Fair Use Notice

FAIR USE NOTICE

A BEAR MARKET ECONOMICS BLOG

OCCUPY MADNESS AND DYSFUNCTION

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates

All Blogs licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

The American Killing Culture



March 30, 2011 at 12:15:00

THE KILLING CULTURE

By Bruce K. Gagnon (about the author)

Photo from the war in Libya

A sign -- handwritten on cardboard fashioned from a discarded box of rations -- hangs around the dead men's necks. It reads: TALIBAN ARE DEAD. According to a source in Bravo Company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the men were killed by soldiers from another platoon, which has not yet been implicated in the scandal. "Those were some innocent farmers that got killed," the source says. "Their standard operating procedure after killing dudes was to drag them up to the side of the highway."


You've likely heard about the article in a recent Rolling Stone magazine called The Kill Team. The photo just above is one of those that were discovered when the military finally investigated and are now prosecuting an Army unit deployed in Afghanistan for killing innocent civilians for sport. It's sick stuff.


You'd think these disclosures would force Congress to reevaluate our multiple wars and the damage they are doing to everyone involved but things just roll along. In fact, we are now advancing this global war onto the African continent with the attacks on Libya. The U.S. and our NATO allies love to blow things up and hold ground.


If you listen closely to Hillary Clinton and the Pentagon brass in the last day or so you can hear the sounds of trial balloons being released and seeds being planted into the minds of the American people.


Corporate news bureaus are reporting that "world leaders say Qaddafi must be removed" and the "Obama administration is engaged in a fierce debate over whether to supply weapons to the rebels in Libya." The New York Times reports, "The French government, which has led the international charge against Colonel Qaddafi, has placed mounting pressure on the United States to provide greater assistance to the rebels."


Sending arms would also create the need to send military advisers. Already there can be no doubt that CIA and U.S. and allied "special forces" troops are working inside Libya to direct "the resistance fighters".


The Times continued, "In London, Mrs. Clinton and other Western leaders made it clear that the NATO-led operation would end only with the removal of Colonel Qaddafi, even if that was not the stated goal of the United Nations resolution."


The war-like Democrats will lie down alongside their war-mongering Republican colleagues in the Congress and will watch this play out and offer no resistance. The Congress is just the puppet show, there to give the public the illusion that democracy still exists in this blood-stained land. But in fact the oligarchy had this whole plan mapped out long ago. All the places on this planet that harbor oil, natural gas, water, and other abundant mineral resources are on the hit list.


It is the job of the U.S. to lead this assault on the remaining global resources for the benefit of the corporations. America has been turned into a killing culture and it is our job, with the help of any willing allies, to take control of these resource rich lands. Killing people does not matter. Their lives rate below that of the oil or other treasurers.


Freedom, liberty, democracy are all part of the puppet show in order to humanize and legitimize these killing fields with the war weary public. Democrats like Obama help keep the peaceniks tamed and in their cages. Republican politicians keep their party faithful distracted by whipping up outlandish fears about the U.S. becoming "a secular atheist country" that is potentially dominated by "radical Islamists."


Few are then left to stand on street corners and protest these wars and call for our war $$ to be brought home. Others are either cowering in their homes or glued to the TV set watching the latest fireworks displays from Libya. All the while the soul of the American people shrivels up and we become accustomed to the killing and barbarity done in our name.


It's a roller-coaster ride for all of us as the biblical injunction "Thou shall not kill" flickers now and then in our consciousness, trying to stay alight against the winds of madness and war.

Bruce Gagnon is the Coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.

more...)

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Psychopathic Tea Party Misogyny

Hullabaloo



Psychopathic Tea Party Misogyny

by digby

I wrote before about creepy Tea Party candidate Ken Buck's harsh views on abortion in case of rape or incest and his bizarre implication that "saving the life of the mother" is open to interpretation:

I am pro-life, and I’ll answer the next question. I don’t believe in the exceptions of rape or incest. I believe that the only exception, I guess, is life of the mother. And that is only if it’s truly life of the mother.


Hey, if a few sperm receptacles have to die, it's a price that's well worth paying to avoid even one fetus being aborted. Plenty more vessels where that came from.

He has a little problem with this sort of thing. (You'll recall that during the primary he said "why should you vote for me? Because I do not wear high heels.") But McJoan finds evidence today that this is just the tip of the misogynistic iceberg:

A 2005 rape case that Ken Buck refused to prosecute indicates that maybe his threshold for what is really rape makes him less pro-life than anti-woman.

When Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck refused to prosecute a rape case five years ago, he probably had no idea that anyone beyond a small circle of people would care. He learned otherwise quickly enough as the victim demanded a meeting with him (which she secretly - but legally - taped), organized a protest and made sure the media knew all about her plight....

The alleged rape victim is back and determined to be heard. She told her story to the Colorado Independent and provided the tape of their meeting, in which Buck appears to all but blame her for the rape and tells her that her case would never fly with a Weld County jury....

He said the facts in the case didn’t warrant prosecution. “A jury could very well conclude that this is a case of buyer’s remorse,” he told the Greeley Tribune in March 2006. He went on to publicly call the facts in the case “pitiful.”

[...]

“That comment made me feel horrible,” she told the Colorado Independent last week. “The offender admitted he did it, but Ken Buck said I was to blame. Had he (Buck) not attacked me, I might have let it go. But he put the blame on me, and I was furious. I still am furious,” she said.

It wasn’t just his public remarks that infuriated the woman. In the private meeting, which she recorded, he told her, “It appears to me ... that you invited him over to have sex with him.”

He also said he thought she might have a motive to file rape charges as a way of retaliating against the man for some ill will left over from when they had been lovers more than a year earlier. Buck also comes off on this tape as being at least as concerned with the woman’s sexual history and alcohol consumption as he is with other facts of the case.


There's more at the link. It's really sickening. But with the ascension of Tea Party values, despite their affinity for certain right wing female politicians, this attitude is becoming more prevalent in mainstream political discourse. The Christian Reconstructionist teabagger Sharron Angle is on record against requiring maternity coverage and is pro-incest and rape forced childbirth. Rand Paul too. It's part of their philosophy.

Not that this is particularly new but it's getting a whole lot more acceptable to say it. Here's Limbaugh today:

"Mammograms are the convenant, the sacred covenant of feminazism"


If mammograms are now considered a leftist plot and are on the menu for derision and ridicule, then basically they just don't care if women die. I don't see how else you can interpret this stuff.

The Anatomy Of Malignant Narcissism

logo

The Inner Landscape of the Psychopath*
Social and Spiritual Suicide

by Hervey Cleckley, "Mask of Sanity", 5th edition, continued from Page One


Anatomy Of Malignant Narcissism




In 1970, Otto Kernberg coined the term, "malignant narcissism"; he pointed out that the antisocial personality was fundamentally narcissistic and without morality. Malignant narcissism includes a sadistic element, creating, in essence, a sadistic psychopath. In this essay, "malignant narcissism" and psychopathy are employed interchangeably.


Imagine, as an abuse survivor of someone with malignant narcissism or narcissistic personality disorder, giving your life over to a psychopath, and doing it with trust and a firm belief in his authority. What if said psychopathic conman, was advising victims? It seems absurd, that an abuser would advise the abused. It seems even more absurd, that the abused would take the advice to heart. Yet it happened to me, till I got wise to it and learned more about this disorder, and its largely superficial resemblance to narcissistic personality disorder, or garden variety "narcissism".

Psychopaths are known to be grandiose, to distort reality, to be contemptuous of human beings, and to be completely without conscience . To ask such a malignant narcissist for advice is to suffer life consequences. Are his words really full of "truth" and "insight" and "care" for the victims?

Recently, I came across the following exchange in part 40 of the psychopath's "narcissism list":

Question

Why do his victims feel they are turning into narcissists themselves?

Answer

Narcissism is contagious. The narcissism creates a "bubble universe", similar to a cult. In this bubble, special rules apply.

These rules do not always correspond to outer reality.

Using complex defence mechanisms, such as projective identification, the narcissist forces his victims - spouse, mate, friend, colleague - to "play a role" assigned to him by "God" - the narcissist.

The narcissist rewards compliance with his script and punishes any deviation from it with severe abuse.

In other words, the narcissist CONDITIONS people around him using intimidation, positive and negative reinforcements and feedback, ambient abuse ("gaslighting"), covert, or controlling abuse, and overt, classical abuse.

Thus conditioned, the narcissist's victims gradually come to assimilate the narcissist's way of thinking (follies a-deux) [sic] and his modus operandi - his methods.

You can abandon the narcissist - but the narcissist never abandons you.

