The Inner Struggle

Despair, “Dover Beach” … Matthew Arnold, 1822 – 1888

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

More poetry, and a bit of historical background, a sort of “how did I get here?” moment.

I once had a co-worker, almost 20 years ago now, who was an intelligent and articulate atheist, and who never tired of explaining to me how ignorant and superstitious was my embrace of the Catholic Faith. I think of Pauros sometimes, and the irony of his name, whenever I dwell upon the inevitability of self worship in any philosophy which denies the existence of God.

DelphiHe, Pauros the Greek, was an Ubber Geek, and knew not much at all outside of our shared programming specialties, namely COBOL, Pascal, Borland Delphi, and C++Builder. That was back when the civilized world was completely engulfed in its Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt regarding the approaching end of the world, the secular end-times, also known as Y2K.

We were both employed in part because of our knowledge of and ability to program in COBOL, and to maintain the COBOL based financial systems for a Health Region with thousands of employees.

These systems were running on a UNIX platform, a large-scale computer system, Hewlett-Packard if I remember correctly, although I was not the network admin. I think I might have also been employed there because I was the only other programmer in the whole department who could work with Pauros the Greek.

Anyway, the point was that he could not bring himself to imagine anything that couldn’t be tested and proven scientifically, empirically, he always insisted that he needed data to back up anything and everything. He refused to contemplate or imagine the universe and everything in it as a subset of reality, created by a being who existed outside the universe.

Solipsism

My fallback position when beaten down by yet another tirade about my “primitive superstitions” was “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” – Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio, or simply to drop some offhanded remark to the effect that “Solipsists are out of touch”.

This always provoked sulking followed by further tirades on the “stupidity” of my views. It was a really fun place to work. Pauros the Greek simply couldn’t admit that his “beliefs” were every bit as much “faith based” as mine.

He and another similar friend, Caoimhín the Celtic Prince, who I met later, have always personified what I see as wrong with Atheism. Behind all their precisely articulated views was the same premise: there is no God, no ultimate meaning beyond ourselves, beyond self.

SolipsismBut, if there is no real meaning to our lives, what is the point of living? No answers there … nada. Caoimhín the Celtic Prince, at least, would admit that his worldview was faith based like my own.

Both were fundamentally unhappy people, for example, Pauros was working hard on getting rid of his third wife without loosing any money and Caoimhín never landed a wife, though not for want of trying. They both were completely wrapped up in and focused on what was wrong with the world of their existence.

But, no answers were forthcoming to the “Why?” question. If life was meaningless, why didn’t they just kill themselves? Pauros’ reply to that question was, “Well, a lot of people do kill themselves because they don’t have the courage to live with the truth.” Caoimhín, on the other hand, believed that it was possible and desirable to be a good person (where did his standard of ‘goodness’ came from? No answer there).

Caoimhín, curiously a big fan of LOTR, maintained that life was worth living, even at a time when he was dieing of bowel cancer. Maybe Caoimhín, in his clear and present understanding of the end, was perhaps more of an “Atheism Lite” philosopher, maybe “meaning” was creeping in “at the end of all things”.

At the End Of All Things

Neither Pauros nor Caoimhín could ever explain how life could be worth living and yet have no meaning? This paradox was not even acknowledged. But atheism, when consistently, logically, lived out, seems to me to be a life of self-deception or despair, or some combination of both, a sliding scale of illogic and unhappiness, a pride in despair, so to speak.

This is all about pride, despairing pride, lonely pride, providing the self I worship with a dark comfort. This is sin, this feeling of superiority is terribly attractive, easy to get attached to, like so many of life’s pleasures.

Once you are there, in your despairing superiority, it is hard to to give it up. Its akin to the feeling of superiority one is tempted with when the current government, which one didn’t vote for, takes everything to hell in a hand basket, and one feels a smug “I told you so…”.

On the part of the atheist, any departure from this “rational” superiority of despair, any turn towards not having “the courage to live with the truth”, would mean that all those superstitious people you have so enjoyed mocking and sneering at really do know more than you. It would mean you’re not so special any more, it would mean giving up being special by virtue of the belief that everyone else is a fool.

