Organizations vs Individuals; The De-optimalization of Enterprise

Maximizing individual liberty from the tyranny of organizations was the fundamental purpose of the U.S. Constitution. Government is just one of the possible forms of social organizations that may form to oppress individualism running roughshod over it.

Corporatism, communism, fascism, organized crime, unionism and even organized religion may be secular forces oppressing individual rights. Contemporary ‘liberalism’ may be a front for organized oppression of individual liberty, unlike the classical liberalism of the founders.

Some believe in error that because organizations are made of individuals they are nothing besides individuals. Organizations are teams and collectives with variegated compensation packages that act as super-individuals; bullies, against ordinary individuals in the pursuit of enterprise with excellence.

There is inevitably an upward drift through organizations to acquire more power and influence over individuals in society. Organizations also may takeover the public sector through a variety of means of infiltration from within and without. In any case the individual is intimidated by the organization and made to follow or at least acquiesce within its method to pursue its goals. Generally collectives and organizations reduce the horizon of creativity of individuals to production of organizational goals.

Some organizations and unionism is necessary to offset maleficience of other organizations exploiting individuals. Yek the dialectical increase of organizational size in challenge and response is its own self-reifying logic for increase. Democracy and individual are distant points of light from beyond the torpid underworld of organizational dark pools of power.

Reason, Science and Faith

Taking a Hebrew language course the last words written across the chalkboard before I left Theology School were Ha Ha Ha! Ha means ‘the’ in Hebrew and my student loan never arrived so I returned to the street and a car with a rusted out floor through which my feet could reach asphalt. Faith is not about quantification, science is. Reason is I think, useful for both.

I had left that car in the care of Sgt. Roy Benavidez, Medal of Honor winner, in El Campo Texas earlier that summer and rode a motorcycle home to Alaska. Now, without a motorcycle I drove the car to home passing through Utah and a close encounter with a spiritual experience. Faith in-the-world encounters experience while science tries to quantify it.

Science, politics and religion are three avenues for the experience of life. Life is an emergent phenomenon of entangled energy fields that seemed to be mass in-the-Higgs-field. We might trust that God has within his infinite and eternal nature all temporal Universes foreknown, even though they all pre-exist in an infinite variety of forms. One might also believe that a human spirit is a finite aspect of spirit. The Great Spirit being God is all being juxtaposing nothingness as a counterpoint and interval for anything that would seem to appear to have time. So what is one to think about science?

Mitochondrial D.N.A. transfers have been politically approved in England although it is still illegal to do so. Upgrading the mitochondria of a woman’s eggs with defective mitochondria might seem compassionate enough. A couple could have a hybrid baby I guess with three different genome contributions. That technology could also be applied to animals. Science could upgrade Siberian tigers to human level intellect with Bonobos and Chimps able to think as well as Republicans and Democrats becoming just a shout away. I suppose they have made Dolly the Sheep sort of creatures in secret. Maybe they made super-mice able to remember all of the passwords necessary to get food from very difficult maze caches as prototypes.

I think science today has a kind of hubris faith in atheism as truth. Because science materially works and has historically enlightened humanity in cosmology and other fields it isn’t uncommon to make the assumption that Biblical truth is obsolete. Those with degrees in science aren’t generally terribly philosophical or well read in Biblical history deeply enough to well-consider the perennial question of interest to philosopher. Even the brilliant mathematical cosmologist Stephen Hawking has said that “philosophy hasn’t kept up”. I think he means philosophers haven’t been doing the math of M-Theory, Emperor Theory and so forth. Generally he would be right about that, yet is it necessary for philosophers or theologians to work out the math of various cosmology theories to consider cosmology theories? Is a structure of a given multi-verse not something that can be represented theoretically with model logic or even a Cantorian abstraction of trans-finite sets within the Spirit?

Faith is about trust in things unseen. God is unseen except as The Son while science seeks to learn about the unseen and unknown through material avenues. Christians too hope to see The Son as scientists hope to find the final formula to whip up there own Universes out of nothing I guess.

