Tag: John Kasich

Monogamy is Unnatural: A college professor reveals the goal of modern education institutions

Look around………………do you see all the problems around us?  Of course you do.  We all do.  But how did all those problems get there?  Who created those problems?  And how in the world do we solve them all.  As readers here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom know, I point directly to our education industry as the root cause of much faulty thinking which is causing those problems.  For years now I received hate mail, and critics of my blog postings attempting to convince me to think the way they do………which is a flat line concession………..a surrender to the animal impulses of life.  The origin of the hate is that they resent having their faults pointed out and placed before their eyes to read.  I typically write around 2000 words per day, much of it ending up on these pages.  I don’t offer these works as published material.  The polish that would typically be accompanied by such work is not there; instead I present them as though I were giving a stump speech in a city square.  The goal is to get people to think and perhaps question the nature of things that are currently accepted as reality.  However when opponents who love flat-line thinking want to attack these works, they sound much like the critic featured below attacking Matt Walsh.

On his blog site, Matt Walsh has been creating quite a stir.  The stir has been so intense that he has attracted negative attention—which is a sure sign of success.  On this is the topic of manhood which Matt often writes about and tries to define what makes a good man.  Surprising nobody a college professor took exception to Matt’s views on relationships, manhood, and sex.  The college professor became angry when he discovered that his students were beginning to quote Matt, so he wrote in to complain about it.  I have received hundreds of these kinds of letters, some of them I have published to show just how stupid the people who write them are. Matt, nicely omitted the college professor’s name, but the letter was so good that I am going to included it below along with a link to Matt’s site for the origin. Needless to say, I agree with Matt emphatically, and I won’t do his words injustice with my own musings about the topic which I have covered in other ways with voluminous content.  So please do enjoy the back and forth that follows…………….the future of mankind is at stake.  If you have a child in college, or even high school, there are excellent chances that they have a teacher who thinks just like this guy:

Monogamy is unnatural

Posted on January 7, 2014by The Matt Walsh Blog

Greetings Mr. Walsh,

 

I am a college professor, author, and researcher. It was obvious to me before you ever stated it that you are a man of little education and limited intelligence. Still, I commend your newfound fame and congratulate you on the enormous amounts of money you must be making.

 

[Five more sentences of insults and pretentious self-aggrandizement]

…You have become a hot topic in some of my classes and this very much worries me. It wasn’t until your name came up for a fifth time that I decided to investigate you. Your prose are rife with fallacies and Neanderthalic musings, so I could easily disembowel and discredit any part of it. But I’d like to concentrate on what seems to be your most common themes: heterocentricism and monogamism. Whether you’re writing about marriage, “stay at home moms,” abstinence, or any other “issue of the family,” you seem to think that there is only *one* way and only *one* sort of family.

 

The truth that either escapes you or frightens you too much to acknowledge is that the “monogamous heterosexual relationship” is a largely unattainable (and undesirable) myth. Sexual unions between humans are not meant to be permanent. As we evolve, so does our understanding of these truths.

 

Monogamy is not simply unrealistic; it is unnatural. You do not find it often in the animal kingdom, and where you do it is generally born of an evolutionary necessity. The necessity of monogamy among humankind has evaporated. This is particularly true of men, who are simply not biologically fitted for the “one woman” life.

 

You could use your platform for good but instead you use it to make those in open and poly relationships feel subhuman. Beyond the latent racism and sexism in your writings, it is your constant reinforcement of archaic relationship models that really does the profoundest of damage. Before you jump to any conclusions allow me to tell you this: I am married. I’ve been married for 15 years and my wife and I both sleep with other people. We are honest about this, which makes our open relationship more healthy than “monogamous” relationships built on lies.

 

Judge my choices if you like, but when you inevitably cheat on your wife, and then continue to sermonize about the sacredness of monogamous unions, I will return the favor.

 

I don’t expect you to use this email as you seem to only respond to imbeciles and easy targets.

 

Good Day Professor,

And this was Matt’s response:

It will be a challenge to type this response to you, sir, while I tremble in the blinding light of your godlike intellect. Do you begin all of your lectures by reciting your resume and viciously cutting down your audience? If so, I can only hope that you don’t teach a communications class. But if you do, then I can tell you that I receive at least 20 emails a day from people who must be your students. They’ve taken your strategy to heart. You should be proud.

In any case, I will attempt to make a rebuttal, but I will first offer the disclaimer that I am not nearly smart enough to use phrases like “archaic relationship models” and “your prose are rife with Neanderthalic musings.” I also lack the power to magically create liberal buzzwords like “monogamism” out of thin air. No, my dear Professor, I am a humble man and I can only write in plain language, using words that, you know, exist.

Now, with my idiocy and your cerebral supremacy well established, let us commence with the discussion.

Monogamy.

Monogamy is “unnatural,” says the Professor. And he says this as a married man — or “married” man, I suppose. A married person who doesn’t believe in monogamy seems an awful lot like a Satanist in a church choir, or an existential nihilist performing lifesaving heart surgery. There’s a bit of a philosophical conflict of interest at work, wouldn’t you agree? In fact, I wouldn’t even bother to address such absurdity if it wasn’t becoming so widespread. What you people — you socially “progressive” academics — have realized is that you can not launch a salient attack against the ideals behind marriage, or abstinence for that matter, so instead you’ve decided to make the bizarre case that these things are somehow mythological. The more you say it, the more people believe it, and the more they believe it the more true it becomes. It’s a clever trick. You’ve succeeded, at least partially, in shouting at a reality until it disappears.

But there is SOME truth in what you say.

Monogamy is not natural. You’re right about that.

It’s supernatural.

It’s above our nature. It might not be realistic. Space flight isn’t realistic, either. If I wanted to be natural, I could live in a hole like a rodent, eat insects, and scamper from one mate to the next, until, after a life of nothingness, I die alone in the cold darkness, decomposing into the dirt without anyone ever noticing. That would be natural. It’s probably pretty realistic, too. So it is fortunate that I am a human being and I am given the chance to transcend the existence of a rat or a lizard. I have the opportunity to experience supernatural things like love, and sacrifice, and commitment.

You say that men are especially ill-suited for monogamy. We are not “biologically fitted” for it. What does that mean, Professor? Do you go about your day and, before deciding on any particular course of action, ask yourself if it is something you are “biologically fitted” to do? I would say we are biologically fitted to be rational beings. And, as rational beings, we are capable of attaining higher things. Monogamy and loyalty are higher things. But are they more difficult for men? I can’t fathom why that should be the case.

I have found a woman who will be with me until I die, even while my hair falls out and my skin shrivels and wrinkles, even when I stumble, even when I fail, even through the doldrums of daily existence, through bills and dirty diapers, through all things — joyous or miserable, pleasing or painful — through every day until death comes. Why should it be hard for me to simply refrain from tossing such a gift into the garbage?

It’s hard for men to be monogamous? What a cowardly, pitiful statement. Also, how incredibly obtuse. It ought to be easy for us. Especially for us.

If you won 600 million dollars in the lottery, would you go out the next day and break into cars to steal the change from the cup holders? That’s what sleeping around is like when you’ve already found a woman who will pledge her life and her entire being to you for the remainder of her existence.

You tell me that you are in an “open marriage.” I will probably be lambasted for “judging” you for it, but, sorry Professor, an “open marriage” makes about as much sense as a plane without wings or a boat that doesn’t float. Marriages, by definition, are supposed to be closed. Actually, I’m getting rather tired of people like you trying to hijack the institution, strip it of its beauty and purpose, and convert it into some shallow little thing that suits your vices.

If you aren’t strong enough to stay committed to one person, that’s your business. Walk down that path of loneliness and confusion, but you can’t drag the entire institution of marriage along with you. Personally, I like circles but I hate squares. Can I subvert the laws of geometry and suddenly decide that all squares shall henceforth be circles? No, because geometry is geometry, despite my strange square-hating quirks. Similarly, marriage is marriage, no matter how many college professors insist otherwise.

All that said, I must agree with one of your assertions: I only respond to imbeciles.

Thanks for writing.

-Matt

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/01/07/monogamy-is-unnatural/

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Ditzy Braless Bitches and Enamored Weak-kneed Men: How public relation firms destroy society with ‘Social Proof’

In the original draft of my novel Tail of the Dragon I was extremely critical of public relations firms—especially those owned by foreign interests in the New York market.  This of course did not sit well with the public relations branch of my publisher.  During rewrites it was insisted upon that much of my harshest criticism be removed.  As the publisher, they had a contractual right to do that even though I wasn’t crazy about it.  Much of the public relations subplots of the novel did not make it into the final draft which didn’t hurt the story, but did not allow me to expose to the extent that I creatively wished to illuminating public relation firms as the propaganda arm of misinformation by exposing a vulnerable aspect of human nature—their ancient and very tribal need to travel in herds.  I was tapping into my reader’s intellectual desire to rebel away from such a manner in my novel, but with that publisher, it wasn’t going to fly.  Public relations professionals such as those who work to improve the image of government schools or run cover stories for corrupt politicians use a term called “social proof,” which Bill Whittle from PJTV covered during a recent segment.  Social Proof, used to be called ‘Peer-pressure,’ but has since taken on a new, less harsh name.   It is essentially a type of mob mentality that convinces people to go along with the herd.  President Obama is really President Social Proof–he convinced a slew of voters that to question him was racist through public relations mechanisms utilizing social proof. Now, several voices are crying out that the Emperor…President…is wearing no clothes, and all that’s left to do is run the hollow people into the river.  Watch Whittle’s explanation of that metaphor below.