He is there, deep inside your traumatic memories, lurking, waiting to act out. You have been modified, very much like an alien snatching bodies.

Analysis

Here is a perfect example of why it is dangerous to listen to the distorted, grandiose, psychopathic musings of a self-proclaimed "expert" on narcissism.

1) He misinterprets the question. He doesn't interpret it as fear and concern. He presumes that the victims have become like their tormentor. There is no ability even to relate to the question- without empathy*, he cannot see what the real question is.

2) Narcissism is not contagious. Any lax behaviour may lead to disinhibiting behaviour in others, and that's a valid psychological construct. If a narcissist sneezes, does that mean you're gonna catch N germs? If you think about it, his statement isn't even within the grasp of reality or logic. It's nigh impossible to "catch" narcissism.

3) Some pathologically disordered narcissists and psychopaths create a cult like atmosphere: in this "cult" there is pressure to conform after manipulating your reality. You may find yourself doing things you normally wouldn't. Part of it is due to disinhibiting behaviour. The rest is due to groupthink (simplistically speaking) and brainwashing and subtle forms of intimidation which include guilt-making and shunning.

They are not "forcing" you into a role- they are enforcing the role they presume everyone plays. They are not capable of distinguishing between their delusions and a human being standing before them. Again, it is grandiose of a psychopath to think that they have the power to force you into a "role" and that it is a given that it is always successful.

4)There is no such animal as the "inverted narcissist". The only ones who totally buy into the cult leader's reality, and usually become his handmaidens and henchmen, are not inverted narcissists. They are just like the leader, only he is more adept at getting and keeping power than they are- kinda like 'Dr Evil' and 'Mini-Me'. They are just 'Mini-Me's' and their use of each other is reciprocal.

5)He misuses the term "folies a deux" (and misspells it), which is reserved in psychiatric diagnoses for a shared psychosis (very rare)- which means neither person is in touch with reality. From his distorted apprehension, this would mean that the victim becomes the pathological narcissist. If there's any "projective identification" going on here it is the psychopath's, who believes that everyone is really just like him; there is also massive grandiosity in that he believes he has the power to self-replicate by transforming others into carbon copies of himself and his world.

6)If you take a good look at the paragraphs you can see that they are only loosely associated. In terms of underlying logic, we are the ones filling in the gaps. It is all smoke and mirrors. There is only significance without substance in his facile claims.

* cf. his definition of 'empathy'- "We are coached to feel guilt and pain when we inflict suffering on another person. Empathy is an attempt to avoid our own self-imposed agony by projecting it onto another." S Vaknin

Summary:

1) The psychopath, incapable of empathy, doesn't understand the question.

2) He is convinced that everyone is just like him.

3)He is convinced that he has the godlike power to transform anyone.

4) He is convinced that he has the godlike power to force anyone to do his bidding.

5)He is convinced that he has dominion over (and dominates) all things, including human beings.

6) He is convinced that he is successful in all his ventures.

Observations:

~~ As a detective he is useless: the evidence suggests to him that he can make anyone like he is-that he has the power; but in truth, he believes that everyone is like him and he seeks to enforce that delusion- he has no power but it is imperative to do whatever it takes to sustain the delusion. And so he brags to feed his narcissism.

~~ His thoughts, and offerings (including facts), are loosely associated and impressionistic, with no real substance or basis in reality. They depend far more on impression and impressing than on fact and logic. This suggests there is a true cognitive deficit in thinking, and the usual psychopathic agenda, embroidered throughout with histrionic morbidity.

Conclusion:

a)The outcome of the psychopath's grand delusions is that he confuses followers in a cult with narcissists, and survivors with narcissists.

b)If he does not understand the question, then he is incapable of an answer grounded in reality. Given his inability to understand, especially a "feeling" question, we need to take care to question a malignant narcissist's credibility.

c) To listen to and believe the ramblings of a psychopath is dangerous for victims/survivors. It is to invite the psychopathic unreality into our psyches and lives. A psychopathic world is a totalitarian world.

He has no perception of us as human beings. He believes we are all like him. He believes that we cannot be healed, and has even said so. He cannot understand the question. And, therefore, any answers he gives are inadequate, incompetent, fraudulent, and serve only his delusions and beliefs.

