Archive for September, 2006

The Daily Show’s biggest error, and how to love America again

September 28, 2006

Is one that is very ironic: they are playing to the same concept of fear that the Bush Administration is.

After 9/11, The Daily Show tells us with their “scared shitless, the country rallied (around the President)” that people were afraid.

I talked to a lot of people shortly after 9/11, and did not sense much fear. I DID sense considerable bewilderment and anger. The people wanted retribution, they wanted blood. They wanted revenge.

They were not afraid. They supported the president since he seemed to share their goals for revenge.

Now… maybe half of the people I talked to were from Michigan or Indiana, many from the West Coast, more from scattered locations around the US and some from outside the US. I did not, as the Daily Show perhaps did, focus my efforts on New York City itself. If I had I perhaps would have seen a different story, perhaps would have seen more fear.

But the Daily Show purported to speak for “the country”, and in this they are wrong. The country was not scared shitless at ANY time after 9/11… the country is *much* more afraid now in light of the actions of the Bush Administration than they’ve ever been from any actions of Al Qaeda.

Besides perhaps a NYC bias, what other reasons could The Daily Show have for their statement? I’ve watched a great deal of this program, and they bring fear up again and again. They believe that the Bush Administration promotes and exploits a culture of fear in the United States.

I agree with them, but disagree with the initial basis for that fear. The Daily Show says its 9/11 that created the initial fear. I say its the culture of extremism, of empty rhetoric, of the demagogues and defeatists, of mindless banter disguised as debate… ultimately of LIES and DECEPTION and the resulting breaking down of truth, that created the initial fear. The Bush Administration merely exploited the uncertainty and fear that has been growing in America.

When your nation’s leader is more damaging to your country that anyone else in the world (including Bin Laden), THAT’S scary.  THAT’S when a nation becomes truly afraid.

And then the schizophrenia hits… he’s an elected official of a democracy!  We voted in the person most damaging to ourselves, EVEN AFTER we knew better! The mind boggles.

I bring this up, and noone wants to discuss it. Noone wants to discuss the *motivation* for a people to elect a force that will bring great suffering to themselves. Noone wants to discuss my theory of the “Rocky Syndrome” (or the V for Vendetta syndrome) where Bush was voted in in order for the American people to rise up, dethrone him, and bask in the misguided glory and self-strength resulting thereafter.

What’s the most sickening thing in America today? I say its Self-Loathing ITSELF that’s the worst disease America has to offer. What travesties that has brought upon us. Bush?… Bush is just the RESULT.

Destroy the demagogues and defeatists, the talk shows of suffering,  falsity in all its guises, rhetoric, and emptiness. Once you do so you may realize that you have benefitted us all… that Republicans and Democrats, black and white, Jon Stewart, Al Franken, and Ann Coulter, will be set free, will be happier than they’ve ever been before.

And I will finally love America, the love I’ve always wanted to give it but was never given the chance.

Advertisements

Woman

September 28, 2006

The problem with woman is that she is not women. Woman is the seat of pleasure and the realization of lost hope. A woman is where a man goes to live and to die.

“Support our Troops”

September 20, 2006

These stickers don’t say “Support our Mailmen” or “Support our Bankers”… they invariably say “Support our Troops”. The sadness and humor found therein compete for supremacy, and humanity once again emerges with mud on their face.

Here’s a question for all the wise people who proclaim “Support our Troops”… is it possible to do otherwise under any remotely normal human behavior?

I’d like to know how to NOT support our troops… perhaps not pay my taxes? Absolutely, that would do it. How about killing American soldiers by virtue of them being American soldiers? Sure, no argument there.

Lets say… arguing against the war in Iraq? Nope, that has nothing necessarily to do with supporting or not supporting our troops.

Yet… despite the considerable *difficulty* of not supporting our troops, still the stickers are prominently displayed. Perhaps declaring Bush Allegiance will save you when the cleansing begins.

Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, etc. are not on the Right

September 15, 2006

Now, hold on. Settle down, people. Let me explain.

