The Message Column

Cartel Carwash Tuesday.

Call this a brain dump, of sorts. I don't always get back here to edit this thing. So old news, like last week's vote (in Britain), ages ago, when people were fooled and the scare was on the sea and the sky and the sun and the moon and also, the stars, a glittering; old news is in my mind.

So what happens next? Star fall at sun set? Dark night? It seems as though many expect shoes to drop, hard crashes to happen with the excuse as the outcome of the vote.

Be your own light. Whatever gets pulled now is under the watch of those who watch, and note, the causes, the false causes, the leaders, the demagogues, the lists of the ones who suffer. The lists of those who so inflict . . . let's not have a list like that because, sadly, it gives some people cause to have a counter beat down. They go with clubs to confront someone in a political park and start swinging at everyone.

So how do we take this anger and present it in a socially public way that allows for the venting of the frustrations that the young people, full of righteous cause, seem to carry with them? Can we provide a ritualized way for these various parties to do a simulated beat down, meanwhile presenting, with comic and text-book authority (comic book and text book co-aligned) as a ritualized presentation of the various causes of the day? Professional Wrestling has often provided such a venue for the ritualized playing out of social aggression between different groups of a population. We can call that 'pageant ethnicism'

So they could have big foam puppets (of a bread-n-puppet genre, but completely non harmful even if it fell on top of you. And they could run these into an arena. And they could beat up the other foam puppets of the opposing view. It would be allegories and innuendo but all in fun, and with no real two-by-fours being used as clubs, and certainly no knifes or guns. Forbidden.

A free and open press is supposed to let me make it that, isn't it? I'm supposed to be able to present the giant wrestling maniac kind of sensibilities. In the end, when the match is over, all the guys (gals/?) go off to their corners and their stage room, and they change back into their street cloths and wonder home. And those who are rivals on the stage, or within the pageant ring, aren't really rivals at all. But in the same game, and basically wanting for the same, or congruent, civility that respects all, and especially those who could never afford to have a harmless giant balloon, foam, or CG generated avatar, either a puppet or an avatar, especially those who have no voice: those, too, must be respected within the polite genre of puppet beat-down (all for the purposes of education and entertainment and to promote a polite and social decorum, we all get to go home and be dry and sleep in a warm bed and not have hunger and not suffer from the ills imposed upon by others.

So what happens when some seem to not respect that 'everyone deserves a warm dry place to call home' sensibility of the pageant ethnicism? If the ethnic rivalry isn't really 'gosh, we're so glad you are our neighbors', like it mostly is in regular times at least in some of this here parts (I say 'this here parts' because I understand that in every place on earth, it isn't like this). If we make the strangers the enemies then we have a difficulty of our own that we impose on the rest of the world. When we make the majority of whoever as enemies, we apply to all of the imagined demographic the analysis of some behavior, anecdotal at best, that we observe in some few of the imagined population. Then we often generalize about them.

examples of this, may be skipped

Like some sex-mad texan, who looks like a swarthy tejano, does some stupid activity and gets popped by the police and has no probation. Suddenly every good-looking texjano guy is some kind of stalker predator when clearly it isn't so. Or we hear some story of bankers ripping off some poor drunk painter fisher-captain son of lost wealth: and we write the story of all bankers as being thieves, when clearly that story is extreme. And mostly they are probably cuddly and adorable people but, some do get greedy, as do some of anyone.

'worst behaviors' as if they are 'general behaviors'

I believe that we need to stop with our broad generalizing, and our painting of the rest of society as if the worst behaviors of anyone reflects the common behaviors of the group with witch we associate the person. So if we see some bald headed white guy in a close up and he's been accused of striking his wife, we then imagine anyone with a chrome dome is some kind of villain. Just an ordinary guy with a common look. You know nothing about him based upon that, really, do you? You place it into a context. You make the mistake of imagining his behavior.

What is the behavior I attempt to describe here? It is the imagination of a group based upon what you percieve as a self-identifying set of people, some 'ethnicity'. They the imagination of the behaviors of that imagined (perhaps 'perceived' would be a better word to use) . . . start over. Then the imagination of the behaviors of the perceived group. Then the application of worst case behaviors of who is imagined as being of the percieved group to all members of the perceived group as common behaviors of the group.

