The News, the real NEWS and how to get it

It has always been difficult to get "the news."
If we were living a thousand years ago, it would be the same.
Story then, had to travel by man on horseback or camel, if it were from a distance, perhaps pigeon if nearby.

Now, our story comes from ourselves, in real time.

Our modern technocracy affords us the luxuries of quantity and speed, but our ability to determine the substance or worth of any news has not really increased.
This is because a polished turd is still a turd.
Our news, if not genuine, is not news at all.
And our news is not genuine, most of the time.

Avid readers of mine know, as does anyone with an appreciation of the peril and promise of Philosophy, that language itself is a slippery slope. The semantic deception of dialectical theses aside, even when we allow ourselves the common sliding scale of understanding, the News is blatantly subjective. So how are we to acheive any real understanding from any real knowledge in a world awash in opinion? By carefully sampling from as many sources as possible and searching out the golden mean.

Here's how I do it:

On TV, I watch whatever channel I want, knowing that any particular channel could have numerous intentionalities, as could any individual or group holding influence over the channel, plus the personalities of producers, anchors, reporters, etc. I use CBCnews and RT CBC is pretty clean, RT is heavily subjective, but they report on stories that the mainstream doesn't, plus theirs is a heavy "northern European" influence. Obviously, it's worth keeping an open mind. (Decide, if you must.)

So I also watch CNN but usually only when I need a "deeper American" coverage than the CBC provides. I never watch FOX because, although it is sometimes funny, keeping an open mind does not include wasting my time. 

But, with the exception of Canadian news, I don't get my "world news" from the TV. I get it all from the net. Here's how I do it:

Above Top Secret  This is the world's foremost conspiracy discussion forum. It's chock full of nutbars. Seriously, I've been a member for a few years now, I know. However, despite having to wade through a bunch of stories about UFOs and Alien Agendas, ATS consistently breaks 90% of my stories to me. This is because ATS members strive to be "the one who breaks it." At abovetopsecret.com, it is required that the breaking news forum provide sources for their articles. These sources, of course, require another evaluation. They vary from the usual alternative sources: RT, the guardian, sky, wired.com, huffington post, etc. to the mainstream. (Any newspaper you'd care to mention.)

-On the ATS main page there is a button that says RECENT POSTS. These are your headlines. Scan through them, right click any that interest you open in a new tab. Then read your newspaper, or skip it.

If there's a story breaking, twitter usually gets jammed up with humans posting it play by play. (Excluding blackouts, for various reasons.) But people often tweet links that lead you to other things. This can be helpful, as can knowing people in various places in the world.

Who should you listen to? Everyone.
Who should you believe? No one.
Try to determine the intentionality of the parties involved in giving you the message, then do the same for the subject(s) of the message.
How do you do that?
You read my book. It's free.

Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama = Win / Win

“First they laugh at you, then they ignore you, then they fight you, then you win.” -Gandhi.

If Ron Paul wins the republican nomination he will run neck and neck against Obama and numbers as of January 1^st, 2012 indicate this could happen. I believe, as the economy continues to crumble and more Americans demand change, this ticket could even win the Whitehouse. Of course, Paul, should he win, would be shut down in his efforts, one way or another. For the will of the people does not necessarily reflect the might of the system. Yet even if Paul doesn't win, his platform will be so pushed into the forefront of the American psyche that his proposals will be demanded, as a necessary product of our times. That is to say, Ron Paul hasn't moved into the mainstream, the mainstream has come to realize that he was right all along. (America isn't for revolution because Paul exists, but rather because conditions are ripe for revolution.) This change is coming, if not now, soon, because it must. The American dream has been hijacked. The grand conspiracy is real, known and documented, yet somehow continues unabated.