Social proof is how the scam artists of public relations work their magic.  They convince the masses that a truth is not a truth because a majority opinion does not believe such a thing.  Once the masses invest into a belief public relations specialists can then direct social temperament to the molding of that belief—which is happening at virtually every level of endeavor in modern America.  Public relations are so corrosive that it could easily be assumed that almost nothing we hear today we can believe—because most of it has been formed to expose social proof as the mechanism of mental acceptance.

Years ago I worked with a girl on a project whose father ran a large downtown Cincinnati public relations firm.  This project involved WLW radio, major local politicians, and a wide range of very dynamic individuals.  I attended several meetings at this downtown location and as things became friendlier, she came to my house.  The more I came to know this young woman, the more I despised her.  I held my opinions in check for the good of the project we were all working on, but quickly, my desire to work with such a corrupt—formless personality became too great.  On an evening when I was set to go do a show on WLW during Willie’s time slot, I refused as the personalities involved had attempted to steer this project into the realm of social proof where a formless void of chaos was acting upon the development.  I quickly learned during this experience why large companies become faceless, spineless organizations as public relation firms and lawyers take their products down a similar path and once there they often have too much time and money invested to back out—so they withdrawal from the creative process leaving everything to the parasites of public relations—which is about as unproductive as an endeavor as there is.  They do nothing for a product except expose in consumers their need to satisfy a social proof which drives them to participate in the products represented by public relation firms.

My experience with this firm disgusted me, and it took me several years to get the bad taste out of my mouth, but I did learn a tremendous amount from them—which ended up in my book.  But as my publisher stated, damning public relations firms would surely damn the sales of the book because without public relations—how could I hope to sell a book in this modern climate.  My statements were the same as what they were all those years ago with the Cincinnati firm and WLW radio—I’d let honesty and the desire for a product that touched on the human desire for anti social proof carry the day.  It doesn’t always work so well, but I feel better about the things I do when social proof is not a factor—but the curiosity of the masses are instead driven by individual desire.  Those generated by public relation firms promoting social proof are essentially advocating falsification of reality.

One of the reasons I love Star Wars so much is that the love of that product is driven by individual freedom and recognition.  Social proof actually worked against Star Wars in the 70s, the studios were rebelling against the film and if not for Alan Ladd Jr., 20th Century Fox would have pulled out of the deal.  The industry did not want the product of Star Wars, but the internal desire of the human race did—which proves to me that such things are possible—and it gives me hope.   Every time we go to the movies and see a preview for a new film—most of which will not live up to the hype, we are seeing attempts by public relations specialists to expose to the mass public a demand created by social proof to obtain strong opening weekend sales.  Most films because they are completely social proof in their content fizzle out within two weeks of their box office take as the public turns away disappointed to their next hope for a successful movie going experience.  In 2013 to 2014 the films which defy social proof are the Disney film Frozen, and Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.  The product of those films exceeds the social proof of popular opinion and my excitement over those enterprises is because they overcome the falsification of social proof.  Those two films are the two best-selling films which still have strong box office support several weeks after their opening weekend release which means that the content of those films defies social proof.  People do not go see them because of peer pressure; they see them because the stories communicate to their individual natures.  There is a BIG difference.

The Disney Company utilizes social proof in massive droves to attract people to their television, movie and amusement parks.  But once there, Disney actually provides a good product and people come away generally happy and fulfilled on an individual level.  Barack Obama uses social proof to hide his many crimes and scandals.  This leaves society always feeling anxious and compelled to fill the void with conspiracy theories.  But the behavior does not change because social proof creates a paralysis among the human species which states that action cannot be taken against injustice if the masses do not recognize the peril.  This is why liberals, progressives, out-right communists and socialists have attempted to remove value from society using public relation firms to help them commit the deed, so that society would not have the intellectual tools to make such a determination.  So long as society is paralyzed with shackles of lost value, they cannot act out against political crimes because social proof prevents them from acting.

Social proof advocated by public relations firms are one of the worst aspects of modern society.  In my local school district of Lakota they are used to hide sex scandals from teachers against students, and advocate dangerously high tax rates among the property owners.  In the current White House, Obama uses social proof to hide the content of his past and the crimes of his present—such as Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and the IRS scandal.  Social proof does not hide the crime, but it does take away the means of holding conviction against it.  Individually, most people will declare under their breath that something is wrong, but due to their ancient tendencies toward collectivism, will not stand by such convictions in the light of day as social proof prevents them from openly advocating such a thing.  It is in this way that much evil is committed in broad daylight and suffering on an epic level is perpetuated.  And all such things begin with public relation firms and ditzy braless bitches lacking a soul propped up by cowardly men who would rather sip wine from their high-heeled shoes than stand on the ground of conviction for what’s right and what’s wrong.  They’d rather spin the facts with social proof and hide the crimes of existence behind that terrible form of peer pressure.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Mark Haverkos Speech For GOP Executive Chairman: Don Quixote without the windmills

To be clear on exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party two people whom I know pretty well ran against each other for the Butler County executive chairman of the GOP.  Todd Hall, who is the grandson of Carlos Todd ran against Mark Haverkos for the powerful seat just given up by David Kern who was frustrated by all the party infighting.  Kern gave up the seat one day before Bridgewater Falls Shopping Center sued the GOP party for $40,000 for breaking the lease of its former headquarters.  Knowing something about the situation up close and all the personalities involved, much of the infighting came because Todd, who used to run the GOP for over a decade during the 90s wanted to retake control of the machine politics so that it was friendlier to business.  Through his influence the money dried up. Dave Kern was a Tea Party type whom the GOP used to secure seats during the 2010 elections but by 2012, the GOP wanted nothing to do with the Tea Party after the Senate Bill 5 mishandling by John Kasich.  So to get all the ducks in a row to support politicians like Kasich, Boehner, and Portman the last I have known from the start of his career and watched decline with corrosive influence, the GOP wanted to push out the Tea Party types like Kern.  Under Kern’s watch the fundraising dried up because he wanted to bring honesty and good politics to the GOP.  But for the traditional GOP, this wasn’t in the cards.

Mark has been as close to a pure hearted political type most of the time that I’ve known him.  He has tried and tried and tried for years to bring to political office the kind of person that every American wishes for, a normal smart guy who wants to give something back to his community.  He enjoys following political happenings and over many years has maintained the ability to maintain his mind.  He is still trying to do the right things in politics, something I remember well from Rob Portman when he was running for his first congressional seat during a special election in 1993 and catering favor from the Ross Perot fan base.  Mark is still that kind of political office seeker.  But sadly, he has found himself to live a parallel life to that of Don Quixote and the fight against windmills which he believed to be monsters.  Only in the case of Mark, the villains are monsters, and are not imaginary windmills posing as monsters—they are quite literal, but the results are the same—futility.  Not to say that Todd Hall is a monster—actually he’s far from it, but the institution he serves is.  The people who are the targets of his fundraising efforts for the GOP, several whom I also know and abandoned me when I needed them because they were afraid of a bunch of girls are also generally good people—but the institutions they serve constitute the collectivism of machine politics making them faceless contributors to a vile enterprise known as politics.  Mark offered himself as a solution but was rejected in favor of Hall for obvious reasons.  Under Mark the GOP likely wouldn’t wrestle much money out of the business community for politicians like Boehner, Kasich and many others seeking money for their war chests.  So during the election he lost to Todd Hall 177 to 266—which represents clearly the split of the Republican Party.  The purists are in the slight minority, the business oriented GOP machine cogs who desire to use political power to protect their business interests from government are the other.  For the rest of this coverage let me provide you with something that the local media does not have access to, or would dare print—the actual speech by Mark given during the election.  I’d rather let Mark speak from his own words of the situation and illuminate the plight of a man committed to honesty in the field of political endeavor which is to my eyes equivalent to the plight of Don Quixote.  It may seem futile, but I admire his effort.

Mark Haverkos speech for the Butler County executive chairman of the GOP, 2014

I am Mark Haverkos, I’ll turn 60 this year, and I have owned and operated my own business for 30 yrs. I’ve served the GOP mostly by supporting candidates directly by planting signs at 3am and hanging flyers on mailboxes.  In last Novembers’ election I spent 13 hrs working the polls to get two West Chester trustees elected and we succeeded by knocking off a 20yr sitting Democrat.

Last year I applied for the County Administrator job and during my interview I was told by Commissioner Dixon he was afraid I had a reputation of “speaking my mind” or “telling it like it is” and that “wasn’t necessarily a good thing”.

