Returning to Normal

The economic news always leaves me struggling with emotional responses pulling in opposing directions.  Many of the human beings living in the same country as me – my fellow citizens – are experiencing a significant disruption of their expectations.  There is a great desire on the part of both those disrupted and those politically dependent on the them for “things to return to normal” or, to follow the Pollyannaish nature of politicians, “better than normal.”  But normal doesn’t really mean actual normal, it often includes a serious bit of the wishful; what can be called TV normal, you know, a Range Rover and a restored vintage muscle car in every driveway – and a Gucci chicken in every piece of titanium cookware.

I have sympathy for the fears and dreads of my fellow citizens, but little for the detail of their aspirations and none for the unsocial actions that they are willing to take to make their expectations real.

One of the coded messages presented in many different forms especially by the Republicans translates into screwing over the other guy so that you can keep what you have– coded messages are especially a Republican thing since if their true agenda were honestly explained,  they would get only about 5 to 10 percent of any election.  Why anyone would believe such messages is unclear to me since when someone tells me something like that, I am quite confident that I am the one that they have in mind to screw over; but shortsighted greed has fueled con games for thousands of years.  The whole ‘big government’ meme is a con to empower big business – when was the last time you had any say in the leadership of Bank of America – and to disenfranchise and disempower the working classes.

So here is middle class Joe Normal American; he wants a regular life (he learned to think this way from politicians!) and by ‘regular life’ he means having the goods and services associated with the top 20% of income (beginning at about $90,000 in 2005).  He just wants to be like everybody else only a little better off: 4 thousand square feet of house (“everyone has 3 thousand!”), a little bigger SUV, a boat and jet skis and so on.  He is told that this is both normal (that is his middle name) and “good for the country.”  Both are also lies.

And here is the rub: what is recognized as good for Joe depends a great deal on Joe’s expectations and beliefs; what is good for the country, and by extension also good for Joe, must be evaluated by much broader and substantive standards.

Joe cannot be expected, nor should he expect of himself, to either fully understand or to fully respond to the major forces of the biophysical space, but he should be expected to know that such forces exist and are essential in how we, as inhabitants of a region, nation and planet, act in the world.

Such a recognition implies restraint and so is anathema to the greedy way of life.  It is the ‘party of greed’s’ argument that Joe only needs to consider his own wishes, that by fully committing to self-aggrandizement he will be supporting the economic growth that will bring all good things to all people… unless, of course, he is materially poor, in which case he is to have no opinion or desire other than to bow to the wants and needs of his betters; restraint is essential for those who are not recipients of the invisible hand of greed.

But what is good for the country?  Are we only to mean by that question the economic elite? Can we mean all of the nation’s people? Are we to include the biophysical structures and systems that support and sustain all of life?  Is it other than shortsighted madness to leave out the people and the ecology from the question?

The last question above is, of course, rhetorical.  Failing to consider all of the relevant and substantive sources of influence on us is something we train our children against, and a sign that a person is losing the compos of their mentis. So, by ‘what is good for the country?’ we must mean to include all of the people and the biophysical forms and functions of the physical space.  This should be so obvious as to need no comment, but I fear it may not be and will add that the damage and destruction of the systems that sustain biological life, not the economic health of Goldman Sachs or Halliburton, ultimately determine the quality and possibility of human life.  That which is good for the biosphere is finally what is good for the country.

Seen in this way, there are some changes that need to be made.  In broad strokes: economic growth as currently configured would have to end; population would have to be reduced; total human consumption of earth’s productive capacity would have to be cut in half and then half again; the expectations and beliefs associated with a good human life would have to dramatically change.  If a typical poorly informed manipulating-message repeater were to say, “you are trying to change our way of life,” they would be correct (if Joe Normal American only realized: ‘Our way of life’ is elite code for, “I am happy having incalculable power and wealth and have no intention of giving them up even if all of life on earth has to suffer.”).

If meaningful changes were to be made, how would Joe have to live? What would his life be like? First let us understand it is only consumption by the many that creates the wealth of the few, the more consumption the more wealth.  All the immediate social drivers are for more rather than less use of the earth’s productivity.  So even if Joe were to realize that he needed to use less,there would be great forces at work to get him to use more.