An example of the fallacy follows:

"one bank cheated an old drunk out of his inheritance and thus all banks will do the same to anyone"

end of examples

Often People Seem Psychic

When people display what seems to be psychic ability by reading the behaviors and mannerisms of another, and determining what they see as being the perception of that other, and when they imagine, or see, that this other is seeing someone to be loathed or who is a 'bad example' then the one who feels loathed, or who imagines that the other sees the first as an example of bad behavior, that seemingly psychic person will often times take the low road. They will back-atcha a worst case to he/she/? who they imagine is disrespecting them. My suggestion is not to do this. Do not backatcha resentment and a 'lesson', be it in good driving or in moral behavior. You may have read it all wrong.

The problem is that peopel will do the 'backatcha' as a knee jerk thing. It happens before they even know why. It's just a reflex, but one of mind that reflects as behavior. It is the advanced concept person, who is in a state of better awareness, who can prohibit that reflex of mind, and thus behavior. The way: you must always write the story of others seeing you as OK, and you seeing them as OK. They don't need a lesson in morality or driving. They are trying to get from one place of importance to some other place, at their descretion, on a public highway or plaza or quasi-public space. And they don't need you to be their moral guide. And if yo think of everyone, everyone who cuts you off, everyone who drives too fast, gets in the wrong lane, goes around you in a dangerous way, walks against traffic outside of a crosswalk, makes nuisances of themselves, if you think of them all as trying to have their own important journey, when you make their journey also important, like your own, then you make your own easier. The last sentense is too long and needs to be rewritten. And how can you aide them if they need aid? They probably will not. And if they ask what will you give? You might have a donation ready, a couple of five dollar bills for the occasion of someone who really does need a few bucks?

what not to do

Or you could have stock snark to tell them? That will not be appreciated. I don't suggest that. But, ya, it's hard not to reflex back a backatcha life-lesson kind of behavior, or snark, when one is caught off guard with what one sees as people breaking rules, violating boundaries, being nuisances, being jerks.

So don't write the long novelized 'why this is a bad person' in your head when confronted with others. Write a better story. Something about mutual success. Do this for the banker. Do this for the beggar. Do this for the saint. Do this for the politician.

But what about the criminal? There are those who know how to deal with the criminal behaviors that some display. Unless you are of them, then you had better watch out who you accuse of what behavior. Rules of liable always apply even though you always have permission to speak freely.

So what will happen in Britain now that they vote is over? Let's just let those who delude to power to write their own story, and leave it to them to have it be that they don't behave as creeps and sulky gollums. I'm not saying that there can't be suggestions for them, how they should behave. Let's jsut say that respect, even for their political rivals, is what they need to have. And then use it to guide you.

Cry baby, Cry baby,
where did you go?
Of into wild drift
of blizzarding snow?

hover above images for a modification effect.

PULSE

hover modifies the back ground for the page.

this image selector div is for the page body background

hover modifies the back ground for the column.

this image selector div is for the column background

  Praise     Praise     Praise
   the        the        the
   Lord       Lord       Lord!
  for    because    
 Easter  He's so awesome! 
  welcome to The Message Column!

      🖐♥♥Love♥♥🖑
      ♥♥🖑Cops🖐♥♥

      

  When you're
  crazy lonly
  no one reads
  your mind
  you find
  the highway stop
  too cold 
  must move on
  to home
  some dream
  outside
  of time
  greenlawn heart growing
  stronger
  give up the fear
  
  
 
 

hover above images for a modification effect.

🖐♥♥Love♥♥🖑
♥♥🖑Cops🖐♥♥

      

changing it now.

     oh those arbitrary frames!
      spinning, but not this line.
     
spin me a yarn neon
spin me a yarn neon
spin me every where but not here!
here is a fresh link, a new path to some older content:
   photo pile!
   
 

They who blah blah blah
They who stand and chaw
They who maw and paw
They who say they saw
They who stand and pray
They who question 'they'
They who ma and pa
They who say they say.

Tranformational bubble tech,
with a nano-fullerine 
hybirdized rubber. 
The amazing hover boo,
hover boy, 
hover bour wheels
are all future tech,
and it's here now,
so get on board.

In Wicked Need of an Edit

🚛 🎓 🎔 🌀

Political and Media Inanity

Kafka wrote comedy. Orwell was a pessimist. Depends who you ask.

Truck-u-later

in this column Truck-u-later steps in deeper . . .

The muck and mire of politics is a stink pit, a mud waller. It's a smelly cesspool of resentment where those who succeed follow theories on how to 'get yours'. Theories, indeed.

