and only this could lead directly to "true and solid happiness." Even the Bible, which has a paucity of information about secular happiness was re-examined for its role in life. The word "blessed" in Jesus' beautiful "Sermon on the Mount" can be interchanged with "happiness"...
Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them, saying: 'Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.'
Matthew 5:1-12
It was recognized that the moral lessons for individuals put forward by Jesus himself (rather than the oppressive churches that grew up to MISrepresent him), could fit perfectly with the ideas of guiltless scientific exploration and philosophical ("philosophy" being a unifier of religion and science) enjoyment of the world around us.
Today, the emphasis put forward by political and economic forces in this country, and thus around the world, focuses almost entirely on the "Life" and "Liberty" aspects of the thinkers of Enlightenment. "Happiness" has been marginalized as a fluffy afterthought. However, the subsequent Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States are meant to more clearly define and categorize civil and criminal law in regards to all three fundamental natural rights. And that NEEDS to be remembered.
I'm going to take a side road now for the rest of this post to highlight the problems with drug prohibition law--specifically cannabis policy, since that is what I have learned the most about when it comes to the abuse of our constitutional rights and the restrictions placed on our right to pursue happiness.
In the last 42 years, several significant rights have been curtailed to fight what was originally Richard Nixon's "War on Drugs." What was touted as a healthful social policy was, in hindsight, just a deflection away from the Vietnam War problems. And since the "evil," "leftist" counter culture were being so vocal about their ojection to the war in Southeast Asia - and heavily into cannabis use at that time - what better way to discredit them? The Drug Enforcement Agency (or, DEA - also formed by Nixon - himself, a criminal: see The Watergate Story - in 1969), now has the authority to violate our self-evident rights, like the 14th Amendment, which states clearly...
Cannabis, which, though proven to have medical benefits, is still listed as "Schedule I" in another of Nixon's inventions: the Controlled Substances Act, which states (my brackets and underlines)...The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and Warrants shall not be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse ["abuse" is an ambiguous term now considered to be completely synonomous with any kind of "use" itself].
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
Statements B and C, have been found to be indisputably inaccurate...
A 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report: Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, says about the cannabinoids in cannabis, on page 4 [my bold and underline]...
The combination of cannabinoid drug effects (anxiety reduction, appetite stimulation, nausea reduction, and pain relief) suggests that cannabinoids would be moderately well suited for particular conditions, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and AIDS wasting.And many states, including Maine, have contradicted federal policy by legalizing medical use of marijuana. Yet there is always a barrier to reforming drug policy, usually erected by the DEA. When a serious attempt was made to reschedule cannabis - see the Medical Marijuana Rescheduling Petition (pdf) - DEA testimony was accepted as more medically relevant than any actual medical studies or reports, and the petition failed. The fox (DEA) guarding the henhouse (drug policy based on medical research), has an obvious conflict of interest in this way, since they would lose a large portion of their funding, were federal law changed by rescheduling cannabis. What does this mean? It means, unequivocally, that Richard Nixon is postumously still in charge of drug law in this country. And neither the voters, nor the scientific medical establishment, can seem to even make a dent in it.
Even though this prohibition was not the result of popular action, but by rather morally conservative political factions, any police officer is ALWAYS considered to be "reasonable" in his search for the substance. Though he needs "reasonable suspicion" to search your house, his NOSE is often his only "objective" way of suspecting the presence of cannabis. And because HE is a police officer and YOU are not, a whole bunch of other violations and abuses of power can then be exercised in his desire for your prosecution. He is motivated by the need to meet arrest quotas for such "drug offenses" and his department feeds at the trough of federal funding especially assigned for this purpose. He has every reason to make sure you are found "guilty," once he starts the process. It often begins with the violation of your Miranda Rights. Here is an explanation for the intention of Miranda Rights, in case you've ever wondered...
Miranda Rights:
Under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, an individual has the right not to incriminate him- or herself. The United States Supreme Court has held that, in order to comply with the Fifth Amendment, an individual who is in custody and being interrogated must be provided their Miranda warnings.
If law enforcement does not provide a defendant who is undergoing custodial interrogation their Miranda warnings, the prosecution may not use any statements derived from that custodial interrogation in the prosecution’s case in chief at trial. Being in custody does not necessarily mean that an individual is in handcuffs or at a police station. Whether a person is in custody for purposes of Miranda is determined by whether a person has been deprived of their freedom in a significant way. If law enforcement officers have not complied with their obligations under Miranda, a defendant may bring a motion to suppress the statements. If the motion to suppress is successful, the statements cannot be used against a defendant in the prosecution’s case in chief.