He is not capable of anything else. He is emotionally and cognitively handicapped. He is not capable of cogent or coherent thought or speech. (cf.Hervey Cleckley's 'Mask of Sanity')

Anyone who, having been disoriented once, believes him, as he glibly throws some impressive concepts and 'facts' into the mix (they' are also good at snow jobs- wouldn't know parsimony in thought if they fell over it), becomes enthralled again to the totality of psychopathic distortion; they are misled and misdirected away from their inherent integrity and their strivings- their human uniqueness, and especially their very real suffering, deleted. He has no conception of humanity and no understanding of himself- he can only tell us what he wants himself to hear. Moreover, he enjoys pulling the wool over our eyes, this 'duping delight'. This is not even a question of hatred towards him. He is a psychopath, a common conman, and he thinks and acts like one. Totally.

So. Question, challenge, be aware, and beware the con.

©2002-2009 Invicta, M.A. Reproduction by permission only. All rights reserved.

Saturday, March 26, 2011

White Knuckle Rancid Individualism and Ayn Rand’s Psychopathic America

Dissident Voice: a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice


Rancid Individualism and Ayn Rand’s America

Rugged Individualism. The term became well known after Herbert Hoover delivered a 1928 speech cautioning the nation against shared response to national dilemmas. The term is entrenched as one of the myths that Americans cling to with white knuckles. Evidence wildly to the contrary doesn’t dissuade Americans of all social classes from believing in this core element they believe themselves to possess. This notion that the individual has worth, but the collective does not was peddled with great efficiency by author and theorist, Ayn Rand. Rand, certainly didn’t believe that rugged individualism was a common trait in all, just a select few, but the seed of this fabrication was firmly planted in the American psyche by the time her works came out, thus allowing her ideas to be utilized by the powerful and accepted by the many.

Though the vast majority of Americans do not recognize her name, Rand’s message dwells within many like an undiagnosed illness. The wildly improbable life Rand lived forms an almost too painful reflection of the basic natures that Americans don’t want to look into, mainly that of hypocrisy and entitlement. Rand advanced the absurd notion that selfishness truly is a virtue, a suggestion wildly contradictory to safe societal function. The other Randian mainstay involves that of artificial division in citizens, to that of “producers and parasites”. Her theories were advanced through massive (literally) novel publication as well as the mentoring of like minded followers. She delivered theory that justified delicious self interest, and her words were devoured by those who were drawn to the guilt free self agendas.

Much like the young United States, Rand began her life with great promise and resource. She had a bright mind, but was born to the world that was St Petersberg, Russia, 1905; a time of hardship for those of Jewish ancestry. She saw the work of her father literally given away when his pharmacy was reallocated to others during revolutionary activity. Rand took from this life experience an overwhelming hatred of those who did not in her mind “produce”. It is, of course, undeniable that this would breed a contempt for those taking these items, but Rand formulated a philosophy derived from a child’s lack of curiosity as to what spurred the unfair situation. Another ironic footnote is that the revolutions in progress allowed her to attend university, something not available prior to women. This was a trend that marked Rand’s life, the cynical use of collective resources all the while denigrating the processes that allowed them to exist.

Rand eventually made her way to America, and in keeping with the rags to riches plot she had created in her mind, she landed in Hollywood. She was determined to become a writer and for a time she resided at The Hollywood Studio Club, something of a sorority for women wanting to break into show business. Rand was working low level jobs , barely surviving , and for these reasons, she was deemed worthy of charity by other residents at the facility. They opted to give the hardworking Russian immigrant $50 in goodwill assistance. This largesse did not impress Rand, who accepted the money, but instead of paying debts, she utilized the sum to purchase black lingerie. This ridiculous moxie fit the times, the roaring 20’s prior to the crash. Rand never wavered in this core element of her personality.

An even more frightening trait emerged in Rand around this same time, that of glorifying any behavior which did not conform to the norms of society. She even went so far as to speak positively in her journal about a notorious kidnapper and child killer, William Hickman. She admired him simply because he didn’t observe conventional morality as others did. The pathological underpinnings were there in Rand’s persona but somehow in the improbable world of Hollywood, she thrived and eventually made a name for herself as a cutting edge author.

Rand’s self promoting schemes and philosophy of selfishness actually couldn’t have fit the times any better. America was emerging as a superpower and little concern was given to the ethics or the sustainability of it all. It was a time predicated on fossil fuel expansion, a notoriously untenable situation, but this was of no concern, much like the end result of advancing a philosophy of rampant selfishness.