I didn’t get the job”. You see, I would rather have someone tell it like it is, than lie to my face”

When I first moved here from Cincinnati I sought a seat on the Butler County GOP and won my central committee seat ever since.

I quickly learned the party had some problems but I had faith things would change. Lord knows every week brings a newspaper headline of something stupid the GOP has done.

The real trouble started years ago when the party held their meetings in what was referred to as the Todd-Ma-Hall, a big fancy building the GOP should never have bought and could not afford.

So while our GOP had little money the Todd-Ma-Hall building was sold and commissions were paid. Those responsible for that mess signed the lease at Bridgewater and more commissions were paid, all while the GOP was broke and rumors swirled that around $20,000 had been misplaced.

The dynasty in charge running the show convinced everyone to just move on, no need to look any further and life would be good.

Some would say it’s all Dave Kern’s fault for not paying the current bills and not holding enough fundraisers. Dave didn’t sign that lease, the dynasty did. I’ve heard several members were working on a settlement deal with Bridgewater, when another member placed a call that ended those talks.  Supposedly if the right people were put in place at the GOP the “dynasty” would settle with Bridgewater and make themselves look like heroes.

The Bridgewater lease isn’t the only outstanding bill the GOP owes. Deals were made with the Ohio House Caucus to pay the bills to win the legal challenge that helped get Wes Rutherford elected. The House Caucus to date has failed to pay their part. Our State reps need to pressure Columbus to honor their promise.

If many of us agree the Butler County GOP is broken, how would I fix it ?

First I will ask local office holders for a small percentage of their fundraising efforts go back into our general fund. How can our candidates expect members to pay $50-$100 for every fundraiser they are invited to and then give nothing back in return to the party?

Second, as for our State legislators, I’m asking you to divert a larger percentage of your fundraising back to our local party, rather than sending it to Columbus where it is wasted.  Otherwise, what incentive or resources does the Butler County GOP have in supporting you in the next election?

And last I will call on those responsible for the Bridgewater mess and demand they negotiate and pay the settlement themselves before this week ends.

If you’re ready to ignore the past and proceed blissfully into the future without accounting for how we got here, I urge you to vote for my opponent.

However, if your principles matter, and you want those principles reflected in our GOP, then I ask you to vote for Mark Haverkos.  Do the resources you donate to the party, your time, talent and money matter to you?  If your reputation and the reputation of our GOP matters to you, then I am Mark Haverkos and I respectfully ask for your vote.

On the education front, can you see what I’m cooking?  This Yale professor made an entire course out of a children’s story.  See what I’m talking about with education?

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Leia Display Systems: The future of science fact inspired by fiction

The reason I provide so many comparison articles about the influence of Star Wars on our modern society is because it is unique in the history of the world.  As much as many would assume that it was just a series of movies made years ago and will fade away in popularity in the years to come are grossly mistaken.  Star Wars in the future will have more influence on philosophy, science, art, history, politics, religion and virtually every aspect of culture than ANY other influence from the 20th Century.  If books like the Communist Manifesto had the ability to change the world with massive collectivism and wealth redistribution sentiments, Star Wars will dwarf that small little book in its ability to reach the hearts and minds of virtually every corner of the globe.  This was never truer than the present age where a new company in Poland has invented a holographic projection system that will revolutionize all forms of communication in the next decade.  It is the new hot thing and will soon make iPads and iPhones look clunky and archaic.  It is very difficult to understand how many astronauts, how many NASA scientists, how many bio tech engineers, physicist, and computer programmers journeyed to those fields because of Star Wars.  But it is quickly becoming apparent in vehicle design, political trends, and social patterns where their influence has come from.  As of this writing the first Star Wars film came out 37 years ago, and now that the kids from that age are in their 40s–the impact of their imaginations stirred in those stories has become obvious.  This has never been truer than the new company called Leia Display Systems created because the Polish entrepreneurs wanted to recreate the holographic message Princess Leia gave to Obi Wan Kenobi in the first film A New Hope.  With that basic premise in mind they worked out the problems of implementation while at European night clubs and the rest is………….the future.

The new way of advertising

Small screen – infinite possibilities

Screen dimensions are 65cm x 65cm. Very thin projection surface (about 6mm) makes possible to project hi definition pictures. Now the only border is YOUR imagination!

Perfect for promotion, premieres, introductions and any applications when you want to draw attention and astonish your guests.

The whole new experience

Clear image on giant screen

3m x 2,5m screen is a perfect solution for event marketing, stage, fashion shows, trade shows etc. You can put your hand through it or walk through it and the screen goes back to its previous form immediately. Interactive kit allows translating it into a giant multi-touch screen or other solution based on people movement.

Leia Display System

Technology for tomorrow

LDS are the devices that allows to display images in mid-air. This unique technology makes possible to walk through the image, touch it or interact with it. Streams of bearly visible fog becomes an image carier and their laminar structure allows to display hi resolution contents. Our patented way to produce laminar airflow for very long distance from the output makes Leia Display the most steady midair screen on the market.

http://www.leiadisplay.com/

When the 1989 film Back to the Future II came out showing Hill Valley in the far away year of 2015, there were holographic images everywhere advertising products and communicating ideas.  Well, it’s now 2014, and with the Leia Display System our society is nearly on target for these kind of video interaction services.  The units seen above should be available to the mass population in approximately five years from now, but without question they will begin to show up at trade shows within the next few years.  This upcoming technology is so powerful that it will change how everything is done by way of communication.  Suddenly public venues such as sports stadiums, night clubs, shopping complexes, even movie theaters will utilize these powerful devices to bring graphic images from the two-dimensional world to the 3D world.

Just ten years ago such cutting edge entrepreneurs would grudgingly admit that they got their ideas from a movie like Star Wars.  But in this day and age where one of the most popular television shows is Big Bang Theory where geeks are the new “jocks” of society, it is now cool to make such announcements.  These guys after all named a cutting edge company that will revolutionize communication after Princess Leia.  So what we are talking about is a whole new way of looking at virtually everything that centers around human activity inspired by the limitless world created by a film series that has only become more popular as time has moved on—not less.

Just this past weekend the popular discovery show Myth Busters did a special on Star Wars and the cast had obvious fun with the topic with open—outright geeky joy.  The important thing to conclude from these activities is the way that science fact is being driven by science fiction—where an idea is communicated through a story and the minds of society seek to manifest that idea into reality.  With Star Wars this has already been a powerful force in our culture but it’s not one from the past only, but will continue well into the future.  In the case of Leia Display Systems the televisions and telephones of tomorrow will be directly influenced by a fantasy science fiction film series which will catapult to even more popularity now that Disney is the force behind the movement.  Without question these Leia Display Systems will find their way into the Disney Parks.

For me personally this new invention of Leia Display Systems means that I can have a Dejarik table within my lifetime.  Dejarik is the chess game of the Star Wars universe.  Dejarik was a popular game which withstood the test of time better than nearly any other game in that fictional galaxy. It originated as a Jedi game, though as it became much more widespread over time, many beings became unaware of its origins.

Dejarik was played on a hologame table, which comprised a hologram generator within a table-sized cylindrical base, with a black-and-white checkerboard pattern on the top surface. When active, holomonsters – full-color, three-dimensional hologram playing pieces measuring between 5-30 cm tall – would be projected on the board. The pieces all resembled creatures, real and mythic, from throughout the galaxy, including the Mantellian Savrip, Grimtaash the Molator, Ghhhk, Houjix, Ng’ok, Kintan strider, K’lor’slug, and the M’onnok. These pieces, when moved by the player, actually acted out the moves as if really specimens of their species. If the pieces were not used for a certain amount of time or the game was abandoned by both players, they would simulate boredom.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Dejarik

It is only a matter of time before this game played only in the fantastic world of Star Wars will be played in homes the way Chess is played today.  It will be just one aspect of a future shaped by Star Wars influence.  It is important to understand why and how these influences do the work of molding society—and is why I’m so interested in Star Wars.  On one hand education institutions have thought that they were shaping society with a huge influence of government pulling the strings—but in reality Star Wars as a work of art has had a momentous impact that is just now being realized.  Much of the future technical innovation coming our way as a species will find the origin of their ideas in a darkened theater where Star Wars planted the seed.