Even if a defendant has been abused of their Miranda rights, any statement made by a defendant may not be introduced into evidence at trial unless the statement was made voluntarily. A coerced confession may not be used against a defendant. It is the prosecution’s burden to demonstrate that an individual knowingly and intelligently waived their privilege against self-incrimination. A motion to suppress can be brought on the basis that either the waiver of Miranda rights was not voluntary, or that it was not knowing and intelligent. Attorneys at Nolan, Armstrong & Barton have successfully moved to suppress statements in murder cases, economic espionage, homicide, petty theft, domestic violence and DUI cases.
The typical Miranda warning is as follows...
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?
But if/when you are coerced into potentially incriminating yourself at the scene, it can be a short trip to a full search of you and your belongings. Saying the wrong thing can set you up for "reasonable suspicion." The problem is that (again) a police officer may say that you forfeited your Miranda Rights and agreed, through a facial expression or other affirmative gesture, to the search. There is precedent for this in California. If you have a chance check out the interview with Attorney Eric Hart at the Psychedelic Salon Podcast, you can get an idea of why this happens. The point being: Whether you are hiding something or not, you must specifically, but civilly, say to the officer that he does "not have permission to search" your house, automobile or person. Otherwise, even a simple gesture can be invented or "interpreted" to justify the search.
The English lawyer, Sir William Garrow (1760–1840) developed the idea of (my emphasis) the "presumption of innocence," a notion that is not found in the Constituion, but is accepted internationally. This requires that the "burden of proof" be placed upon law enforcement, rather than the accused. Yet, many times, instead, there is an assumption by law enforcement that you are guilty until proven innocent, leading to the potential permanent seizure of your cash and/or property, even if you are never prosecuted for any crime (my underlines), as in this instance...
A police dog scratched at your luggage, so we’re confiscating your life savings and you’ll never get it back.” In 1989, police stopped 49-year-old Ethel Hylton at Houston’s Hobby Airport and told her she was under arrest because a drug dog had scratched at her luggage. Agents searched her bags and strip-searched her, but they found no drugs. They did find $39,110 in cash, money she had received from an insurance settlement and her life savings, accumulated by working as a hotel housekeeper and hospital janitor for more than 20 years. Ethel Hylton completely documented where she got the money and was never charged with a crime. The police kept her money anyway. Nearly four years later, she is still trying to get her money back.Furthering what I was saying in Part 1 of this thread, people who rely on certain ideologies that they feel are fundamental to social stability should not be changed (such as capitalism being seen as the final word and the ideal economic system) often become willing to change the world around them in order to support these ideological positions. These people believe that the good intentions of capitalism and civil rights sometimes need to be "amended" to fit the now-outdated primary philosophies that they cling to. We saw this with the abuses of capitalists who are in denial about the destructive nature of the original ideal of "capitalism," set forth by Adam Smith, to today's economy. We also saw how capitalism is actually hostile towards free markets. And now in this post we see the same kind of "amending" going on with the abuse of the civil rights set forth by the Constitution in the government's drug policies. But all that is politically acted upon is easily transposed back into economic terms.
So, what does all of this have to do with "The Happiness Economy"? Well, first of all the DEA is a great example of an entrenched, para-military (remember the submerged male instinct?) organization that receives huge amounts of money from the Federal Government. This amount has increased steadily. Consider the following...
Fiscal Years 1990-1997
From FY 1992 through FY 1997, DEA funding for the Southwest border increased 55 percent (from $82 million in FY 1990 to $127 million in FY 1997).
- Total budget authority for DEA increased nearly 90 percent (from $558 million in FY 1990 to $1,054 million in FY 1997).
- The number of DEA special agents in the Southwest border region increased 37 percent (from 587 in FY 1990 to 806 in FY 1997).
Fiscal Year 1998
In the FY 1998 budget request the DEA budget totals $1,146 million, an increase of $92 million (nine percent) over FY 1997 ($1,054 million). At the FY 1998 level of funding:
- The DEA budget will account for seven percent of the National Drug Control Budget request for FY 1998 ($15.917 billion).