Unfortunately, self-referential meaning is only a short-lived stop-gap: it is real only in the sense that the stage set of Elsinore Castle (see Hamlet quote above) or Darth Vader’s Death Star is a real place. We can suspend disbelief while the play (our life) is being performed, but at some point, the curtain falls and one must leave the theater. The “poor player” strutting his stuff must leave the stage.

So, if “Helping Others”, “Doing Good Work”, and “Having Friends” are just a “stage setting” and “green screen special effects”, then what? Pauros and Caoimhín seemed to share a vision, that vision which John Lennon articulated in the popular song “Imagine”, and it’s beautiful song . . . if you don’t think too hard about it. If we don’t think about it then the “nowhere” outside our “ME” universe surrounds our cold fortress of solitude, and there is nothing else, no joy, no forgiveness, no point in anything, just put your Ruger in your mouth and save the planet from your wasteful consumption of resources..

The vision: “Imagine there’s no heaven. Imagine there’s no hell. Imagine all the people, living life in” … WTF Man? Take religion out of the picture, and everybody spontaneously starts living life in peace? Whaaa?  Now I have been around the block a few times, my blog is named “notmyfirstrodeo” for a reason. In my experience, peace is not the default state of human beings. All I need to do is look at myself, and most of the people I have met over the last 50 years, to recognize that anger, jealousy, insecurity, envy, contempt, selfishness, fear, and greed are deeply rooted in the core of every human.

Even a cursory look and listen about us today with unjaundiced eyes reveals the big lie of our atheistic culture. There is no god, there is no devil, there is nothing outside of the self … and all the evil we see playing out everywhere around us is just a figment of our imagination. They are not really people, they have no value, out out brief flame. Medical malpractice, traffic accidents, abortion and euthanasia, mercy wagons, 9/11, all the same … erasing the inconvenient …

It seems to me that a cultural embrace of atheism, namely “Secular Humanism”, leaves folks with all the same problems as history suggests, but worse! The 20th century’s atheistic human rights track record, that is, the human-rights track record of atheist countries, like China, and the Soviet Union, and Canada, is poor.

I know and understand the difference between imagination and wishful thinking. If atheism is true, if life truly has no meaning, then all of our actions cannot have any meaning either, there is no right or wrong, no rights and no responsibilities, no justice, no love, entropy rules and at the end of all things we are just so much rotting meat turning into dust.

And the difference between imagination and wishful thinking is beautifully captured in the poem “Dover Beach” by Mathew Arnold:

Dover Beach

Matthew Arnold, 1822 - 1888

Matthew Arnold, 1822 – 1888

Matthew Arnold, 1822 – 1888

The sea is calm tonight.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the straits; on the French coast, the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand,
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the sea meets the moon-blanched land,

Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the Aegean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth’s shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

Cheers

Joe

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

… and miles to go before I sleep …

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, The Inner Struggle

Logically Speaking … What If Everything The Progressives Assert Is True?

“Think Of Me”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

HotBathMonkey

HotBathMonkey

-8 degrees Celsius, sunny with cloudy periods, or cloudy with sunny periods. Sunday is a good day for thinking. I might even get dressed!  Or not! Sure wish I had a hot tub.

I’d guess that most of this is a personal gedanken experiment,  the meanderings of someone who has too much time to think and not enough experience of the reality of daily life given that I have retreated to the Shire and spend my time congratulating myself about how intelligent and fortunate I am.

So I am indulging  myself by contemplating my lack of charity, patience and humility, my default position (un-vocalized these days) that I know the answer, or at least I am on the right track, and anyone who doesn’t get that is an idiot, full of sound and fury but (fortunately) signifying nothing.

Why do I feel deeply offended by some of what I read over at (for example) Being Liberal (how convenient that there is an easily accessible site where the left can effusively wear their heart on their sleeve), and other sites, and by what I hear every day on most of the MSM both Canadian and American (thank God for satellite TV)? Polarized doesn’t even begin to describe the gulf between the views.

001-a-orcIs it uncharitably to imagine progressives in the image of Tolkien’s Orcs and Goblins? I am certain that in fact the orcs and goblins of “The Lord of The Rings” were in fact literary references to the progressives of Tolkien’s day. Was Tolkien uncharitable?