Ron Paul is touring the country talking to one packed stadium after another and he's doing it alone. He hasn't any corporate backers, his pockets are surprisingly shallow. He's achieving his success through 21^st century grassroots movements and without the help of the media. In fact, CNN and FOX news admitted to “accidentally” providing misleading news stories about Paul's lack of success. It has been suggested by some that there is a rampant smear campaign against Dr. Paul. The reasons for this are obvious, if you know anything about Paul's platform, which is a threat to the status-quo; anti-military industrial complex, anti-banker, anti-income tax, anti-big corporation, anti-big gov. Paul himself has said, in a rather telling, all encompassing sentence, “As long as you want to run this world Empire at a trillion dollars a year, believe me, you can't solve this problem.” To be anti-American Empire, it would seem, is to be anti-American. So how is it that Paul has such popular support? Simply put, it means America is waking up to the fact that its morality is flawed, its intentionality is either directed at money or power and is self serving. Much of the rest of the world hates America, not due to envy, but rather due to its inability to mind its own business. Most Americans are people of principal, why shouldn't the “American way” follow suit?

“We have broken from reality. A psychotic national ignorance with a pretense of knowledge, replacing wisdom. An epidemic of cronyism, a central bank that deliberately destroys the value of the currency in secrecy, without restraint, without nary a whimper.” Paul believes we print money to pay for illegal wars which renders Americans poor, or dead. His solutions are extreme, measured against the current norm, but they could be the answers we (the 99%) are looking for. Ron Paul has been nothing if not consistent in his message, for over thirty years. (Something very special in politics.) The drums he has been beating carry the same rhythm: “End the fed. Stop taxing so much. Stop spending so much. End the Empire building. End the wars. Stop intervening. Stop policing the world. Stop lying and stealing. Return liberty. Return to the constitution.” These ideas, while being good, right and true, in my studied opinion, shall most likely not be delivered unto the world by the likes of Ron Paul, not because he can't win, but because the machine won't let him. This change is yours to make or break.

If Ron Paul wins the Presidency, he will be shut down, by any means necessary. The only way America can win back the right to be proud again is if the people move the agenda forward. It only takes a few wrong people in the right places to stop any change and those people are currently entrenched. Paul will not change their minds, they will have to be removed. They will not go lightly, there will be friction. Only the masses behind the movement will have the force required to get the foxes out of the chicken coop. A new Centrist paradigm is needed to succeed. We must all come together to agree that these extremes we swing to are not solutions, but the very causes of the problems we have. Then we must be willing to fight to change them. This is the new Beginning.

If Barack Obama wins the Presidency, he will not be able to hold back this American desire for change. Imagine an “Occupy Wall Street” like movement, with a leader like Ron Paul, funded by other libertarians, possibly the Koch Brothers, organized, earnest, smart and strong. We'll have an American Revolution unlike anything we've seen. It will be unstoppable, (although, they will try, often by removing liberties,) because it must win. It is insane to expect the same causes to return different results and with Obama you will get more of the same. Thus, you can expect more of the same resistance from Americans, only more effectual. This is why an Obama vs. Paul Presidential race would be the best thing for America. Regardless of who wins, the revolution takes place. It's going to hurt, it's going to be ugly, but it's necessary. Without the Revolution, America will fall apart like every Empire before it, which would the latest and greatest betrayal of the latest and greatest dream.

America's Nervous Breakdown

In any period of enlightenment, there are certain adjustments that must take place, both inwardly to ourselves and outwardly in society. Personal realization changes our minds, in some way or other, revolution changes our world, similarly. Paradigm shifts, regardless of their qualifications or measurement, come and go. We need only look back in time to examine possible outcomes. We need only be aware of the shift in the present, to achieve the healthiest attitude toward it, whatever it may be.

In the 21st Century Enlightenment, our personal adjustment is one of a technologically achieved amalgam intellect, our societal result is a discovery of the systemic flaws in our designs. The internet, and more importantly, the uncontrolled sharing of information on it, has lead us to an unprecedented awareness of the mechanics of various aspects of societies problems, as well as an expectation that something be done about it. Thus, the revolutionary aspect of change, necessitated into action by way of a new intentionality. We are, after all, in our modern times and devices, nothing if not in control of our own systems, (or so it should be...)