- DEA funding for the Southwest border will total $157 million or about 14 percent of the total DEA budget in FY 1998 ($1,146 million).
- The number of DEA special agents in Southwest border region for FY 1998 will total 902, an increase of 96 special agents (12 percent) over FY 1997 (806 special agents).
And this money is being spent to fight a losing "war"--everyone knows this! I strongly encourage everyone who reads this post to take an hour or so off and listen very carefully to this lecture by Jonathan Ott: Crimes Against Nature the Civil War Against Drugs. It is BY FAR the most informative, factual, single source I have ever heard on this subject. Download it...study it. You will never be able to defend US drug policy after you understand what Ott presents.
How many other failed programs continually get more and more money, just for failing--with zero hope for success, while their appointed agencies exhibit such extensive corruption, violating natural, civil and even human rights? And no one - including our dear selves, it seems - ever considers raising a real political stink about this fact. Instead, we waste our collective energy running around scratching our heads trying to determine whether we are"liberals" or "conservatives"; Republicans or Democrats. It should be quite clear, though, to rational people, that wasting money is wasting money--no matter which of the Republicrat sides of the isle they associate themselves with. These are OUR tax dollars.
I don't know about you all, but this institutionalized hypocracy does NOT make me happy. Nor, does the fact that whether I'm doing something against the law or not, I can be arrested and detained without cause, searched without warrant and lose all of my property and life savings without conviction.
The economics of this unhappy situation is unsound, patently unfair, highly prejudicial and ultimately facilitates an endless and completely arbitrary hemorrhaging of public money, at a time when we need every last dime just to run the basic infrastructure of the country. Now, combining politics with economics. Just look at prison figures. Over 50% of all incarcerated non-violent prisoners are drug offenders. And it costs $18,000-31,000 per federal prisoner, to hold each of them for only one year. I have never even made $31,000 per year in my life. The most I ever made was at my last job as a supervisor was $30,000 per year. Yet, non-violent drug offenders are costing that much to incarcerate.
Combine all this ridiculousness with fact that the US locks up more of its own citizens than any other First World nation. Drug policy is mainly responsible for this. Yet, illicit drug usage remains the same. If making cannabis illegal is such a brilliant concept why do countries who have decriminalized it (like Holland), have LESS drug use, per capita. And seen over-all, illicit drug use is a non-problem globally. Only 3.3% to 6.1% of the adult population worldwide use illicit drugs. To give some perspect 25% of the adult population uses legal tobacco (a substance that kills around 300,000 people per year in the US alone). Direct use of cannabis has never physiologically killed anyone in 10,000 years. For a surprising and fairly well-balanced report, download: The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime's (UNODC) World Drug Report 2011 (pdf).
People finding happiness or relief for medical problems - which can also bring happiness - from the use of cannabis (and this is only one example of the many ways that happiness is sought, obviously) are being hunted down and shut away in prisons, with their property being seized and their reputations being permanently marred, by their own tax dollars, and by an organization (DEA) that consistently FAILS in its mission to rid the country and the world of "drugs"--and cannabis IS the most likely substance to be arrested for. Yet, never, not one single time, scientifically, has a negative independent study of cannabis held up to the ocean of positive ones. Nevertheless, unscientific, politically-motivated, para-military, irrational, hypocritical, economically wasteful public policy is maintained. This is not a rational way for the country to spend money. It is also depriving its citizens of their right to "cognitive liberty" (visit: the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics, or CCLE, for more information on this concept). I promise you that in the next 5-10 years, cognitive liberty will be the new battle cry for human rights activists (like myself). An overview of the CCLE's mission is (my underline)...
...elaborating the law, policy and ethics of freedom of thought. Our mission is to develop public polices that will preserve and enhance freedom of thought into the 21st Century.
Freedom from slavery. Universal sufferage. Protection for sexual preference. Most of us see the moral reasoning behind these things, but there is also an economic advantage to each of them. And their acceptance is part of an ever-progressing trend toward a happier humanity; one with less discrimination, more diversity and more money for all (something I will address in greater detail the next post on this subject). It is a sad fact that human beings - now that they are achieving freedom in the outside world - have to fight tooth and nail for the most fundamental freedom of all: the freedom to think what they want, in the way that they want. It must become so. And it WILL become so.