This would be the first condition of his life; confusion, pressure and the resulting anger.  The physical conditions would not necessarily be ameliorative.  No 4000 square foot houses, more like 400 sq. ft. for 2 or 3 people.  No boats, ATVs, SUVs, more like bicycles and public transportation; most people would travel long distances rarely.  Joe would need to grow some of his own food and would, therefore, have to learn the skills of gardening and animal husbandry.  Most people would eventually live in villages of no more than a few hundred, these grouped into super-villages totaling a few thousand and these grouped into townships of several tens of thousands.

There would be a good bit of collective functioning as a way to reduce the consumption of major capital goods.  This should not be an especially foreign idea since we do this now with things like libraries on the public side and factories on the private side.  There would be a shifting of personal goals away from private consumption of material goods as a way to maximize the human experience (He who dies with the most toys wins) to maximizing the human experience with as few material goods as possible (getting the most pleasure and fulfillment from using as little of the earth’s productivity as possible).  This is the ‘way of life’ of all other species, and is driven by natural biological incentives; we would need to reintroduce the incentives that result is sustaining adaptations.

Joe would be very very unhappy if he continued to believe, and if the society around him believed, that excess was the way to success.  If Joe didn’t want to grow food; if he wanted to go where he wanted when he wanted by any means he wanted; if he continued to believe that his behavior was only his and no one else’s business, that he owed no compensation to the air to breathe it, to the wood in his chair or clothes on his back other than to pay the store a money price; then Joe would be a very unhappy camper indeed.

But if he began to discover the body pleasure of walking or biking; if he found satisfaction in preparing soil, planting seeds, protecting the growing crops, collecting and storing food for a season; if he began to realize the need and seek the methods for compensating the ecosystem that supplies him with the very conditions of life, and then find the pleasure in both the actions and connection of that compensating, then Joe could live with a fullness unavailable through excess.

And so my dilemma when I read and hear about our financial tribulations: There is a desperation to return to normal, return to a normal that is destructive of our environment, our humanity and our specieshood. Returning to normal often means today returning to the abnormal; like drug addicts, we create the new ‘normal’ of intoxication that we are driven powerfully to return to. There is the maddening fear of what is come if we have to give up our economic expectations, the big house, the hundreds of thousands ‘in the bank’ for ‘the future,’ the toys.

But what we are collectively experiencing now is only a very mild form of the changes that we will have to endure, and embrace, to get to a ‘way of life’ that will allow us to live not only on, but with, the earth and its total living process.  There is anger at the elites for lying to us, for manipulating our information, for intentionally controlling our expectations.  But we like today’s normal, as infantile and unhealthy as it is.

I want people to recover from their present fear, but I don’t want them to fall back into the lethargy of excess, yet that is exactly what they see as normal.  The closer we are to what is called recovery, the farther we are from the path and the forces that can initiate and guide the changes essential for the human species to reconnect with the behaviors and beliefs that can let us move from now to the future without the major conflagration that certainly awaits us otherwise.

I want to yell out, “This is the future.  See what you want of it.  Make it work for you.  Use the courage of your disrupted life to take on the elites – they are nothing without you; they know that, but will kill you to keep you from knowing it.  These economic disruptions are a gift; it is only through them that the real structures of power and economic domination can be seen.  Then you must act, act in defiance of the normal and in pursuit of a truly human life.”

But I am speechless.  It all sounds so foolish to the modern ear when said out loud.

James Keye is the nom de plume of a biologist and psychologist who after discovering a mismatch between academe and himself went into private business for many years. His whole post-pubescent life has been focused on understanding at both the intellectual and personal levels what it is to be of the human species; he claims some success. Email him at: jkeye1632@gmail.com. Read other articles by James, or visit James's website.