One of those first very obvious seeds is the new holographic system by Leia Display Systems.  The future is here and it’s relatively on schedule.  In the past, many from the previous generation kept these kinds of technical innovations from being proposed to secure their own archaic ideas concocted from usually impure motivations.  Colliding with the compactness of modern computing power and a generation raised on Star Wars, exciting new inventions are about to explode upon the marketplace.  It was only about 7 years ago when I was seeking out the kind of compact cameras that were the size of a pin head for use in spy techniques.  Such things cost $300 to $1000 dollars at The Spy Store back then.  Now they are in the front and back of a paper-thin iPad for virtually no cost.  Star Wars is specifically a creation of American cinema, but its reach is world-wide.  In the case of Leia Display Systems, they are a European company.  Star Wars is popular in virtually every country in the world and has touched minds in those far-flung regions that only a functionally healthy mythology can perform.  And those benefits are just now beginning to come to us in the form of political discourse, technology, and philosophy that is unique to this period of time in history.  The fledgling bud from a deeply planted seed that will soon grow into a new way of thinking where once before only dark, archaic thoughts once prevailed has arrived with the very exciting new developments at Leia Display Systems.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

The American Terrorists: Why Michelle Obama split up her husband and the Dutch prime minister

The really hilarious thing about progressives is their duality nature—their living lie with every breath that they take because their actions defy their philosophic positions.  Nothing more exacerbates that lie than the progressive excuses given for Barack Obama’s behavior with Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt snapping selfies of themselves at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service with obvious flirtations.  That in itself didn’t surprise me, after all aren’t these confused progressive types the very people dressing in drag at gay bars, attending Fantasy Fest in Key West, or flying to Cancun to spend long weekends at the Temptations Resort.  Obama as a progressive and defender of the LGBT community obviously endorses strange deviant sexual behavior and swinging is part of that culture.  Obviously the Clintons are swingers—so it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Michelle and Barack Obama support such relationships.

But it quickly became clear that Michelle isn’t into that kind of thing because she was angry about the behavior of her husband—so angry that she made him switch seats with her—which I thought was the biggest part of the story.  But the behavior was only picked up on by a few remote conservative outlets.  Most everyone else saw that Michelle was upset and assumed that it was just a normal issue of a wife reigning in a flirtatious husband from sexual activity that would flourish without her edit.  But what is more telling is the fact that Obama’s infatuation with women who look like Helle Thorning-Schmidt should be obvious.  Most young men pick wives who are most like their mothers—it’s a natural reaction to the development of their psyches.  Helle Thorning-Schmidt in her mannerisms, in her presentation of herself, and in her skin color more resembles Obama’s mother than Michelle does.  Deep insecurities about Obama’s past seem to have come out which would threaten Michelle’s current life, and she felt she needed to interject herself for her own self-preservation.  It is this that the American people need to know about the situation which really hasn’t been discussed properly.  Obviously what is about to be reported here could only be confirmed by Michelle Obama—but since her family, and her supporters are well-known to denying facts, lying, and behaving in an underhanded manner, then good old-fashioned detective work will have to do.  The Obama family won’t be able to dispute any of these things, because if they could—honestly—they would.  But they can’t.  Silence is the testimony of the guilty.

Michelle was, according to Bill Ayers himself, working with his wife the Weather Underground Terrorist Bernadine Dohrn at the Chicago law firm Sidley & Austin a year ahead of Obama joining.  The four got together for mutual benefit, the terrorists seeing in Obama a Trojan Horse into politics that could do what their bomb from the 70s couldn’t—destroy the evil imperial America from within.  In 1995 Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn launched Obama’s political career from their living room once the socialist-oriented New Party member Alice Palmer announced that she wanted Obama as her successor in the state senate when she stepped down to run for Congress.

Obama has had some inconsistencies about his recollection of how he and Michelle met—but what is known was that they met at the law firm and it is of no coincidence that Dohrn and Ayers helped shape the relationship by pointing the two in the same political direction.  Michelle wouldn’t be the first woman under the advice of a wiser older woman in Dohrn to grab hold of an upcoming star and ride it as far as it would take her.  The trouble with Barack Obama was that his mother was a white woman, and a rather loosy-goosy one at that who loved interracial sex and had communist leanings formed by her own parents.  CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION—WARNING, THIS LINK LEADS TO NUDE PICTURES OF OBAMA’S MOTHER ALLEGEDLY TAKEN BY THE COMMUNIST FRANK MARSHELL DAVIS.  So if Michelle was going to make a relationship work with Obama, she needed to make sure she kept the kind of women who Obama was naturally attracted to out of his life as much as possible.

At this point in his life Obama had already had several white girlfriends—which as a young man from an interracial union, was his prerogative.  Michelle would have to change that by becoming the mother in his life—rather than his lover.  Obama, understanding that he needed that kind of balance in his life to achieve any level of success yielded to it knowingly—and put his white skinned girlfriends of the past well behind him without looking back.

When Genevieve Cook first met Barack Obama in the kitchen of a mutual friend’s New York flat in 1983, he was wearing jeans, a T-shirt and a dark leather jacket.  As the night wore on, they sat close together on an orange beanbag in the hall while Cook swigged Baileys Irish Cream straight from the bottle.  They were amazed at how much they had in common: both were children of divorced parents, both had lived all over the world and had never felt truly at home anywhere.  They exchanged phone numbers. Within days, he was cooking her dinner at his apartment.  ‘Then we went and talked in his bedroom,’ Cook recalled. ‘And then I spent the night with him.  ‘It all felt very inevitable.’  For Genevieve Cook — to whom admittedly the President alludes to in his memoirs — she wasn’t the first white girlfriend in his life, nor the last.

As a young student in the early Eighties at Occidental College, a small arts university in Los Angeles, Obama developed a serious crush on another student Alexandra McNear, who was co-editor of a college literary magazine which published two of Obama’s poems.  She was a white woman and had a presence much like his anthropology loving mother.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163468/Barack-Obama-The-white-girlfriends-US-President-erased-past.html

But once Obama got serious about a political career and knowing he needed to appeal to the minority voters around Chicago and greater Illinois to do it, old flames like Genevieve Cook and Alexandra McNear wouldn’t be very acceptable to voters.  And if Obama was ever going to get high up in political office as he and Ayers planned, he’d need a nice traditional wife – like Michelle Obama to “darken” him up a bit and get people to forget about his past, his mother and connections to the Communist Party through Frank Marshell Davis.  Ayers knew Obama needed more of a Jessie Jackson type of progressive representation than the one he and his wife projected—and that was the ticket to possibly even The White House over a ten-year span.  Imperial America would never see it coming.  Jackson at the time was at the height of his power and was bringing companies to their knees with unfettered guilt from their unsubstantiated role in American slavery.  America couldn’t resist the communist underpinnings of Barack Obama or they’d be called a racist, but Obama needed Michelle to complete the public relations package.

Likely, Michelle knew from the beginning that this was her role in the whole affair.  Arranged marriages are not uncommon in the world and Obama wasn’t the worst option.  He was a genuine person who really believed things, so she could make it work.  But she’d have to keep him focused on the tasks at hand, and for the most part she has.  Unlike the Clintons the Obamas are fairly sexually conservative for progressives.  They are more about radical social reform than personal pleasure.

Fast forward nearly 20 years to Nelson Mandela’s memorial service where the Obamas found themselves seated next to a nearly mirror image of Barack’s mother, Helle Thorning-Schmidt—a woman from a very permissive Danish culture where sex scandals are not even reported.  In nearby France they are common and the topic of gossip.  But in Denmark a woman like Helle Thorning-Schmidt could have sex in the streets with a menagerie of baboons and nobody would even snap a picture.   Helle is the type of Prime Minster who in 2012 spotted Sex in the City actress Sarah Jessica Parker on the street and rushed up to introduce herself like a Catholic school girl just let out of the seminary attending her first boy band concert.  It wasn’t that Helle was more attractive than Barack’s mother, it was that she is as liberated—something that Michelle cannot compete with in the bedroom or anywhere.  So when Michelle saw her husband getting too loose with himself she pulled him together like she always does, and switched seats to make sure that the two world leaders didn’t get any ideas.  Helle not really meaning any harm in relation to her culture took the hint and pulled herself together as did Barack—who dutifully listened to his wife and swapped seats leaning forward in his chair and spending much of the rest of the time defensively crossing his arms protecting himself from the embarrassment of the world’s eyes which were now upon him.  It’s not like he intended anything malicious—it’s just the whole mother/son—husband/wife aspect of being in a relationship with an unnatural psychological mate—one that is foreign to him from his childhood years.

http://topconservativenews.com/2013/12/michelle-makes-obama-change-seats-so-he-cant-talk-to-denmarks-beautiful-pm/

As much as Obama has had issues over where he’s born, how he grew up, who he knew in college, and where he actually attended, the real issues with the guy are the missing pieces from his past that he can never reconcile.  Being a dutiful socialist, Obama believes that the greater good of society is more important than his individual happiness, so he will sacrifice that so that he can have the power to redistribute the wealth of the world for the better, a plan hatched years ago under not so much cloak and dagger tactics in Bill Ayers’ living room.  But his yearnings are more for the kind of attention that a woman like Helle can provide not due to skin color—which is only reference, but mannerisms—a white woman willing to throw off the prejudice of society and sleep with a black man, and to pose nude for one of his only real father figures in Frank Marshell Davis.  The open shirt blowing carelessly in the wind from such a woman holds more lustful euphemisms than a stack of pornography books because it reminds him of his dead mother and the incomplete relationship he had with her as a single parent hopping hopefully all her life from man to man.