Is it because they and their opinions are truly wrong or is it simply because they don’t agree with me? Why do I strongly feel that they (Progressives) haven’t thought through the implications of their declarations about reality and desirable social engineering, and the concomitant ridiculing and vilification (Bulverism) of virtually any voice raised in disagreement (is this what I am doing?).

cs-lewis-tyrannyMany of these folks are manifestly intelligent and well intentioned. Many of them do a lot of “good” work, spending their lives helping the downtrodden and disenfranchised, the needy and destitute.

But equal or greater numbers seem to spend all their waking hours ridiculing their “enemy” and explaining in great depth and with great volume why anyone who disagrees with them, any religious who do not share their religion, are wrong and not to be credited with any reasonable points.

Any attempt to engage in any discussion is met with an immediate attack aimed at destroying the new opponent which their “sensors” have detected.

In a logically twisted sort of way it seems at times that if they ( Progressives) are right (as in “correct”) to castigate and vilify those whose views they don’t share, that is, if they are truly OK to be writing and broadcasting and posting what they “believe” is reality (because after all they are all “basically good people”), then it must be equally OK for me to do the same thing, right?

And if they are wrong about what they believe and post, etc., then is it not equally wrong for me to indulge myself , so where do we go from this impasse? How do we move from this “preferential option for confrontation” to a place where we can discuss methods and directions “with good will”?

Maybe the answer can be found in looking dispassionately at the declarations and the methods and examining the points, assumptions and observed results, all the while striving not to take anything personally. I think “Not taking anything personally”, even when is is obviously intended to be both personal and as hurtful as possible, is how we get out of this conflict.

That requires a boatload of Charity and Humility, which I find to be in short supply these days. That’s what I’m working on, and I am making progress, albeit glacially at times.

So methods and declarations, the slings and arrows of outrageous fate … I find these days, having arrived at a political position closely akin to “A Pox On All your Houses“, that politics simply no longer provokes anything beyond sadness, but Faith, Logical argument, unreasoned Theological or Philosophical opinions still field barbs I cannot resist. No lack of Pride there, eh?

“The Music Of the Night”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

For example, “God can create anything so can he create a weight too heavy for him to lift? (or some other rhetorical impossibility)”.  This is a rhetorical question of the sort I have had thrown at me when I respond or comment on egregious declarations about Catholicism.

In the past, unfortunately, I had great difficulty letting them pass (still a struggle) and my naturally provocative nature makes non-believers uncomfortable.

Which sort of discussions frequently came up (before I learned to keep my damned mouth shut) when being accosted by unbelieving family members (or other acquaintances who are also unbelievers) who in their cleverness and self worship imagine themselves astute. ( AHA!  I’ve got ya now Joe). Let’s discredit Truth and by proxy discredit guilt and responsibility.

Another variation goes like this “If god can do anything, can he create a 4 sided triangle or a square circle?” (Now I’ve really gotcha, eh?). The argument might be termed “Reductio ad absurdum” but is actually “Ad hominum”.  Always looking for a way to put down and belittle believers, insecure in their unbelieving, and unaware of their logical error since logic has been conspicuous by it’s absence for most of their 50 or 60 years on this earth.

Of course God CAN create anything, and God CAN do anything … except self contradiction is not a thing. God is THE absolute almighty being and imagining a weight which The Almighty can’t lift is is to imagine a contradiction in terms. A four sided triangle or a square circle are glib but utterly meaningless constructs.

001-eskimo-inuit-sunglassesThese geometric and physical fantasies are all nonsense, all nothing, rather like approaching the real world with nothing but theories about how things “should” operate and more theories about why the world doesn’t conform to the first theories. And if the world fails to conform to one’s narrow view, well, I have a theory about that…

If one is accustomed to believing one’s theories about the world and people no matter how incongruent with observed facts and events, when the world diverges from the theories, then it is a small leap to believing that things like square circles are logical.

By way of illustrating the prevalence of illogic in daily life let’s look at the canard of “Pro Choice”. Very popular with my sisters – Pro-Choice – interesting place to build your house of cards.

Imagine us entering a restaurant and being shown to our table by a helpful Maitre d’. The waiter approaches with your drinks and menus and everyone quietly peruses their menu. The waiter returns after the drinks are almost gone to take our order “Ladies and Gentlemen, may I take your order, what are your choices?”.

