Is There A Higher Law Of Physics?

Does nobody get it? The First Amendment clearly, wisely, and generously states that anybody can practice any kind of religion they want, but NO law can be made just because it says so in any establishment of religion’s book of dogma or doctrine, including the Bible, and therefore no religion can be respected in public school as being even hypothetically equal to empirical science or evidentiary history as representing the truth. Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, and the other TV political evangelists blatantly promise to disregard and disobey that First Amendment because they believe they are obeying "A Higher Law" than the mere secular Constitution they would swear to uphold.

In making their case that science is only theories, and therefore no more "true" than any other speculation, and so trying to semantically end-run the Constitution, Creationists have a strange notion of "proof." Science does not begin with the "faith" that you have the answer, then you look for evidence that supports it (and reject that which does not), but the other way round. They are as quick as the OJ jury were to declare that the mathematical possibility somebody else could have the same DNA signature was one in one-hundred-seventy-nine million was good enough for "reasonable doubt" to declare that because the archaeologists found a place called Jericho and the walls have fallen down that means science thus proves every word in the Bible is true.

Creationism does not agree with science, it is the antithesis of science, the denial of evidence, and the abandonment of reason. There ain't nothing much stupider than "faith-based science"... or more dangerous and less democratic than Faith-Based Government. Particularly if you are Christian, or an old-school Republican, be very careful about voting for candidates on the basis of the brand-name they are advertising themselves to represent.

Freedom Is Really Only For A Few.

The rich and powerful of every political and religious stripe hate and fear nothing more than an informed and empowered populace. When reality is defined by what TV news-mongers and evangelists say, and your idea of "freedom" is a mortgage serviced by a rigorously demanding job, and the right to vote every four years for which of Massa Washington's boys gets to wear the Big Hat next, then the number of informed and empowered people is pretty small.

Most working-class Americans look to me like livestock on a treadmill with a feedbag and a virtual-reality hat over their eyes. Should we freedomists then strive to awaken and so liberate the sheep (like in the Matrix)? If you free sheep, they wander until led. They are still sheep, free or not. Most Americans have no idea what day-to-day freedom from their social and professional roles and responsibilities might really be like, and there is little they would do differently if offered unlimited freedom. We who exercise what we think should be freedom, outlawed or not, just learn to do it, living as outlaws among the lawfully ordered. It seems clear to me for that few who desire to exercise maximum freedom to still live in an affluent society, most of the people must prefer the ordered life, and must have that life. Whatever we revolutionaries do, it must not upset or disrupt the lives of the fat, dumb, and happy working middle class.

When a group of people are called "alternative" or "radical" or "fringe" that means most people are not that way, given freedom of choice or not. Obtaining a law by the vote of the majority which includes all of the fringe element is always going to be unlikely. It seems clear therefore that some of us are always going to be an "outlaw class" for exercising one freedom or other, and it is also clear that the form of order which best enables us outlaws to live among them as we wish is not the intolerant witch-hunting hangin-judge Conservative, but the more diverse and inclusive Liberal.

If what you want is to live a very free personal life, perhaps doing things others might not do, with a minimum of government intervention in your life, then it is clear to me you should vote for the most progressive Liberals, and then responsibly live your life, rather than submitting yourself to loyally following and enforcing a severe code of honor, duty, and accountability, and living the life of a slave at arms, as good soldiers do. If you want that kind of life, don’t vote Republican and start shooting at Senators, just go join the Marines. Really, I mean that. It is there such a self-sacrificing life of service is most valuable to our society, and most honorable, precisely because it enables the rest of us to live relatively libertarian and even libertine lives. To attempt to impose such a dutiful and puritan lifestyle on everyone, and to declare the freedoms being fought for should not be exercised, is a betrayal of those rights themselves.

A Marine says, “I give up my freedoms in order to give you freedom to do what I do not. I get up before the light so you can sleep till noon. I take orders and obey without question, so you can do nothing and serve no one. I am sober and straight, but I will kill for your right to suck a joint, whether that is somebody’s reefer or somebody’s cock. I will give my life to pay for the Food Stamps that keep your babies alive, even if they are all illegitimate. Though I may weep when my Flag touches the ground, I will stand for your right to….. aw, horsechester, I just can’t do it! There is a line I can’t cross, and that is it, bud. I won’t have no pinko, faggo, dope-smoking, butt-poking, baby pumping, border-jumping, freeloading Food Stamp fatsos and Medicaid junkies making a pack of glutted-out Wall Street billionaires even fatter on my ticket, and then burning my Flag bitching about it! Goddammit, there’s a point I just got to shoot somebody!”