28 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. bozh said on November 16th, 2010 at 9:38am #

    sorry, james! i do not burden self with understanding [fully or otherwise] why-how ‘laws’ were vritten by rich people or what it is they r after!
    i, and billions or trns of joes, as kids or adults, do not have to understand anything; we all have received from god or nature or god/nature everything we ever need; includes understandings.

    don’t, please, either tacitly or explicitly posit that they, the mafia, got it and we joes have not. for that is one of the greatest lies ever told! unfortunately works well for robbers and their hired guns.!
    to me it is hunting for a snark when one hunts for understandings or truth; neither exist apart from thinkers.
    and as i said, we got our rightful inheritance at birth and there is no extras to be obtained after.
    and never in an iniquitous society like that of india, egypt, u.s, israel
    the fact is that the only ‘understandings’, ‘truth’, ‘justice’, war and peace u gonna get is the one meted u by mafia.

    and, then we stand accused of not understanding their understanding and efforts to obtain justice, peace, eternal progress, etc. tnx

  2. Don Hawkins said on November 16th, 2010 at 11:17am #

    Accused of not understanding their understanding it all sounds so strange to say the least. It does look like we are about to find out just how much we do understand.

  3. bozh said on November 16th, 2010 at 11:21am #

    don, it does sound strange. what scares me the most is me understanding the understanding people. ah yam not scared of stupid people– just the smart ones! tnx

  4. Deadbeat said on November 16th, 2010 at 2:32pm #

    Yet another “blame the victim” screed by James Keyes. This is nothing but a story based on fallacious strawman “Joe”. IMO this is really about Mr. Keyes own class anxieties rather than Joe’s. Once again Mr. Keyes engages in the Malthusian misanthropy ..

    Here’s the tell tale giveaway …

    Seen in this way, there are some changes that need to be made. In broad strokes: economic growth as currently configured would have to end; population would have to be reduced; total human consumption of earth’s productive capacity would have to be cut in half and then half again; the expectations and beliefs associated with a good human life would have to dramatically change.

    You’ve got much of the world’s population living on less than $US2.00/day so the problem is not “overconsumption” it is UNDERCONSUMPTION.

    Also Joe wasn’t busy buying a big-assed house. Joe was getting over-EXPLOITED during the past 30 years and was compelled to take on DEBT in order to maintain living standards. He was faced with stagnant wages yet rising housing, health care, child care, transportation and taxes expenses. Joe was also like to be divorced and owning the bank and compelled by the state to make other payments that left him on the TREADMILL.

    These key facts are missing in Mr. Keyes allegory.

    Then Keyes says …

    If a typical poorly informed manipulating-message repeater were to say, “you are trying to change our way of life,” they would be correct (if Joe Normal American only realized: ‘Our way of life’ is elite code for, “I am happy having incalculable power and wealth and have no intention of giving them up even if all of life on earth has to suffer.”).

    So the U.S. has the worst distribution of wealth and power in the industrial world and Mr. Keyes wants us to believe that Joe is now priding himself for this “power”. Who’s “zooming” who?

    I’m sorry to say but the level of real analysis on DV lately has been questionable to say the least.

  5. Max Shields said on November 16th, 2010 at 4:17pm #

    Apparently Deadbeat, you don’t know “Joe”. Meet him some day and see what kind of “victim” he respresents.

    Now if you want victims, take a look at the babies we’ve slaughtered in Afghanistan as “Joe” waits to fill his SUV.

  6. Deadbeat said on November 16th, 2010 at 5:35pm #

    Max Shields writes …

    Apparently Deadbeat, you don’t know “Joe”. Meet him some day and see what kind of “victim” he respresents. Now if you want victims, take a look at the babies we’ve slaughtered in Afghanistan as “Joe” waits to fill his SUV

    Again Max you don’t offer any analysis to the discussion. Joe didn’t vote for the War in Iraq and Afghanistan. AIPAC and the Presidents of the top Zionist organization did through their 5th column that you choose to ignore and shift the blame over to Joe.

  7. bozh said on November 17th, 2010 at 6:37am #

    but joes are still victims! regardless what they voted for! and, did u guyz note, joes never ever vote against anything. they vote solely for fuzzy yeses and fuzzier political ‘promises’.
    and they do that because they were told when they were tykes that god blesses only america; its constitution being a holy writ; thus, whatever u.s does is holy!
    and 99% of u.s pop still believes that.
    even nazis have not gotten 99% of support. or, did, but after killing or imprisoning all
    dissenters!

    if anything goes wrong in u.s it is always palin’s, christine mcdonnel’s, beck’s, bush’s fault. tnx

  8. Deadbeat said on November 17th, 2010 at 6:55am #

    bozh write …

    but joes are still victims!