The Awakening of Animals - Fox in the Anthropocene Era

We are lead to wonder what the spotted chartreuse fox would be like if he were endowed with human intellect? Would he be an insatiable carnivore seeking to devour? A Heinrich Himmler with crematoria or a Don Carlione with a broadcast network of selective predation viewing the social environment as his henhouse for chowing down?

Humanity is something like a fox itself. Its cleverness and manual dexterity gives it such an advantage over other animals. Though the smell of the hunt leads men after foxes human beings are made by their Creator in the image of God though they try so hard to forget that fact. Rational, thinking and spiritual is the God-like image reflected in our dual-natured selves, one that increasing tends to prefer the rational, scientific, godless atheist side over the spiritual, creative and thoughtful.

Soon humanity may give itself the opportunity to bring an awakening of intelligence to animals. Because the approval by ethics groups of the transfer of healthy mitochondria with their own genome to women with unhealthy D.N.A. in their eggs it might be possible to give D.N.A. from superior women with outstanding characteristics to women with defective or less-well endowed characteristics (fox might believe that means less than DD cup) of intelligence. Einstein’s Mama could have been a mass mitochondria donor to talk radio host Mama’s and the future of U.S. politics could have been saved if only fox had thought of mitochondria transfers earlier. This technique could be applied in reverse bringing superior, reasoning intellect to animals. Scientists have probably already experimented secretly in making Bonobos as sharp as politicians and chimpanzees able to report news. Probably that is all concealed in the Snowden files and will be revealed.

Frankly if I were guessing I would say that Democrats are descended from Bonobos and Republicans from Chimpanzees. Humans share something like 1.7% of their genome with both simian sects and a much higher percent with both. Supposedly the evolutionary line of humans and the greater apes forked 5-7 million years ago. Political alpha humans perhaps a little later. It may develop that ethical approval to enhance animal intelligence with mitochondria transfers and genetic modification may let thinking, reasoning animals go ahead and be remade in the image of mankind.

The idea of an awakening of animal intelligence isn’t exactly as silly as it seems. First some market will be found where people want to have a conversation with their beagle, or the military will find it cheaper to send a smart Bonobo on Mars missions because they are shorter and stronger per body mass having evolved without junk food. One can imagine a Siberian tiger with the intellect of David Stockman as Director of the Congressional Office of Management and Budget. Since this is the Anthropocene era being named so in the year 2000 for the human effect on creating mass extinctions of animals and plants bring up animals to human level smarts is the least we can do.

One might wonder where the scientific atheism leads politically speaking. Scientific development is good and informs us that loss of genetic, taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity may crash the ecosphere. The ecosphere is something like a house of cards that could collapse if too many cards are removed. Even the beneficial farming green revolution has some deleterious effects because of all the destruction of wild land and dumping of pesticides. Plainly human food production seeks to satisfy just human hunger and doesn’t take into account the need to conserve the ecosphere. Without proper stimulus fox won’t move. It needs a hunger to search for a family of chickens to eat. Sated, well-fed and in digestive torpor the lack of spiritual seeking after the perfect will of God leads to a too-narrow intellectual pursuit of immediate material security. Maybe humanity is doomed, maybe not.

Scientific atheism may lead to an eclipse of democracy. John Ralston Sauls, a philosopher who has written about corporatism as a political-economic development wrote that “The acceptance of corporatism causes us to deny and undermine the legitimacy of the individual as citizen in a democracy”. As the Democratic Party relies more and more on Wall Street and the Harvard network for political appointees and wealth is concentrated Americans are trained to look to corporations as the alternative to government. Splitting the difference leads to encroaching corporatism. Democracy is degraded.

