The aspect of the second-hander is the only one that makes sense when many of the world’s problems are analyzed. My hatred of the intoxication culture stems from this division between second-handers and producers—which was elaborated upon as a kind of identifiable introduction in a previous article. One of the primary reasons that I have enjoyed the movie Gladiator so intensely is because it deals squarely with this problem of producers and second-handers—as the Emperor’s son was a second hander, and Maximus was a producer. When that same son—Commodus inherited the throne through treachery—and attempted to completely destroy Maximus by killing his family, robbing him of all his social connections, and leaving him for dead in a forest the producer lead Maximus rose up through the ranks of the gladiators to challenge the entire Empire not through any other effort but sheer tenacity. Commodus could not understand how his old rival had managed to regain such respect and stature because as a second hander, he had to be given his value through others. The new Emperor believed that because he stole away the life of Maximus that he destroyed the man. But Maximus was a producer and therefore a great leader—it didn’t matter if it was among the best fighters in the world at the time of Roman legionnaires or the dregs of society as gladiators fighting for their life in the arena. Maximus thrived because he didn’t know how to do anything else but generate success—as a producer which eventually destroyed the emperor. Gladiator was a great movie primarily for this reason.
Producer types make their own way, and enjoy thinking. They typically don’t pray to the gods for success, they don’t seek to live off the inheritance of their ancestors, and they don’t gamble or purchase lottery tickets hoping to be filled by chance of a draw so that they can wake up one morning filled by the efforts of others. Everything they do is geared toward productive enterprise even when they are performing in leisurely endeavors. That said producers would typically not be comfortable in social settings like bars where intoxication is the objective. Producers do not wish to lose their mental faculties. Second handers however do wish to lose their ability to think—as mentioned in the previous article about people who prefer electric shock over thinking. The practitioners of drunkenness are second handers because they are surrendering thought to chance as relief from the responsibility of action.
Intoxication is one of the vilest activities that could be perpetrated against an active mind. Yet second handers routinely abuse their thinking because they cannot allow the impulse of their own inner producer developed as children to reemerge to the life of choice competing with their adult decisions to remain a passive second hander waiting for others to fill them with thoughts and action. When it is said that someone is “drunk with power” this is something to which they speak—taking the example of Commodus once again, the new Emperor killed the old one believing that his actions would settle the issue of who would lead next the Roman Empire after the conquest of the Germanic people of the north. But Maximus interfered with this equation with a new set of rules—that of a producer who did not care for politics—because he did not need politicians or social connections to give him authority—he simply generated it. Maximus didn’t need a god to give him authority or validation to be great—because he already knew that he was. And Maximus didn’t need favors granted by those in a bloodline of leadership because he knew he was a natural leader functioning well as a producer. So Commodus tried to have Maximus killed to preserve his illusion of power and right by blood to lead an entire region of people as if he had a right to the throne by grace of the gods.
The drunk does the same thing in essence; they drink to lose their minds from the observations of contrary reality which conflicts with their path of parasitic social behavior—that of the second hander who needs the approval of others. A room full of drunks as a bar is a palace of second handers evading their destiny as thinking producers. Instead they have surrendered their fates to being filled by others for their sustenance. Getting drunk helps them not feel the conflict of thought which is always seeking to emerge.
A constant companion of dialogue in these modern times is the term “depression” which is thrown about so flamboyantly by second handers to explain their affliction—much of which is prescribed drugs to alleviate the pain. The cause of depression is the desire for something which does not come to second handers by luck—such as love, money, respect, or general value. When those things fail to come to a second hander by the grace of invisible rulers—people find themselves depressed and seek alcohol or other drugs to relieve them of that pain. As alcohol is a depressant it often makes depression worse—but what is really sought is the numbness of thinking—not the affliction of depression which usually becomes more pronounced. A producer generally does not feel depression because their thoughts are not out of alignment from their actions. Producers are not let down because their IRS refund check did not come in the mail, or some perfect job fell upon them by social connections. They make these things for themselves and are generally a happy lot of people because they are living authentically to their nature—as producers.
If you walk into any environment where large amounts of alcohol are being consumed you are seeing a temple of second handers seeking to suppress thought and responsibility for productivity. As second handers they try to crush their inner Maximus so that their Commodus can speak to them. And what Commodus says to them often exacerbates the tendency toward depression they feel, but without thought to measure against—they are free of the pain so long as they drink. This is why second handers tend to drink to get intoxicated and producers do not. Producers value their thoughts as second handers are running away. This means that if anything is ever to be fixed in the world about us, it has to start with this tendency toward second hander behavior. The world cannot be run and built by second handers—because they are incapable and are not equal in value to the producers of the world. The issue is not one of race, sex, or even fate—it is one of decisions and mental faculties by way of focus.
I’m not a particularly huge Harry Potter fan. There are aspects to it that I enjoy—there is too much magic in it for me—too much mystic fantasy. There is a tendency to hope that the world is different from what it is—so fantastic creations bridge that gap intellectually. But there are some wonderful values explored in the Harry Potter books and movies that have provided many of the values today’s young people possess. But the new Diagon Alley exhibit is a living mythos—that is the point of the place—to put visitors into that world in a way that has never yet been possible anywhere on earth. But to what end—for simple entertainment? Human beings require myths to hold themselves together and put their values in line with priorities. Harry Potter was born out of this need, and it has been so successful that Universal Studios built a magnificent shrine to that mythos.
Mythos carries over into every aspect of human life. It goes to the voting booth, it becomes the focus of productive enterprise in business, it creates the values a family uses to bond themselves to one another—or to fly apart. It provides a mechanism for people to recognize evil, or good depending on the vantage point—a mythos can be either destructive or beneficial—but so long as human beings exist, there will be the creation of myths. Once those myths are created, a physical manifestation will be attempted, such as what Universal Studios has done with Diagon Alley. Visitors to those parks will attempt to bring the values of Harry Potter—for good or bad—into their daily life. So to me, watching the mythos of our world is the most important things a culture can do.
My excitement over this current mythos period is in the realization that only a few years ago none of this easy access to so much mythos was available. When I was a child, Disney World was brand new and nothing like it is now, Universal Studios was simply a dream, Dungeon and Dragons was very primitive and movies were limited in what they could create due to budget constraints and film executives functioning from the philosophies of Kant and Plato. Tolkien was the premier fantasy writer inspiring a new generation that would magnify his work hundreds of times over, the culmination being stories like Harry Potter. And video games were clunky. The opportunity to step into a mythos the way young people can now simply did not exist. But now things are changing rapidly—much more rapidly than any conniving bankers in Europe, or politicians in America can even fathom—any thoughts of potential tyranny are being crushed under the weight of a dynamically changing mythos.
That doesn’t mean all is well, there are major problems that will play out in the years to come—the bankruptcy of America, the continued attempts to spread collectivism to every corner of the earth at the expense of the individual—but those are the results of the previous mythos built by the pre and post Renaissance periods, religious ignorance, and minds so stifled with daily obligations that they did not have the liberty to think. My greatest joy of late has come from Fantasy Flight Games in that they create a product that generates not only a positive mythos—culturally, but a lot of thinking. When those types of entertainment options are coupled with the physical reality of something like Diagon Alley there are real opportunities for massive human enjoyment.
As I write this I know of several individuals planning their visit to Diagon Alley. They are reading the Harry Potter novels again at Steak and Shake at 3 AM in the morning and going to work when the sun comes up. They are playing Fantasy Flight’s Game of Thrones card game at Starbucks with their friends and are living in the mythos of those fantasy realms for a large portion of their life—and that is wonderful for the psychological well-being of their many otherwise treacherous disappointments in life. The joy of the mythos created artificially by the human minds behind Harry Potter and The Game of Thrones replaces the many areas where deficiency has otherwise occurred.
It is not good to substitute reality for fantasy—but it is not good to be crushed by too much reality—and often a positive mythos can alleviate the impact of such a disappointing force. With minds full of value, the diabolical schemes concocted by maniacal tyrants losses their ability because of the hope given by a mythos which feeds an individual mind as opposed to a soul looking to be filled by some come-lately leader drunk with power and filled with ill intent. But Universal Studios has performed a modern miracle, they have recreated Diagon Alley the way that only imaginations had previously contemplated, and made it real. The impact of this dramatic shift in mythos will resonate for quite some time in a positive way as the future unfolds itself out away from the small minds who previously wished to contain it. Diagon Alley is proof that such attempts have failed and that the human mind is now relishing in triumph over feats that are only now available for the first time on planet earth. When such things become real—they become a new reality in the realm of mythos.
Minds free to think, and contemplate new ideals create the mythos that will become the foundations of future values—but more importantly, such minds cannot be controlled. So long as a mind can contemplate mythos, a physical body will reject the chains placed upon it—literal or metaphorical. What I see in Diagon Alley is a culture in America who has professed that it values imagination and thinking to such an extent that it wanted to make it into a physical reality—which is a beacon to the world that imagination is alive and well and that tyrants have no place in Central Florida. You can feel it at the Orlando airport—as you travel down the people movers from the grand departure gate where hotel guest look down into the giant room of people traveling from everywhere in the world to see the theme parks of Florida first hand. Of those great theme parks, Universal Studios has recaptured the lead of the most spectacular attractions among them with Diagon Alley. There is nothing like it anywhere—except deep in the mind those who generate mythos upon a blank page to share with the world and incite in them the freedom of thought which is the greatest gift to civilization that there is.
Dear reader, I am going to ask a lot of you today—there’s a lot to read here—but read it you must. The future of America and all your children, grandchildren and even people you have never met yet are at stake and this critical issue requires your full understanding.