Having been a Marine (and yes, you never recover), and also a libertine libertarian, I understand how being a Christian social conservative defending the Constitutional freedoms of a libertarian society is a bit like a monk who guards a whorehouse, and I also understand how unpleasant and unfree life can be when the Marine decides to impose his martial lifestyle and morality upon the house he guards. Be a Marine if you love that lifestyle, but vote Progressive for those whose freedom you defend.

You Sure You Want A Revolution?

The American Revolution was possible because we were an isolated and well-organized colony with vast natural resources, and we didn't have to destroy the terrible taxing Empire, just separate ourselves from it. We also had foreign help that wanted to bring down the government we were revolting against. To what foreign countries today might American freedomists turn for help to bring down Washington? Which of those do you want to see become more powerful than we are?

The French "people's" Revolution resulted in Napoleon. Russian "people's" Revolution resulted in Stalin. Chinese "people's" Revolution resulted in Mao. Spain's failed and they got Vichy. Germany did it with an internal Uber-Party coup... and got Hitler.

Looks to me like a new US Revolution would result in not an affluent Libertarian community, but rule by militant religious fanatics under a real take-charge authoritarian Ordained Leader who would brook no dissent from liberals, perverts, perps or suspects, protesters complaining about their rights or rations, or the Godless... no? Tell me, after we have guillotined Pelosi and torched the Tar Baby on a cross in his front yard, then what? Will we all become Deputies, open a gas station or a Bible school, and buy new cars? And what about Aunt Bea's apple pie? Is that to kill for, or what?

Is The Internet Divine Vision?

“The computer is a mirror in which I can see through the eyes of Thoth.”
Alex St. Luc, Enosar Emeritus
The Scribes Of Osiris

We take it for granted already. To know everything, anything, anywhere, now. That was only for God to know. There was a time only a few years ago in my own lifetime when most of the information in the world was printed on paper and available in catalogued libraries. That might sound like a terrible restriction today, but in its time it was a revolution. Before Gutenberg, there were few books, and only a few had access to read them. Most of what everyone knew of the world, they had only heard. After Gutenberg, all of the established institutions began to change as larger numbers of people knew more and more about the world. The changes were not predictable at the time. It was only after a generation had grown up with that information that they developed not just new ways of doing things, but new ways of organizing themselves and relating to each other.

If the invention of writing is the First Literary Revolution, and the Printing Press the Second, then the Third Literary Revolution is the Internet, the great commonly-shared data cloud of access to all of the information in the world, instantly. I can “invoke” the content of every book in thousands of libraries, in every language, and thousands of films, and daily newspapers across the world. I have access to cameras, maps, and even pictures from outer space, anywhere on earth, right now. All the information anyone knows, or has ever known, is now available instantly, to everyone, anywhere. Only a few years ago, such access to knowledge could only belong to God. Only Thoth, the Ibis-headed scribe who represents the Egyptian “intellect of God” could know all things at all times. Now we all have that. We are become as Gods. Though some of our science fiction writers have been exploring the idea for a century or so, this is going to change the nature of being human in ways we cannot yet predict.

The generations of people raised on the Internet and its Siamese-cousin the TV, living in that omnipresent data cloud (it knows who we are and where), and all connected to each other by social networks of varying exclusivity, will not think and feel much like the more individualized lives we live today. The Latterday-19th Century Teaparty type still trying to remember the Alamo for Jesus on election day would look to those people like a blind old fool who wandered in from the desert, and has never even seen an encephalo-metagram projection. “He wants to disband the Terran Sodality and the National Consensus and let everybody vote for two guys who will make all the rules… and they get to decide how much we pay them! Haw haw haw! When did you find your way out of the cave, Gramps?”

James Nathan Post

The Scribes Of Osiris

Wikileaks And Anonymous

Can Speaking The Truth Be Blasphemy?