I intend to continue doing my part, that you (the reader) might similarly be inspired to educate yourself, and then take action in your own way to make this a more balanced world; one with the (1) material resources that make life comfortable and (2) the intellectual freedom to review and improve upon your own inner life, thereby enhancing the lives of everyone on this ever-shrinking world of ours--both are required for the coming of The Happiness Economy.
[Please check in for the next post on this thread.]
I intend to continue doing my part, that you (the reader) might similarly be inspired to educate yourself, and then take action in your own way to make this a more balanced world; one with the (1) material resources that make life comfortable and (2) the intellectual freedom to review and improve upon your own inner life, thereby enhancing the lives of everyone on this ever-shrinking world of ours--both are required for the coming of The Happiness Economy.
[Please check in for the next post on this thread.]
Monday, August 8, 2011
The Happiness Economy - Part 1
Portland was alive on Wednesday, August 3rd. The Farmers' Market invaded Monument Square (as it does every Wednesday) with an expeditionary force of beautiful colors and tastes! These farmers (through the Portland Farmers' Market Association--at Monument Square and Deering Oaks) have banded together with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Women, Infants and Children (WIC) - along with other federal food benefits organizations - to make nutritious food more available to low income people in Portland and the public in general; by offering the ability to pay with credit, debit and EBT (food stamps) cards. There is also a "wooden token" system for EBT recipients, where you buy a $1, $5 or $10 token and are then able to use it at any of Portland's Farmers' Markets and it never expires. As with strictly food EBT purchases, you cannot receive cash back in change. But it is a neat idea, allowing people to save the tokens and spend them regardless of whether they also have their EBT card on them. This beneficial program was introduced on that Wednesday by Mayor Nicholas Mavodones, Jr. (Dem), right in Monument Square; an event that I happily attended.
Now I plan to come in to Portland every Wednesday that I am able, to enjoy the festive atmosphere, fruits, herbs, vegetables and friendly people. It is a wonderful way to revive the "town square" feel of the old days. People were milling around, having lunch, talking business, soaking up the sun... I watched a woman I've seen many times in Portland, who I know is very poor and living on the street, buy cucumbers and tomatoes--rather than her usual cigarettes and beer. She pulled out a cucumber and walked down the street eating it and talking to herself (as is her way) about how delicious it was.
On this particular day the atmosphere brought to mind many ideas about how the nature of a new kind of business - capitalizing on quality of life, rather than quantity of money - might help to protect us economically, while better satisfying a disillusioned society; one that has been blinded by purely material concerns.
At the market I bought a REAL Maine-grown tomato; a "Black Krim." Eating it was a delicious orgy of sweet, tangy, juicy, wrist-dripping glory. The taste was simply magnificent! And it was huge. I had to take out my leatherman knife and cut it down to bag it for later. I hadn't had a Maine tomato in quite some time. What a difference!
I had recently heard a Fresh Air episode "How Industrial Farming Destroyed the Tasty Tomato" on NPR, about how nearly all supermarket tomatoes in the country (about 80%) come from Florida (NOT a proper state for tomato cultivation!). In this Fresh Air episode, I was disappointed to learn about the artificial means of production and appalled by the abusive and illegal labor practices in Florida tomato cultivation. It is kind of a disgraceful process for such a dignified and important fruit.
These moncultured, factory-farmed tomatoes are tasteless monstrosities, forced to turn red before they are ready (via the artificial application of high levels of ethylene gas--a gas naturally released by the fruit over the much longer natural ripening stage, and used by the Florida growers for appearance only) and then harvested, literally, by slave labor. This is what agricultural philosophy has come to in this country. Further, the Florida tomato serves is apt metaphor for how big business puts greed and profit ahead of natural processes and even human rights. I don't mean to generalize...but in order to play in that corporate league, no matter how egalitarian you think you are, somewhere, your good company is likely being strongly influenced by unethical companies as well.
We all know this problem of blind greed is an age-old one. Since the domestication of animals - and well after the settling of agricultural villages and their subsequent development in towns, cities, states, nations and empires - the quantity of assets held, played a bigger and bigger role in daily life and thence, collectively in society's psychology.
While discovering that possessing and storing grains and seeds from year to year benefited the positive stabilization of the home, people (men, mostly) also stumbled into the increasingly more negative tendency to want power over other people. That was how the security of one's property could be maintained. The desire to plan for the future has subsequently been used as an excuse to wield absolute power whenever possible. The hierarchical structure branching out of patriarchal society was what I call a "nose-dive development" in regard to the civility of cultures for thousands of years, and it still is.