    I’m glad bozh that you see that Joe is actually victim which is exactly my point and runs contrary to how Max view Joe and how Mr. Keyes portrays him.

  9. James Keye said on November 17th, 2010 at 3:43pm #

    Gentlepeople,

    Of course, Joe is a victim; as are his oppressors. Claiming victimhood is a useless pursuit; what do you do after you have decided who is and who is not a victim?

    But… this has nothing to do with the essay and its essential points. Did you get it? If not, it would be useful to me to know.

    Deadbeat, Don and Bozh should read through the essay again: The Joes are not prideful in their power, the power elites are, and they use coded language to confuse the Joes. If they are going to snark away, they should at least snark in the right direction.

    Also, since they feel free to offer me advice to correct my misperceptions of life, let me suggest that they learn how to read with clarity and restraint rather than with the sole intention of discovering things that annoy them.

  10. Max Shields said on November 17th, 2010 at 3:57pm #

    Here is my problem with this idea of Joe as victim. If “Joe” is a victim, what is he a victim of? And if Joe is an American middle class regular Joe guy, why are “we” so damn smart and can see that Joe has been manipulated by the powers that be, but not us?

    How have we, all those who think they know best how the system works to manipulate poor Joe, see right through this, while Joe with his material lust (tho recently depressed by an economic system beyond his control).

    Now there are some, who with the great economic depression pressing down on them, begin to suspect some of these things, but these world views die hard.

    Now the baby in Afghanistan who is blown to pieces by carpet bombs from American drones…we must recognize these are NOT moral equivalents…that should be obvious.

  11. Don Hawkins said on November 17th, 2010 at 4:03pm #

    James I see your point maybe we are just a little tired I do feel we are all philosophers now or if not should be.

  12. bozh said on November 17th, 2010 at 5:00pm #

    james,
    i reread carefully the top part of ur piece. the expectations by joes that were disrupted were engendered by whom and why?
    how-when did they acquire these expectations? obama or dems were saying smthing! so joes understandings of what was to happen came after explicit or tacit political ‘promises’ or vague sayings and joes not onto it.
    and they haven’t spotted it because they were previously semanticly rendered blind. or are joes stupid as their masters say explicitly and tacitly?

    As i have affirmed many times before there is nothing wrong with us. if joes misunderstood obama, then, i firmly conclude, joes were lead by the nose.
    it is not a nice thing to do humans; it hurts like hell.
    so my view that they have been victimized or hurt or even damaged for long time stands.

    and haven’t all of us fallen prey to a liar?

    u also say that u have little sympathy for joes’ aspirations and unsocial actions they are willing to take to fulfill them.

    but if they are lead by the nose, as i assert, they don’t then lead but follow or do what u.s constitution and system of rule allows or teaches them to do– and from childhood.

    there we come back to some kind of abuse, victimization, ill treatment!

    about the use of coded language pols use. what they say appears clear to me.
    what can be clearer than god bless [only] america, the greatness of america, infallible constitution, we are nation of laws, this or that is what made america great, we are defending our interest, we are brining democracy to this or that people.

    i wld agree that 99% of people everywhere evaluate coded language as clear also; alas, the meanings they receive are not the meanings sent.
    once again we come back to some kind of abuse!
    what is good for joes depends on their expectations appears a bit fuzzy to me. i do not know what i mean by that.
    but expectations just don’t happen! aren’t they imparted from childhood just like belief in god.

    i have postulated and even affirmed that there is nothing wrong with us. we are just lead by worst criminals imaginable that’s why they have private spies, cia, fbi, army.
    all that is extant because they know that some joes can smell the cofffee. and it is these people that fbi and cia watches. more cld be said. tnx

  13. Deadbeat said on November 17th, 2010 at 5:45pm #

    James Keyes writes …

    Deadbeat, Don and Bozh should read through the essay again: The Joes are not prideful in their power, the power elites are, and they use coded language to confuse the Joes. If they are going to snark away, they should at least snark in the right direction.