001-a-vulnerable-the-deception-2

Vulnerable … the Deception

I order Prime Rib Au Jus, rare with all the trimmings and veggies, my partner chooses the Baked Atlantic Salmon with Roast Potatoes and a Spinach Salad, the rest of the guests reply “Yes!”

The waiter, a little confused, repeats “What are your choices, folks?” and the rest of the guests reply again “Yes!, we are pro-choice, therefore Yes!, our choice is “choice”!

“I am very sorry folks but we cannot serve “choice” here, we are unable to create “choice” here, we need you folks to make a choice between the various items which you have on the menu.

Then and only then can we move forward here, you have to MAKE a choice, “choice” is not a choice.  The waiter is faced with an insoluble problem both logical and grammatical.

You have to make a choice!  You can’t choose “Life” because that would make you “Pro-Life”, and unfortunately the only other “choice” is “Death”. Death for the children, death for the elderly, death for the handicapped, death for the ugly, “eugenics” that’s the game, and we are well on our way to the Great Society. Newspeak presents “Pro-Choice” as a euphemism for “Kill everyone who you find inconvenient”.  Pro-Choice is the biggest, most cowardly, cop-out of our modern society.

USHMM 89063 Men with an unidentified unit execute a group of Soviet civilians kneeling by the side of a mass graveWhat’s the moral difference between killing folks in a clinic, and killing folks in a ditch?

The logic of “Pro-Choice” can apply to any behaviour in the entire range of human behaviors, and the language of Progressive Newspeak will give you a get out of jail free card for any perversion or inhuman crime imaginable. Just vote the right way and you can do anything you like, because you are basically a nice person, right?

There is no such thing as sin, “I’m OK, You’re OK” that’s what Progressive Social Theory teaches the voting public. And this social theory leads to some unbelievable practices. But the problem is that “denial” is not the same as “proof”, and material reality in every aspect requires “proof”. Of course, “outside” the material is also part of reality but no proof regarding extra-material things is possible for humans.

Any cursory observation of modern life and the memes dispensed by the talking heads on MSM outlets make it manifestly obvious, that for the Secular Progressive Humanist, the Theory is more important than facts, logic or anything else, especially any part of daily reality that seems to go against the Theory!

Unfortunately, if one is completely immersed in the sea of illogicality it is impossible to understand that God cannot do or create anything that is a self contradiction. All self contradiction, is nonsense, is “Nothing”. There is no such thing as a “Triangle which has three sides, but on some occasions it might have four, maybe.” This is a “nothing”.

Self contradiction is a place reserved for Modern Humanist “Thinkers”.  Self contradiction is a “nothing” and as some of us know “nothing is impossible to God”.

Back before there were “Progressives”, and “Wiccans, and Gia,  and “Atheists”, and “Secular Humanists”, and “National Socialists”, aka Modern Progressive Humanists of all stripes, the folks (and philosophers and scientists for that matter) understood that you needed both “Theories” and “Practice”.

Learn To Be Lonely”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

001-a-philo_mediev

Queen of The Sciences

So, our medieval ancestors understood Theology as the “Queen of the Sciences”. Her twin sister Sophia (the Greek word for “wisdom”) was also venerated in the discipline of Philosophy. It was hard to tell the two beauties apart, but together they once ruled the many domains of human knowledge. This was the domain of “Theory”. Theories fell into the disciplines of Theology (The Queen of the Sciences) and Philosophy (Wisdom).

Practice was how you did things in the material world while taking into account the dictates of the Queen and the Handmaid. The practice was guided by the theory, but the theory was proven out by the practical experience of daily life. Theory and Practice are equal partners. Theory without Practice is like a wagon without wheels, a hard load to pull. Equally, Practice without Theory, is like riding swiftly down the road in your wheeled wagon while stone cold blind, a sure recipe for utter disaster!

001-a-star-trek-motivational-posters-captToday we find that Philosophy and Theology are increasingly irrelevant backwaters in the modern university, ridiculed for engaging in seemingly endless “solipsistic” debates. Not surprisingly,  we find the modern view is theoretical, Godless, and endlessly self referential.