The male primate instinct to temporarily overpower woman, and woman's instinct to willingly (and sometimes unwillingly) submit to both the penetration of her body and then the extreme discomfort of giving birth as a later result of that submission, set up a purely human problem that has only grown in complexity and scope over the last ten to twelve thousand years. I say "purely human," because non-human animals may prepare the way for their children, but they have no conscious concern at all for fortifying their environment in anticipation of grandchildren.
Once man learned that woman was no longer needed as a partner in his own survival - but only necessary as (1) as a menial-duty slave, (2) for the procreation of sons and grandsons, (3) for sexual-gratification - she became just another possession, and so did her often unwanted daughters. Mankind - even with the relatively recent political liberation of womankind - has not abandoned its need to be in control. He may have socially submerged this formerly-outward need to rule over his castle and everything else around him, but the unconscious training of his fathers and grandfathers, and their fathers and grandfathers before them, remains alive and well.
In more modern times money has increasingly allowed even the "common man" to abuse his power. This proclivity is coupled to the fact that man has also been exceeding slow to relinquish the power he has over his money. And to connect the dots, it isn't even the money that is the problem, but rather, his lack of self control in not abusing that power once he has it. And surely, this can be true of woman as well.
All human beings crave material power because they have a need for spiritual control over their future. But the two states (power and control) are mutually exclusive. They are a kind of uncertainty principle, where if you know a lot about one you know a lot less about the other. Capitalism has been a liberating tool for power. And the results of such an unholy union were aborted social progress and miscarried natural resource management, in the name of high, but temporary, profits.
The misconception of "capitalism" today, as an answer to all the world's problems and the antidote to so-called "socialism," "communism," and "anarchy," was introduced by Adam Smith in his The Wealth of Nations (1776). What we think of as such a sacred premise for business expansion has only been around for 235 years. Though, less-loosely defined ideas may have existed (as I said above) since the agricultural revolution, capitalism has become a way to crystallize and codify the male instinct into an economic theology that he could then point to and say, "look at all the benefits we have from chasing profit and accumulating things, at any cost."
The worst philosophical problem of all comes from the confusion of equating the very noble idea of free enterprise with capitalism. But even the quickest glance around should tell us that capitalism is hostile to free enterprise. Strictly speaking, a good capitalist spends every waking hour trying to monopolize everything. Free markets just get in the way...too much uncertainty. Free markets are a democratic ideal. But, where democracy says, "every human being has equal worth," capitalism encourages people to "die with the most toys."
Yet, indeed, until the post World War II era of the 20th Century, the assertions of capitalism seemed to have some merit. The US (getting a jump start on this, in a parallel evolution with capitalism--both becoming independent and self-acting entities in 1776) was able to mine massive advantages from the classic European model of global colonialism. By exploiting weaker nations and peoples, ostensibly by extending carrots, while being very quickly willing to turn those tasty roots into great big sticks whenever necessary, America and Europe were able to enjoy virtually unstoppable growth for over two centuries.
Unfortunately, problems began to arise that would force the shiny crown of capitalism to appear more tarnished. Sacrifices in moral and ethical standards became necessary in order to facilitate the economic growth of Western capitalist expansion. Meaning: capitalism was a flawed concept from the beginning, because it was not self-sustainable. It NEEDED exploitation in order to function properly.
One initial change came right off the bat, as the institution of American slavery brought unheard-of profits for international investors in the early 19th Century. Britain - going through a severe down-turn at the time - was only too willing to overlook its own distaste (and legal prohibition) of the trafficking in human beings, by eagerly supplying "free" ports in the Empire where cotton could be exchanged for human cargo which would then be sent across the Atlantic to the plantations of the Southern United States. To illustrate this more clearly...
It was an almost perfect capitalist circle: Cotton and tobacco, farmed by cheap slave labor in the America, would be exchanged for sugar, rum and spices in the Caribbean, which the American merchants would then bring back to the States and sell at a profit. This then allowed British shipping companies to earn themselves an even-heftier profit from the re-sale of American cotton on their own island - whose exploding population was in desperate need, having used up most of their own natural resources - and then sell tobacco at a giant mark-up to European and more distant Asian markets. This, in-turn, financed British trips to East Africa where more slaves would be bought and then transported to British free ports, for sale back to American traders. "Hand over fist" doesn't even begin to describe the monetary-value gained by that wicked circle. Of course we know that eventually moral standards more-or-less caught up in the US, where 600,000 young American men (the flower of a generation) had to die; butchering each other during the American Civil War, but finally ending legal slavery. Definitely a high price to pay for amending capitalism. And still (if the Florida tomato industry is any indication) some folks are willing to bring slavery right back again.