    I’ve read the article and there is no need for me to return to it. I already pointed out one of the more disturbing aspect of Mr. Keyes rhetoric …

    Seen in this way, there are some changes that need to be made. In broad strokes: economic growth as currently configured would have to end; population would have to be reduced; total human consumption of earth’s productive capacity would have to be cut in half and then half again; the expectations and beliefs associated with a good human life would have to dramatically change.

    The issue therefore isn’t JUST Joe. It is the idea of shifting blame onto the weaker parties and away from the powerful. It is even the audacity to lying blame for this system on even the weakest. “Joe”‘s relative power than those living on $2.00/day is albeit greater but against the system of Capitalism is relatively weak. What is lacking in Mr. Keyes’ article any semblance of CLASS analysis.

    There’s such a desire to shun the ideas of that bearded old man from the 19th Century.

  14. Deadbeat said on November 17th, 2010 at 5:48pm #

    Max Shields writes …

    Here is my problem with this idea of Joe as victim. If “Joe” is a victim, what is he a victim of? And if Joe is an American middle class regular Joe guy, why are “we” so damn smart and can see that Joe has been manipulated by the powers that be, but not us?

    It’s called INDOCTRINATION Max and your advocacy is designed to keep poor old “Joe” a victim.

  15. Max Shields said on November 17th, 2010 at 6:28pm #

    So deadbeat you have missed out on the indoctination, but our buddy Joe has not? And I am the cause of Joe’s indoctrination. And you are the savior?

    Is that what you tell yourself, deadbeat?

  16. bozh said on November 17th, 2010 at 6:50pm #

    people can be mislead by words alone. what some people do not espy [being also victimized by words solely] a very important panhuman trait: trust.
    we ?all yearn to trust, relie on others but in an ideally interdependent way.
    i leave the word trust undefined because such a word cannot be explained by words.

    we ?all may have known a person whom we trusted and trusted that that person trusted u [establishing an interdependence], who betrayed u in some way.
    it feels just awful and pain almost never goes away.

    trust appears our greatest panhuman wealth. it, perhaps more that any other value, enabled us to survive.
    but we have been robbed of it. if one leaves out but this fact only, one brings us a fictitious reality.
    why-when how we became utter dependencies ought to be studied. but it is not!

    isn’t puzzling that people ‘know’ god exists and not having ever seen her/him.
    isn’t puzzling that people ‘know’ bible is word of god and u.s constitution a sacred writ; written by dead men called fathers of the confederation!
    how’s that happen?

    are 98% of world pop struck dumb by devil, god or nature and this then cannot be changed, but god gave them teachers and leaders to look after the dumb asses?
    is keyes really trying to tell us that we are dumb, unruly, vicious and god sent people to make sure they behave as god intended.
    meanwhile, swiss proving that it is not so. so , i trust my eyes and hell with gods and u.s constitution and all clergy! tnx

  17. Max Shields said on November 17th, 2010 at 7:30pm #

    Could it be that for some time, however long, people just hold a point of view? Could it be that Joe has a point of view that is different that deadbeat’s or bozh? Or do you deny Joe his point of view because you say he is indoctrinated and a victim; while you are not?

  18. hayate said on November 17th, 2010 at 8:02pm #

    Deadbeat

    “It’s called INDOCTRINATION Max and your advocacy is designed to keep poor old “Joe” a victim.”

    Yup, powerless and deep in the mushroom cave. People are not that different from each other anywhere. This is something Jewish zionists, with their Judeao-supremacist “I’m so special” mindsets, fail to understand. Indoctrinated to be irrational, people will be irrational. This is why the indoctrination begins very early, indoctrinations imposed during childhood are the most ingrained and most difficult to over come. They plant the “buttons” early, then use their media to “press the buttons” when need arises.

