Life in a small town, Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

The vested interest in keeping people sick …

Snow”, by Kobudo, from the album “Ototabi”  (2013)

Good post this morning over at David Warren’s site…  Go read the whole thing.

Dr. Atul Gawande

Dr. Atul Gawande

He drew from Crisis Magazine (here) , which I subscribe to …”In a recent episode of the podcast Freakonomics, Dr. Atul Gawande contrasted the adoption rate in the 1800s of two new technologies: anesthesia and antisepsis. An anesthetic gas, which could be used in surgery, was discovered and first used in Boston, and “…within two months of publishing the result that a gas could render people insensible to pain, it was being used in every capital in Europe.

There’s no internet. You had to send news by boat and horse.  And within two months people were using it in the capitals of Europe, and by six years later there wasn’t a hospital in the country that was not delivering anesthesia care.

Compared to anesthesia, the adoption of antisepsis was very slow, even though sterilizing equipment and washing hands could cut the rate of infection by up to eighty percent. Since infections were often fatal, an eighty percent reduction meant a huge savings of lives. And yet, according to Dr. Gawande, “a generation later, you still haven’t gotten to half of the profession doing it.”

The difference in the adoption rates of the two new technologies was caused by the fact that anesthesia helped the doctors as much as it helped the patients: “Surgeons don’t like having a screaming patient on the table. They had to do their operations in 60 to 120 seconds because you just didn’t have that much time when the orderly is holding people down. And having a patient asleep meant you could be meticulous—you were so much happier as a surgeon. And so this was a win-win for both.”

By contrast, antiseptic protocols didn’t do anything for the doctors, they were just an added problem for doctors, and so they had no incentive to use them.”

And not much has changed amongst the medical establishment and the health industry in general here in the 21st century. There is no incentive to the system to actually help patients and to actually cure them because the medical and pharmaceutical bread and butter of the western world depends entirely on the continued existence of sick patients.

If the Department of Health and the medical Associations ever actually fulfilled their stated mandate of curing people and supporting a healthy population they would put themselves out of work. Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that “in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people”:

First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.”

Dr. Jerry Pournelle

Dr. Jerry Pournelle

Dr. Jerry Pournelle was a blogger of note before the internet was invented and before that in columns in Byte Magazine. He died last year in his 80’s. I followed him for many years. He will be greatly missed. Anyway … Health Departments and such …

Ergo, the mission of Health Departments, Medical Associations, and Pharmaceutical Research Companies everywhere is not (as stated) to get people healthy and keep them there but rather to encourage illness everywhere possible, both physical and mental, in the interest of continued existence, expansion, and an ever increasing revenue stream.

There once was a book I owned and readThe Organization of Hypocrisy” by a Swedish researcher, Nils Brunsson, who is (or maybe was) Professor of Management at the Stockholm School of Economics and Chairman of the Stockholm Center for Organizational Research. In his little book he laid out chapter and verse why such conduct occurs, and why it will continue to occur.

Unfortunately I loaned my copy to one of my college professors who never returned it. It is out of print and currently retails new for around $1200.00 U.S. Never trust your college professors, as they also fall under the Iron Rule of Bureaucracy. The ones in charge will always be corrupt.

Some say I am too cynical, but I prefer “realist”. If it walks like a duck, and all that stuff.



Ready, Aye, Ready … Quid hoc ad aeternitatem


Life in a small town, Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Controversy, “Normal” and the Media …

Waiting on the Night To Fall, Casting Crowns,

lobos-vestido-de-ovejaWhat is normal? What are lies and distortions.  How about  “they are everywhere”, or “they are just like us”, or “everybody sensible  thinks like me” or “we are the majority, and we speak for “insert your group here”, or “it’s the Jews”, or “it’s the Niggers”, whatever!

And by who and how are these ways of thinking conveyed to the general population of proles? Obviously in our culture it is the media, the talking heads and anyone with a public stump, like politicians, religious figures, artists, actors, documentary makers, publishers, bloggers, and so on.

I suspect that there have been these “purveyors” of news and ideas in every time and in every culture.  The trend setters, the agents for destabilization, the gossips, the sewing circle, the pub talkers, the town crier, the broadsheet scribbler, the PTA, eh? So, for arguments sake, let’s call this group with the agenda, which they have to sell to the general population, lets just call them the “X Group”.

Unfortunately for the “Non-X” group, the percentage distribution of proclivities and passions amongst politicians, artists, the media and academia does not translate automatically or logically into the larger sample we know as the “general population”.  “Accurate to 3 percentage points 90% of the time” is not only untested but is simply an appeal to the authority of the poling agency  to hold off difficult questions. It is the adult equivalent of “My Dad Said So!”.

The larger sample is, always was, and always will be, simply “untested”, and this “inconvenient truth” is a detail which presents a type of “catch 22” to any agenda setter.  Along with a strong bias to not test further because one already has a carefully selected sample which confirms one’s desired view or meme or belief, the usual suspects, good old fear, uncertainty, and doubt, mitigate against any attempt to truly get at “truth”.

FUDFUD affects both the the purveyors of pseudo-scientific “poles” and “reports” as well as their audience, the consumers of such pseudo-scientific dreck.  It is common practice to “intentionally or unintentional” target a certain demographic or geographical area, zone, population, community, identified population, whose expected opinions will point towards supporting whatever the latest direction the poling company’s masters want to go in.