These kinds of profit-to-destruction-to-reform patterns would occur again and again throughout the 20th Century. The divide between rich and poor grew wider through the industrial growth of the early part of the century, leading to a swing away from the gold standard as a base for the American dollar, and replacing it with a speculative, debt-based system. Why? Because the Federal Reserve (which, by the way, is NOT part of the Federal Government, and thus not answerable to the people) learned that issuing paper money eliminated the need to back those notes up with anything of substance--like gold or silver. And to their eternal delight, the financial rewards of printing money out of thin air was discovered--something that is now reaching it's ugly conclusion as we speak.
This was the birth of what would end up being a system not based on the exchange of goods, but on something less substantial: confidence. Now the global economy balances entirely on psychology. Like fickle, lazy, greasy, spoiled, little children, the markets whine and complain, but always grow fatter. The "bubbles" this produces by this model CAN pop, with disastrous results. One popped in 1929, leading to the "Great Depression," and and another in 2008 leading to the "Great Recession." All that extra cash (credits actually) comes as a direct consequence from irresponsible lending; where banks give a loan to a consumer or each other and then immediately take back what they've lent from ALL consumers, as a credit (thin-air, printed money). And this "cash back" deal is sweetened by an increase for more than they lent in the first place, due to interest returns. This is a sweet little set up until...well...just about anything at all happens! Then confidence dives and instabilitty tips the vase off the window sill.
The point I'll be trying to make in the coming posts in this thread is that, even after the big scare we had in 2008, no one is even seriously questioning the wisdom of continuing to blindly follow capitalist models still. No one dares to suggest just how revolutionary an economic change would have to occur in order to save the democratic form of free enterprise as a new (and yet-unrealized) ideal. Yet, I believe it can be done. If the markets are ruled by psychology it is time to psych them out.
I theorize that if we were to relax, appreciate what we already have as comfort as being good enough - knowing when to say when to what I call "accumulation syndrome," and deeply question WHY it is that we are doing what we are doing, and what do we REALLY want to be doing.
The world - even with its seven billion people - produces plenty of food to feed itself, can store enough water to quench itself, can produce energy from natural, safe and renewable sources to power itself, can focus life-saving emergency missions to the sites of any natural disaster that might strike. Big business, militarists and capitalist materialists don't care about these beneficial things yet, but they will be forced to. Either the world-civilization will no longer accept preventable environmental destruction, poverty, hunger, violence and pain from the oppressors who literally capitalize on these things, or it is going to be a very, very dark, hot and miserable future for everyone.
The garden party is over. It is time to start tending the garden again.
[Please stay tuned for the next post on this thread.]
Now I plan to come in to Portland every Wednesday that I am able, to enjoy the festive atmosphere, fruits, herbs, vegetables and friendly people. It is a wonderful way to revive the "town square" feel of the old days. People were milling around, having lunch, talking business, soaking up the sun... I watched a woman I've seen many times in Portland, who I know is very poor and living on the street, buy cucumbers and tomatoes--rather than her usual cigarettes and beer. She pulled out a cucumber and walked down the street eating it and talking to herself (as is her way) about how delicious it was.
On this particular day the atmosphere brought to mind many ideas about how the nature of a new kind of business - capitalizing on quality of life, rather than quantity of money - might help to protect us economically, while better satisfying a disillusioned society; one that has been blinded by purely material concerns.
At the market I bought a REAL Maine-grown tomato; a "Black Krim." Eating it was a delicious orgy of sweet, tangy, juicy, wrist-dripping glory. The taste was simply magnificent! And it was huge. I had to take out my leatherman knife and cut it down to bag it for later. I hadn't had a Maine tomato in quite some time. What a difference!
I had recently heard a Fresh Air episode "How Industrial Farming Destroyed the Tasty Tomato" on NPR, about how nearly all supermarket tomatoes in the country (about 80%) come from Florida (NOT a proper state for tomato cultivation!). In this Fresh Air episode, I was disappointed to learn about the artificial means of production and appalled by the abusive and illegal labor practices in Florida tomato cultivation. It is kind of a disgraceful process for such a dignified and important fruit.