There seemed to be a lot more American flags out in 2014 during the 4th of July as paper patriots fearful of the direction of their American country thought simply saying they were patriots—or walking in a parade was enough, than there has been in the past. It was good to see a little stirring of the American pride and as millions across the nation waited for a fireworks show as dusk crawled across the supposedly freest nation on earth, Megan Kelly on Fox News broadcast an epic debate between the filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and the domestic terrorist Bill Ayers—the same man who launched the political career of Barack Obama. The theme of the interview, part of which can be seen below, was the concept of American Exceptionalism and a recurring theme represented most by the current American intelligentsia was extrapolated during the debate. The cure for many of the current problems in America are actually quite easy to fix if only the concept of American Exceptionalism were understood. The border situation with Mexico would be solved, the economic restrictions seen throughout the world, and basic premise of freedom could save the lives of millions if only the basic understanding of American Exceptionalism could be embraced. Yet Bill Ayers revealed what many that have learned from him over the years wished to argue regarding American imperialism as opposed to Exceptionalism. Their position is that American had no right to interfere with other governments throughout the world, or to rob the land of the “Native Americans” or that it was built on slave labor and that all Americans should pay for the guilt of their past sins and chastise themselves before the world. Behind the waving of American flags this particular year there seemed to be a reconciliation behind the public who many had just realized that their president—Obama had delivered them to the enemies of the world on a plate provided with a bow and apology. It was Bill Ayers who helped develop the young mind of Barack and Michelle Obama into being a future weapon of the Weather Underground—a radical from within the people’s house. The flag waving and fireworks were a bit more vigorous as though the American people hoped at this late hour that their complacency could erase the impact of this domestic terrorism in the year of 2014. But it can’t, only understanding the role America plays in the world will, and supporting that role with a philosophy much different from the one that Bill Ayers believed.
There are a lot on the political left who think the way Ayers does, many of them are those who are part of the education industry. They aren’t as violent as Ayers, but they hold very similar beliefs which can be seen through their actions. Recently watching a “Watters’ World” episode Jesse Watters managed to get a red carpet interview with George Clooney—who is a native of the Cincinnati area and a powerful mover and shaker in Hollywood. He’s a generally talented guy who thinks he’s very smart politically—made worse because he donates a lot of money into liberal candidates—particularly President Obama—so he thinks he has a good political grip on the world stage—but if you strip away his belief system to its root core—it will be discovered that the kind of people who shaped his foundation thoughts were people like Bill Ayers from the 1960s. In Hollywood right now there are a lot of these young actors who are little cardboard cutouts of Bill Ayers—just as Obama is. Clooney made sure that Watter’s knew that Obama was our “president” and deserved respect for the title—as though he were the King of America—which is clearly disjointed from reality. Some of those cutouts are people like Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, and Sean Penn who all have an anti-imperialist slant against America and have communist political leanings. Their instruction in life has come from the type of beliefs taught by liberal professors like Bill Ayers and this has gone on for a long time. Many of the current flag wavers who are just now realizing the folly of their ways are looking for answers but their belief system prevents them from seeing them.
As an example of this scenario let us look at Ben Affleck’s very good movie Argo, which won Best Picture for its 2012 release. This was a great film about the cause of the hostage crises in Iran in 1979 and was generally a patriotic film about the very good work of a CIA agent in bringing out some stranded Americans home from that crisis. However—Affleck couldn’t help himself. George Clooney was a co-producer of the film so without question there was bound to be a left leaning political messages emitting from the movie—and there was. Understanding that very simple element and making a decision on it—has the ability to fix many of our modern problems. At the end of the film out of all the philosophers that could have been picked for a closing statement by the John Goodman character it was Karl Marx who was quoted. This after a brief cartoon opening told the back story of Iranian history and essentially placed the blame of the westernization of Iran squarely on the backs of American influence. Affleck skillfully showed during the opening that once Iran’s oil fields were nationalized—which is a communist concept—that all was well. However–once Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi—the Shah of Iran started westernizing the country it upset the people who overthrew him. The blame for the hostage crises to begin with fell on the shoulders of America who had been caught trying to manipulate the Iranian people with Western influence, then threw gasoline on the fire by giving Pahlavi exile within The United States. The movie Argo essentially proclaims that the fault of the crises fell on American imperialism—the same basic assertion that Bill Ayers and Barack Obama believe.
But they are all wrong, America and the accusations of imperialism come directly from the Cold War conflict with communism which was taking over the world during the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, and that people like Ayers, Affleck, Damon, and Clooney are all supporters. The Easter egg is clear as day at the end of Argo and generally none of those political activists are shy about their faith which they hide behind the Democratic Party. What they fail to mention is that the CIA operations in the Middle East, in Central America, in Cuba, in Vietnam in virtually everywhere that there was conflict was caused by a defense against communism. The infusion of American culture against the proposed communist cultures was the battle. It was a fight between the merits of capitalism and communism—a fight over regional control and freedom. Iran was under the influence of communists in the 1970s and the cost was a reversion back to their nomadic past. Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi had taken steps to modernize Iran but walked the line between becoming a ruthless dictator and a western loving visionary. Ironically, and this is why I will say that Affleck did a brilliant job directing Argo—there was a wonderful scene showing how this transition was going in Iran—on one hand there were protestors burning American flags in the streets, but on the other they were eating Kentucky Fried Chicken which was a direct export of American capitalism. So before drawing conclusions on these metaphors let’s study the real history of Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi without the slant of communism blowing in the sails of thought. The following comes from Wikipedia but has been edited down to the relevant portions. The link to the entire article follows.
Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi (Persian: Mohamad Rezā Ŝāhh Pahlawi, [mohæmˈmæd reˈzɒː ˈʃɒːhe pæhlæˈviː]; 25 October 1919 – 27 July 1980) was the ruler of Iran (Shah of Iran) from 16 September 1941 until his overthrow by the Iranian Revolution on 11 February 1979. He took the title Šâhanšâh (“Emperor” or “King of Kings”)[1] on 26 October 1967. He was the second and last monarch of the House of Pahlavi of the Iranian monarchy. Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi held several other titles, including that of Aryamehr (Light of the Aryans) and Bozorge Arteštârân (Head of the Warriors, Persian: Bozorg Arteŝdārān).[2]
Mohammad Rezâ Pahlavi came to power during World War II after an Anglo-Soviet invasion forced the abdication of his father Reza Shah. During Mohammad Reza’s reign, the Iranian oil industry was briefly nationalized under the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh before a U.S.-backed coup d’état deposed Mosaddegh and brought back foreign oil firms,[3] and Iran marked the anniversary of 2,500 years of continuous monarchy since the founding of the Persian Empire by Cyrus the Great. As ruler, he introduced the White Revolution, a series of economic, social and political reforms with the proclaimed intention of transforming Iran into a global power and modernizing the nation by nationalizing certain industries and granting women suffrage.
A secular Muslim, Mohammad Reza gradually lost support from the Shi’a clergy of Iran as well as the working class, particularly due to his strong policy of modernization, secularization, conflict with the traditional class of merchants known as bazaari, recognition of Israel, and corruption issues surrounding himself, his family, and the ruling elite. Various additional controversial policies were enacted, including the banning of the communist Tudeh Party, and a general suppression of political dissent by Iran’s intelligence agency, SAVAK. According to official statistics, Iran had as many as 2,200 political prisoners in 1978, a number which multiplied rapidly as a result of the revolution.[4]
By the early 1950s, the political crisis brewing in Iran commanded the attention of British and American policy leaders. In 1951, Mohammad Mosaddegh was appointed Prime Minister and committed to nationalizing the Iranian petroleum industry controlled by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. Under the leadership of Mosaddegh’s democratically elected nationalist movement, the Iranian parliament unanimously voted to nationalize the oil industry – thus shutting out the immensely profitable Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), which was a pillar of Britain’s economy and provided it political clout in the region.
Pahlavi with US President Truman in Washington, c. 18 November 1949
At the start of the confrontation, American political sympathy was forthcoming from the Truman Administration. In particular, Mosaddegh was buoyed by the advice and counsel he was receiving from American Ambassador in Tehran, Henry F. Grady. However, eventually American decision-makers lost their patience, and by the time a Republican Administration came to office fears that communists were poised to overthrow the government became an all-consuming concern (these concerns were later dismissed as “paranoid” in retrospective commentary on the coup from U.S. government officials). Shortly prior to the 1952 presidential election in the United States, the British government invited CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., to London to propose collaboration on a secret plan to force Mosaddegh from office.[8] This would be the first of three “regime change” operations led by Allen Dulles (the other two being the successful CIA-instigated 1954 Guatemalan coup d’état and the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba).
Under the direction of Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., a senior Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer and grandson of former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, the American CIA and British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) funded and led a covert operation to depose Mosaddegh with the help of military forces disloyal to the democratically elected government. Referred to as Operation Ajax,[9] the plot hinged on orders signed by Mohammad Reza to dismiss Mosaddegh as prime minister and replace him with General Fazlollah Zahedi – a choice agreed on by the British and Americans.
Despite the high-level coordination and planning, the coup initially failed, causing the Shah to flee to Baghdad, and then to Rome. After a brief exile in Italy, he returned to Iran, this time through a successful second attempt at a coup. A deposed Mosaddegh was arrested and tried. The king intervened and commuted the sentence to one and a half years. Zahedi was installed to succeed Mosaddegh.[10]
Before the first attempted coup, the American Embassy in Tehran reported that Mosaddegh’s popular support remained robust. The Prime Minister requested direct control of the army from the Majlis. Given the situation, alongside the strong personal support of Conservative leader Anthony Eden and Prime Minister Winston Churchill for covert action, the American government gave the go-ahead to a committee, attended by the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, Director of Central IntelligenceAllen Dulles, Kermit Roosevelt, Henderson, and Secretary of DefenseCharles Erwin Wilson. Kermit Roosevelt returned to Iran on 13 July 1953, and again on 1 August 1953, in his first meeting with the king. A car picked him up at midnight and drove him to the palace. He laid down on the seat and covered himself with a blanket as guards waved his driver through the gates. The Shah got into the car and Roosevelt explained the mission. The CIA bribed him with $1 million in Iranian currency, which Roosevelt had stored in a large safe – a bulky cache, given the exchange rate at the time of 1,000 rial to 15 dollars.[11]
The Communists staged massive demonstrations to hijack Mosaddegh’s initiatives. The United States actively plotted against him. On 16 August 1953, the right-wing of the Army attacked. Armed with an order by the Shah, it appointed General Fazlollah Zahedi as prime minister. A coalition of mobs and retired officers close to the Palace executed this coup d’état. They failed dismally and the Shah fled the country in humiliating haste. Even Ettelaat, the nation’s largest daily newspaper, and its pro-Shah publisher, Abbas Masudi, were against him.[12]
During the following two days, the Communists turned against Mosaddegh. Opposition against him grew tremendously. They roamed Tehran, raising red flags and pulling down statues of Reza Shah. This was rejected by conservative clerics like Kashani and National Front leaders like Hossein Makki, who sided with the king. On 18 August 1953, Mosaddegh defended the government against this new attack. Tudeh partisans were clubbed and dispersed.[13]
The Tudeh party had no choice but to accept defeat. In the meantime, according to the CIA plot, Zahedi appealed to the military, and claimed to be the legitimate prime minister and charged Mosaddegh with staging a coup by ignoring the Shah’s decree. Zahedi’s son Ardeshir acted as the contact between the CIA and his father. On 19 August 1953, pro-Shah partisans – bribed with $100,000 in CIA funds – finally appeared and marched out of south Tehran into the city center, where others joined in. Gangs with clubs, knives, and rocks controlled the streets, overturning Tudeh trucks and beating up anti-Shah activists. As Roosevelt was congratulating Zahedi in the basement of his hiding place, the new Prime Minister’s mobs burst in and carried him upstairs on their shoulders. That evening, Henderson suggested to Ardashir that Mosaddegh not be harmed. Roosevelt gave Zahedi US$900,000 left from Operation Ajax funds.