Michelle didn’t make her husband switch seats because the eyes of the world was watching and might think something ill of the flirtations.  That may have been the reason she presented it to Barack and Helle.  She primarily did it to protect her marriage, and all that she had invested into a life which would fulfill the terrorist yearnings of her mentor Bernadine Dohrn who with her husband actually bombed the Pentagon on May 19, 1972.  Ayers said of that day, “Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon.  The sky was blue.  The birds were singing.  And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.  Kill all the rich people.  Break up their cars and apartments.  Bring the revolution home; kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.”  This was Michelle’s friend who worked at her law firm feeding into her hatred of America which was revealed in her Princeton college thesis illuminating her deep feelings of a race-obsessed worldview and incredible resistance to being “further integrated into a white cultural and social structure that would only allow her to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant.”  Dohrn directed her anger and with her husband taught the Obamas how they beat the rap during the Pentagon bombing—how to deny, deny, lie, deny, and lie again for the greater good—for the fight for social justice.

Michelle listened to Bernadine Dohrn and bedded her future husband.  She became a first lady in the process and everything and more that was planned in that Bill Ayers living room.  The promises by his wife, her co-worker came true.  They now can spend millions of dollars of looted money from those oppressors she wrote about in her Princeton thesis and laugh about it as they carve up the nation in a way that their terrorist mentors never dreamed possible.  And as far as she has come, and the sacrifices she made along the way, nothing is going to get in the way—especially a pretty Danish Prime Minister and the flirtations of her husband with a mother figure that if she were not in his life would likely be the object of his obsession.

So she sat between them…………………………….

Read more of this terrorist past from a CBS report in 2008—before Obama was elected, and before Glenn Beck exposed many of these things later on.  The following report came before CBS became concerned that they’d be blacklisted in the press room if they didn’t play ball with a tyrannical regime lead by the Obamas and their crusade to remake America into the image of some Chicago terrorists and a mother who slept her way around the world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-bad-company-of-barack-obama/

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

The Real Robber Barrons of Puget Sound: Labor union votes for a new contract

What happens when you pay people who generally aren’t worth it over $100,000 a year–they operate a union against productivity which is what Boeing narrowly escaped over the weekend with a 51 to 49 vote among approximately 31,000 eligible members.   Making that kind of money the machinist union at Boeing is the economy of Puget Sound and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers is basically their own local government.  Because of their belief in the evils of capitalism they nearly drove Boeing as a company to move their new 777X design build with its composite wing out of Washington to be manufactured in right-to-work states where the union could not wreck the development of the new state-of-the-art plane.  Most of the members of the machinist union do not have the technical aptitude to build a new airplane from scratch let alone sell it to markets all over the world.  Yet they are paid six figures because of the union infiltration into a successful American company and they buy their boats, their new trucks, and live their relatively opulent lives blissfully unaware of what makes a company work—or profitable.  Their union preaches against the evils of profit—yet they demand more and more money with every contract.  For this latest contract the members received a $10,000 signing bonus and money towards a 401K plan.  Still, the margin of victory for Boeing was razor-thin.  Many of the 49% of the union members who voted against the contract believe the company should continue to fund their pensions.  They don’t want the 401K plan.  They obviously don’t fathom that Boeing cannot continue to throw money at them in such a rate for indefinite periods of time—because they are disconnected from where the money comes from.  For them, the planes arrive on the shop floor, they assemble them, and they leave.  They have little to do with the design process, the sales and marketing, or the delivery.  They simply show up, do some work, and leave with their six figure incomes.

To get an idea of how much money the machinist make at Boeing understand that there are 11 different pay grades depending on job categories.  At Boeing the lowest level machinist are considered Grade 1 which stars at about $25,000 per year and tops out around $66,000 per year.  The top-level union workers before the contract made more than $90,000 in base pay annually not counting shift differentials, overtime or incentive payments.  After the contract those workers will top out over six figures in base salary.  Clearly this was the difference in the vote.  Many of the aging workforce at Boeing saw the writing on the wall.  In the Puget Sound/Evertt area where the Boeing plants reside the median household income is about $47,000 a year.  If Boeing packed up and left—which they clearly intended to do so to avoid more work stoppages in the future from their striking labor force, there is no place else capable of paying employees such large sums of money for performing jobs that are only worth half that value.

Boeing has been throwing money at the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers for decades and like gambling addicts they have spent it as fast as it has come in and continued to reach their hand out for more, and more, and more until the company finally looked to move from the Evertt area.  The decisions Boeing were faced with reminded me of my hometown where I once worked at Cincinnati Milicron—which is now a parking lot.  A vast complex that resembled a small city is now completely gone down in Oakley just north of Cincinnati along I-71.  All the skill that was employed there is gone.  Just to the west of that location was the old Norwood General Motors plant which built the old Camero.  It’s now gone—destroyed by the parasitic unions.  Just to the north up in Hamilton, is the old Fisher Body plant for General Motors where my grandfather worked.  Long after his death my grandmother continued to give me comic book money from the retirement benefits he received as well as thousands of other retired GM workers all over the country who were not productively working any longer.  General Motors was trying to cover all those legacy costs with newer workers in a pyramid scheme concocted by the unions which did not add up.  To this day the old Fisher Body building is still standing, but the company is gone.  It’s primarily just warehouse space now.  Over to the east in Middletown was a town—once a thriving place flourishing off the old Armco Steel Plant.  The wage structure got out of control there and most of the orders for business went away.  It is now AK Steel but employs far fewer people than it once did and is only a distant shadow of its former self.  The result is that the economy of Middletown crashed and burned.  Homes that should be $70,000 in value are $20,000, and the area is riddled with crime.  As people lost their jobs they became addicted to welfare and the quality of life for the once prosperous town dried up like a gold mine in the Old West once the precious element ran out.  That is the eventual future of Puget Sound.  This latest contract only buys a little more time.  It will cost Boeing a lot of money to move their operation to another state, so it was cheaper to throw $10,000 bonus checks at workers so they could pay off their new Ford F350s or plan to buy a new boat.  Boeing has a hot new plane to build and sell, so they took the lesser of the two evils.  But why should they be in such a situation and why would the Department of Labor side with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and not Boeing in forcing the job provider to bleed itself dry to appease a bunch of out-of-touch workers bred under a communist labor union system designed to destroy American business.

In the videos above the guys at PJ Media hosted by Bill Whittle explore this topic, and it is worth watching.  The guest Dr. Burt Folsom told the story of the so-called Robber Barrons at the start of the progressive era, (just prior to the Twentieth Century) when many of the American labor unions were just getting started.  Because of their hatred of capitalism the government went after the Robber Barrons, such as the rail road industry and went on anti-trust witch hunts and essentially through federal force took away the power of American business and handed it over to the workers of manufacturing.  The manipulative power that the Robber Barrons formally had were now in possession of the solidarity effort of the labor unions—which turned out to be just as corrupt, and destructive.  The biggest difference is that the labor unions didn’t create jobs, as the Robber Barrons did.  With two evils being equal—that of human greed—the companies created by Robber Barrons through capitalism at least provided good jobs whereas the labor unions provided nothing but labor.  Labor can be found elsewhere if it becomes too problematic, but Robber Barrons who create jobs—cannot.  They are few and rare as gold whereas general labor who can push a button on a CNC controller and read micrometers into the thousands of an inch are quite common.

The vote at Boeing over the weekend which upset many of the labor union members is the grudging realization that without Boeing in Everett, Washington, there is nothing that will replace their loss and politicians, union leaders and all their F350 driving members with their $10,000 bonus checks are at the mercy of those who create the jobs.  100 years of progressivism has come smashing against a cold reality that should have been obvious from the start.  Eventually the union demands will outpace Boeing’s ability, or willingness to pay off the workers with bonus checks and excessively high salary—and Boeing will move to a right-to-work state or possibly move their operation to another country where they can obtain stable labor without such outrageous expectations.  But for now, with a narrow union vote, some of the members are beginning to see the writing on the wall and is appreciating Boeing not as a Robber Barron company that has been forced to become a heavily subsidized company of political entrepreneurialism, but for its roots as a Market Entrepreneur.  It was the labor unions which pushed Boeing into a relationship with politics to protect itself from the thieving hands of an ungrateful workforce—and the rest has been downhill—except that Boeing still makes cool airplanes that sell very well—which is the only bright spot of an otherwise bleak future.

Watch the videos above to learn more.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Obamacare: What it will cost you and how it will be enforced–the grim reality

Obamacare is one of the worst policies that have ever been concocted by political statists.  It should be rejected by everyone but the most destitute social parasites which this law is designed to promote.  It is a severe infringement on human liberty and a detriment to successful health care advancement in the future.  It is an attack on innovation and a promotion of lack-luster government bureaucracy.  It is terrible law made by bad, corrupt politicians who hid their intentions of wealth redistribution through taxation under the cover of a holiday season and a nation filled with year-end compassion who didn’t read the fine print of a massive multi thousand page document.  Obamacare was a Trojan Horse designed to wreck the American economy by progressives who hate the capitalism of the West.