The first time I heard Rush Limbaugh, I laughed. Ludicrous, ridiculous, I thought. Maybe I even thought this was a new form of humor… perhaps I admired its subtlety. The Blowhard Republican come to life – a parody of the right.

Others, seemingly, did not also treat it as parody… so while in a world of Brian Koontzs Rush Limbaugh would be a parodist of the Right, in this world he became an ADVOCATE for the Right. All of us use, exploit, Rush Limbaugh… and “for the Right” is the most politically successful exploitation of him.

Later, Bill O’Reilly comes along. Ann Coulter comes along… even MORE extreme parodies, really crazy, REALLY out there. Yet again, they are treated seriously. This time, unlike with Rush Limbaugh, even the LEFT treats them seriously.

But through all this pathetic nonsense called American society, are any of these people really on the Right? Come on… Ann Coulter is a satirist, a rightist HATER… she makes conservative values look horribly bad. She makes NOTHING look good.
The horrible thing is that the left is more monstrous than anyone (except perhaps people like Ann Coulter) thought they were… they are using these humorists for their own ends… to try to destroy the conservatism that apparently they always wanted to destroy.

What actual effect does Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, have? Like any satirist, you can’t treat their words straightforwardly… look at the effect. All of these people are self-loathers, that much is true. They have more in common with Jim Carrey than with George Will.

Ostensibly, these people are bringing up issues a more mainstream America doesn’t bring up. These people hate the entire American political debate system and want to revise it into something more “passionate”… they want to explore debates between impassioned extremes… that’s the kind version of what they do.

The cynicism inherent in this is pathetic. The concept that there are PREDEFINED positions, that a human is so PRE-Understood that he can take some preexisting Liberal or Conservative position, call it his own, and then slug it out against an “opposite” of him is ridiculous. Its the HUMAN that is important, not a shallow stereotyped position.
With all the vile, all the bile, all the blanketed loathing, even something good that can come out of them is soiled.

Really. Next time you see one of them, give them a hug. And get a smile out of them! They aren’t nearly as bad of people as they make themselves out to be. Just way too blind, way too ignorant about the complexities of humanity. Perhaps way too desperate for a simple humanity where every issue boils down to black and white…

That they have grown a political following, however, THAT you cannot blame on them. They have proven to me that America is more pathetic than I thought it was. But from this too America can recover… I hope.

In a time of Uncertainty, Insecurity brings to power those who issue a false sense of Certainty. I argue that anyone who puts a garbage-man into power by means of their own uncertainty is a monster… so… how’s America doing these days?

Please… please… just tell me what to think! Should I choose Ann Coulter or Al Franken? Give me some extreme to clarify everything for me, and some arch-nemesis to hate!

The Exceptional thing about this Administration

September 14, 2006

For the first time in American history, the people control the federal government.

Normally, the people elect a government that then does what it thinks is best for the national interest. Normal oversight is used, normal checks and balances, that’s it. Normal administrations do many things in secret, and noone cares because they are, to an extent, trusted.

The Bush Administration is so ridiculously agendaed, so obviously biased, so incompetently manipulative, that for the first time in America’s history none of this is true. Now the American people, the congress, the press, run the show in Washington. None of the inner circle of the Bush Administration can do *anything* without it being hyper-scrutinized, without a metric shitton of cynicism thrown at it, and without being *resisted against*… a new level of awareness, a new gridlock is upon us.

If Nixon made the American people darkly cynical about the federal government, what will the Bush Administration do to it? How valuable exactly is this?

Many people like to ignore Bush’s accomplishments in favor of his many failures. But what does a sneering, blustering, man really want if not a punch in the face? If not to generate a RISING UP against him?

Friends, I fear that on this most dreadful of tasks he is succeeding… I see it in the American people who think they are weak and thus need to experience through Bush’s pain their own supposed strength.

Several thousand dead Americans. Many more dead Iraqis. An increase in terrorists and terrorism worldwide. I’d accept all of these things as long as you do not succumb to Bush’s greatest desire.