Obamacare is a practice of corporatism in action, so is immigration reform that would allow 15 to 20 million Mexican citizens become U.S. citizens. They would be super-citizens with dual passports as would be their tens of millions of children. The political center of the United States would in effect shift south of the border and Mexican citizens would become the de facto electors of the U.S. government. Because Mexicans would be fairly easy for drug cartels or global corporations to control corporatism in the U.S.A. would tighten its grip. Americans would lose their historical battle for political self-determination. Scientific, godless corporatism arm-in-arm with its godless, atheist Chinese-communist peers in ruling would down-size the population of the world morally and demographically in whatever way it selected for it’s class, Zarathustrian super-men advantage. There has got to be a better way.

One might keep in mind that down-sizing corporations and keeping the ecosphere intact are good things. Stable population size and respect for local political control at the state or at least national;-size are good defenses against corporate or communist imperialism. It would be possible to develop farming in closed containers-probably spheres in space and on the moon in extremely intensive, cleverly designed encapsulated multi-level growth areas, condense the food and readily pack and send it to Earth it low cost or even disposable containers. It’s important to keep the relative mass of Earth and the other large solar system bodies intact. In other words it would be possible for spiritually responsible people to keep a stable population, scientific development, spiritual liberty and freedom from the worst of Fox’s raging beast seeking to devour characteristics from running crazed through civilization

Helium.com Slowly Erases the Author

I encountered one of my articles at Helium.com and checked the author page. After being banned from that web site Christmas 2010 my content there-several hundred articles have continued to be sold while my photo has been deleted along with most personally identifying information. Fortunately I published all of my articles in books and elsewhere so I can successfully defend authorship if I need too. My concern is the really rotten treatment that web page gives to authors they deem to be politically incorrect ( I was regarded as antipathetic to the homosexual agenda and rightly so where it concerns corrupting the institution of marriage).

Corporate pimps ought not exploit authors so badly as Helium-it's simply the bad faith treatment of writers that are poor and really put a lot in to their work in difficult circumstances. I would prefer they delete all of my articles instead of continuing to profit from them. That seems crooked and I cannot afford lawsuits.

https://app.heliumnetwork.com/heliumnetwork/viewPublicUserBio.sc?userNumber=105553

U.S. Foreign Policy as Good As U.S. Bi-Partisanship in Congress

The United States since the last clever, innovative President who understood the nature of the American people- the late Ronald Reagan- has significantly deteriorated its foreign and domestic standing. As the economy increasingly worsens rotting from the inside out the stock market has risen over its all-time high at 16,000. That's a result of concentrating wealth because of the political correctness and recalcitrance of the Congress and Presidents after the end of the cold war top act responsibly as egalitarian citizens of a democracy and tax the rich progressively rather than regressively. President Obama is the latest incarnation of giving the people of the United Sates a pacifier-President rather than and economic reformer. America's domestic policy failures are consistent with its foreign policy failures.

It isn't reasonable to expect the U.S. Government to make any sort of realistic deal with Iran on stopping the development of nuclear weapons. Eventually Israel will need to make an air assault and take out the Arak nuclear plant itself and bear the consequences. Iran will get over that and maybe still have a good relationship with the hillbilly's of Washington D.C. that are better at posturing and feuding than real politick.

 http://news.yahoo.com/iran-says-continue-building-arak-nuclear-despite-deal-154834561.html

One can't rely on Rush Limbaugh to fix things either in spite of the acclaimed new book Rush Revere. One wonders if Mr. Limbaugh ever rode a horse.

Giving the children of the U.S. a common inheritance of a healthy and recovering global ecosphere is as important as giving them a personal family inheritance of hard-earned dollars that the public has no right to usurp. It is important to regulate business such that large organizations public or private do not hog all the wealth and opportunity. The diner's and prisoner's dilemmas paradigms are reasons why government and talk radio hosts advocate tax cuts for the rich, deregulation of big business and corporate health care (Obamacare). The President gives what strategists believe are opiates to the masses of marijuana, homosexuality and illogically proffered health care while the domestic economy rots. 