U.S. actions further solidified sentiments that the West was a meddlesome influence in Iranian politics. In the year 2000, reflecting on this notion, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright stated:
“In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s popular Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs.”[14]
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi returned to power, but never extended the elite status of the court to the technocrats and intellectuals who emerged from Iranian and Western universities. Indeed, his system irritated the new classes, for they were barred from partaking in real power.[15]
In his “White Revolution” starting in the 1960s, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi made major changes to modernize Iran. He curbed the power of certain ancient elite factions by expropriating large and medium-sized estates for the benefit of more than four million small farmers. He took a number of other major measures, including extending suffrage to women and the participation of workers in factories through shares and other measures. In the 1970s the governmental program of a free of charge nourishment for children at school (“Taghzieh e Rāigān”) was implemented. Under the Shah’s reign, the national Iranian income showed an unprecedented rise for an extended period.
Improvement of the educational system was made through new elementary schools and additionally literacy courses were set up in remote villages by the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces, this initiative being called “Sepāh e Dānesh”, “Army of Knowledge”. The Armed Forces were also engaged in infrastructural and other educational projects throughout the country (“Sepāh-e Tarvij va Âbādāni”) as well as in health education and promotion (“Sepāh-e Behdāsht”). The Shah instituted exams for Islamic theologians to become established clerics. Many Iranian university students were sent to and supported in foreign, especially Western countries and the Indian subcontinent.
In the field of diplomacy, Iran realized and maintained friendly relations with Western and East European countries as well as the state of Israel and China and became, especially through the close friendship with the United States, more and more a hegemonial power in the Persian Gulf region and the Middle East. The suppression of the communist guerilla movement in the region of Dhofar in Oman with the help of the Iranian army after a formal request by Sultan Qaboos was widely regarded in this context.
On 16 January 1979, he made a contract with Farboud and left Iran at the behest of Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar (a long time opposition leader himself), who sought to calm the situation.[71] Spontaneous attacks by members of the public on statues of the Pahlavis followed, and “within hours, almost every sign of the Pahlavi dynasty” was destroyed.[72] Bakhtiar dissolved SAVAK, freed all political prisoners, and allowed Ayatollah Khomeini to return to Iran after years in exile. He asked Khomeini to create a Vatican-like state in Qom, promised free elections, and called upon the opposition to help preserve the constitution, proposing a “national unity” government including Khomeini’s followers. Khomeini rejected Bakhtiar’s demands and appointed his own interim government, with Mehdi Bazargan as prime minister, stating that “I will appoint a state. I will act against this government. With the nation’s support, I will appoint a state.”[73] In February, pro-Khomeini revolutionary guerrilla and rebel soldiers gained the upper hand in street fighting, and the military announced its neutrality. On the evening of 11 February, the dissolution of the monarchy was complete.
During his second exile, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi traveled from country to country seeking what he hoped would be temporary residence. First he flew to Assuan, Egypt, where he received a warm and gracious welcome from President Anwar El-Sadat. He later lived in Morocco as a guest of King Hassan II, as well as in the Bahamas, and in Cuernavaca, Mexico, near Mexico City, as a guest of José López Portillo. Richard Nixon, the former president, visited the Shah in summer 1979 in Mexico.[74] The Shah suffered from gallstones that would require prompt surgery. He was offered treatment in Switzerland, but insisted on treatment in the United States.
On 22 October 1979, President Jimmy Carter reluctantly allowed the Shah into the United States to undergo surgical treatment at the New York–Weill Cornell Medical Hospital. While in Cornell Medical Center, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi used the name “David D. Newsom” as his temporary code name, without Newsom’s knowledge.
The Shah was taken later by U.S. Air Force jet to Kelly Air Force Base in Texas and from there to Wilford Hall Medical Center at Lackland Air Force Base.[75] It was anticipated that his stay in the United States would be short; however, surgical complications ensued, which required six weeks of confinement in the hospital before he recovered. His prolonged stay in the United States was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement in Iran, which still resented the United States’ overthrow of Prime Minister Mosaddegh and the years of support for the Shah’s rule. The Iranian government demanded his return to Iran, but he stayed in the hospital.[76]
There are claims that this resulted in the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the kidnapping of American diplomats, military personnel, and intelligence officers, which soon became known as the Iran hostage crisis.[77] According to the Shah’s book Answer to History, in the end, the United States never provided him any kind of health care and asked him to leave the country.[78]
He left the United States on 15 December 1979 and lived for a short time in the Isla Contadora in Panama. This caused riots by Panamanians who overwhelminglyobjected to the Shah being in their country. Panamanians viewed it as their country being used as a stooge of the United States. The new government in Iran still demanded his and his wife’s immediate extradition to Tehran. A short time after Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s arrival in Panama, an Iranian ambassador was dispatched to the Central American nation carrying a 450-page extradition request. That official appeal greatlyalarmed both the Shah and his advisors. Whether the Panamanian government would have complied is a matter of speculation among historians.
After that event, the Shah again sought the support of Egyptian president Anwar El-Sadat, who renewed his offer of permanent asylum in Egypt to the ailing monarch. He returned to Egypt in March 1980, where he received urgent medical treatment, including a splenectomy performed by Michael DeBakey,[79] but nevertheless died from complications of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma) on 27 July 1980, aged 60. Egyptian President Sadat gave the Shah a state funeral.[80]
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi is buried in the Al Rifa’i Mosque in Cairo, a mosque of great symbolic importance. The last royal rulers of two monarchies are buried there, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran and King Farouk of Egypt, his former brother-in-law. The tombs lie to the left of the entrance. Years earlier, his father and predecessor, Reza Shah had also initially been buried at the Al Rifa’i Mosque.
If it is traced back the accusation of American imperialism being so vile it is the belief that cultures are better off left alone by removing American capitalism from foreign policy. It wasn’t in the case of Iran a bunch of people who wanted to preserve Islamic faith or the sanctity of their country and its history—it was communists who wanted complete control, just as they did in Vietnam, Cuba, and Central America. The trouble within America leaving the CIA to be so clandestine—a journey started by his grandfather Teddy Roosevelt with his vengeful commitment toward Progressivism—which would become a more “intellectual” name for communism in the states–Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. was all over the Middle East trying to stop the spread thus making those countries dangerous not just to America but their own people. Domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers would continue to sputter the belief that America just wanted the oil from Iran to operate cars cheaply so they could drive over all the land stolen from the Indians—but behind such sentiments is communism just as those who hate America abroad are fearful of the kind of freedom that capitalism brings to people wherever it touches. The communists in Iran didn’t care about justice; they wanted a head to put on a pike as they took over in the same manner that the French Revolution of 1948 attempted and elsewhere that the words of Karl Marx touched.
Yet Ben Afflect gave away his political sentiments in the closing scenes of his movie Argo just as his friend Matt Damon made an argument for communism in the science fiction film Elysum. Elysium only made $93 million dollars in The United States. It made most of its money in the foreign market raking in $193 million around the rest of the world. Americans could tell that there was something wrong with the message—but in countries where communism and socialism are already the standard, Elysium was a ray of hope that their poor political philosophy had merit.
America has a stake in those far-flung markets because when capitalism is not a part of their life—they seek to come to America to live. So America to protect itself has an obligation to spread capitalism to Iran, to Iraq, to China, Afghanistan, to India, Mexico, and Central America because the restrictive economies of socialist and communist countries has impoverished people and they can’t all come to America for refuge. It would be nice if everyone could live in America—but they can’t as America is only around 5% of the world’s population. So America has to bring itself to the world—and not be shy about it. But first the remnants of communism and a love for Karl Marx must be removed from the debate by confronting it directly. Affleck put the reference in a movie offered to the American public as a patriotic film and surely George Clooney thought it to be high brow political theater. Bill Ayers wants to see American capitalism crushed so that the land can return to the Indians—or so he thinks—and America will no longer have the ability to broadcast capitalism messages to the far corners of the world where communism is still the operating foundation of their governments.
It takes more than waving a flag on the 4th of July to keep America as the best hope the world has for freedom—and economic prosperity. And the CIA shouldn’t have to behave the way Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. did to prevent communism from gaining the looted wealth of oil fields and to use that wealth as weapons against America funneling money straight into the black hole of communist Russia at the time. The situation was then and still is far more complicated—but the essence is a decision between capitalism and communism. America has a need to project capitalism to every corner of the world so that immigrants don’t topple its economy with welfare benefits but instead give the potential immigrants the ability to live freely in their own countries with economic vitality as their foundations. America wasn’t trying to take over Iran, Iraq, Cuba, or any place else—it simply wanted to show those countries how to live in a capitalist society and how to benefit from it as partners throughout the world. The hatred of America from Bill Ayers, George Clooney, Ben Afflect and others who utter sentiments about imperialism projected from The United States is that they fear capitalism and believe that a version of communism needs to be the ruling philosophy—it has nothing to do with the good of the indigenous people. The root of the anger always comes back to capitalism versus communism. These radicals like Ayers do not support communism with a capital “C” but with a little one—and that is a sentiment that is very popular among those who think they know better than everyone else.