Rand’s theories would merely be curiosity if so many now in power had not taken them to heart and found methods to advance her designs in concrete fashion. Alan Greenspan was a member of Rand’s inner circle of followers; he was able to advance many of her unfeasible socially disruptive tenets while Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Another vocal and noteworthy devotee of Rand is Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas. The frightening implications from his subscribing to her theories are too numerous to mention. There is a (not so) silent army of admirers incongruously occupying many levels of government today, in the midst of the very systems they decry.

The recent resurgence of Randian philosophy is best be exemplified by The Tea Party. Undeniably the movement has followers who truly idolize Rand, some even going so far as to carry signs in reference to Rand protagonist John Galt. It’s likely that many aren’t directly familiar with her works, other than having a knee jerk positive reaction to a theory that fits nicely with branding certain segments of the society as “parasites”.

One delectable irony in regard to Tea Party policy is the fact that the followers have no idea how astutely they are emulating Rand. The group, often was seen last year advancing the “no socialist healthcare” dogma, all the while, many were served by one quite successful collective program, that of Medicare. It’s a common theme with the group, the concept that one is deserving of these types of programs, yet “others” do not merit the same protections .

When Rand became ill with lung cancer late in life, she was faced with a similar issue. She knew Oncology care could be expensive and although the years had been relatively kind to Rand in terms of ability to make a living from her words, she opted to forego her convictions. She went on the very same successful, but very socialist program called Medicare. And mind you, this was early 80’s dollars, well before the runaway costs we now face from this profit driven system. Rugged individualism turned as rancid as the cancer inside of her.

Rand’s convenient ideological amnesia did not represent a death bed conversion, but a measured casting out of principles for self preservation and gain. The ultimate unmasking of an unworkable theory. The simple fact that this woman, with the advantage of wealth and friends in elevated places would not shoulder the responsibility of her own health care, exposed the philosophy for what it was: impractical and brutal. Those Medicare recipients at current tea party rallies are her mirror image displaying toothless convictions and self serving entitlement.

All of this has not been enough to sully the growing reputation of this woman and her theories. Rand’s books continue to sell at a brisk pace even now, and there have been indications that a cinematic version of Atlas Shrugged will be offered to the public in 2011. One wonders if this film will be viewed at Tea Party rallies of the future. The advancement of ideas that promote eventual cruelty and systemic collapse continue unabated.

What is there to do for America? Is the nation doomed for allowing charlatan ideals to be ingrained in the national consciousness? The trajectory is not looking good, but a spreading awareness of the pathology that brought here would be a pragmatic first course of action. One must know exactly what the problem is before it can be solved.

We’ve become a nation addled by this rancid individualism. The question is do we continue to allow the bankrupt ideologies to color the end of Empire Americana? There is an opportunity to go down with something akin to dignity, to carve out a smaller, but equitable place in the world. A chance to realign with poise and empathy is possible, if improbable, but this will certainly never be the case until the disjointed, pathological theories of Ayn Rand are discarded once and for all.

Kathleen Wallace Peine is a registered nurse who has a special interest in producing works that encourage the strengthening and advancement of fairly latent populism which she feels has the potential to grow, especially in the United States. She has been writing as a hobby for the last 20 years and now wishes to find a broader audience than her desk drawer. Read other articles by Kathleen.

This article was posted on Saturday, March 26th, 2011 at 8:01am and is filed under Philosophy, Tea Party movement.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

We Don't Know Whether We Are Sane


Blackspot Blog

Learning from Jung's Madness

We might not know anymore whether we are sane.

Micah White


From Carl Jung's Red Book
From Carl Jung's Red Book

Twice on a train, to then from Schaffhausen, Carl Jung suffered waking hallucinations; his vision overtaken by macabre imagery of thousands dying in catastrophic floods. The first terrifying fantasy was accompanied by a voice that prophesied it would become real and Jung interpreted that on a subjective level, believing his personal world would soon collapse. For the next ten months, between October 1912 and July 1913, Jung continued to be plagued by similarly dark visions of death, war, destruction, corpses and seas of blood. Alarmed by his deteriorating mental health, Jung privately feared he was descending into madness and diagnosed his situation as dire. "I thought to myself," he later recalled, "'If this means anything, it means that I am hopelessly off.'"