Bush is poking you in the face with a stick. Do not strike back. Instead, send him away. Impeach him. If you do not have the courage to impeach him, vote his affiliates out in 2006 and 2008.
Bush is not the problem. You voted for him, lest you forget. Stop complaining and start impeaching.

Don’t be shortsighted. Do not be blind. Don’t let Bush’s small injuries to you mask the far greater injury he is trying to cause.

Don’t give Bush what he wants. Give him what YOU want.

The 1960s attempt their perverse revenge

September 12, 2006

Upon people who were never even born at the time.

The 1960s were said to be a failure. Since the decade was largely undefined, I’m not sure what exactly they failed AT… apparently they failed at creating a new society, a hippie utopia of sorts with milk, honey, and none of this painful remainder of life. Well… at least they’re *ambitious*.

So the 1960s thinks the 1960s failed… time goes by, they reload their guns, and BINGO, Neocon perversion greets us, attempts to define the 21st century. Failure has apparently taught them self-righteousness and idealism (oh wait, the 1960s were also defined by that) and BY GOD, they will not allow a second failure!

Stay the Course, these Neohippies tell us… and now they will Manipulate us into a new society instead of groupthinking us into a new society as the 1960s tried to do (haven’t you heard, ’50s culture was deeply corrupt and possibly world-destroying?).

They didn’t even wait long. The ’70s saw the beginning of the Think Tanks, where your mind should no longer be under your control. The Media used as an instrument of external will instead of a method of non-agendaed information transfer.

Don’t you notice… something sick about a people who will not accept failure where they define success as a complete overhaul of humanity? Given the terms, at least their DESPERATION is logical. Its the *terms themselves* that are disgusting.

After all, can’t anyone be NOT OVERHAULED ENOUGH? Can’t anyone be NOT PROGRESSIVE ENOUGH? Their thinking is a blank slate to a condemnation of the entire world, the entire past, and probably the entire future.

And its funny, because this thinking about THEM is the same kind of disastrous thinking that they are doing… maybe its different because while they are saying the world is the problem, I’m saying THEY are the problem… different scale I suppose.

All of this arises out of a feeling of desperate emptiness… they try to be larger than life, to produce a legacy that is deeply ambitious, BECAUSE otherwise they cannot live with themselves… because otherwise, however many small successes they may have, they are a failure.

I see the 1960s in a positive light, as long as the 1960s remain in the 1960s. Hippies showed us love, they showed us freedom. The 1960s were *successful*.

But not successful enough for many, who successfully manipulated America into believing the 1960s were a failure. And a failure of Liberalism also, another fucking lie!

So now we get this guilt-ridden, insecure, overcompensating, action-oriented, confused, emotionally-exhausted, mind-numbed, good action-incapable monstrosity called the Bush Administration and by extension, the Neocons.

Thanks, Think Tanks. Thanks, 1960s Nihilism. Go away now. Go away and do not return. This world is not yours.

On Conspiracists

September 12, 2006

There are many dark creatures in today’s world, Conspiracists being a particular breed. They are fueled by their desire for illumination. They, perhaps more than any other, speculate on the possibilities of reality. They do not claim facts, only shadows, only maybes, only hopefully nots… they live not under truth but under ‘I hope that’s not true’.

The rest of us make fun of them, but they will have a place at the table until reality becomes secure again, until truth becomes KNOWN again.

Many conspiracists claim nobility, claim they are fighting for a greater reality. I doubt that a deeply speculative people can ever generate that reality… where is the reality they use as their base… is the FIGHT their entirety?

But as a player IN the game, conspiracists can be valuable. They have not the ability to put the pieces together, but they can bring pieces to the puzzle. They can contribute… maybe that’s all they hope for.

We may find that more of us are allied with conspiracists than we ever thought possible just a short time ago.

Anyone who wants illumination lives in darkness.