The World Cup soccer matches were so terribly boring for The United States because soccer is a socialist game. As pointed out in previous articles, the off sides rules and lack of ability to use hands during the game is metaphorical of socialist and communists governments. Soccer is the game most enjoyed in countries mired down with socialism. This is why there is a huge movement in America for many years to make soccer the dominate activity among young people—but as a sport, Americans, just like their rejection of Matt Damon’s Elysium know that there is something they don’t like about it—which of course is that they are both anti-capitalist in their primary philosophic foundations. So it’s not enough to wave a flag and clap after some fireworks explode. If you really love your country you’ll openly support capitalism not just in America—but in Iraq, Honduras, Mexico, China, and Russia—everywhere. There is no way to support both; a passive attitude toward Karl Marx’s communism cannot be permitted because it cannot compete with capitalism. Communism has to destroy capitalism to survive and if it does that, people will live in oppressed huts, under the control of regional warlords, international bankers, and fanatic religious radicals—and the borders of The United States will continue to be flooded by refuges seeking opportunity where only capitalism can give it.
First however dear reader you have to know your history and understand what is really behind any animosity exhibited by people like Bill Ayers who has corrupted the mind of many people with his hatred of American capitalism. A whole generation of Ben Affleck types have bought into his anti-imperialism hook, line and sinker and they make movies like Argo to support their thesis. But now you know rest of the story regarding Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi without the slant of Marxist philosophy clouding the matter. Most Americans watch Argo and don’t quite get the Marx reference or the anti imperialism at the beginning until Barack Obama says something similar in a speech, or a teacher instructs something like-minded in a class room. Americans have been taught that they must feel “compassion” for those other places and be respectful of their history—even as communism eats away at their foundations. Americans sense it when they watch soccer or when the message is blatant like it was in Elysium so they vote with their dollars and work out their anxiety with a few more fireworks on the 4th of July and wave their flags a little more vigorously hoping to get back what they lost in philosophy to the dregs of society represented by Bill Ayers—exposed on the Kelly File on July 4, 2014.
You can’t play with America like a cat pawing at a ball of yarn, waving flags at patriotic holidays and putting your hand on your heart at sporting events. You have to buy into the philosophy of America and support capitalism everywhere it has an opportunity to develop—and you have to do it now. Because the enemies are deeply entrenched, and are everywhere—at every level of society—and they want their own kind of “regime change” and as Barack Obama has proven—mentored personally by Bill Ayers—capitalism is not the mode of operation. America is exceptional, but it is not its job to confine that exceptionalism to only 5% of the world population. It is not America’s task to yield to 95% of the rest of the world, but to teach them to be capitalists so that same 95% doesn’t try to cross over into the Mexican border to flee the communism and socialism of their home countries. America to defend itself must turn those numbers around so that more people within their own countries can gain the opportunities they would have in only The United States because of capitalism. It isn’t imperialism and control that America has been doing throughout the world—it has simply been the self-defense of capitalism against communism that is as still alive today as it was in 1950—only the names have changed and moved underground only to be revealed behind some of Hollywood’s biggest names at the end of the movies they produce thinking they are the smartest people in the world—and the only ones who notice.
They weren’t……………………….now, watch all these videos, and take note of the pattern.
If I could claim to have had a teacher which had a great influence on my life as many contemporaries feel is so pertinent, it would be Joseph Campbell—which I’ve talked about before. Campbell was in the time of his life at the center of many intersecting ideals and he acquired that center through a grand adventure that could only have been found pursuing an extremely individual course through his life. One of those adventures found him to be one of the characters in the John Steinbeck novel Cannery Row as the great American novelist chronicled those years in that literary work. Steinbeck and Campbell were friends until Campbell fell in love with Carol Henning, Steinbeck’s wife. The group lived a pre-hippie existence in California as communism was becoming all the rage in America and all these intense experiences became the subject matter of Steinbeck’s novels. In a speech given by Steinbeck over Radio Free Europe in 1954 to the repressed people of Eastern Europe Steinbeck revealed some of his more mature political ideals refined over the years through his art and experiences. It is an eloquent defense of free expression and the power of the individual that represented the culmination of Steinbeck’s life work which is very pertinent to this very day. Instead speaking to the censorship behind the Iron Curtin, as Steinbeck had in the following speech, in the present day, the same censorship is occurring behind the veil of intelligentsia. The goal is the same—just the method of execution has changed. So before elaborating on the life of Steinbeck, Campbell, and our modern times—read that pertinent speech.
“To my friends,
There was a time when I could visit you and you were free to visit me. My books were in your stores and you were free to write to me on any subject. Now your borders are closed with barbed wire and guarded by armed men and fierce dogs, not to keep me out but to keep you in. And now your minds are also imprisoned. You are told that I am a bad writer but you are not permitted to judge for yourselves. You are told we are bad people but you are forbidden to see and to compare. You are treated like untrustworthy animals, subjected to conditioning as cold and ruthless as though you were rats in a laboratory. You cannot travel, you cannot read freely and you cannot work at the profession of your choice. Your writers are the conditioned servants of a regime. All of this is designed to destroy your ability to think.
I beg you to keep alive the integrity of the individual in his ability to judge and compare and create. May your writers write secretly and hold their writing for the time when this grey anesthetic has passed as pass it must. The free world outside your prison still lives. You will join it again and it will welcome you. Everything around you is cynically designed to destroy you as individuals. You must remember and teach your children that they are precious, not as dull cogs in the wheel of party existence, but as units complete and shining in themselves.”
John Ernst Steinbeck, Jr. (February 27, 1902 – December 20, 1968) was an American author of twenty-seven books, including sixteen novels, six non-fiction books, and five collections of short stories. He is widely known for the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Grapes of Wrath (1939), East of Eden (1952) and the novella Of Mice and Men (1937). Steinbeck received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1962 “for his realistic and imaginative writings, combining as they do sympathetic humor and keen social perception”.
Steinbeck graduated from Salinas High School in 1919 and went from there to study English Literature at Stanford University in Palo Alto, leaving, without a degree, in 1925. He traveled to New York City where he took odd jobs while trying to write. When he failed to have his work published, he returned to California and worked in 1928 as a tour guide and caretaker[7] at Lake Tahoe, where he met Carol Henning, his first wife.[3][7][8] The two were married in January 1930 in Los Angeles, where, with friends, he attempted to make money manufacturing plaster mannequins.[7]
When their money ran out six months later, Steinbeck and Carol moved back to Pacific Grove, California, to a cottage owned by his father, on the Monterey Peninsula a few blocks from the border of the city of Monterey, California. The elder Steinbecks gave John free housing, paper for his manuscripts, and from 1928, loans that allowed him to write without looking for work. During this period of the Great Depression, Steinbeck bought a small boat, and later claimed that he was able to live on the fish and crab that he gathered from the sea, as well as fresh vegetables from his garden and local farms. When that didn’t work, he was not above getting welfare, or rarely even stealing food from the local produce market.[7] Whatever food they had, they would share with their friends.[7] Carol became the model for Mary Talbot in Steinbeck’s novel Cannery Row.[7]
Many of Steinbeck’s works are on required reading lists in American high schools. In the United Kingdom, Of Mice and Men is one of the key texts used by the examining body AQA for its English LiteratureGCSE. A study by the Center for the Learning and Teaching of Literature in the United States found that Of Mice and Men was one of the ten most frequently read books in public high schools.[28]
At the same time, The Grapes of Wrath has been banned by school boards: in August 1939, Kern CountyBoard of Supervisors banned the book from the county’s publicly funded schools and libraries.[14] It was burned in Salinas on two different occasions.[29][30] In 2003, a school board in Mississippi banned it on the grounds of profanity.[31] According to the American Library Association Steinbeck was one of the ten most frequently banned authors from 1990 to 2004, with Of Mice and Men ranking sixth out of 100 such books in the United States.[32][33]
Joseph John Campbell (March 26, 1904 – October 30, 1987) was an American mythologist, writer and lecturer, best known for his work in comparative mythology and comparative religion. His work is vast, covering many aspects of the human experience. His philosophy is often summarized by his phrase: “Follow your bliss.”[1]
Campbell traveled to California for a year (1931–32), continuing his independent studies and becoming close friends with the budding writer John Steinbeck and his wife Carol. On the Monterey Peninsula, Campbell, like Steinbeck, fell under the spell of marine biologistEd Ricketts (the model for “Doc” in Steinbeck’s novel Cannery Row as well as central characters in several other novels).[8] Campbell lived for a while next door to Ricketts, participated in professional and social activities at his neighbor’s, and accompanied him, along with Xenia and Sasha Kashevaroff, on a 1932 journey to Juneau, Alaska on the Grampus.[9] Like Steinbeck, Campbell began writing a novel centered on Ricketts as hero, but, unlike Steinbeck, he did not complete his book.[10]
Bruce Robison writes that “Campbell would refer to those days as a time when everything in his life was taking shape…. Campbell, the great chronicler of the ‘hero’s journey’ in mythology, recognized patterns that paralleled his own thinking in one of Ricketts’s unpublished philosophical essays. Echoes of Carl Jung, Robinson Jeffers and James Joyce can be found in the work of Steinbeck and Ricketts as well as Campbell.”[11]
To this day many of the people who infect the literary world are the same Marxists, socialist and political Democrats/communists who hung around circles like the one Campbell and Steinbeck had experimented with creating the same kind of stunted philosophic exploration witnessed in Eastern Europe during 1954. Nowhere else in the world were these concepts challenging convention than they were in places like the Monterey Peninsula during the time of Campbell and Steinbeck who would both move on to become some of the most prolific American writers of the 20th Century. Both men later in their life would be described as conservatives or libertarians depending on the source even though they were surrounded by the typical coastal communists so prevalent in artistic and scholastic circles. In the battlefield of ideals—both men would reject collectivism ultimately. Steinbeck’s thoughts on the matter were easy to see in his speech to Radio Free Europe. Campbell would ultimately develop the simple line, “Follow your bliss,” which is an extremely individual proclamation. Campbell would bounce back and forth for the rest of his life between the cause of that “bliss”–the origin of what makes a unique life part of some programmed destination—be it a god, or some unforeseen force—but his declaration was one that supported vehemently the value of an individual in pursuit of their own life.