  

Because of the deficient and ill-conceived domestic policy leadership the foreign policy of the United States sucks too. The nation spies upon its allies leaders and flunks nuclear limitations with North Korea. The food for stopping nuclear production policy of the Clinton administration was an abject failure, the administration is so cool on reinforcing the Iraq government that that nation is on the brink of sectarian war and Afghan leader Karzai won't sign off on the Loyajurga's will to have U.S. troops remain after 2014 just because he wants to stay alive after leaving office and enjoy is wealth is Gstadd or wherever one would think. Who wants to be blamed for having U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan if they aren't going to be President and control the troops for a decade or two?

American government prefers feuding for the simple reason that it's easy to publicize good and bad guys to a nation of comic book readers. It's also difficult to change the villains for writing and entertainment purposes. It was really a problem to stop making Boris and Natasha the villains until Al Qae'da arrived and maintaining bad relations with Iran was easier too.

When the Iranian revolution happened I was working in a kitchen with Iranian cooks that had very large knives for cutting meat. That was a little uncomfortable yet because I graduated a computer programming course I moved on. America can also move on despite the risk of possibly redeveloping a neutron bomb capacity to liberate Iranian leaders from worry about their infrastructure being vaporized if a war occurs.

Seriously though, the United States had good relations so far as there were any in the 1930s with Iran. An American economist was the basic adviser to the government and Iran did very well at developing its economy. After the Second World War and the start of the cold war the inability to understand the Muslim world very well led the Eisenhower administration to support a coup against the Iranian government to restore monarchy. The Brits of course goaded us on because the Iranian government had nationalized the British owned oil fields. Foreign control of Iranian natural resources had long been a source of trouble even amidst the troubled Iranian social rivals for power. That coup wasn't necessary; there wasn't much chance of a communist takeover in a Muslim country although theorists didn't know that then, so the United States started a lasting progression of bad relations with the people of Iran. And of course our preference for business imperialism continues to this day as the people of the U.S.A. become poorer while the rich globally become richer.

Iran then has the difficult problem of negotiating with a disingenuous American partner that does want to halt nuclear weapons development honestly yet simultaneously prefers what are neo-imperial economic developments globally. Since the cold war ended U.S. leadership has forgotten what democracy is and taken a turn for deregulated existential Spenserian capitalism. Morally the leadership seems taken by the devil so right wing politicians in Iran and the United States (fewer perhaps) can rightly find a wealth of criticism of the U.S. Government opportunity.

Bill Clinton claimed to be able to chew gum and walk at the same time. That was probably an exaggeration since he worked for the government and keeping two foreign and domestic policy initiatives going concurrently such as promoting small business and individualism while regulating big business adequately domestically and becoming good friends with Iran while halting their nuclear development and strongly supporting Israel would just be too much. U.S. leadership would probably inhale the gum and require a tracheotomy with whatever knife some passerby has in her pocket.

Matter of Spirit (poems) video

I read a few poems from my most recent book over video of S.E. Alaska.

If Homos Can Marry Shouldn't White Males Be Regarded as Black for Equal Affirmative Action?

Homosexual militants often compare their desire to expropriate heterosexual marriage for themselves to the racial problems of black Americans. That comparison is silly.  Black is not a behavior. Enslaving souls is behavior. Homosexuality is behavior, pregnancy is physical. One ought not set up separate legal status for behavior if possible, except as it is necessary to have criminal laws for bad behavior.

Including homosexuality in the traditional heterosexual paradigm for marriage is as wrong as including  straight white males in affirmative action for blacks.

Someone has to pay for the wealth of benefits homosexuals want to expropriate from heterosexuals-and that would be single individuals-especially youth whom already will be required to buy health insurance they don't generally need.

In my opinion citizens that practice homosexuality,  public nose-picking, race car driving or spelunking already are treated equally. If they want to heterosexually marry they are free to do so.

I stipulated in the original article that there are some with congenital sex identity issues. 