  19. bozh said on November 17th, 2010 at 9:24pm #

    max,
    of course, joe 1, 2, 3 thinks differently than i do. i had a different set of teachers than joe 1, 2, 3
    and joe 1 does not think exactly the same as joe 2, 3, 4
    however, 99% of americans think, i guess, that constitution is unemendable and that all u.s wars were just.

    if they thought as i think, why wld i waste my time telling them what they already know?
    both james and max are supremacists and i am not. so, if supremacism is right, they are right. servant class must do all the dirty and dangerous work and creme de la creme must rule and push paper.
    but the swiss are showing that it doesn’t have to be that way. they have not waged a war for about 700 yrs! tnx

  20. bozh said on November 17th, 2010 at 9:35pm #

    max and james had been conditioned like pavlov’s dog had been. but i hope that pavlov had unconditioned the dog so that he wldn’t salivate at the sound of bell.
    max and james cld be unconditioned if there is a way and them being willing to be deprogrammed.
    they will always defend their supremacism. and so will all ‘jews’.
    as of necessary truth, they cannot be right. how cld such an evil as supremacism be right for all time? tnx

  21. Max Shields said on November 18th, 2010 at 9:46am #

    The point is Joe is a symbol of the status quo. We can say “he’s” been indoctinated via the education and mass marketing system. But every system is supported by a critical mass status quo.

    Simply saying these people, in effect, are the gulable doofs who just figure out how to “succeed” by prescribed measurements seems to leave us with a question. Are these “gulable” sorts educable? Certainly they are, but to what end?

    Are you offering Marx and socialism as their new status quo? Or will that suffice if we haven’t defined with clarity the problem and how to effect change. One is the ultimate collapse…or some painful facsimile.

  22. bozh said on November 18th, 2010 at 10:18am #

    comparing and ideology like igalitarianism, comprising not ?a living soul, with an supremacistic ideology comprising ?every human being that ever lived since its institutinalization, will not do; precisely, why supremacists throw this at u with abandon.
    for one thing, there is no communists anywhere as of yet. but supremacists fear one day there may be even a few let alone bns.

    or they may say: ok, ok, but communism is even worse. a safe thing to say because such statement cannot be evaluated as true or false or right or wrong.
    however, people conditioned to love a flag or constitution– tho, mere symbols, wld always show joy at seeing the flag just like the dog salivates and joyfully runs for his food at the sound of bell.

    pavlov’s discovery appears as one of the most valuable i know of; thus, it apears ?totally banned. yet, the uncodioning the dog or human may be all we require to save the planet and bring on an egalitarian society.
    and once again after millennial hiatus we become human; discarding once for all religions and all supremacism. tnx
    T

  23. James Keye said on November 19th, 2010 at 3:43pm #

    Knowledge of the autonomic NS based conditioning experimented with by Pavlov is not being suppressed. Learning theory requires that some time and attention be given to it. If that means that it is effete or elitist, then so be it. I cannot agree that humans have all that they need of experience and learning by being born — there is certainly a meaning there that I can approve, but it only applies when the ‘native’ powers are used to collect functional process and evidence as tools in life.

    The essence of the essay is here: “There is a desperation to return to normal, return to a normal that is destructive of our environment, our humanity and our specieshood. Returning to normal often means today returning to the abnormal; like drug addicts, we create the new ‘normal’ of intoxication that we are driven powerfully to return to.” How is it that the discussion devolves to such minor and tangental issues? I suspect I know, but it is disappointing.

  24. bozh said on November 19th, 2010 at 5:00pm #

    when i said that at birth a baby receives all s/he needs, that includes honest, truthful people as well as apples, clean water, respect, value, peace, security, health care, tutoring, etcetc.
    in short, baby receives hisher inheritance. but the next day most babies are deprived of it.
    ok! i do not know that pavlov’s experiment in not taught in some schools but i do know it is not mentioned in these sites nor in media. nor is it ever mentioned that the method works on humans!
    suppose, it does not? then, what works on and against them? tnx

  25. Max Shields said on November 20th, 2010 at 7:49am #

    James Keye,
    I agree with your premise that there is a pull back to “normal” or business as usual. It is not the simple drive to return to a time structured by the cycle of job to and fro, that is most disconcerting, after all human, like a organisms strive for a kind of stability.

    What is troubling is that we have layers of so-called “progressives” who think we needed more, more stimulus, more growth, more consumption to “recover”; while their “opposites want less stimulus but are in complete agreement on the comsumption and growth aspects. In other words, unlike DV which clousters itself away from the daily chanting of growth to bring back “normalcy, the dominate narrative by the plutocrats is clear – we need to grow the economy. That simple phrase used over and over has the same effect, as implemented in our production, in our trade, in our daily consumption of needless goods, as a cluster of atomic missiles.