On Genius, Madness, and the sad rest

September 9, 2006

Neither are impressive terms. I do like the link between insanity and anger (madness).

What some people call insanity and then throw up their hands because, OF COURSE, they can know or explain nothing about such a crazy, crazy thing (or rather, they don’t want to create any potential for other people to label them crazy and then get to have their way with them) I explain fairly simply: the consistent pursuit of communication in socially unacceptable fashion. Notice also the link between criminality and insanity.

So while a human acting in a weird way who then STOPS and acts normally is not called insane, a human who doesn’t stop at some point is deemed crazy. Also note that the many people who call insanity a *lack* of communication are wrong… there is much pathos in silence.

The treatment of the insane is a pretty good litmus test for the morality of a people… certainty a test with respect to how they deal with individualism, which is what insanity boils down to.

After all, a hermit is nothing but a man who doesn’t want on his conscience the act of pathos, so he removes that act by removing the people who would receive it, and gets SOCIALLY HONORED with the name hermit rather than the name insane.

Its all a fucking joke. Insanity is treated in a hands-off manner in order to retain control over humans, in order for US to be able to control who gets expelled from US. “You’re crazy!” is not a statement of fact… its a THREAT. Stop acting crazy or you’ll get what’s coming to you!
The freedom to communicate in the precise manner in which you want to communicate is more important than our feelings of power as we abuse or cleanse such people, ridding ourselves of them. Hence, the Age of Suffering is upon us… that Jerry Springer and his kin slipped by without anyone else but the people the Aristocrats despise noticing what they herald is hilarious.

I apologize for not dealing with the entirety of the thread title in a prompt manner. There isn’t a close link between genius and madness… one REASON for madness is the inability to communicate the results of what is later called genius. But its only one reason… most of madness is never called genius… genius is a name that US give to who we want to provide honor, and thus control, over humanity… another bullshit term that only gets in the way of truth.

He’s a Genius… He’s a Madman! We can’t decide! I know, I know, lets decide by whether or not he pleases us, by whether we can exploit his material or whether he angers us by his material staying out of reach! Yes, its all about truth!

Is this piece about Shoes or about Rape?

September 4, 2006

About http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/5313256.stm

We don’t give a fuck about shoes.

Woman who’s been raped: NO, NO, not my shoes! Anything but my shoes!

The Age of Uncertainty leads to pursuit of the Highly Unlikely

September 3, 2006

Or as Nietzshe would put it: “I have hope”.

Bin Laden also… has hope. In his case, hope in the future of Islam. So he pursues a destructive measure which MIGHT, however low a chance, create his dreamworld.

In Nietzsche’s case, he invented an Anti-human behemoth so that he might literally Save the World. Apparently we’re still in this Good/Evil Destroy the World/Save the World duology. Nietzsche wasn’t quite “Beyond” it so it would seem.

But back to Bin Laden and this postmodern pursuit of the Highly Unlikely. Speculation is that he envisions an Islamic superstate. Neocons call this a feverish Western nightmare, although at this point that might be WHY he envisions an Islamic superstate… Neocon-assigned Western nightmares might be good enough for his vision.

What would have been deemed ridiculous in previous eras now is called (at least by enough people to allow it to continue) a Good Idea. Both the West and the Muslim world see Islam in danger. While a more peaceful approach might allow a continually impoverished Islamic world (or an integrated world losing its Islamic nature), only an aggressive approach *could* allow a more stable Islamic world.

Here’s a tip: When you begin your day by saying “anything can happen”, then anything will happen (in your mind). Aliens? Why not. Bizarre conspiracies? Sounds good. Islamic superstates? Sign me up.

What’s next, in this brave new world of the Highly Unlikely? What other ridiculous fantasies do we get to experience firsthand? Can I be blown up for someone’s pipe dream?

Nietzsche calls this Freedom. Nietzsche calls this The Pursuit of Hope. It looks to me like Desperate Lunacy.