Nevertheless one doesn't want to get rid of criminal proceeding just because a few innocent people are convicted. The better course is to improve the applications of the legal process and change the social conditions that lead to crime.

Because some people are maladjusted sexually that does not mean that the most socially effective course would be to abolish traditional marriage integrity. Instead homosexuals or any others for reasons besides perverted lust might form a different institution somewhere within business law. 

That might be a partnership for individuals with whatever special conditions homosexuals think they need to be legally tangled up. Make no mistake, hermaphrodites are usually infertile and those with odd genetic combinations and sex paraphernalia leading them toward non-heterosexuality are not a social norm, although polar bears have had increasing incidents of hermaphroditism because of pervasive estrogen contamination in water due to industrial waste-products.

Because some people are born like old people as children with odd disease, or are dwarves and short as children, that is not a good argument for letting adults pay a child's bus fare so they have equality. The real differences amidst social classes given different rates are made with the idea that people are not equal in all things. 

America was not always a wicked nation forsaking its forefathers and mother's traditions. Though Americans today did not fight a civil war and mostly did not fight in the Second World War much less the revolutionary war they are quick to give away their inherited civil rights, border security and comparative advantages in an existential way rather than strengthen them.

 Homo partnerships with particular rights giving them some sort of advantage presumably over singles would be better than the godless, atheistic attack upon the millennial old traditions of marriage and less threaten to accelerate national moral and social decay. It is wrong to tempt priests to perform ceremonies of sacrilege such as homosexual marriage. Yet in an era of a hierarchical priesthood instead of a priesthood of believers far too many are oriented more toward secularism rather than doing things pleasing to God.

Political Opposition to Homo Marriage Isn’t Bigotry

N.P.R.’s Mike Peska hosting the political radio show ‘Left, Right and Center’ said that opposition to homosexual marriage is bigotry. That show might consider changing its name to just 'Left of Center'. Peska was ostensibly the centrist indicating how far skewed the nation to the left after nearly 24 years of bad Presidential leadership. Opposition to queer marriage is just honorable and those for it, dishonorable. Homosexuality is a learned behavior, not a congenital fact. Opposition to corrupt behavior is the core of political democracy, not a form of bigotry. There may be some tiny percentage of genetically aberrant individuals to be understood, yet that understanding should not comprise a cause for corrupting society with mass social legislation to abandon reason.

Marriage was perhaps the first civil right established before there were civil rights. Monogamy protected the weak from victimization and was a social sanction against adultery and the conflicts attending the sexual exploitation of women. It is remarkable that the decline of social morals have gone so far and become so common under the corrupting broadcast media influence that social dishonor is regarded as virtually normative.

One can expect NPR to advocate for the rights of Sugar Plum Fairies, unemployment compensation checks for the employed and spousal benefits and quarters for soldiers sucking thumbs of other soldiers. The real bigotry is blaming the poor instead of the rich and middle class for the vast left and right wing public debt.

Hollywood might need to remake the Titanic again with Michael Douglas as the ship’s captain. He could call for ‘women, children and queers’ to the lifeboats. Single adults can open doors for one or the other of a homocouple and marriage while marriage can become disassociated with raising children. So many social traits and customs exist about men being gentlemanly with the fairer sex and probably will even in an era when women feel equal or more than equal financially. There are many forms of competition that men simply would not be comfortable with, being rough with women. Now homos too will desire to be treated ‘without bullying’ and go to the head of the class.

Mike Peska wrongly believes that it is bigotry to oppose the socially deleterious expropriation of marriage by homosexuals. Strait singles and society have made many sacrifices to let marriage be a supported social institution that would be utterly foolish of given to a pair of guys or women homosexuals. Defending one’s individual social equality as an adult means that the blatant corruption of political and social establishments should be opposed. Homosexual marriage is one glaring, blatant corrupt of political and moral reason.