To fathom what is in store for all of us in 2014 read the below report by a guy who took the time to write down his thoughts on the Affordable Care Act Facebook page.  The guy tried to sign up for Obamacare, and then realized that he couldn’t afford the payments—and attempted to back out.  This story has been floating around for a while and describes what will be a common for every American now that we are in 2014.

JIM MEIER OSP PROJECT ENGINEER
Fort Myers Fl. 33903

RE: OBAMACARE A comment posted on the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare FB page:

“I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 AM. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually. I chose tier 2 “Silver Plan” and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I “opt-out” and chose to continue along with no insurance. I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. Informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the “REPERCUSSIONS PORTION” for “non-payment” of yearly fine. First, your driver’s license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with “Non-Payment” and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy “Automatically withdraw” your “penalties” weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is “Free” or even “Affordable.”

Obamacare not only infiltrates a major portion of the American economy, but it roots itself deep into the lives of every tax paying citizen and will remain there so long as people permit such an intrusion.  Statists like Obama and his gang of government thugs are hoping and praying that they can get millions of people addicted to this new government “service” so that it can never be repealed.  They do not care about the 6 to 10 million people who are losing their current plans so long as those people are forced under severe coercion to enroll in one of these government plans.  Obama’s people know that all those people who have lost their plans will HAVE to sign up for their plan because they have the authority of law at their back and will take your driver’s license, they will take your house, they will fine you through payroll deduction and steal your money right out of your pockets—because they can—because they voted themselves the power to theft—to steal the money of American citizens and give it to drug addicts, fatherless homes bulging with welfare babies, and common criminals who otherwise would not have insurance.  The federal US Government is promoting scum bags and harming the productive and they are doing it on purpose.  Their attack on America through the medical insurance industry is on purpose—it is calculated and aggressive.

As it can be seen from the scenario illuminated by Jim Meier the affluent golf club member who has supplied excellent health insurance for his family for decades could suddenly be thrown in jail like a common criminal if he refuses to comply with Obamacare mandates purchasing insurance plans picked by the government designed to pay for abortions, and reckless living by people who intentionally make bad decisions in their lives.  While those people thrive under government support stolen from people like the golf club member, the affluent man will rot in jail treated as a criminal because he dared to question the authority of a tyrannical government.  If the man does not end up in jail he will be picked clean of his wealth through fines, fees, and insurance premiums because of his ability to pay.

Obamacare is socialism at best—but likely it would be communism if proposed under the U.S.S.R during the middle of the Twentieth Century.  It is under tyrannical regimes that Obamacare belongs and is indicative.  It has nothing to do with affordable care except for people who lack ambition to begin with and crave the security blanket of government built by stolen wealth.  It is the creation of a little boy from Jakarta who grew up hating the West, raised by grandparents who leaned toward communism as a political philosophy, and was nurtured into politics by the American terrorist Bill Ayers.  That little boy is now president rubbing the token of Lord Hanuman in his pocket, empowered by a slew of old hippies who now serve as congressman, and senators hiding the fact that Obamacare would be a new tax instead of an attempt to help equalize the medical insurance industry.

Obamacare is terrorism.  There is no sugar-coating which can disguise the fact.  It is an assault, and it is vile.  It has no place in a free society—as it will be everything but a semblance of independence, free markets, or free will.  It is thuggish coercion of the utmost imposition, it is dangerous, and it is designed to destroy America as a nation.  It is the terrorism of Bill Ayers designed to implode the economy of an “imperialistic” nation as conceived by haters of America—of which Barack Obama seems to have a history of supporting.

That leaves the question………………why is it still a law?

If there is any wonder why this law is so bad, vile, and flat-out corrupt read the article at the following link for more information:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/01/02/obamacare-cheerleader-now-realizes-she-cant-afford-health-insurance-for-herself-and-young-son/

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Mara Jade in Disney’s ‘Rebels’: Advice for Ted Stevenot

Yes John Kasich will be challenged for the Ohio governor seat, yes Obamacare will face many challenges in 2014, yes the Senate is up for grabs, yes there are major rifts in the Republican Party, and yes public education is guilty of training the mass of society into collectivism. However those are things that were set in motion many years ago—and were covered here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom pointing to this grand fortissimo of cultural events—but these are just the beginning notes of that movement and the next portion of that symphony will not come from politics but art.  Politics does not drive culture it reacts to it.  Art however does drive culture and when I cover artistic efforts with superior footing to political ones, this is the reason why.  Personally it is for this reason that I am so excited about the new Disney program coming up in the fall on their XD channel called Star Wars: Rebels.  Listen to the executive producer Simeon Kinsberg discuss his motivations for the show intended for children—but extremely relevant to adults.

As stated previously, mythology in the rock, paper, scissors game of world culture beats politics or popular fashion because it is the foundation of those beliefs.  In not just America, but throughout the world are an entire generation of disgruntled young people who have watched previous generations of adults rob them of their future with massive debt, wrecked health care, educational opportunities that have not manifested into profit, and a lifestyle less vigorous than that of their parents.  For them, and their children, the new Star Wars dynasty beginning with Rebels will permeate deep into their consciousness and my point of bringing it up is so that the kind of people who read here regularly can take note and act upon it.

There are two better than rumored female characters in the upcoming Rebels which will resound powerfully through the myths of our society which will carry well beyond common cartoon shows.  Ahsoka Tano will be back after her departure from the Clone Wars and perform her duties as a Rebel Pilot in the fledgling young Rebellion.  And more notable will be Mara Jade who will be a young girl serving as the Emperor’s Hand as the Empire rises to power. 

Mara in the future of the Star Wars saga was the wife of Luke Skywalker, was killed by Han and Leia Solo’s son Jacen, and gave birth to a son named Ben who will reportedly be in the new films by Disney in 2015.  It was also Mara who trained Jaina Solo to be a Jedi Knight who and will be the star of the new film series as the Sword of the Jedi.  Mara plays a significant roll in the overall mythology and will be present in the upcoming Rebels which will cover her origin story.

Lucasfilm is not a political company.  Most of their employees probably voted for Obama over Romney—but they are deeply philosophical.  They have at their disposal at Skywalker Ranch a treasure trove of books from around the world to expand the Star Wars mythology which centers on the struggle of individuals over statist control from dictators.  That premise to a story makes Star Wars important in that the story helps people see how those tyrannical forces come into their lives in various forms.  I have no doubt that Rebels will do this for millions of young people and millions of people who are over 30—and will grudgingly admit that they will be watching the new television show.  Once human beings learn to identify where troubles begin in their lives through mythology they will desire to take actions against those troubles.  For many, my friend Doc Thompson at The Blaze will offer an alternative to the statist offerings they currently have in the media.  I often refer to The Blaze as “Rebel” radio.  Glenn Beck is preaching in the real world much what Mon Mothma and Bail Organa will preach in the upcoming Disney show, Rebels.  The producer has said that one of his primary inspirations is the American Revolution and this will take minds to that real life rebellion as they learn to see the same signs.  Rebels as a work of art and fiction will provide a palette of context to the real life struggles we are all dealing with from all political fronts.

As I look through the history of such endeavors I can think of no time in entertainment history where this kind of high-profile television show offered this kind of content.  What comes to mind are the old Disney shows like Johnny Tremain and Davy Crockett.  But those were shows dealing with the past, Star Wars is both the past and the future and has more power because of it.  Star Wars has the power to communicate values to several generations as very high quality family entertainment that will get discussions started.  If our present society is lacking value because the art we live by has focused on exposed female breasts, silly adolescent jokes, and other forms of didactic pornography, our culture mirrors those aspects presently.  Lucasfilm owned by Disney is about to present a show to the world through a simple cartoon which will be beaming with value—value that people will gobble up like parched desert travelers deprived three days of water.

I speak to people at all levels in the gaming community, and I speak to people at all levels of politics—and I’m declaring that the former is more powerful than the later.  There is a pent-up energy looking for release.  Companies like Disney can take that pent-up energy and convert it to dollars through merchandise sales—which helps expand the overall mythology.  But what is more interesting is why the merchandise sells—why there is an excitement for the new Star Wars: Rebels action figures that will be sold at Target and Wal-Mart.  The reason why grown adults are already saving their money to add these little trinkets to their already vast Star Wars collection is because the overall story speaks to them about things that are otherwise beyond their control.  These people typically don’t vote, or might otherwise call themselves political independents.  But they can be motivated to do so if the message taps in to their already curious minds.

Rand Paul………….are you listening?  Ted Stevenot, President of the Ohio Liberty Coalition and challenger to John Kasich, are you seeing the wave that I’m pointing at?  There is a wave deep at sea that nobody sees coming ashore yet, but when it arrives a skilled surfer can ride that wave with careful timing.  I’m pointing to that timing.  Culture drives that timing—entertainment drives culture.  Lucasfilm is providing a valuable entertainment that will not only provide values to a new generation—politically neutral values—but resolutely values against statism.  With those values voters will be looking for someone in politics who beholds similar values.  Take note, and act upon them—and good things will happen.  It doesn’t mean that candidates need to start quoting Star Wars lines on the campaign trail, but that they need to take note of why Star Wars is so popular, why people want to spend so much money on it, and to utilize those methods in reality as politicians.  They should strive to be politicians like Mon Mothma and Bail Organa and not like Governor Tarkin, and Emperor Palpatine.  The reason Star Wars is so popular is because such characters do not exist in real life—and people wish they did.