And then, a festering social-wound erupted, an Archduke was assassinated and a great war declared. Swiftly the world slid into chaos, sixty million Europeans were mobilized and an ocean of blood flowed from countless charnel houses. When Jung heard the declaration of war, he was unexpectedly relieved for he saw immediately that the apocalyptic imagery which had haunted his mind was not a sign of personal insanity but instead a symptom of a collective, cultural madness. He understood that his prophetic visions were evidence of a collective unconscious, a shared cultural psyche that can become diseased.

The tale of Jung’s personal crisis is significant for activists, designers and visionaries today because it pierces the false barrier between subjective and objective reality, between personal and societal insanity, and between the pollution of our mental ecology and catastrophes in our physical reality. His brief madness bridges the Cartesian abyss separating the mental health of individuals from the cultural and environmental health of nations and calls us to rethink contemporary forms of political engagement.

In an obscure essay, Karl Marx once identified a correlation between societal wealth and individual madness. His estimate was that one in seven hundred residents of Great Britain was classified as a "lunatic". The trend has continued with post-industrialization; rates of mental disorders are rising annually. The World Health Organization maintains that one in four residents of the States has a mental disorder (not necessarily lunacy), the highest rate globally. In the Netherlands one out of seven are similarly afflicted. And soon, the average person may be mentally ill. In 2005, researchers estimated that this is already destined to be the case in the States as half of Americans will likely manifest a mental illness in their lifetime.

No one can say with apodictic certainty what is behind this seemingly contagious mental plague. Is it the polluted air we breath, the agrobusiness crops we eat, the noise of our streets or hectic multitasking lives we lead? Might it be the thousands of advertising messages that pound our psyches each day, the digitally manipulated imagery that pollutes our minds with consumer-hype, fascist-cool and agro-sexuality? Or is it nothing but proof of the continuing medicalization of psychology, a scheme of the pharmaceutical industry to find illnesses where there are none, to sell placebo pills to a gullible public turned hysterical? And yet, it seems too easy to dismiss it all as a conspiracy, for behind our anxious protestations that everything is fine there remains the sinking realization that, if insanity has become the norm, we might not know anymore whether we are sane. Alas, the distinction between real and reverie is collapsing.

In the time between the wars, eight years before Nazis invaded Poland, Jung wrote an urgent open letter to the American public. Warning that the world was sinking toward "another catastrophe from which we may never recover," Jung cautioned that the Americans’ conscious refusal to reject the destructive consumer fantasy that happiness lay in "trying to live exactly like one's successful neighbor" was forcing their unconscious to rebel with dangerous eschatological yearnings "to see our great railroad terminals deserted, the streets deserted, [and] a great peace descend upon us." Unless we heed the "symbolic warnings of our bodies," Jung wrote forebodingly, "we may gas our lives out."

Today, the plague of consumer fantasies has spread globally and, once again, we are haunted by prophetic dreams of collapse. It is not enough to say that we must, subjectively, imagine another way or dream another world. These words won’t take us far if we can’t stem the flow of images that saturate us, the marketing messages that commercialize us, the faux-news that distract us. These infotoxins are driving us insane and, leaping from our psyches, they defile the world as well. Here begins the future of activism, a spiritual insurgency against the polluters of our mental ecology – corporations, advertisers and consumerists alike. Mental environmentalism means knowing that, to halt ecological/psychological catastrophe, we must first disrupt this waking dream.

Micah White

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Fraudulent Faith : Christianity & Tyranny




Fraudulent Faith : Christianity & Tyranny

Peter F Daily Journal (Opinion) Mar 9, 2011The conflation of religion and nationalism, or “God and country,” has long been a hallmark of the American ethos. Many of the first Europeans to unsettle the so-called New World were fleeing from domineering, state-sanctioned religious institutions like the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. (That there was nothing “new” about this continent, already home to tens of millions of civilized people is another conversation.) Yet over time Euro-American society has developed increasingly theocratic undercurrents, specifically those of fundamentalist Christianity. Recent decades have seen an acceleration of this politicized religiosity, even spawning in the academic world the discipline of Political Theology. This past decade has seen an alarming intensification of this marriage between god and country, the re-dedication having largely to do with the hysteria whipped up following the events of 11 September 2001, and the George Bush, Jr presidency. The spectacle of 9.11.01 was indeed the “trifecta” needed for the ultra-regressives to launch their ideological assault at home and a belligerent unilateral militarism abroad. The church, always the faithful servant of tyranny, has been aiding and abetting this imperialist onslaught every step of the way.