The United States constitution does recognize the right of free association and liberty for individuals. Although moral reason rules against homosexuality it is politically a concern for individuals and for individual behavior within the paradigm of privacy. The fundamental causes for the homosexual marriage aggression probably include fear, delusion, greed, hatred of heterosexual normality and power. It is supported by many godless atheists with wrong ideas about the moral implications of science and evolution theory.

Peska and other N.P.R. radio-heads in their sniper-tower quality communication lofts of unfair political advantage may believe that evolution or atheism means that life is meaningless and morality is judgmental without reason. There are social moral practices that are functional and utilitarian in practice rather than in theory. Morality is not just a theory that can be applied or removed to an existential practico-inert social politik reformed to most reflect the moral nihilism of political leadership.

Christians may believe that morality stems from adhering to the will of God. Even so morality has a basis in real-world social stasis that is not a moral vacuum. To throw in bad political moral choices as law such as homosexual marriage develops inertia for political nihilism deeply to the ground of being and becoming in the transcending development of social history.

Homosexual marriage and other abominable practices sew the seeds of chaos into the cohesive fabric of civilization. Especially when there is a vast range of inductive, non-destructive ways for individuals to ensnare themselves within legal encumbrances unnecessarily it was and is entirely a gratuitous if not vicious assault upon traditional marriage and morality to force homosexual marriage upon society poisoning marriage in the process.

If marriage is of such substantive financial and social value that single individuals should be required by law to make tax sacrifices to support it and if queers are to benefit from that historically heterosexual practice then it would be utter bigotry to deny single adults the financial and tax benefits of marriage. That is if one uses same irrelevant sort of expropriative paradigm as advocates for queer marriage developed.

The moral nihilism of the Democrat Party forged in the existential swamp of moral relativism seems to be an oath of allegiance required for the broadcast media. Maybe some of them really believe that society are better off with a pervasive homosexual hegemony from military training to public educators and that homos would never ever exploit a social ecosystem of homosexual marriage renormalization and atheism.

Media swanks may be above it all for-themselves and disingenuously giving trendy support for their own narrow financial self-interest. Even so it is wrong to denounce political opposition to homosexual marriage or to any public policy change as bigotry. The right to dissent on political issues is fundamental to a democratic society. That little fact is something the nihilist media may hate.

In the brave new world of the age of fracture none will make sacrifices and all will be forced by law to be equal. From each according to his ability and to each according to his/her/its needs. At least in the affirmative era political set power, privilege and wealth will be redistributed from poor and middle class non-class members to class members except for the rich who overall will just accumulate more wealth and power going away while the remainder of the local populace gets poorer. Yet they will have legal dope and queer marriages in the society. How better could they be slopped?

Magnus Carlsen Wins 2013 World Chess Championship

Norwegian Magnus Carlsen (rated 2870) took the World Chess Championship for 2013 with three wins and seven draws. Former champion Viswanathan Anand played rather conservatively hoping the challenger would make a mistake he could capitalize upon. Carlsen, the highest rated chess player in history at age 22, did not make critical errors in end games exploiting the Reti opening, Nimzo Indian and Berlin defenses during the match to set a tempo leading to victory.

Carlsen has an interesting and challenging future ahead with one of several excellent challengers for the 2014 World Chess Championship. There are several players rated in the high 2700's and even more than 2800 as is Carlsen that would be formidable challengers including number for ranked in the world 24 year-old American Hikaru Nakamura rated 2786 and 20 year-old American-born Italian Fabiano Caruna rated 2782

Senate Democrats Use Nuclear Option to End Minority Filibusters

The U.S. Senate voted today to end the power of minority parties to filibuster confirmation votes. In what may be another short-term gain strategy to pack the government with Obama left-leaning nominees blocked from confirmation by Senate Republicans the administration and Sen. Harry Reed have set the stage for long range recovery by conservative nominees of the bad fiscal order of the U.S. Government.

Far too many Americans are out of work while the administration has cooked the unemployment books to make happy meals for news consumers.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/21/us-usa-senate-nominees-idUSBRE9AK0V920131121?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=76