When it comes to pass that the masses become aware of some gross injustice by the very people whom are meant to be in charge of being fair, no one should be surprised by discontentment, particularly when said injustice has a profound effect on the lives of the masses. Furthermore, any such discontentment, provided both time and force should grow into something that becomes expressed, often violently. (Although, not always. Violence is certainly not a prerequisite to revolution.) However, there is a deeper, further reaching aspect to the 21st Century Enlightenment that couldn't even had been imagined in any movements of the past. In modernity, we carry with us a firm understanding of the machinations of control. We've already pulled back the curtain and revealed the wizard, both within our psyches and societies. We know we're being manipulated, placated and systematically busied. We understand there needs to be some system of control to avoid having us live lives of chaos. We dare to presumed that we know better than those who hold power now. We go so far as to accuse them of being robber barons, because we've come to learn that they are. Previous revolutions may have had similar reasons for being, but ours leaves an unavoidable trail.

Yet part of the problem is, we know we're right. Our current frustrations are the predecessors of a nervous breakdown, brought on by the semantic deception of dialectical theses. Namely, the people in charge are the criminals and they must do more than simply point fingers in circles. Consider the current self-inflicted economic crisis as the impetus for a death blow. When the wizard behind the curtain is out to screw us, gets caught, then shrugs it off and blames someone else for it, we want our pound of flesh. When it turns out the that bad guys are the people who we thought were the good guys, we want justice that much more. When we're living in our car, eating food stamps because of the betrayal, how can we be expected to be anything but livid? Our breakdown is planned, the nervousness is fear of what it's going to take to stop it. This kind of control isn't given up without a fight.

Movements to occupy wall street are effective in raising some awareness of “a problem,” although not necessarily “the problem.” Simply put, the problem is that the interests of the government have become infiltrated by the interests of business, which have changed the nature of the system, to create the opportunity to profit off our losses. The cost of their crime is the failure of the system they serve, the price paid by the culprits is continued control. In the simplest terms, the economy is failing due to the lying and cheating of a very small group of individuals. These folks happen to populate the corridors of the most powerful institutions in the world.

The cross pollination of bankers and politicians, or politic and profit, of contraindicating ideologies is the stuff that leads to our predicament. The argument that this is conspiracy theory is no longer valid. This is conspiracy fact. When President Obama throws up his hands and says, “What can I do? Senate won't approve what it doesn't want.” He is not being exactly fair. By way of his inaction on things he could force and his appointments of guilty players, he is, at least, guilty by association. Therein lies another facet contributing to our frustration: Shall we occupy the White house? Occupy everything? Where do we draw the line? Are we too guilty by compliance? We do, after all, perpetuate the faulty designs of our predecessors: Producing waste in the name of needing to continue profiting. A solution to this problem, however, must remain to be solved at a later date: we have more immediate fish to fry.

This brings us to the next problem: how do you fry the proverbial fish, when there are so many? What if, in the process, you discover that you too are a fish, currently being fried? America's nervous breakdown is caused by the deepest running scam of all time: the fiat based economy, highjacked by an elite. Entrenched and secure, seemingly from all threats, the same folks keep turning over in the same positions. Kings of commerce, Traders of economies, complicit if not directly profiting, guilty by intentional inaction. This is the final screw, the last great snatching at the lone gold ring. Efforts to postpone the death of the free market, as it is incarnated, (an overly de-regulated liars contest based on an un-evaluateable imaginary tender,) only serve to delay the inevitable. Business, trade and profit must remain reasonable and warrant servicing the needs of individuals over profit. This utilitarian philosophy will come to fruition in time, with or without revolution now, as it is a means and the median always wins out.

The only way to speed solution to our doors is a complete changing of the guard, a shakedown not seen since the days of JFK. Government and trade must be separated, on all fronts, including militarily. Unfortunately, I think it's much more likely that our great distraction will win over our minds, our hearts, our wallets and our souls. Manipulations and distractions are the greatest, easiest, most effective way to trap our acceptance to any particular raw deal. The bigger the distraction, the better. Other leaders, in other moments of opportunity have brought about new paradigms with which to use the machinations at their disposal, in essence, creating the reality they desire, leaving you begging for the action they wished to achieve in the first place. These moments always appeal to baser, emotional, instinctual reactions than to the reasoned objectiveness that hindsight often provides. Nervous hands have itchy trigger fingers. These are the dangers of any revolution.

It could all be avoided. It's all based on things that don't exist. It's actually ridiculous.