We respect the effective things that work. The public respects, without question, processes proven honest and necessary. But then new ideas get put forward by ? ? ? some governance who want to modify the current methods, and yet have the same kind of mass acceptance to the new idea the same as for those proven and true parts of governance. There seems, at times, to be a push for new process that would be at the same level of credibility as the old processes, but without the democratic necessity of people actually wanting this as part of their day-to-day dealeo. (dealeo: all the rigarmarolle that they have to endure to just tred water, oh mixed up allegories). How does 'cause' accomplish the acceptance of imposed order into the dealleo? They have to use bought and paid for people. People who spout cause and adhere to on-message operations to condition the public to the new methodologies (walk away, people. Do not fill out their forms. You have to invite the vampire in, remember).

The bought-and-paid for people, well, they are bought, and paid for. And franchise people? They only want the part that has their branding, their logo, the markings of their cartel.

Governance devolves to cartel conference governance. Nearest-shrimp-bar yearnings lead the ruler ship class by the nose, by a nose ring, I suppose. The micro-tyrannies of bully-governance and do-as-they-tell-you institutionally demented policy bullying . . . without regard for the well-being of the clients of government: we the people. Those who must follow the new dealleo, who don't really want to be part of it, often have no choice due to misfortune. For those who do have a choice this delusion of the new-delleo, that new part of the process that eveyrone has to follow, spreadsheet of money mongers shows that it will work (work for who), we choose to not do what the redictiphone of false-cause governance tells us to do. We don't disobey, persay. But we are civil. And if you want to know our story maybe we don't tell it to you becuase we fear reprisal? And we write about topics of great importance in vailed analogies and with obvious rantting automatica (writing of a spontanious sort) that we don't edit well when we first present it so as to have plausible deniability (it's all just fiction, right? Can't I say anything? Well, of course I'm a reputibile person and listen to those of so accuse . . . but that doesn't mean that I do what the redictiphone says to do. Only if it makes sense to do it.

One might imagine that those who delude to be the best and the brotatious wouldn't be inclined to want to be lead around by a nose ring, but fashions fleet like the shadows of withering plants, fifty years later the tangle vines become? We can imagine the scene: the long fallow garden of bad-governance left fallow for fifty years and the children-of-the-? have now . . . ? Who gets to write that story?

We live in a world where having friends helps us. We are purported, by many, to be 'social creatures'. But their is much complexity in the very many societies, each with some different set of crazy rules: 'tradition' some call it. Others call it hazing.

Yes, we live in a world where (some) people like to 'be in control'. Those do what they do and perhaps afford for themselves some sense of center, a locus of themselves that they use to sit upon as a throne above the cares of the cedar swamp, deep in the forest of ignorance (iggovernance) except for what is immediate. We all live, at times, that way, where the 'outside world' is something that we ought to just blow up (not wanting to use explosives, I'm guessing, but just as a metaphor for 'total annihilation of false idols'. false idols? Well, that is a conundrum, isn't it? If the idol is false then it needs no annihilation, as it never had effect in the wider world, in the first place. So that takes us to that curious case of pogrom: an old world habit. Some tribes were mean to other tribes. Some tribes were slavers. Some tribes were hunted down and made into slaves by other tribes. And it all just kept going on and on for a very long time and it really still does, in many senses. People are enslaved within the strictures which get bound onto them, and augment their behavior with (depricate?) alternative deprecated behaviors? Obsession, chemical or sex addiction. I'm not going to write a discourse on this.

It would be a lurid tale of sex-drugs-and-power-mad-politically motivated governance of one tribe, or tribes, at war with other tribes. People playing the political world as a bunch of chumps. Buying up politicians with sex and booze and pills. Compromising and corrupting everyone that they can . . . oh the inhuman lusts utilized as sexual weapons so that the power-proxiers of the proxied can rule the world from their catamaran yacht somewhere east of the western lands and west of the eastern lands. Off in someone's bad play novelization of life and politics whose 'just saying' nonsensical, vague, accusatory, innuendo and false conjecture (false? you know it is false but you say 'oh it could be true'. )

Al right, now, let me just change the subject. The subject of the imagination of horrid governance will now turn into a discussion concerning conjecture. If we know that a statment is false then can we fairly ever say that we present as conjecture such a statement? I posit that a conjecture is something that might be true. And thus if we know that the statemenet is, in fact, false, then we should not present that statement as conjecture. And we could thus call it a 'false conjecture'.

Oh, well, I'm defining terms. And so what? What does it matter? We still have these visions, these horrid visions, of the tribes of international suck-it-all-for-us politics, who enslave the world to their bad ideas, and mandate governance of incompetent franchisees and their ilk (oh the out rage here!)