When I see the Wikileaks guy being chased across the planet with the Agents all pointing at his penis, and not a word about the truth of what he revealed, and the Anonymous "1000 Points Of Leak" participants being called cyber-terrorists and traitors, I am reminded of that iconic scene in The Wizard Of Oz. There pulling the levers behind the curtain and putting words into the mouth of the Great and Powerful stands a guy wearing an expensive suit and an Uncle Sam hat. While Dorothy and her trio of stooges stand gaping, he calls for his loyal guards. "This dirty little dog is trying to tarnish the reputation of The Great OZ," he informs them. "Take it out and kill it."

AFGHANISTAN UPDATE

"Insurgent" used to mean somebody from outside a country who comes in to organize arms against the legitimate government. "Partisan" used to mean civilians in a country who organize arms against an occupying foreign-empowered regime. "Red State" used to mean Communism, where everybody gets a job, a government check, and health care. Today, insurgent means anyone who stands up against America's guns, God, and credit cards. Partisan is a dirty word freeloading liberals call loyal Republicans, and folks in Red states vote to kick the sick old beggars and demand to see their papers. Ever read Orwell? "He who writes the dictionary defines the truth."


The people of Afghanistan are in the same position as political Independents in America who say voting for a GOP or DEM candidate is picking “the lesser of two evils” – or the new con deciding which cellmate to let fuck him to protect him from the other (even knowing he’s going to get fucked by both). The Afghan must choose between the mad executioners of the puritan authoritarian Islamic Taliban or the ultimate-armed robots and evangelists of the Christian American equivalent. Both are clearly evil by any reasonable standard. Those who try to do something to help themselves -- Allah beheads, and Jesus bombs from heaven.


Unfortunat­ely, the war in Afghanistan is not about them at all. Without a war, our economy would collapse. Troops are cheap, and sending even a few thousand of them, withdrawing them, honoring them, and burying them are politically visible actions, but if we ever quit sending the bombers burning 40,000 gallons of fuel every mission, and the USAF quit buying all that gas, EXXON would go broke! Likewise, if we quit bombing the opium and hashish fields to protect the US big pharmo corporatio­ns from superior third-world agricultural produce’s competitio­n... our so-called health care industry would go broke! If we quit sending our civilian armed security troops­, and quit paying our Afghan regime to hire them, we would have 30,000 unemployed perp-shooting Jesus-­fanatic killer-cops-for-hire looking for work back in the inner city hoods of home. If we quit making war on the reed fields of Araby (like Caligula)... our economy would go down like a pom-pom boy in the shower.


Much as he might like to, The President cannot get us out of that war, at least not without starting another. You know the scene: the men in black suits take Barack Obama into the underground projection room, and they show him The Film. He turns white (gulp!), and quickly comes to a specuguine conclusion… “I ‘spec you gwine do what you has to… Mr. President.” ("Ya shoulda seen the last boy was in here... heehee, ol Dub like to shat his shorts!")

The 1st Amendment Means Jesus Too.

From Day 1, 1776, we have violated the 1st Amendment prohibition of laws respecting an establishment of religion in several ways. One of them is freedom from the taxation other establishments must pay, even if doing the same thing, like publishing and broadcasting to generate revenue. A mistake then, worse now, as one extremist religious sect's marketers have created an industry rich enough to play the game of Senators and Presidents, in the hope of waging world war on the unsaved.

Another is the power to issue sex licenses... that is, legal marriage as defined by that establishment of religion's dogma, where all sex without that license is not just sin, but statutory crime.

Also the "blue laws" which regulate business and property use to conform to religious practice, when and what you can buy and sell vs Holy Day schedule, when you can drink, where you can put your business with respect to that church's premises, what books are not in your public libraries, what you can't teach in your schools, etcetc...

The Neo-Conservative Christian American Taliban (NEOCATs) believe their monopoly on the blessing of The One And Only Real God whose image is graven in occult symbols in their ancient scrolls like a mummified idol wrapped in papyrus entitles them to exemption from that Constitutional restriction, as they believe they serve "A Higher Authority" than the mere secular Constitution they would be sworn to defend... ergo, caveat.