A failure to be heroic, bold, or project the values of a political rebel will lead to more of the kind of dysfunction that we’ve had—and nobody wants that.  Don’t look at what politicians have been doing for centuries—look at what entertainment is doing and tap into the same reasons that people a year in advance are willing to plop down $10 bucks on a new Rebels Star Wars action figure.  Once those two things are aligned, our society will benefit greatly in a new direction that will be a lot different from our current system.

Meanwhile, I am very much looking forward to watching the back story of Mara Jade in the new Star Wars: Rebels television program on Disney XD.  And I’m even more looking forward to Ted Stevenot challenging Governor Kasich in the upcoming primary for Ohio governor.  Both are rebels, one is fictional, one is from the actual world, but both speak to the heart of an ideal that is deep in the human consciousness—bold changes are necessary when tyranny is afoot—and when those times occur, it is time for “rebels” to throw off the old and make way for the new.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com  


How People Learn: A test that proves public education is teaching incorrectly

When it is wondered why homeschooling is proving more successful than public school, or why Common Core education is so dangerous to the minds of young people, or even in determining the amount of money teachers should be paid, and how often—it must be understood how children learn and achieve.  The science of learning must be dealt with, and an assumption that the traditional top down learning system must be abandoned so that an open-minded analysis can be explored beyond cynical protection of the public education government sponsored empire building which has been enslaving children presently and entire societies globally.  For that analysis, let me provide a bit of evidence as provided by Delancey place.com regarding a 1999 study in India where Sugata Mitra conducted an experiment that should change the world if only government involvement in education would step out-of-the-way.  Governments create the kind of slums talked about in the article below, governments create ignorance, and governments create most of the roadblocks that stand in the way of innovation.  If left alone, society would advance much faster toward much more prosperous educational opportunities and social innovation as the proof below will display.  Please keep in mind upon reading this that the study was conducted well over 15 years ago as of this writing and that is simply appalling.  Sadly it has not been officially endorsed by any serious advocates of education.  The reason is that teacher unions do not want innovation, they do not want competition, and they don’t want any model of education that abandons their top down approach because it does not fit their long-term strategy of advocating dependence on government.  The purpose of education in public schools is not to teach independence among its students, but dependency—more specifically “interdependency.”  Thus, it is an educational system that deliberately works against the way human beings think, feel, and learn—it is in defiance of nature—and is the primary reason that it is a global failure not just in America—be everywhere in the world relative to the kind of educational methods described below.

Continuing Delanceyplace.com’s End of Year Encore Week: This year a full week on creativity.

In today’s encore selection — from Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think

by Peter H. Diamandia and Steven Kotler. A creative approach to education:

“In 1999 the Indian physicist Sugata Mitra got interested in education. He knew there were places in the world without schools and places in the world where good teachers didn’t want to teach. What could be done for kids living in those spots was his question. Self-directed learning was one pos­sible solution, but were kids living in slums capable of all that much self-direction?

“At the time, Mitra was head of research and development for NIIT Technologies, a top computer software and development company in New Delhi, India. His posh twenty-first-century office abutted an urban slum but was kept separate by a tall brick wall. So Mitra designed a simple exper­iment. He cut a hole in the wall and installed a computer and a track pad, with the screen and the pad facing into the slum. He did it in such a way that theft was not a problem, then connected the computer to the Internet, added a web browser, and walked away.

“The kids who lived in the slums could not speak English, did not know how to use a computer, and had no knowledge of the Internet, but they were curious. Within minutes, they’d figured out how to point and click. By the end of the first day, they were surfing the web and-even more importantly-teaching one another how to surf the web. These results raised more questions than they answered. Were they real? Did these kids really teach themselves how to use this computer, or did someone, perhaps out of sight of Mitra’s hidden video camera, explain the technology to them?

http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001vln7_heHl4wTkvFZvHnwJl86tCteGzL-aT6KJSAiJTQUtXd7LPH_IKlZ6NkbJKbxQdw9LD_Xlhdt56PCxb5O9IRc80s-tb0AXFSvkWD5JCdDCFIqvuXCfjd_yMNUZMfOwAWQhf7kSbRkfDSvGofowpVo4OKaHTs0YfpFppwVG92eiDTVXvJVejiRzeCg1dTzzwqm-AUqB3awROuEYPllMPp8xemqL6w1cSKyCzKXj1ATmdjHrltBdHU71DLcKj626rPGWrn9ooDpruElprRIg4TIjWBO317G2k9_vTfi_-saUsbahILStrtwKGEo36T8yohzVg3Pb3euYg8vJZKfwG3ahyWSHZbfDqvgEZmawP2m0WGg9zWFyg==

“So Mitra moved the experiment to the slums of Shivpuri, where, as he says, ‘I’d been assured no one had ever taught anybody anything.’ He got similar results. Then he moved it to a rural village and found the same thing. Since then, this experiment has been replicated all over India, and all over the world, and always with the same outcome: kids, working in small, unsupervised groups, and without any formal training, could learn to use computers very quickly and with a great degree of proficiency.

“This led Mitra to an ever-expanding series of experiments about what else kids could learn on their own. One of the more ambitious of these was conducted in the small village of Kalikkuppam in southern India. This time Mitra decided to see if a bunch of impoverished Tamil-speaking, twelve-year-olds could learn to use the Internet, which they’d never seen before; to teach themselves biotechnology, a subject they’d never heard of; in English, a language none of them spoke. ‘All I did was tell them that there was some very difficult information on this computer, they probably wouldn’t under­stand any of it, and I’ll be back to test them on it in a few months.’

“Two months later, he returned and asked the students if they’d under­stood the material. A young girl raised her hand. ‘Other than the fact that improper replication of the DNA molecule causes genetic disease,’ she said, ‘we’ve understood nothing.’ In fact, this was not quite the case. When Mitra tested them, scores averaged around 30 percent. From 0 percent to 30 percent in two months with no formal instruction was a fairly remark­able result, but still not good enough to pass a standard exam. So Mitra brought in help. He recruited a slightly older girl from the village to serve as a tutor. She didn’t know any biotechnology, but was told to use the ‘grand­mother method’: just stand behind the kids and provide encouragement. ‘Wow, that’s cool, that’s fantastic, show me something else!’ Two months later, Mitra came back. This time, when tested, average scores had jumped to 50 percent, which was the same average as high-school kids studying bio-tech at the best schools in New Delhi.

“Next Mitra started refining the method. He began installing computer terminals in schools. Rather than giving students a broad subject to learn-for example, biotechnology-he started asking directed questions such as ‘Was World War II good or bad?’ The students could use every available resource to answer the question, but schools were asked to restrict the num­ber of Internet portals to one per every four students because, as Matt Rid­ley wrote in the Wall Street Journal, ‘one child in front of a computer learns little; four discussing and debating learn a lot.’ When they were tested on the subject matter afterward (without use of the computer), the mean score was 76 percent. That’s pretty impressive on its own, but the question arose as to the real depth of learning. So Mitra came back two months later, retested the students, and got the exact same results. This wasn’t just deep learning, this was an unprecedented retention of information. …

“Taken together, this work reverses a bevy of educational practices. Instead of top-down instruction, [these ‘self-organized learning environments’] are bottom up. Instead of making students learn on their own, this work is collaborative. Instead of a formal in-school setting for instruction, the Hole-in-the-Wall method relies on a playground-like environment. Most importantly, minimally invasive edu­cation doesn’t require teachers. Currently there’s a projected global short­age of 18 million teachers over the next decade.”

Author: Peter H. Diamandis and Steven Kotler

Title: Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think

Publisher: Free Press

Date: Copyright 2012 by Peter H. Diamandis and Steven Kotler

Pages: 174-176

Abundance: The Future Is Better Than You Think

by Peter H. Diamand is by Free Press

So long as education methods stay as they are, human society will suffer, there will be continued poverty, continued subjugation to authority, and a level of ignorance that flat lines across the vast spectrum of society from the highest to lowest levels of archaic pecking order hierarchy.  That hierarchy is what public school is all about, and it is what holds back mankind the most from achieving a level of greatness that is on the tip of everyone’s tongue with a free mind able to comprehend that something is terribly wrong.  Public education does not work as well as the ‘grand­mother method’: just standing behind kids and providing encouragement. ‘Wow, that’s cool, that’s fantastic, show me something else!’  Kids, because of the tendency toward personal profit will work hard to get that personal encouragement from a figure of respect.  They do it for the same reason that a business owner tries to make money, or a video game player tries to score more points, or a man takes a woman to dinner hoping to have sex with her—it is the prospect of profit that drives the world, and for kids, all they usually need are the tools with limits removed and an encouraging voice to push them along—and “POOF” success is nearly 100% guaranteed.

