A Glimpse of the Real Deal

Because we are so heavily conditioned from birth to embrace the basic ideas of governance and hierarchy of power, it seems nonsensical to seriously question it. But there are times when, for a brief moment, the scope and self serving nature of the system and even the opposition to it lay bare for what they are in my mind.

When that happens, I desperately wish I could take a snapshot which would adequately render into words my view at that instant. I know the thought is there and that it is valid, based on observed fact, and kind of interesting, but it plays hell with me when I try to adequately present it.

I think it must have been because something caused me to question a statement I made in an earlier entry. (Thank you S. I couldn't figure out what to call what I write--not really articles or memoirs or fiction or self help tips--entries. I write Entries! yay. got a label for it) The statement was that government is a necessary evil. I'm not sure that government, as we know it anywhere in the world operates in a fashion I consider necessary.

I'm not saying I have the plans and means laid out for how it should be changed, undone and all that, although I have no more fear of such a thing than I do of the way the many forces of thought and behavior modification serve one another and manifest themselves in almost every source of information and education.

Maybe when Obama told people in the areas hit by the storm to continue to listen to the "instruction and guidance of government officials" red flags went up in all corners of my mind, and I'm pretty sure puffs of smoke were visibly billowing from my ears. When I've been in a hurricane, whatever the president had to say was totally irrelevant. But my mentality wasn't one of, "Oh what do I do? Let me wait to hear from a government official. I need guidance and instruction."

Nothing is wrong when seeking information when your property and possibly your physical well-being are at stake in a natural disaster. In that case I can usually get what I need from weather forecasters. Even then, guidance and instruction seems a bit of a stretch.

I interpret such language to mean "let's use this excuse to further convince you that your government knows what is best for you. Let us run your life. After all, who can argue with our helpfulness in this time of need? Do what you are told and you will be safe." And the flip side is "Good news!! Leaving the thinking to us!"

It is not just Obama, so don't call me racist or uncivil or whatever today's tag is when you think the president is full of it. He's the big wahoo of the moment, so screw him. It's the idea and what such a scene represents. I hate monarchy, have no love of kings, queens, dictators, or people who play the game as it has become played.

Well we've let THEM do the thinking and controlling and "protecting" for hundreds of years, and how is history marked? By wars, conquests, and destruction. Leaving the thinking to them has created entire classes of people with no moral compass, and who live purely to destroy themselves and others. Classes of people who believe winning is the goal, even if you cheat, kill, lie, steal and deceive. And most of those include our governing bodies and political parties. So, tell me convincingly that, in the long run, we need this sort of elitist control, that it is a necessary evil.

There is need for standards of respect and courtesy, which I hardly consider evils, necessary or not. The policeman is your friend, even when he tickets your mom in a sleepy residential section for coming to a rolling stop at a stop sign but continuing on after realizing no other cars are in sight. Thanks pal, that was certainly necessary. You just saved the community ten minutes of a safe driver driving on the by ways.

Listening to some who no doubt consider themselves progressive intellectuals I am astounded at their absolute blindness to the nature of cause and effect. The internal contradictions in their conversations also amaze me. Never do they consider that free individuals could enjoy freedom and thrive if they simply did not screw around with people's lives beyond their natural rights.

No, they justify those who do damage to others, constantly present ethnicity as a moral value rather than condition of birth, and then set such philosophically irrelevant features as reason for one group to resent or pander to another and yet another's expense.

It was nervy of this country to push ideas like innocent until proven guilty, and to limit the police power--even though in practice people's rights were being denied. The fact that the idea was there is a big deal. Instead of using such a philosophical base to steadily increase personal freedom and ensure that people could enjoy their natural rights, they found ways to interpret language in convoluted ways and increase the powers of authority. And the public at large has bought it forever.

It is not a matter of one party over the other. They both push the mind washed. They are brain washed themselves, just like those before them. I'm a little suspect of the church in this area, as well. The most religious countries gave us things like the corruption and ongoing crime in Mexico, the Mafia, Muslim terrorists, etc. Maybe because the biggest ones are a form of government in themselves. Got nothing to do with souls, God, the meaning of life or any of that.

People are afraid not to look up to something and it is usually just a group of humans. Otherwise, explain why skank celebrities, wife beaters, drunks, louts, thieves, etc. are making millions, get swamped by eager fans and their mere presence causes people to faint or achieve spontaneous sexual release.

Many an avowed atheist falls right in line when it comes to seeing a politician or celebrity as larger than life and some sort of savior. Really, it shames me that I can't help but know that Charlie Sheen flipped out, or that Oprah decided to end her long running show. I pride myself on knowing very little beyond that. Regrettably, I know who Paris Hilton is, and I have no idea why I know, or what she even does. Hated as she is, she has fans and money, and is probably making money at this very moment.

It all plays together in a sick way and will be the demise of the species. That's because the governing officials control science and research for the most part. And the only way the human race will ultimately survive is to conquer long distance travel. You can bet that every government will want to control that technology when it comes down the pike, and that it's emergence will be radically slowed and delayed by those same people we are supposed to look to for guidance and instruction.

It is easier not to look at these things because we literally have guns pointed to our heads insisting we play along. And half the hostages are crying, but if we don't do it this way, how will we do it? It is hard to argue with that.

I guess it is why lawyer shows are popular; not because it makes sense that these people make obscene money or that often wrong wins, but because it is a world of man-made complexity and drama. So is politics, international affairs and the DMV.

As an added bonus, soon after Vietnam, when I could not imagine they'd be able to sell non-defensive wars, the glamorizing of war and military life began its renewed rise in movies and television. Eventually it took over much of the video game world. Coincidence? Probably to some degree, but look how it plays hand in hand with the real deal. All of it is based on government agency, unlimited funds, and power that civilians never enjoy. Like when, in cop dramas, they yank a citizen out of his car while flashing their badge because they need it more--in their view. The hero abuses the common public and we cheer for him or her. Not me, I flip em the finger and am ticked off that tax payers have to now pay for the hijacked and trashed vehicle instead of the arrogant creep who has no respect for people minding their own business.

Conditioning. It is hypnotic and certainly makes for an easier life if you embrace it.