America is in the saddest confused state of modernity and has no one to blame but itself.

the 21st Century Enlightenment - Essays from the year 2011

My essays from 2011 delivered in an inexpensive paperback, available now. Includes my ongoing commentary on the state of the world, the occupy movement, the 21st Century Enlightenment and "the war on reason."

Celebrate the War of 1812?

Those of you familiar with my writing, in particular, those who read chapter seven of my book, (below) Anti-Social Engineering the Hyper-Manipulated Self, (now available as a free download,) know something of both my love of using intentionality to explain reality and my love of hating conservatism, in particular, the political variety, to explain the virtuous life.

My thoughts and feelings are not shared by Stephen Harper and Canadian neo-cons. This comes to no surprise for me or my readers. Some of you may have noticed that I tend only to write about this specific topic when an announcement of this ilk is made, or I otherwise get pissed off about how this country, (this world,) is run.

My latest complaint is centered around the Conservative government's decision to “celebrate the anniversary of the War of 1812.”

(I thought I'd let that sentence stand alone in your mind for a second. You know, so the ridiculousness could set it. “Celebrate the War of 1812.”)

Yikes. Well, before we start discussing the intentionality of the idea, or discover it's purpose by delineating the prior intention from the intention in action, let's take a look at what is being said by our government. These include but are not limited to statements like: “Celebrate the history of the war of 1812. Visit the sights, relearn the history, take in a museum, check out the re-enactments.” (Yes, they're paying, sorry we're paying, for re-enactments.) We're also paying for the restoration of historical sites, a national monument, coins and stamps.

Here are some relevant links:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/travel/Government+trumpeting+anniversary+plans+1812/5540874/story.html

http://www.celebrate1812.ca

http://www.visit1812.com

http://www.google.ca/search?q=celebrate+the+war+of+1812

This, I guess, should not surprise us. Conservatives are, well conservative. They like things just the way they are. That is to say, War is good business, War works. By way of being conservative, they have traditionally been supportive of the motives and methods of war. They like war, they think it should continue. Furthermore, by way of being Canadian, they are always playing catchup with Americans, the Kings of war. They have all but admitted that this is the kind of patriotism they wish to endorse. This is to be a nationalism based on our ability to enforce our ideologies.

So, again we should not be surprised that we are to toot our own horn about the one time that “Canadians” (in quotes because Canada wasn't a nation in 1812,) were able to kick some American ass. Now, if you know me at all, you know I think this is bordering on absurd and is, at the least, unnaturally stupid. Perhaps we should also celebrate the destruction of our Native peoples? Maybe build a monument to the wasteful poisoning of the world's largest fresh water supply? How about we design a coin and stamp commemorating our most famous mass murderer, Clifford Olsen? I wouldn't mind paying a few of my tax dollars for a statue in Ottawa of an eagle raping a beaver. But then again, being who he is, Stephen Harper wouldn't think of this as a problem. He condones it, approves of it, works toward it, hard.

Having made my rather subjective tirade clear, let's now take a look at what Mr. Harper and his neo-cons are actually intending by their actions. As usual, we will have to reduce their intentions to the base, the lowest common denominator. Yet, in this case, I think this is aptly done by the folks presenting the intention. This is what I find so shocking, if we are celebrating war, we are celebrating war. If we are specific in our celebrations, as in, “celebrate this or that war, with this or that people,” then we have narrowed it down enough. We're supposed to be thinking about war with America. Why?

It pretty obvious isn't it? Conservatives are conservatives because they don't want change. What's the opposite of war? Peace. So the real question is, why don't we celebrate peace? There's no money in peace. Simple answer for a stupid idea.

Conservatism is unnatural. Stephen Harper and those who support the ideas of conservatism are blocking progress. Natural systems, even those we design and allow to grow prudently, are flexible, dynamic systems that can, at the very least, change. Conservatives don't want change. They think everything is fine. They are very close to finding out the masses disagree. Everything is not fine.

I grow weary of the rampant ineptitude of modernity. Stop the humans before it's too late.

Further reading: (I've been complaining about conservatism for awhile...)

Problems with Patriotism

Canadian Politics out of Order

A comment on Canadian nationalism

A letter of warning to Canadians