Gee! That sure sounds like the actual definition of solipsism! Solipsism is the idea that a person’s mind is the only thing that actually exists. It is a philosophical argument that maintains reality is based on the perceptions of one’s mind, and therefore nothing really exists except for that perceptual reality of one’s mind.

So how do they come off accusing the disciplines of Philosophy and Theology of “solipsism” when the foundation of  both sciences is fundamentally outward looking in search of answers that man cannot find on his own – nothing even slightly self referential there. I’d guess this skull twister would be explained buy the modern concepts of “attribution” and “transference”, but that discussion has to be for another day.

Cheers

Joe

coptic-desertPatience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. It’s like climbing Everest!

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Are The Elites Out Of Touch?

cooling-towersThis blurb is just the gathering of info, or what passes for info, from around the net. How can that be seen as uncharitable? Am I making judgements here or just allowing others’ to reach conclusions on their own by presenting disparate items in a targeted sequence? Allusions and aspersions all in the same slough.

Solipsism (Listeni/ˈsɒlᵻpsɪzəm/; from Latin solus, meaning “alone”, and ipse, meaning “self”)[1] is the philosophical idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside of the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist.

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – The Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation (CTF) has come out swiftly against the federal Liberals’ carbon tax plan, saying it will cost the average Canadian family $2,569 more in taxes every year by 2022. The plan, revealed in the House of Commons today, will establish a “floor price” on carbon pollution of $10 a tonne in 2018, rising to $50 a tonne by 2022.

Will whoever replaces the Liberals as the Natural Governing Party of Canada continue with these policies or roll them back? Has any government in this country or anywhere, when returned to power after a hiatus, ever rolled back policies which the opposition decried when out of power. Brexit comes to mind but that wasn’t about the revenue, was it? Anyone remember that roll back happening ever when revenue was the question?  I don’t remember a single incident except when it involved changing spending priorities rather than rolling it back. It was that way with the old helicopter scandal under Chretien.

AlaskaPipeline-e1447444783580In other news: Saskatchewan’s first blast of wintry weather has hit the province hard. By the morning, up to 40 centimeters had fallen on some communities and according to Environment Canada, another 10-15 cm was expected to fall during the day.

cypress-hills-snowSo we NEED to do this carbon tax thingy to save the planet for our children … right? While colder winters continue to rise in the U.S., many aren’t sure which factors to attribute such extreme weather and freezing temperatures to.

The question might be posed, how can it be global warming when it snowed in places like Phoenix and Las Vegas last year? The truth is, global warming doesn’t just mean the earth is supposed to turn into an all-out fireball. To the skeptics, however, the persistent weather and climate changes are dismissed as pure happenstance. Is global warming even real?

Whatever the proponents and skeptics say, we can be absolutely certain that this new Canadian Carbon Tax is ABSOLUTELY NOT just another tax grab in a long line of tax grabs by government under many names. The Federal and Provincial governments would NEVER lie to us, eh?

justin-trudeau3Funny how the 40’s tune “D-Day Dodgers” popped up when I heard Justin declare he would prefer to make mistakes while speaking “ rather than to be inauthentic … and hyper-controlled and totally scripted the way other people are.”

Mr. Trudeau, like Lady Astor, standing on a platform and talking tommyrot, just like the D-Day Dodgers we are, we workers who have no say, and who pay for all the government folderol. And of course why should Justine care a wit since he doesn’t pay any of his own bills and never has in this life – born with a silver spoon and moved on from Daddy’s fortune to the taxpayer’s dollar in one smooth progression.

SO!  Pop Quiz! Another time – same government –  same party, who remembers inflation and indexing in the 80’s? Why wasn’t the income tax grid indexed? Why was the income tax level the ONLY item not indexed by the Federal Liberals? I guess Mr. Martin figured Canadians were too stupid to notice this HUGE stealth tax grab, and even if they did they probably would not leave, or the government could always just lie about it.

I guess Mr. Martin was right, eh? Poor, poor Canadians, so smug and naive in their practically perfect lives, in their practically perfect country, practically perfect in every way. hmmm. And, should doubts ever arise you can always rely on CBC, CTV, and Macleans for your daily Koolaid ration. What? Me Worry? PM Zoolander (aka PM selfie) has to be the attention whore….always tries to make himself centrestage. Never miss a good photo-op, eh?