I see the work of John Steinbeck as some of the pinnacle moments of observation and discovery ever recorded in human history–because of the impact they had on culture thereafter. His novel, and thus the performance by James Dean in the movie version of East of Eden are some of the most haunting and realistic portrayals of complex human problems ever seen in print. What is vastly important about all these literary works—those of Steinbeck and of Campbell was their sincere dedication to the lives of the individual as the rest of the creative world plunged down the drain of collectivist thought most adequately reflected in the communist push to take over the Democratic Party. Even though modern times has slid treacherously toward socialism—the kind of America that was a product of uniquely individual thinking can be found specifically in Steinbeck’s writing. Those who hated it—those college professors and critics who declared negativity toward Steinbeck were the same type of people spoken to in Eastern Europe—those who desire to destroy the individual in favor of collective salvation. These were aspects of John Steinbeck that were formed during that critical year of 1931 when he and Joseph Campbell were penniless and far from famous—where they worked out a complicated web of the human struggle between collectivism and individualism even when it threatened to destroy things they held precious—namely women. America’s literary future took a drastic turn for the good in these adventures between those two men which would be one of the few pillars left between the America we hope to preserve and the vile intentions of the European collectivists and their desire to spread the dark ignorance of philosophy that John Steinbeck tried to shine through across Eastern Europe in 1954.
This adventure was told in lurid detail in the great book, A Fire in the Mind. Click the link below to read it for yourself. I like the authors—even if they lean too far to the left for me. They are—following their bliss and captured in time the great work of these two men John Steinbeck and Joseph Campbell in their struggle to behold the strength of the individual.
MYTHOLOGY / BIOGRAPHY
“A marvelous account of the life of a man who fell in love with stories and became our greatest teller of timeless myths. A feast for the mind, the imagination, and the heart.”
–Sam Keen, author of Fire in the Belly
“Joseph Campbell was an amazing, abundant, humane man. This book, by incorporating his journals, letters, and a massive offering of his intellectual sources, helps us understand how, in this half-dead world, such a character comes to be.”
–Robert Bly, poet and author of Iron John: A Book About Men
“Joseph Campbell: A Fire in the Mind ignites the soul of the reader with immortal longings. To read it is to swim in a river of old with Joseph Campbell, whose capacity for knowledge was as vast as his passion for living. [It is a] potent telling of the quest of one who brought life to myth and myth to life.”
–Jean Houston, author of The Search for the Beloved
Joseph Campbell forged an approach to the study of myth and legend that made ancient traditions and beliefs immediate, relevant, and universal. His teachings and literary works, including The Masks of God, have shown that beneath the apparent themes of world mythology lie patterns that reveal the ways in which we all may encounter the great mysteries of existence: birth, growth, soul development, and death. Biographers Stephen and Robin Larsen were students and friends of Campbell for more than twenty years. With exclusive access to his personal papers and journals, they weave a rich tapestry of stories and insights that catalogue both his personal and public triumphs.
The authors, STEPHEN LARSEN, Ph.D., is the author of The Shaman’s Doorway and The Mythic Imagination. He is a practicing psychotherapist and Professor Emeritus of Psychology at SUNY (Ulster). Robin Larsen, Ph.D., is an exhibiting artist and art historian. She is editor-in-chief of the tricentennial biography and anthology Emanuel Swedenborg: A Continuing Vision. The Larsens co-direct the Center for Symbolic Studies in New Paltz, New York.
(Yeah, I know that guy, really well). I was in Hollywood once where an unnamed actress wanted to pay me a handsome amount of money to treat her in this fashion and I tried to explain to her why she wanted to have it done and that she needed to correct that desire. Of course it angered her and she never spoke to me again—but let me be clear—I have a lot of experience in the how and why people desire BDSM, and I have always been against the practice. Unfortunately, a majority of the people in the world these days desire BDSM in some capacity and this is extremely unhealthy. The cause I will reveal at the end of this article, but first we need to understand why people do it—or want to have it done to them. The best example of course is Larry Wachowski who started messing around in the Dungeon in Los Angeles and his experiences there ruined his marriage and made him realize that he desired submissive sex—and that he was really a woman. No—that is not the reality—he just took it too far and misread his desires. So below are quotes from an article on the topic by dominatrixs who are paid professionals whose task it is to turn people into sexual submissives—particularly men—and their observations on why their clients came to them. Larry Wachowski’s story is actually one that too many people have, men and women and there is no way to solve the many riddles in American culture when these silly fantasies occupy the minds of a society the way that it currently does—so some attention must be given to it. The part where my opinions on it will enrage people is that it is clearly a mental neurosis built on poorly constructed values which causes it and is the direct result of a failed personal philosophy. If you dear reader are a man and have submissive fantasies—you are fu**ed up and need to be fixed. Here is why.
Many men who turn to submissive fantasies do so for precisely the sort of vacation from responsibility that Roiphe suggests women are seeking. Olivia Severine, a transsexual dominatrix living in San Francisco, says most of her clients were “very high-powered” men weighed down by responsibility. “They came to see me as a brief escape when no one was looking at them for direction or leadership,” she says. “The time with me is when they were told what to do, what to feel and how to act … and all the weight of their careers, families, lives, is lifted from them for a cherished few hours.”
Mistress Shae Flanigan, a Los Angeles dominatrix, says her clients are “CEOs, high-ranking managers, lawyers and wonderfully brilliant men from all over the business spectrum.” What they have in common is “that they come to me to create an environment where they don’t need to think,” she says. “Where they can trust me to keep them safe while I weave together an enticing, thrilling, euphoric and painful world where it is literally impossible to think.”
It isn’t that these guys wish they had less real-world power — it’s just, power is stressful, and submission provides a release. “BDSM is a hell of a lot more affordable of a vacation than the Bahamas, I promise you,” says Flanigan.
Melissa Febos, author of “Whip Smart,” a book about her time as a pro-domme, tells me, “As someone who spent nearly four years catering to the submissive fantasies of men, and who eventually had to acknowledge her own submissive fantasies, I can say with some certainty that I think all people experience anxiety about power,” she says. “Aren’t our objects of eroticization often the things we feel unreconciled about?”
Most of Febos’ clients “experienced an imbalance of power in their lives,” she says. For some it was “extreme disempowerment,” like child abuse, racism or poverty; for others, it was “an overwhelming burden of power,” related to everything from wealth to politics. (“During the Republican convention, business at the dungeon boomed,” she says.) All of that is to say that “eroticization stemming from anxiety is not gender-specific,” Febos explains — nor is it specific to the relative power one has in the real world.
“Everyone, regardless of career choice or level of importance, is saddled with the burden of making important decisions about their own lives and the lives of the people around them,” Domina Nyx of New York City points out.
While Natasha Strange, who has worked as a domme for almost 20 years, has had plenty of “men who are powerful and want to give up control for a bit,” she’s also had tons of “musicians, cab drivers, pharmacy reps, teachers and your basic blue-collar workers who are just kinky and want to feel desired for an hour or three.” Interestingly enough, she says, “The very first female client I had was a housewife and a mother of two.”
All of my creative written works up until this point have been focused on human sacrifice. It is a topic I have long been obsessed over. When I realized that becoming an archaeologist would not answer the questions I was asking I turned to comparative religion and philosophy to understand. In my 1997 screenplay The Lost Cannibals of Cahokia I directly explored the horror of this topic and the work bounced around Hollywood for a number of years. When I showed apprehension in joining the Writers Guild when directed by a Wilshire Blvd agent—the story died because with the promise of developing the script was a reworking of the sacrifice plotline and a refocus on the horror aspects. Well, the point of the story for me was to understand why human beings felt they needed to sacrifice themselves to other people. So I continue to retain the rights, but development died on the vine. My 2004 novel The Symposium of Justice was essentially about a vigilante who protects people from the desire of an “evil system” to sacrifice the good for the many at the expense of the individual. My 2012 novel Tail of the Dragon was essentially about a man who refused to allow himself to be sacrificed in any manner at all socially. His refusal caused the greatest car chase in American history—it became a kind of Vanishing Point type story except much more intense. But the central thesis was on sacrifice. I have had many publishers, agents, actors, financiers and the like convey their appreciation of my works, but there is always something left out of our dialogue which goes unsaid and prevents further interaction and development.
From 2006 to 2009 I conducted a number of onsite visits to areas known for their human sacrifice to understand better the cause. I visited the site of Cahokia outside of St. Louis and the subject of my 1997 screenplay. Based on some new information from that visit The Lost Cannibals of Cahokia screenplay won an award at the Indie Gathering Film Festival in the horror category. Shortly after my wife and I visited the Chichen Itza archaeological site in the Yucatan Peninsula to study the actual location of many human sacrifice examples. I had thought that the Mel Gibson film Apocalypto was actually one of the best Anthropological/Archaeological films done on the Mayan culture and on human sacrifice. So out of all the world’s sacrificial sites—Chichen Itza held the best example of the practice that was the most fully preserved. I had my thesis which was put into my books and screenplays and ironically, Mel Gibson was destroyed as a filmmaker after that film which came out during this period. There was something about the subject matter of sacrifice which made people feel uncomfortable. On one level they agreed—the Mayan practice of human sacrifice was terrible, and barbaric. On the other, human sacrifice still occurs; it is just much slower and doesn’t necessarily mean that a person must be killed—literally. Just metaphorically—the cause of most BDSM is to reconcile that metaphorical death within an individual life.
While helping Doc Thompson promote the first Atlas Shrugged film over AM radio, I discovered Ayn Rand and read all her books and found that she had already been down the road I was going in regard to human sacrifice. She had approached the problem philosophically where mine was archaeological, but the conclusions were similar. This helped me refine the argument from a big general thesis against sacrifice to a more pointed one backed by her previous work in Objectivism. So this lead me to establish the proper background in declaring that I have spent a lot of time on this notion of sacrifice and explored its nature as a corrosive social element and am fully capable to speak on the matter with authority.