These moncultured, factory-farmed tomatoes are tasteless monstrosities, forced to turn red before they are ready (via the artificial application of high levels of ethylene gas--a gas naturally released by the fruit over the much longer natural ripening stage, and used by the Florida growers for appearance only) and then harvested, literally, by slave labor. This is what agricultural philosophy has come to in this country. Further, the Florida tomato serves is apt metaphor for how big business puts greed and profit ahead of natural processes and even human rights. I don't mean to generalize...but in order to play in that corporate league, no matter how egalitarian you think you are, somewhere, your good company is likely being strongly influenced by unethical companies as well.
We all know this problem of blind greed is an age-old one. Since the domestication of animals - and well after the settling of agricultural villages and their subsequent development in towns, cities, states, nations and empires - the quantity of assets held, played a bigger and bigger role in daily life and thence, collectively in society's psychology.
While discovering that possessing and storing grains and seeds from year to year benefited the positive stabilization of the home, people (men, mostly) also stumbled into the increasingly more negative tendency to want power over other people. That was how the security of one's property could be maintained. The desire to plan for the future has subsequently been used as an excuse to wield absolute power whenever possible. The hierarchical structure branching out of patriarchal society was what I call a "nose-dive development" in regard to the civility of cultures for thousands of years, and it still is.
The male primate instinct to temporarily overpower woman, and woman's instinct to willingly (and sometimes unwillingly) submit to both the penetration of her body and then the extreme discomfort of giving birth as a later result of that submission, set up a purely human problem that has only grown in complexity and scope over the last ten to twelve thousand years. I say "purely human," because non-human animals may prepare the way for their children, but they have no conscious concern at all for fortifying their environment in anticipation of grandchildren.
Once man learned that woman was no longer needed as a partner in his own survival - but only necessary as (1) as a menial-duty slave, (2) for the procreation of sons and grandsons, (3) for sexual-gratification - she became just another possession, and so did her often unwanted daughters. Mankind - even with the relatively recent political liberation of womankind - has not abandoned its need to be in control. He may have socially submerged this formerly-outward need to rule over his castle and everything else around him, but the unconscious training of his fathers and grandfathers, and their fathers and grandfathers before them, remains alive and well.
In more modern times money has increasingly allowed even the "common man" to abuse his power. This proclivity is coupled to the fact that man has also been exceeding slow to relinquish the power he has over his money. And to connect the dots, it isn't even the money that is the problem, but rather, his lack of self control in not abusing that power once he has it. And surely, this can be true of woman as well.
All human beings crave material power because they have a need for spiritual control over their future. But the two states (power and control) are mutually exclusive. They are a kind of uncertainty principle, where if you know a lot about one you know a lot less about the other. Capitalism has been a liberating tool for power. And the results of such an unholy union were aborted social progress and miscarried natural resource management, in the name of high, but temporary, profits.
The misconception of "capitalism" today, as an answer to all the world's problems and the antidote to so-called "socialism," "communism," and "anarchy," was introduced by Adam Smith in his The Wealth of Nations (1776). What we think of as such a sacred premise for business expansion has only been around for 235 years. Though, less-loosely defined ideas may have existed (as I said above) since the agricultural revolution, capitalism has become a way to crystallize and codify the male instinct into an economic theology that he could then point to and say, "look at all the benefits we have from chasing profit and accumulating things, at any cost."
The worst philosophical problem of all comes from the confusion of equating the very noble idea of free enterprise with capitalism. But even the quickest glance around should tell us that capitalism is hostile to free enterprise. Strictly speaking, a good capitalist spends every waking hour trying to monopolize everything. Free markets just get in the way...too much uncertainty. Free markets are a democratic ideal. But, where democracy says, "every human being has equal worth," capitalism encourages people to "die with the most toys."
Yet, indeed, until the post World War II era of the 20th Century, the assertions of capitalism seemed to have some merit. The US (getting a jump start on this, in a parallel evolution with capitalism--both becoming independent and self-acting entities in 1776) was able to mine massive advantages from the classic European model of global colonialism. By exploiting weaker nations and peoples, ostensibly by extending carrots, while being very quickly willing to turn those tasty roots into great big sticks whenever necessary, America and Europe were able to enjoy virtually unstoppable growth for over two centuries.