And the real truth? We all try to get along and get our stuff accomplished, whatever that happens to be. In the real world if there were tribes of international suck-it-all-for-us politics, who enslave the world to their bad ideas, wouldn't we, those who they seek as their slaves to fetish governance (like global whateveaa), wouldn't we tell them? Look it, this is just a fetish of yours, non substantiated bunk science? You've been mislead by agenda'd causes of some grand international scheme of some even more sinister nature: the urge for central and total control of some small subset of people: world governance and no way to say 'no, we don't want this anymore'. They would, of course, deny it all. Maybe they might call us a 'denier' and put us on a list . . . or . . . is it just group delusions of institutional dementia: the thoughts of the ghosts in the machine, and not the result of anyone thinking those things. It just shows up as a cause of an organization, and though everyone is sekptical, skepticism is somehow forbidden.

I say that if people really are under hypnotic delusions than they would snap out of it at some point, hopefully of their own choosing (say right now) and they would start to understand that blind adherence to 'cause' is always questionable behavior which might provoke them to subhumate others and ignore the rights of others. When blindly following for a 'cause' you are worshipping wind, and falling under the sway of corrupt practices of institutionally demented governance.

The cause of no one mandated to be the cause of all, and with punishment for dissent.

My theories on institutional dementia are designed for the purpose so as to provide a valid narrative that alos disallows blame for those eggregious in their errors concerning their proper roll in the society at large. I use 'society' in singular. I assume that each soul here has it's own purpose of lving and that gets provided by . . . a nature that we dare not discuss within the realm of politics. That being so, we are given this cause as our life, and we have to walk the paths that we see. We can't walk the ones that we don't see yet, unless sight means more than the ability to sense something. We could be guided upon them, perhaps.

In any case we all have to decide for ourselves what we each want as individuals. We all live in one world. Does that mean we should have a world government? And if we did have such, don't we then need to know what kind of government it is? Obviously no one mind is large enough to govern everything. Even computers, if the intellegence were artificial, there can't be one single point of decision, one world urge, the Urge Central (hence the name of this website). It simply can only exist as a methaphor or allegory for something central to an individual. We, none of us, can control the world, the universe, with our wishes. We can't do it with computers. We can't do it with nuclear weapons, we can't wish the world to be as we would have it. The delusion of one-world-governance is that it is ever a good idea, in the first place, to consoladate power like that. We all know that power, routed into a house, is broken into multiple circuits. On a street, in a town, how many different circuit breakers or fuses are there? Thousands, no doubt. In government, institution, and governance it should also be thus. People should be given leeway to do what needs to be done but circuit breakers on power should exist that will trip when someone gets out of control.

I say some pie in the sky idea, and it's useless without a concept for implementation. I guess what it means is that we need to be able to see what people do. The press is the circuit breaker. The printed word is the tripped breaker. The warning: someone is out of control, some institution has gone rouge, some governance has become self-serving and thus obsolete. Without a free press there is no process to do this. When cartel governnace is a bought and paid for certainty, and nations are ruled by money-lords by proxy (through bought-and-paid-for politicians) we can get a heedless and incessent operation that seeks to condition everyone to a new dealleo which actually doesn't help. And once it becomes the vampire, or the parasite, once it takes much more than it gives, once it becomes a tyranny, the people have to walk away. the paths to the doors of hte institution are no longer used, no one seeks their services. Their mission becomes void, their purpose obsolete.

This has happened to very many of our current institutions. (has it really?) They still exist, however, with zombie purpose. They are fully funded and on-message with the grant-hounding leadership. the grant is what buys and pays for the sychopantic adherance to the on-message of the operant bully governance (or heedless cartel).

Our purpose: perhaps to identify who are those who have been so bought? Just for our own head. Just for our own knowledge, not to go on a pogrom against them. There seem to be too many of them. They are deep and buried down in their hidey hole well-funded office. They can not be rooted out. They are ubiquitous.

So what can we, the citizens, do? Citizens of what? Voided promise of cartelled proxied governance? It is meaningless. We do not invite it into our abode. We will not harbor thought that it is real. If it does not serve the people then why would the people serve it? Do not feed it. It's only real if you talk about. So I'll shut up now and all of it will disappear as if it had never been.

June 22, 2016

Billion dollar ideas? They are all around us!

Alright. We'll be changing it up a little bit!.

Cal:

"I never minded the surveillance society. I've always been kind of an exhibitionist"

June 6, 2016

"I never minded the surveillance society. I've always been kind of an exhibitionist."

 a beat . . .

  Praise     Praise     Praise
   the        the        the
   Lord       Lord       Lord
  for his    for his    for his
 unfailing  unfailing  unfailing
   love!      love!      love!

  well, nothing more here today.