Beware, however, the political monsters that call Bin Laden a terrorist. He’s, unfortunately, merely a man of our times. Following your dream… isn’t that what America is all about? (Granted, its perhaps assumed that your dream doesn’t involve lots of corpses, but what if it does?)

The conspiracist might scream “You will not take away my freedom!” but it looks to me like the conspiracist has already taken away his own freedom. Is that the point… that HE was the one to take it away? “Don’t dildo-rape me… I’ve got that covered already!”?

Why can’t people just be strong? Why do people need to be political monsters? Have humans always been this pathetic?

Can I have a pipe dream too, so that I can justify killing others and preventing myself from being a pipe-dream victim?

Nietzsche: A full round of hopeful Pipe dreams – they’re on the House!

Thanks, Daddy Nietzsche… thanks for saving us from Big Bad Schopenhauer-Wagner and instituting your… whatever the fuck it is.

The only thing true nowadays is that noone knows what’s going on. That’s our new name for “freedom”. If you don’t understand, you can’t oppress.

I guess.

Terrorism as a modern tool of power

September 3, 2006

Its kind of funny, all the stupid that’s out there. I’ll address this…

“Almost every serious contender uses terrorist tactics (ie targetting soft civilian targets or symbolic targets to destroy an enemy’s will to fight rather than relying on “legitimate” military targets or whatever the case may be).”

Militant Terrorism is not intended to, and does not, destroy an enemy’s will to fight. Its intended to ENGAGE a subject into (usually militant) war. If the subject fails to avoid engagement, he goes to war.

Once the subject is engaged into war, the war proceeds. One of the strategic beauties of terrorism is its decentralization, nullifying much of the value of an army. Reduce an army to creating substantial civilian casualties and there goes the moral high ground.

Non-militant forms of Terrorism can also be used. Terrorism such as propaganda, advertising, groupthink, newspeak…

What wonders the future holds in store for us, as long as we are willing to do whatever it takes to control other people. I personally think I am SO cool that I should propagandize my position such that other humans do my bidding. After all, its either me or them… either I’m propagandized or they are. I’ll eat them before they eat me…

American: Self-promotion, nothing wrong with that. Advertising, nothing wrong with that. Propaganda, nothing wrong with that. Groupthink… hey, wait a second!

{America is cleansed}

American: Groupthink, nothing wrong with that. Newspeak…

Crank

September 1, 2006

Any movie with one of the funniest sex scenes in film history has already won me over. A very good-natured tale if you don’t take the body count too seriously, kind of like cinematic terrorism. Proof that in a narrative, collateral damage is no damage at all? Fallout is a bitch, for the *rest* of us.

No stereotype was spared in the making of this film. Tunnel-vision man, vacuous woman, calculating boss, resentful underling. Its like a who’s-who of modern psychology. I guess in a short action film, that takes the place of characterization.

On the previews preceding the picture, its remarkable how Horror films have no context. A bunch of kids, captured by some psychopaths, slaughter ensues. Is that the point, that it could happen to anyone? A generalized lack of specifics is the whole idea? Or that in the movies, the visceral replaces all else? Horror films seem to be becoming boring. Why not show real horror? I mean, yeah I’d be afraid if I was captured and tortured by psychopaths, but so what? I’d marvel as to my incredibly bad luck, do whatever it takes to get out of there, but I still wouldn’t count it as one of my better experiences. It would be horrifying, but only WHILE I was in it. The horror of everyday life is far more scary… the horror that only death provides an escape from. Its not the fantastical or the rare that is scary but the mundane, the everyday, the banal, the ignorant. You telling someone he is a monster and him calling you crazy… THAT’S horrifying. Searching for a means of communication and finding none… THAT’S horrifying.

Blood and guts?… ridiculous. Faux Horror for a world obsessed with decadence. How sad…

Look at it this way: the corpse feels nothing. The becoming-a-corpse feels deep desperation. The living outcasts however, feel, among other things, Horror.

What now calls itself the Horror genre should instead be called the Desperation genre. “A desperation film about a group of kids who will quickly become corpses”.