xian flag Fraudulent Faith : Christianity & Tyranny


Any one with eyes has seen the ubiquitous ribbons, with their pious appeals for “God” to support and/or bless “our troops” (see I AINT IN IT: THE RHETORIC OF DOMINATION). I’ve seen the bumper sticker reading “God bless our troops – especially our snipers,” and its all to common to see vehicles sporting the “Jesus fish” or other Christian slogans along with “support the troops” propaganda. In recent months we’ve seen revelations of a weapons manufacturer stamping their weaponry with bible references, and concerted efforts to turn the US military into a missionary branch of fundamentalist Christianity (see the efforts of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation to combat this). And casual observation reveals that most churchgoers aren’t opposed to American militarism, holding disinterested ambivalence at best. With acritical indifference typical of the masses, or with fervent faux patriotism of regressives, American Christians never get around to asking the simplest of questions, like How can their god of love condone America’s wars of aggression and “bless” her soldiers that carry them out? or How could their god “bless” a nation that for centuries has enslaved and slaughtered other peoples as a matter of policy? or Just why would this god, reputed to be the creator and lover of all humanity, hold in especially high regard a nation built on genocide, racism, and exploitation, and fueled by economic violence and permanent war?

But these pesky theological questions need not be asked, because the answers have already been established. Solutions to these troubling inconsistencies have been reached by applying the calculus of Americanism – by crafting the dominant narratives that serve to define what America is, irrespective of the facts. The crafting of Narrative Americana has unfolded over the last several centuries, the developments of each era woven into its ethnocentric distortion of history, new questions and conundrums rationalized in light of its own delusional logic. Any inconsistencies involving a “just god” alongside systemic injustice, or the “Prince of Peace” embracing a society defined by violence and perpetual war are rendered unnecessary. The resolution of these damning obscenities – oops, I mean theoretical questions – is found in one final decision, one definitive doctrine, namely American Exceptionalism. This doctrine has been the doorway to all manner of ethical effrontery, breathtaking hypocrisy, and of course, unspeakable crimes against humanity.

Theologically speaking, this racist, murderous doctrine is the ultimate example of syncretism, based as it is on the conviction that the Judaic-Christian god is the source of America’s “manifest destiny” to conquer and subjugate lands and peoples as she sees fit and to police the world as its arbiter of human rights and political liberties. Syncretism is a conscious combining of two or more religions over a short period of time, or a process by which one religion absorbs elements of another religion over a long period of time. With American Christianity, we see both of these functions over the course of history. And make no mistake; Americanism is very much a religion, the civil religion of the United States. It is a set of beliefs (about America) that a group ardently or fanatically adheres to, and is upheld by myth, rituals, and symbols. Or to borrow from Black Theologian James Cone, religion is that which “gives a people their identity and determines what they must do to actualize in society what they believe necessary for the attainment of their peoplehood.” And what gives Americans their identity, frames their worldview, forms the limited sense of peoplehood they may have, and determines their collective trajectory? It’s not Jesus of Nazareth, that much is for certain.

If there’s any question about the religious status of Americanism, consider the brouhaha over Rev Jeremiah Wright during the 2008 election cycle: he was slanderously misquoted by the press, but the excerpt made famous by corporate media was what – “god damn America….” The once-venerated Wright was an overnight pariah, pilloried by corporate media and kicked to the curb by his own once-loyal congregant Barack Obama in a shameful and cowardly act of betrayal and political posturing. The firestorm against Rev Wright was fanned by regressive Christians (the so-called Christian right), and not because the preacher had said “god damn” from the pulpit, but because “god damn” was followed by “America….” Never mind that that was followed by “…for killing innocent people…for treating our citizens as less than human…for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.” Americans couldn’t seem to muster any righteous indignation for that litany of national treachery, but were outraged, insulted, and undone by Wright’s rhetorical irreverence toward America, the perpetrator of these and countless other atrocities. It was blasphemy in red, white, and blue.

Christianity itself was born when the nascent (and at one time illegal) Christian faith was adopted as the official religion of empire, namely the Roman Empire. This abrupt conjoining of “God and country” was the foundation for the ideology that served and supported European colonial enterprises for a millennium. American Christianity is the contemporary incarnation of that ideology, and must be recognized as such and exposed for the handmaiden of oppression that it has always been.