The reason that men desire to “not think” and to surrender themselves to a dominatrix is because they have been taught that not everyone is a superman—that not everyone can support the world—and that weaknesses are virtuous. It is inconceivable to me that a “powerful” man responsible for the jobs of many people and the fiscal merits of a company he works for—or owns, would desire to have his pants pulled down like a child and be spanked—harassed, and dominated by another human being because they want a vacation from making hard decisions. The cause is a failed philosophy at the heart of their very minds. But the cause of the belief that not everyone can be a superman is that the notion of self-sacrifice has been embedded into such men from the time that they were children. If a man is too successful, he feels guilt about it and seeks to reconcile that guilt by being dominated—the way he dominates others. It’s a silly belief that a social balance must be maintained and that it can only be found through masochistic pain. That is the start, and like Larry Wachowski who went from zero to a 1000 after the success of his Matrix film—he did not have the mental capacity to deal with the success other than his instruction of self-sacrifice by a society still functioning like the now extinct Mayans.
When the actress asked me to beat her with one of my whips, I understood what she wanted. She sat with me at the catering truck talking about how tough it was to get roles in Hollywood, how relationships were tough to maintain, that everyone expected you to be one way or another and that if you didn’t fit those molds—you didn’t get parts. She went on and on about her father’s expectations, her mother’s feminist declarations—her agents typecasting—I don’t think I said a word during the entire lunch hour on set. It was like nobody had listened to this girl for a decade and for whatever reason she felt she could talk to me. At the end she put a stack of ten $100 dollar bills on the table and asked me to hit her with my whip the way I had been doing on set—only privately. She talked about the culture of Los Angeles and how much money I could make providing such a service to the frustrated actresses in Beverley Hills, the confused house wives of the studio executives up in the hills around Burbank and the cultural immigrants of Glendale looking for the kind of abuse they received in the countries they came from in the safety of a person they could trust would not hurt them permanently. She told me about places like the Dungeon where Larry Wachowski lost his mind and manhood. Apparently this nice clean-cut girl who was married to one of the producers with several of her children on the set spent a lot of time in those kinds of places. I told her I didn’t do that kind of thing—that my interest in bullwhips was inspired by Douglas Fairbanks and the old serials of the 30s, 40s and 50s. I hoped that by mentioning old Hollywood, we would find common ground—but instead she went cold and got up embarrassed from feeling so vulnerable in what she revealed to someone who wouldn’t jump to the dark side with her. “Fu** Douglas Fairbanks” she said as she took her tray back to the truck. She left the bills on the table, angrily dispensed her tray, then came back to retrieve the money and sat down next to her husband who had been doing his best to avoid my gaze—until his wife sat back down next to him.
These broken thoughts—these desires to be abused don’t just regulate themselves to the bedroom. They come out in voting booths where voters secretly desire to be dominated by a Barack Obama, or commanded around by a Harry Reid, or lied to by Nancy Pelosi. Men and women want to be seduced by Bill Clinton—they know he is a scum bag liar, but they have this notion of wanting to be abused by him to satisfy the internal need they have for insult—pain, and suffering. The more comfortable their lives are, the more they feel they must pay someone or something back to the universe to balance out existence. And non-thinking pain and abuse accomplishes two things, it does give them a retreat from responsibility, but also it equalizes the guilt they feel from being successful and having the ability to get their nails done, or play a round of golf at 1 PM in the afternoon until 5 PM while most people in the world are working.
Chances are dear reader you have these same thoughts and feelings and they were given to you by a failed society and its ridiculous philosophies built upon crumbled civilizations from the past. If you desire to be spanked, slapped around, have your hair pulled—to be called disgraceful names, to be handcuffed, raped, or have things clipped to your skin by someone else until it hurts—you are messed up. You are broken and need to be fixed. What you are feeling are ancient thoughts that should be eradicated. They are not healthy thoughts given to you outside of your control by some deity living in the hereafter. They are screwed up philosophies given to mankind by the past which always lead to failed societies. In the case of Larry Wachowski he destroyed his life and is seeking justification in the form of being a woman to excuse his mistakes. It is only because he is a progressive that the studio bosses keep him employed hoping that one of his films will be the next Matrix—which was a fluke—a one shot wonder. But the entire nation of America is seeking a similar punishment through self-sacrifice and under such a belief system nothing can endure.
Consider the absolutely stupid notion that we are supposed to thank our troops for their service to their country. The popular phrase—“some gave all” implies that giving one’s life to the freedom of everyone in the country is the noblest thing anyone can do—and that is just stupid. The sudden appreciation of our troops over the last decade of treacherous debt (nearly $18 trillion and counting) only confirms to individuals everywhere that the state is the highest authority and its continued preservation must be endured at any cost—even if it means death. Therefore, with that basic premise intact success is believed to be reconciled through pain and suffering. And because sex is a major part of every adult life, punishment has entered the bedroom to align the minds of warped individuals with the insanity they are being forced to contend with due to massive mismanagement and poor philosophical choices of the world’s governments—particularly America. It is worse in America not because it is a bad nation, but because there is a pretense of freedom which is assumed, but the old diabolical need for abuse still persists in the human mind forcing the behavior underground on a massive level. This duality causes many of the problems we are seeing.
In Asian countries where the governments are communist and abusive, the old desires to be abused by an authority figure satisfy their innate impulses so the sexual deviancy does not go underground the way the cultures of Los Angeles or New York conduct their affairs—living one way in the open, another when nobody is looking. But the causes are all the same—mankind has not grown up and away from the self-sacrificial nature of their ancestors and are still just as primitive. Until a mind grows up and away from such a desire of sacrifice—the evils of personal destruction through masochistic abuse and internal hatred will continue. And that will cause more movies like Cloud Atlas to be made instead of films about people who have overcome self-sacrifice—like in Atlas Shrugged.
Patti Alderson is a state-central-committee woman tied to many political heavy weights from Governor Kasich to John Boehner. She is one of the wealthiest citizens in Southern Ohio and is involved in many charities—and has been a major levy supporter for Lakota schools. Years ago my group No Lakota Levy offered to her charity The Community Foundation to join forces and help the children of Lakota and the pay for play extortion rates exhibited by the public school and their labor union. Instead of working with me as proposed, she decided to attack me which became the foundation of a media blitz led by her and her friends on the Lakota school board. When I heard what she said about my reaching out a helping hand I made my opinion of her type of levy supporters known—which of course she understood clearly and took all the offense that I intended. The rest is history. Reflecting on the matter I have come to believe that the real reason she was so angry with me wasn’t just the truth of my statements which conveniently found their way into every media outlet in Cincinnati. It was because I am likely the only person in America who does not kiss her ass. When it comes to Patti Alderson, politicians want her money, business people want her alliance, public employees want her ability to control the temperament of a community, and countless legions of parasites just want to be invited to her parties. Click the video below to hear my radio segment on 700 WLW talking about this issue. I was careful not to name names at the time of the interview, because at that time all the guilty parties were not so obvious. But over time, the pieces came together nicely.
When the deal was offered to the Community Foundation to join forces I wasn’t all that impressed by her reputation. Wealthy people like her put their pants on like everyone else, so I didn’t see anything coming from her as particularly special. To me, she was clearly playing politics when she refused to help the youth at Lakota by picking sides in favor of the levy supporters at the expense of the children attending. So I have first-hand experience of how she conducted her business—leading to the things that I said about her supporters backing the Lakota levy. And while all this was going on, it surprised me how people who were quite intelligent, wealthy, and powerful coddled her so openly. It disgusted me—because the real cause of the school levy at Lakota fell right on her doorstep, and too often she skated away free of responsibility because nobody challenged her—because nobody wanted to be on the political out with her—since she controlled so much.
So I have some context to her proposal of bringing the Boys’ and Girls’ Club to the Lakota area. In order to achieve this she wants to share expense, time, and space with Lakota schools. Under this plan, the Club would use the space after school and during the summer, while Lakota would expand kindergarten to all day for those who wish, and have a place for younger pre-school children during the day when school is in session. Seven months after the 2013 levy passed, there was a proposal for tearing down the old Union school and building this shared new facility. During the last levy campaign the following excerpt was taken from an article in the “Journal News” published in May of 2013, “’No part of this levy is just going to be hanging out there undisclosed as far as what it’s going to be about,’ said Joan Powell, school board president. ‘It’s very important to recognize that of the levy dollars we are contemplating asking, virtually all of them are dedicated to either additional personnel we need to give help along the way, for security, or for technology.'” So now that Lakota got their money, it is time to start breaking the promises which won their votes, and at the center of the activity—as usual is Patti Alderson.
People in the know around the politics of the situation have reported that Patti’s group received around $350,000 cash as a giveaway from Attorney Mike DeWine to purchase a building down on Smith Rd for another youth center. Alderson’s company was the real-estate broker on the deal and collected the commission. Now, none of that is big stuff to Patti—its chicken feed really, but is part of the game of politics which she enjoys controlling. And in order to control those strings there needs to be an unquestioned, mutually agreed upon target—and that is the exploitation of children. When I had my fall-out with Patti, it was because I was trying to take away that exploitation which left the pro levy argument publicly stripped down with nowhere to hide. I hoped at the time that more people would listen to my argument over hers, but in the end, it was a lesson of the old children’s story, The Emperor’s New Cloths. Patti is used to everyone telling her wonderful things, because they want her money just like in that famous story. Then when a child says—“but you’re naked”—anger ensues. I was the one who metaphorically told her and the rest of the levy supporters they were really naked and was using the children of Lakota as their cloths to hide behind. Most people who I thought had guts and nerve stood down and got behind Patti. They told me privately that they supported me, but publicly they stood behind Patti. Most did, but not everyone.
Recently Patti gave up her position after 15 years as head of the Community Foundation. publicly it seems that Patti wishes to pursue her interest in this Boys’ and Girls’ Club deal. But Beth Hauer believes it’s something else related to her—which can be seen in the comments section of the Journal News link shown below.