    It is the “normalcy” which is at the root of the American, Western pathology. Rather than do what must be done, dial back growth for developed nations, we have presidents and congresses demanding MORE MORE MORE. And all of this is done in the name of JOBS. No one looks at what we mean by jobs; and the fact that real work is diminished by this growth mantra. Solutions are out there – Peter Victor, Herman Daly, Tim Jackson, Juliet Schor to name a few. The facts are lucid and obvious to ANYONE who would just take a magnifying glass to NORMAL. Normal produces destruction, and social injustice.

  26. bozh said on November 20th, 2010 at 8:47am #

    i do not object to use of the word “indoctrination” to explain how people view reality or all-of-it-at-a-p0int-in-time.
    by this long label i mean that as of necessary truth we know everything we need to known at a given time; more to know later but only if people are earnest in quest for knowledge.
    a hebrew may have or may have not been the first to have espied the eternal truth by saying: sufficient onto the day is rigor thereof.
    mind u, i am only concluding that s/he meant what we mean.

    about me saying that pavlov’s experiment is not explained in any school? i did put ? mark before totally banned.
    my actual expression is “?totally banned” . so, james misread or misunderstood the statement.
    now i need smone to tell me whether in schools or life, educators say that the experiment works on humans? tnx

  27. bozh said on November 20th, 2010 at 9:28am #

    DB, please don’t read this crap!
    reducing american or european output by 90% wld be ok with me and the mice.
    as i said or pleaded with people: don’t only look at a bra look also what’s behind it?
    “economy”, “growth” and such labels can be compared onto bras; tits being elsewhere and entirely different in qualities.
    this eternal truth applies to all labels: flag, a law, constitution, corruption, honesty, peace, war, truth, etcetc.

    so, what does mean: we are a nation of laws? to me it means: we are a nation of bras or blah of the blah!
    i suspect that all high supremacists are instinctively onto this or r very aware of the verbal entrapment.
    alas, 99& of world people may indeed not have a clue about what we say!

    i believe that people r being trained to fear-hate any new ideas or even facts. hadn’t torah, bible, quran, das kapital, lenin, schooling, constitution said it all?
    so stop spreading nonsense! such attitude can be labeled “misoneism” = fear -hate of anything new.

    i find it odd that 10 or 15 yrs ago in an u.s corporate paper a few readers in letters to eds said that no one can understand u.s constitution.
    and yet, on ‘dissident’ sites i have yet to read such a statement.
    some dissidence! tnx

  28. Don Hawkins said on November 20th, 2010 at 11:54am #

    Did it all start in Israel or Jerusalem? What all started there that the Universe can be a rather violent place or on Earth ever now then we get a flood or two a volcano war’s started by type A humans real active human’s so that’s where it started or myth about how it started and all work’s.

    4000 BC

    c. 3300 BC—Ötzi the Iceman dies near the present-day border between Austria and Italy, only to be discovered in 1991 buried in a glacier of the Ötztal Alps. His cause of death is believed to be homicide.

    3000BC
    3000 BC First evidence of gold being used (in the Middle East) was from this time period.

    2030–1556 BC—Xia Dynasty, first Chinese dynasty and government system established
    Golden age of Ur in Mesopotamia. (2474 BC–2398 BC

    2000BC
    1700 BC—An earthquake damages palaces at Knossos and Phaistos
    Conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. The United Monarchy emerges in the last decades of the millennium. (According to the Bible.)

    1000BC
    1050 BC: Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant from Israel in battle. (Approximate date)
    Saul the King becomes the first king of the Israelites.

    200BC
    The first good measurement of the distance between Earth and the Sun is made by Eratosthenes (approximate date). By studying lunar eclipses, his result is roughly 150 000 000 km. The currently accepted value is 149 597 870 691 ± 30 metres.

    The Great Wall of China is completed.
    The Roman Army reaches 300,000 soldiers.

    1000AD
    Gunpowder is invented in China.

    1945 AD

    Atomic bomb tested it worked