Unfortunately, problems began to arise that would force the shiny crown of capitalism to appear more tarnished. Sacrifices in moral and ethical standards became necessary in order to facilitate the economic growth of Western capitalist expansion. Meaning: capitalism was a flawed concept from the beginning, because it was not self-sustainable. It NEEDED exploitation in order to function properly.
One initial change came right off the bat, as the institution of American slavery brought unheard-of profits for international investors in the early 19th Century. Britain - going through a severe down-turn at the time - was only too willing to overlook its own distaste (and legal prohibition) of the trafficking in human beings, by eagerly supplying "free" ports in the Empire where cotton could be exchanged for human cargo which would then be sent across the Atlantic to the plantations of the Southern United States. To illustrate this more clearly...
It was an almost perfect capitalist circle: Cotton and tobacco, farmed by cheap slave labor in the America, would be exchanged for sugar, rum and spices in the Caribbean, which the American merchants would then bring back to the States and sell at a profit. This then allowed British shipping companies to earn themselves an even-heftier profit from the re-sale of American cotton on their own island - whose exploding population was in desperate need, having used up most of their own natural resources - and then sell tobacco at a giant mark-up to European and more distant Asian markets. This, in-turn, financed British trips to East Africa where more slaves would be bought and then transported to British free ports, for sale back to American traders. "Hand over fist" doesn't even begin to describe the monetary-value gained by that wicked circle. Of course we know that eventually moral standards more-or-less caught up in the US, where 600,000 young American men (the flower of a generation) had to die; butchering each other during the American Civil War, but finally ending legal slavery. Definitely a high price to pay for amending capitalism. And still (if the Florida tomato industry is any indication) some folks are willing to bring slavery right back again.
These kinds of profit-to-destruction-to-reform patterns would occur again and again throughout the 20th Century. The divide between rich and poor grew wider through the industrial growth of the early part of the century, leading to a swing away from the gold standard as a base for the American dollar, and replacing it with a speculative, debt-based system. Why? Because the Federal Reserve (which, by the way, is NOT part of the Federal Government, and thus not answerable to the people) learned that issuing paper money eliminated the need to back those notes up with anything of substance--like gold or silver. And to their eternal delight, the financial rewards of printing money out of thin air was discovered--something that is now reaching it's ugly conclusion as we speak.
This was the birth of what would end up being a system not based on the exchange of goods, but on something less substantial: confidence. Now the global economy balances entirely on psychology. Like fickle, lazy, greasy, spoiled, little children, the markets whine and complain, but always grow fatter. The "bubbles" this produces by this model CAN pop, with disastrous results. One popped in 1929, leading to the "Great Depression," and and another in 2008 leading to the "Great Recession." All that extra cash (credits actually) comes as a direct consequence from irresponsible lending; where banks give a loan to a consumer or each other and then immediately take back what they've lent from ALL consumers, as a credit (thin-air, printed money). And this "cash back" deal is sweetened by an increase for more than they lent in the first place, due to interest returns. This is a sweet little set up until...well...just about anything at all happens! Then confidence dives and instabilitty tips the vase off the window sill.
The point I'll be trying to make in the coming posts in this thread is that, even after the big scare we had in 2008, no one is even seriously questioning the wisdom of continuing to blindly follow capitalist models still. No one dares to suggest just how revolutionary an economic change would have to occur in order to save the democratic form of free enterprise as a new (and yet-unrealized) ideal. Yet, I believe it can be done. If the markets are ruled by psychology it is time to psych them out.
I theorize that if we were to relax, appreciate what we already have as comfort as being good enough - knowing when to say when to what I call "accumulation syndrome," and deeply question WHY it is that we are doing what we are doing, and what do we REALLY want to be doing.
The world - even with its seven billion people - produces plenty of food to feed itself, can store enough water to quench itself, can produce energy from natural, safe and renewable sources to power itself, can focus life-saving emergency missions to the sites of any natural disaster that might strike. Big business, militarists and capitalist materialists don't care about these beneficial things yet, but they will be forced to. Either the world-civilization will no longer accept preventable environmental destruction, poverty, hunger, violence and pain from the oppressors who literally capitalize on these things, or it is going to be a very, very dark, hot and miserable future for everyone.
The garden party is over. It is time to start tending the garden again.
[Please stay tuned for the next post on this thread.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)