Government schools are not about success, they are about combating this essential truth about human beings—they are at war with profit of every kind—the wish to socially engineer such desires from human minds and in so doing, they are destroying what it means to be human.  This is why they are detriments to society, and villains where they think of themselves as heroes.  They are in denial of the role they play in the destruction of mankind—and all those politicians who help them do it are as complicit to the act as a witness to a murder keeps their mouth shut, and provides a get-away-car for the bandits who committed the crime.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

‘The Desolation of Smaug’: A gift that only mythology could give–a film of GREAT importance

Until I saw the new Hobbit film The Desolation of Smaug my favorite dragon film was the old 1981 flick, Dragonslayer.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  I have been waiting for this Part II of The Hobbit series for a long time—so much so that I have avoided talking about it to keep my excitement level in check.  The reason is that the attribute of human society that I most value is mythology, and there is no better exhibition of modern mythology than the Star Wars films and the Tolkien films by the great unpretentious filmmaker Peter Jackson.  Mythology in films and novels can communicate complicated aspects of human culture that cannot be communicated any other way and are the hinge pins of modern philosophy—which is directly created by a society’s mythology.  I don’t see The Desolation of Smaug as just another fantasy movie—I see it as a functioning mythology that says a lot about the state of our modern existence.  A great storyteller like Jackson can pour so much value into a film like this that years of a similar education under an orthodox system of instruction will fail after many years of trying.

There are two basic kinds of dragons in classic mythology, the oriental dragon which is largely a symbol of rebirth, and the European dragon.  I spoke about the oriental one the other day when discussing the upcoming film Godzilla.  Godzilla is very much an oriental dragon in a modern context.  Then there is the European version of dragon, the classic villain of so many movies from Sleeping Beauty to Fantasia, dragons in a European context represent human greed, arrogance, and corruption.  If one wanted to understand the major differences between Eastern and Western cultures, their basic interpretations of dragons in mythology would be the place to begin.  In the classic 1937 novel, The Hobbit, the dragon villain Smaug is a classic European dragon, and in this updated movie version, he is the king of all dragons ever filmed and put on a screen.

I would say that seeing The Desolation of Smaug is the most important commentary on modern politics that is available to anybody on planet earth presently.  A student of politics, philosophy, and social organization could watch MSNBC, Fox News, Politically Incorrect on HBO and achieve a doctorate in psychology, history, and political science—read all the books by Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, and Charles Krauthammer—listen to talk radio for the next 10 years, and there would not be a more accurate summation of the state of our world than in this Hobbit film.  The simple line of dialogue between two of the elf characters in the film upon deciding if they should fight on behalf of light or let the world fall to darkness was uttered by, “when did we let evil become stronger than us.”  That is what almost every human being is facing on the very day that you are reading this—what are the consequences of living our lives away from the light?  How does evil spread?  And what do we do about it when we are confronted with it?

The Desolation of Smaug is not just a simple morality tale speaking in generalizations about an ideal existence wrapped in fantasy.  It is a commentary—a mythology of the problems experienced in our modern times.  The setting has been changed to provide context in a similar way that Star Wars removed time and history with the opening, A Long Time Ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away.  The Hobbit is dealing with the very nature of evil, greed, and faulty living that is at the heart of every human being.  It is literature on film, and is marvelous to behold. 

Smaug as the centerpiece of this latest story is the embodiment of the kind of individual who has taken the world’s wealth by force and sits upon it guarding it religiously.  He is the kind of bourgeois that added fuel to the fire of the communist movement where the common man wished to wrestle power back away from such dragons so that they could have their riches away from such greedy bastards.  That is why Smaug is a European dragon that sits in this movie upon a pile of gold taken from the Dwarves and their mines.  He loves it so much that he has buried himself within it so that he can worship it like a rodent burrows itself into the ground.  Many real life wealthy people like Bill Gates, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, and Warren Buffet give so much money to philanthropy advancing progressive causes because they feel guilt over their wealth.  They wish to prove to the world that they are not dragons like Smaug even though in their wealth building years they behaved just like Smaug—rolling their bodies into their confiscated wealth.  In the case of Gates, he made his money the correct way with a superior product—but discovered that the world saw him as a Smaug, just as the Dwarves in The Hobbit saw Smaug as a villain who took their wealth.  Gates wished to prove that he was not such a Smaug so he began to give mast amounts of money to the public education system in America feeding the teacher unions.  In many ways Gates became like the treacherous politicians in Laketown—living in constant fear of Smaug—scheming around the beast to carve their own way to power and wealth.  For Gates and his idealism, he became a major supporter of Common Core which seeks to centralize the education process for society.  A good intention with a sinister reality which allows corrupt teacher unions to control the kind of curriculum being taught to children—which opens the door for despots to shape the minds of society for the worst.  In the film, once the dragon was no longer a threat, the kingdoms of the world now without the fear of Smaug immediately launched themselves into a power play for control of Middle-earth.  Smaug as cruel as he was made out to be when confronted by Bilbo in The Lonely Mountain was caught between his own genius and ability to inflict cruelty, and his ability to keep the vast evil that the occupants of Middle-earth possess in check.  Only a proper and effective mythology could communicate such a complicated concept. 

Peter Jackson is such a great filmmaker.  He knows instinctively much of what I write about here because his understanding of mythology allows him to think of things in the large view.  He can make a film like the Hobbit movies with an ease that is unfathomable to most Hollywood directors—especially on the scale that this Desolation of Smaug is.  Jackson gets it—and people sense that something important is going on in the movie which is why it has made over $500 million world-wide dollars in just two weeks at this point.  When he completes the trilogy, of The Hobbit, along with the Lord of the Rings films, Jackson will have completed one of the greatest explorations into the nature of evil ever done by anybody anywhere.  Of course Tolkien started the process with his great books, but Jackson has taken the baton and ran with it in a way that few people could ever hope to do, and he does it with a lack of pretension that is simply wonderful.

People who love fantasy stories like this generally are aware that the real world does not have much to offer them.  Most of the time, they see too much, and can’t lie to themselves about the nature of reality.  So they bury themselves in fantasy where they can relate to the characters that stand for justice, righteousness, and a fight against evil.  Doing such things in the real world is considered unrealistic, naive, and foolhardy.  So they turn to fantasy and lose themselves to the efforts of gaming, movies, books, and any other attribute a story can bring to a mind hungry for understanding.  We all know a Smaug in our life—whether it is a rich uncle, an employer, or even a political power.  Most of us think that such dragons must be killed and slayed so that the wealth of the world can return to us.  But often—which is an ideal that the writer Ayn Rand was exploring around the same time that Tolkien was exploring Middle-earth—there is a need for such dragons as they prove to be more capable than the greed of the Dwarves, or residents of Laketown.  The masses may not like the dragon, but often the dragon is more capable than the masses in dealing with the overwhelming pressure of greed—thus the line at the end of this film by Bilbo—“What have we done?”  Bilbo means, we killed the dragon, but we seem to have slayed ourselves in the process.

The Desolation of Smaug is such an important film as it deals with a massive social commentary that is pertinent to our present time in such critical ways.  Smaug is one of Ayn Rand’s characters who have failed at life.  He is not an overman able to support the world without corruption who creates wealth with creative effort.  Smaug took the created wealth of the dwarves with force, not creative effort—and spent the rest of his life guarding that gold because he was unable to create more of it.  To Smaug, the wealth was finite, created by others and if he wanted to keep it, he had to hold it greedily with terror which of course everyone in Middle-earth resented.  But without Smaug, the people of Middle-earth would be at war with one another constantly.  Smaug focused their hate into a direction that only a fire-breathing massive dragon could carry.  Bilbo because of his ability as a thief was able to spot a weakness in Smaug and let the people of Laketown know about it.    Once that weakness was exploited, and Smaug was removed as a threat, the real work of Sauron, originally known as Malron the Admirable, could begin.  Mariron was turned to evil by the Dark Lord Morgoth in the early days of the world, and ever after remained a foe of the Valar and the Free peoples of Middle Earth.   We all know people like Sauron too.  In fantasy fun is made of combating such figures with magic and battles with fantastic monsters, but the content of such people can be found on a local school board, or machine politics at any level and on both sides.  The reason people flock to see these films is not an escape from reality, but to actually see reality as it is masked to us in the light of day. 

The second Hobbit film, The Desolation of Smaug is a movie that everyone should see; its great cinema, wonderful story telling, and a visual art of the highest order.  Nobody makes films better than these films, except for possibly the upcoming Star Wars films which deal with the same basic content, only in a future/past kind of way.  On a scale of 1-5 I give this Hobbit film a 100.  It is that good—but only if viewers enjoy exploring the hidden aspects of a society that is not so far away in Middle-earth, but right in front of us all—only not seen because of our educations, and prejudices–a world that can only be revealed to us through mythology.

To understand more fully how powerful mythologies are to all societies, CLICK HERE.  

To read more about what I’ve said about The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, CLICK HERE. 

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com