Ask any member of x group how many x people they know and they will naturally know a high percentage of x’s. That is their group. People naturally believe that what they think and see and say is what every sensible person thinks and does and says so they project their proclivities and concupiscence, their favorite passions onto the general population and proceed to the conclusion that “x” is the norm amongst the general population except for a few “stupid” outliers. Of course there are many fewer “non’x’s” among the “x” group just as there are many fewer “x’s” among the “non-x” group(s).

So regardless of one’s political or social leaning does anyone really see any lapse of truth, any escape from reality, any “bias” about the above observations? I mean, seriously, all sides routinely throw accusations of all the above observations at every other media player with a competing view, so it just MUST be true, right? But faulty thinking and false opinions matter because for good or ill those errors and lies have real consequences in the real world. Once we stop believing “Truth”, we will believe anyone and anything, to our everlasting peril and the peril of those we are responsible for guiding.

Desolation Row, Chemical Romance, from the “Watchmen” soundtrack album

One of the prevalent popular memes in our current culture of death is the “Rainbow Myth”, that “Gay is OK”, That “Gays” are just like us. I am going to quote freely from some writing by Austin Ruse at Crisis Magazine   I am linking to his work at Crisis magazine because what is bothering me about “What is normal?” and “What are lies and distortions?” of the popular “Rainbow Mythology” of current progressives which I started writing about three weeks ago, has suddenly, lately become “Up Close and Personal” in our family.

I quote Austin Ruse because it is very difficult to get any “truth” from all the usual outlets; just not politically correct dontcha know? I have found both Austin Ruse and Crisis magazine to be reliable truthful sources over the years when examining our current progressive culture.

Modern family screen-shot-2014-04-13-at-10-24-59-am1In our broad extended family, our immediate cell (our immediate family) are the only family group who still hold to “traditional Christian beliefs, values and life style”.  In other words, we are very most definitely not a “Thoroughly Modern Progressive Family”.

All the rest of our extended family are very much poster families for the “Thoroughly Modern Progressive Family” (eg. No God, totally progressive “values”, public school educated accessory kids, parents careers are more important than the progeny, same in group/clique since high school, senior “Public Servants” blah blah blah  ya all know the drill.

All thoroughly modern progressive poster families which I am, through God’s grace related to, and therefore unable to avoid the drama of the 12 year old son announcing to our Poster Family that he is “gay”. The grief, stress and angsting melodrama (which the precocious little darling wants) will now unfold around us and will surpass the whole “abortion is murdering babies” crisis which is still unfolding around us.

So on with the story about why this development is both appropriate and totally predictable given the values of the families in question. This little burp of family emotion was predicted years ago when the subject 12 year old exhibited an inordinate fascination with little girls and princesses — not what one would expect —  but rather he expressed the desire to BE a princess. Wow, couldn’t see this one coming, right? Nah, don’t worry about anything, he’ll just grow out of it. We can just ignore it and it will go away. Can’t be seen to be “homophobic”, right?

Two of the great propaganda achievements of the progressive homosexual movement are the now culturally internalized beliefs that they are everywhere and they are just like us. Many propositions laid the ground work for that huge change in public opinion from the time homosexuality was openly mocked to today when you can get fired even for poking gentle fun. Much of the polling changes in attitudes about homosexuality are grounded not in acceptance but in this kind of fear.

From Austin Ruse” “But, these two—that they are everywhere and just like us—are two monumental but highly effective lies. Polling data shows that most Americans think homosexuals are far numerous than they really are. Gallup shows that most Americans think that 25 percent of the population is homosexual. Among those dim and dimmer millennials, it is 30 percent. That’s right, they think something on the order of 97 million Americans, including toddlers, are homosexual.

But not even Kinsey with his utterly debunked 10 percent thought homosexuals were so plentiful in the population. In fact, according to the best research—the Laumann study conducted out of the University of Chicago in 1994, and the recently concluded study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control—the true picture is profoundly different. According to the Centers for Disease Control, a measly 1.8 percent of adult men and 1.4 percent of adult women identify as homosexual. This translates into a tiny 2.1 million men and 1.7 million women. This is less than half the number of Methodists in the United States.

Because they are “everywhere,” a concomitant argument they make is that attitudes have changed because of the personal interaction people have with them. Even a casual look at the numbers would show that those would be some very busy homosexuals. The adult population of the United States is roughly 247 million.

In order for it to be even remotely true, that it is personal relationships that have changed public opinion, you would have to assume that each of these 3.8 million homosexuals are out of the closet, wearing their homosexuality on their sleeves, and are best buds with 65 non-homosexuals each. So, no, the proposition that they are everywhere is simply not true. And most Americans have hardly any meaningful interaction with homosexuals.

Are they like the rest of us? Certainly. They are children of God, made in his image and likeness, and deserving of their human dignity. But, in the choices they make, in their attractions and in their behavior, and in the results of both, they are profoundly different.”

Well, enough for tonight, even writers have to sleep sometime which kinda gives the game away, to wit, they are not gods after all even if they thought so. I’ll continue in my next post.



Cigar_120471628Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Sometimes when I post, I look at my sig and wish that I’d follow my own damned advice.