And in OTTAWA — Justin Trudeau has heard the naysayers. He knows “cynics” say he’s all flash and no substance, and that there are those who believe Canadians are turning out to see him only because of his famous last name and good looks. He knows some are wondering how he, of all people, can claim to want to fight for the middle class, or when the next time he’ll put his foot in his mouth will be.

That’s okay, he says in an exclusive interview with Postmedia News: “My values and my heart are in the right place. My challenge is to have people get to know me.” But will that pay the heating bills at -40 degrees Celsius?  Does anyone outside of Ottawa and Toronto really think a nice shiny new carbon tax will do anyone in Canada any good at all, and if so, who?

So the question remains: Are The Elites Out Of Touch?  This isn’t a new meme; nor is the notion that the “little people” can’t look after themselves; nor is the reality that folks would rather believe what they think they know than what they actually know because at the root of it all we actually know nothing. And it is what we don’t know we don’t know that always bites our ass.

And here is another version of that 40’s tune ” The D-Day Dodgers” . I guess it reflects the perennial reality, and the media of the day were as cavalier with the truth then as they are now – anything goes in pursuit of a good lead.

pope_francis_marriage_remarks_810_500_55_s_c1Back then, “D-Day Dodgers” was a term for those Allied servicemen who fought in Italy during the Second World War, a rumour spread (anonymous source?) during the war that the term was publicized by Viscountess Astor, a Member of the British Parliament, who supposedly used the expression in public after a disillusioned serviceman in Italy signed a letter to her as being from a “D-Day Dodger.”

Of course, there is no record that she actually said this, in or out of Parliament, and she herself denied ever saying it.[1] What can we ever know when even the Pope changes transcripts of what was said at events.

800px-ortona_cimitero_canadese_05A reference to a “D-Day Dodger” was bitingly sarcastic, given the steady stream of allied service personnel who were being killed or wounded in combat on the Italian front. A “Dodger” is someone who avoids something; the soldiers in Italy felt that their sacrifices were being ignored after the invasion of Normandy, and a “D-Day Dodger” a reference to someone who was supposedly avoiding real combat by serving in Italy, whereas the reality was anything but.

Just another classic case of an idea which the elite got totally wrong, and the folk ran with because of their personal leanings pro or against the government of the day or perhaps the particular MP in question. Nothing much changes under the sun as long as people are involved. I bet the Roman Empire’s media were the same as ours are now, just slower because they had no internet.

Whatever … we watch the media spin the story, along for another wonderful progressive ride, just like the D-Day Dodgers on their way to Casino, but thankfully not taking enemy fire (yet).

Cheers

Joe

wheat-harvest-timeAlways remember, “Be charitable in your judgements, and never take yourself too seriously”

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Is too much weight given to History?

A wonderful story is history, a wonderful, wild story full of fantasy, and grand lies, and some truth in there filling up the space between, like sand in a large jar of rocks. And the talking heads and politicos, and academics, and the host of parasites uncountable observe the rocks and act according to what they think they know. Or they make their own fantastical, absurd, duplicitous rocks and throw out the old rocks. they never seem to notice that the sand they put back in the jar with the new rocks is the stuff of daily reality.

Too much weight… personal, peoples, cultures, past errors judged, mischance and carelessness, and the reward of effort is only regret. Refuge of fools, there doesn’t seem to be much in life worth the effort to achieve it and the rewards are ephemeral at best. Too much weight … the reason for failure, the reason for success, it’s not my fault, I’m all right jack… Even the excesses and indulgences pale eventually … and the dying are all the same … pulling into themselves, shrinking, leaking, recoiling, and the last vision, a last 10,000 mile stare is something utterly banal…

Is solipsism a viable point of view? Can one really be so firmly sealed in the prison of self that the (pick your concern of choice) is the primary datum of one’s existence?

Joe

Post Scriptum “that which comes after the writing”

The Last Judgement - Das_Jüngste_Gericht_(Memling)

The last Judgement

Das_Jüngste_Gericht_(Memling)

Standard