I wonder if Patti Alderson’s resignation has anything to do with the formal, documented complaint that I filed against her as CEO, the Foundation, a now former V.P., the West Chester Tea Party, the Cincinnati Tea Party and a number of other people concerning the last election for a Fiscal Officer for West Chester Township? I have to tell you, Journal News, that I am not happy about your decisions not to publish anything about that federal complaint, and to publish glowing articles about Patti Alderson.
From that same Journal News article written to give glowing praise of Alderson’s work over the years:
“She’s able to get things done because she does her homework,” said Foundation co-founder Debbie Boehner, the wife of U.S. House Speaker and West Chester Twp. Republican John Boehner. “She is a brilliant businesswoman. Patti’s always had her hands in something that’s a change factor.”
Boehner, who has been friends with Alderson for more than 35 years, said she is amazed with how much of her time and her talent she has given to this community, including spearheading the recent effort to form a Boys & Girls Club of West Chester/Liberty.
“I don’t think that anybody comes any closer,” Boehner said. “We ought to call it Aldersonville instead of West Chester.”
So now Patti Alderson is even more directly aligned with Lakota schools and is looking to tear down the Old Union School which has value by building something else designed to essentially provide free day care to more levy supporters and use the altruism of the escapade to get more shiny stars on her reputation.
Taxpayers have spent half a million dollars refurbishing the old school, putting in new windows, adding air-conditioning, and re-carpeting rooms in the building, not long ago. The school is structurally sound and by tearing it down equity will be lost in it. A charter school or maybe a business could make good use of it as new school buildings that have gone up in recent years often require additional money for structural repairs.
While the school system takes over the childcare responsibilities after school, there are many local day-care centers that will suffer. Parents often want the school to handle their children after hours because it is less expensive. This way the taxpayers are subsidizing childcare for parents under the leadership of Patti Alderson. The parents will pay less because the school system is building and maintaining the structure and the tax payers will absorb the cost.
There is a very great possibility that in this shared project the donor-grant funded responsibility could fall behind in payments do to the funding mechanism failing. These things always work so well in meetings, but reality often deals different cards. That would leave the school system to pick up the slack. The Club has received a $500,000 grant, and the rest will come from donors. This means that at some point in time, tax payers will be asked to cover the costs of mismanagement which history indicates this to be the future of this endeavor.
It is a huge undertaking to decide to provide the luxury of all-day kindergarten (when the value to the children is questionable), subsidizing childcare for parents, extending busing (when recently there wasn’t money to provide it), and tearing down a perfectly good school to make room for a new building which will just turn out to be another temple built to honor Patti Alderson.
The taxpayers passed a levy, and within 5 months, this plan was unveiled which was kept from voters prior to the election. This appears to be a “bait-and-switch” situation led by an underhanded and unethical group of people. No Lakota Levy said this all along—I certainly did.
Patti Alderson is now openly cozy with the Lakota school board and even sat with them, superintendent Mantia, and a facilities person from Lakota in a round table discussion on Monday June 23rd. At the meeting a decision was made to pursue a land lease arrangement with the Boys & Girls Club for the Union school property. It was discussed that Lakota would not fund a new building. It was estimated that demolition of the existing building would cost about $500K. The building currently has an occupant that will end its lease in approximately a year, (summer of 2015). Lakota made a study to see if they had room with existing facilities to house an expansion of the all day kindergarten activity; there currently exists enough space within Lakota’s current buildings to due this service expansion. It was said that someone who wanted to put a charter school in the existing building had first dibs but superintendent Mantia saw that proposal as potential competition for Lakota which didn’t make her happy.
The financial attractiveness for Lakota is that the district would get some revenue for the property – possibly to offset the cost of the building demolition. It would be a long-term lease. It sounds like Boys and Girls Club could, in turn, lease some of the building space to others. The plan is to have the all day kindergarten be tuition funded, which is why it will likely fail and fall back on the tax payers at a future point. Lakota’s lawyers will now draft a land lease plan and at this point it would seem that the approach would not redirect any of the levy fund’s commitments as stated to the public. But the devil is always in the detail in these kinds of things—and a few years down the road when things don’t work out the way everyone intended, the financial loses will have to be recovered somewhere by somebody—likely the tax payers.
This is where my problem with Patti originates. The last levy at Lakota is projected to generate well over $10 million dollars from every property in West Chester and Liberty Township. Yet Patti is a rich woman and has the ability to generate vast sums of money just at her charity events. She has in her power the ability to fully fund Lakota as a self-contained entity. If she wanted she could remove the burden of Lakota funding from tax payers—but that is not what she’s interested in doing. Her focus instead is to use other people’s money and resources to use “good causes” to show what a giving person she is. My experience with Alderson is that she enjoys more being the center of attention than actually solving problems. Children are an easy target and are the most exploited demographic group of people on planet earth, and that exploitation is alive and well in West Chester—or as Debbie Boehner says—“Aldersonville.” The real goal of the effort at Lakota will be to expand kindergarten for parents too busy to care for their young children. Everything else about this whole deal is to inflate the ego of Patti Alderson—based on my experience with her. People tell me all the time that she means well, and has the best of intentions—but I’ve seen her behavior up close and she showed me her fangs—and that is not a person who is trying to do “the best for the community.” The context of that niceness is to be seen as the Emperor of Andersonville—as defined by John Boehner’s wife Debbie and her new “social” cloths.
In the story The Emperor’s New Cloths a vain Emperor who cares about nothing except wearing and displaying clothes hires two swindlers who promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or “hopelessly stupid”. The Emperor’s ministers cannot see the clothing themselves, but pretend that they can for fear of appearing unfit for their positions and the Emperor does the same. Finally the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor marches in procession before his subjects. The townsfolk play along with the pretense, not wanting to appear unfit for their positions or stupid. Then a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor cringes, suspecting the assertion is true, but continues the procession.
I am happy to be the only one in the crowd not functioning from a desire to keeping up a destructive social pretense. The Boys and Girls Club deal with Lakota for Patti is just another robe for an Emperor of Aldersonville where everyone kisses her ring and begs for her money. Just like the school levy campaign was a chance to get like-minded supporters of altruism together for parties, cakes, and back-scratching. It is why she chose not to take my offer of a partnership because the goal wasn’t helping kids; it was in exploiting them for the causes of wearing new cloths and showing them off to the people of Andersonville. In the end it won’t be Patti Alderson writing a check for all her ideas—even though she could—it will be the tax payers still paying for her metaphorical wardrobe years from now once she has disappeared into history and the many monuments dedicated to her charity work will be lost to future generations who could care less who or what she ever was—or anything she ever did.
A special thanks to the many people who contributed to this article. It helps to have so many eyes and ears in the trenches. Not everyone is intimidated by the Emperor of Aldersonville, and lucky for the tax payers of Lakota, the number is growing. Let’s see, what was it that Patti said about me to the Cincinnati Enquirer……………“We refuse to accept funds where political statements are attached.” She also said she had no affiliation with Yes To Lakota Kids. Oddly enough, one of those members was on her arm Monday playing their part in making a deal with Lakota. Ahhhh, the emperor has new clothes indeed–and of course politics played no part.
To review the deal that Patti was so against, CLICK THE LINK BELOW to read an article done about it in Forbes.
It was bitter-sweet news for me to learn that the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular show at Hollywood Studios, Florida is closing at the end of fiscal year 2014 to make way for a new Star Wars land in the popular park. While I can’t wait to take my grandkids, and children to the new Star Wars land, since in our family, those films have so much reverence—I have a long history with the Indiana Jones show that I will always cherish. I wrote about my latest visit to the park in an article complete with footage from the show. Years ago, I nearly moved my family to Florida to be a stuntman in the show which was only supposed to run for 3 – 5 years according to casting agents 20 years ago. But, the show has been so popular that it has endured all this time. On the same day as I received this news, my friends at U.S. Wings let me know that they had a new Indy jacket limited edition that they were releasing based on the original measurements from Raiders of the Lost Ark made of kangaroo hide. Kangaroo hide is a favorite of mine as many of my whips are made from the common Australian hide and is very tough stuff. The jacket will cost $849 which is well worth the price giving more meaning to fans of the popular show in Florida. Once the show closes, it will mark the end of an era with Indiana Jones that the world will never see again. If fans of the films wanted to buy a special jacket to remember this time—now would be the time to do it.
Closing the Indiana Jones show along with the American Idol exhibit will free up a lot of space in the already packed park. Star Wars is the future of Disney—so it is only fitting that they make good use of the area. As much as I love the Indiana Jones show, it is dated and can only really be enjoyed in a nostalgic way. Star Wars will fill that space far better than the same space is used now—so it’s a great decision. But for me, Indiana Jones will always have a special place that can’t be matched any other way. I am happy I was able to take my first grandson to the show at least once. Crowds for the show from now until the end of 2014 will be intense and in high demand as fans from all over the country will flock to see it one more time. For those people I suggest remembering this year with an official jacket from U.S. Wings which is the closest thing to the jacket shown in the show that anyone will ever get anywhere. Here is the press release from U.S. Wings:
Limited Edition – Back By Popular Demand! We last manufactured a kangaroo Indy-style jacket more than 10 years ago, but we’re once again offering one in this outstanding leather! We’ve chosen to offer our authentic Indy-style “Legend” Jacket (which is based on the specs of one of the original movie jackets from three decades ago) in this ultra-durable material. Besides being a rather rare and unique jacket material, Kangaroo-hide is outstanding for its practicality: it’s perhaps the most rugged leather available while still being light in weight.
Features include two front cargo pockets with original-style pocket flaps, side-entry handwarmer pockets, pleated action back for freedom of movement (with correctly-sized small side gaps), small yoke on back panel, original-length side adjustment straps with rectangular sliders, an interior pocket, satin nylon lining, brass zipper, and plain cuffs & bottom. Also features a shorter overall length and a trimmer, more tailored fit in the body & sleeves. Our Kangaroo jackets have that desirable “rugged look” right from the start, because the hides come from wild Kangaroos, not farm-raised. The hides will display naturally occurring scratches, scuffs, and other range marks which adds character to the jacket. This will be a limited production run, so get this unique jacket while you can. A U.S. Wings exclusive. Made from hides imported from Australia.
Limited production run: once these jackets are gone, they will no longer be available.
Availability: These jackets will be available late Summer 2014.
As I’ve said in previous articles I have a U.S. Wings leather jacket of a similar style and I wear it every day. They don’t just look good, but are actually functional—which is basically why Indiana Jones wears that type of clothing no matter if the time period is the 1930s, the late 1950s—or the current time. There isn’t a better style jacket for a person who conducts their life with actual adventure. I have an A-2 variation of the same jacket that U.S. Wings is offering made of Kangaroo hide and let me declare how tough and stylish it is.
Just the other day I had people from outside the country visiting and we were meeting in downtown Cincinnati for dinner. It was a hot day and I had to high tail it to the city from about 30 miles out in 20 minutes, so I was speeding down I-75 during rush hour in heavy traffic with bugs and grit from cement trucks bouncing off my U.S. Wings leather jacket. Without the jacket, the ride down a busy highway at those speeds would be nearly impossible. At times I had to use the emergency lane which was filled with gravel to avoid crashing into cars coming to sudden stops in the wall to wall procession of cars heading south. I was late to dinner and parking downtown anymore on a motorcycle is a nightmare as the parking garages no longer allow them, so I was pressed. After a series of adventures parking in a safe lot about eight blocks from Fountain Square, I climbed over walls, up ladders, across rooftops and then back through heavy traffic in a full sprint dripping with sweat dressed in a suit. Protecting the suit was my U.S. Wings jacket which was covered with bugs that I was brushing off as I approached the restaurant and directed the hostess to take me to my table where the guests were already waiting with expensive wine and appetizers. I was stylishly late, but better yet, the jacket was dressy enough to match the surroundings, but tough enough to get me there without screwing up everything that was underneath. That is the gift of a U.S. Wings jacket.
This is why the actors of the Indiana Jones show in Florida have used jackets like these A-2 types for years. Indiana Jones wore them to allow the stunt men to do all the dangerous stunts with an added layer of protection that still looks good on film. In the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular, the actors use those jackets show after show, after show giving that added protection in the hot Florida sun as the stuntmen fall from the ceiling and rappel into the stage area five times a day for twenty years. The leather jacket doesn’t just to look good; they protect the people who wear them.
So in the year that the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular is closing for those who are willing to drop a couple thousand dollars to watch the show one last time before it closes, do yourself a favor—buy the new Indy-style “Legend” Jacket from U.S. Wings at the link provided. Don’t even waste your time thinking about it—because it is a real treasure that you can give yourself. I like the jacket so much I may even buy another one. The jacket U.S. Wings is offering is thinner than the one I use everyday, and would have its uses on hot summer nights in remote locations far from home—which is of interest to me.
I’m sure Disney will do something with Indiana Jones that will appease fans—but it won’t be the same as the era that we have all just moved through. That era of live shows at Disney World and Harrison Ford films will end in 2014 and for that a treasure is deserved—and I can think of nothing better than a new U.S. Wings jacket from their “Legends” collection to hang in a closet and remind the owner of a period in their life where Indiana Jones was new, fresh—and original.
In regard to this movement of changing the name of the Washington Redskins NFL football team, the intention of the parties involved is not reverence of a conquered people, but an emphasis on progressive politics and all the garbage that comes with it. Native American guilt is used in the same way that other Civil Rights violations are exploited to advance social gains by progressive political advocates. Most of the time, the argument is a full proof slam–nobody would dare criticize a socially abused minority group—especially if the critic is in the majority—such as a “white male.” This leaves arguments one-sided and defenseless, which is the nature of the push to change the name of the Redskins to something else. The goal of the endeavor is not respect of the Indians who supposedly lived in North America happily and in accordance with nature before the “white men” came and destroyed their way of life. The goal is power over NFL owners and the public in general. This is a power attempted at the expense of the Native American Indian.
But for those who wish to propel the myth that the Native American had all the answers, they don’t know the history of those people. They don’t know that outside St. Louis was a gigantic “Indian” city of over 30,000 people who likely traded with the Mayans down the Mississippi, across the Gulf of Mexico and straight into Chichen Itza and their culture of human sacrifice. They don’t know that it is highly likely that many of the American Indian tribes—especially the Shawnee who settled Ohio out of Florida where always at war. The Shawnee couldn’t settle just north of Florida because the Cherokee fought them away driving them further. Once in Ohio, they settled just west of the Five Nations of the Iroquois and lived for a few hundred years in the manner that many believe was the way of life for all Indians since the start of time. But in all reality, it was a short time in human history and the Shawnee were long at war with their neighbors much the way the Mayans were constantly at war with neighboring factions. They were not a society living in peace. They were warriors.
Their culture of collectivism was not compatible with the settlers fleeing European statism so war ensued and the Indians lost. They were beaten and dominated by a culture inventing capitalism. They were fighting on equal terms of social evolution, and the Native Americans—who were largely stranded Chinese from various trading missions around the world by gigantic Junk ships circumnavigating the globe far before Christopher Columbus—were beaten by minds further developed creatively, financially, and socially. Indians were not superior to the American Frontiersman. They did not hold the key secrets to the universe, or have a special relationship to Mother Nature. They were hunters, gathers, and fighters, and they lost their fight against the “White Man.”
Even with the help of American culture to get financially on their feet, the Indian nations still resort to their collectivist tendencies, and are economically—poor for the most part. They still are happy to live in villages and avoid using their brains to create new industry, or even create great works of art—because they have allowed themselves to be conquered, even when their conquerors tried to help them. They like many of the poor living in the inner cities of America cannot shake their psychological tendency to live in village huts waiting to act under the direction of some chief. The reason the Indians lost to the American Frontiersman was because they rose and fell as a society based on collective effort as the Americans were individually motivated—and could not be conquered. If one group of frontiersman were scalped, raped and tied to trees as warnings to all who might follow with their innards used as ropes, more American settlers came behind them fearless and in pursuit of freedom. There was not tribal chief in America who decided not to be at war with the Shawnee, the Cherokee, the Iroquois or any other tribe so “White Men” never stopped coming forcing the Indians to yield, and yield and yield until they were all but destroyed.
To their credit, the Americans felt sorry for their conquered rivals and they named their schools and sports teams after the brave antics the Indians showed on the battlefield. If Americans were truly bad, they would have bragged about their conquests of a superior culture over an inferior one–over one culture who yielded to nature and one who sought to overcome it with the power of imagination. But they didn’t, they gave them reservations to live on because in a world dominated by private property ownership, the Indians did not have any money to own any land. So they were given reservations—just to be fair to them.
Over time, the American western tried to incorporate the Indian into American culture through mythological endeavor. And tensions eased between the former frontiersman and the Native American and if the progressives kept their noses out of the situation and did not attempt to exploit them, the American Indian might be more integrated into American society. They may invent new technology, new cars, or even new philosophy—but they haven’t. Instead, they have allowed their name to be exploited by progressives looking for political capital to attack all tenets of capitalism.
The reason for exploiting Indians, specifically in the case of the Washington Redskins is to force a name change of an NFL team and start a chain reaction of appeasement toward progressive causes. The plight of the Indian is the unfairness of American ownership of private property to supplant the open community nature of the Indians. The Indian is valued as superior by progressives because they did not understand the concept of private property, and revered nature with the highest regard—which of course is a dog whistle to liberals and their support of the Green Movement. But the Indian that progressives hold in such high regard, are fictional characters in that they were part of a Utopia in America that was destroyed by the self-greedy Frontiersman. That Utopia never existed, and the Native American Indian was war mongers and deeply in love with battle, which is why an NFL football team wanted their name to begin with. Nobody wants a football team to be named, the “Washington Pacifists,” or the “Liberals.” Nobody wants to play on a football team named after losers, lowlifes or characters of low valor. The NFL has done the memory of the Indian a favor by naming a team after their battlefield antics—instead of the progressive pacifism which ultimately allowed them to be conquered utterly, and completely.
If the Washington Redskins change their name and cave in to the progressive activists advocating such a thing, it will not stop there—but will unleash a floodgate of demands affecting nearly every college and high school in the country. And it won’t have anything to do with the Indian. Their time has come and gone in a flash. They were not Native American in the way that people think they were—instead they were a mix of many cultures—some nomads who crossed the Bering Straight, some where Chinese stranded in North America when giant ships traveled the world well before recorded history has acknowledged the ability, and some where immigrants from Central Mexico who traveled into North America up the Mississippi River and traded with Cahokia and broke away to start their Indian tribes. But they were not Native Americans living in North America from the start of existence with established cultures who owned the New World with a deep history. The American Indian was no more Native American than George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or Simon Kenton. Daniel Boone had every right to settle the land of Kentucky into Illinois as Tecumseh did. In fact, Blue Jacket was a “White Man” who took up the Shawnee war against the frontiersman. The Indians were a mishmash of cultures that lost philosophically and technologically to a superior culture. Any attempt to highlight otherwise is an attempt to destroy that superior culture with guilt, and lackluster performance to stop the spread of capitalism throughout the world in favor of socialism—which is the standard of the progressive.
I am aware of the controversial nature of these assertions, yet history can confirm it. All anyone who wishes to dispute what I’ve written here need do is study Native American history prior to 1550 AD and they will see that the cultures that resided in North America were no better than any nomadic culture anywhere in the world and were just as primitive. They lost their war with the American Frontiersman fairly and have been remembered through the folklore of a capitalist culture. If not for football teams like the Washington Redskins, who would remember anything of the Indians—even if they were a failure? The NFL has made such memories household names which would otherwise never happen—which is an honor to a society that was a flash in the history of the world. But the Indian was never what the progressives paint them as—a Utopian society that should be followed, and honored with mimicry. That attempt is a falsehood and just another example of how progressives exploit minorities as a way to advance their agenda—even if it means they conduct themselves as complete liars.
If Obama wanted to quell suspicions that he is an Islamic insurgent sent to infiltrate The White House as a domestic terrorist, he certainly failed to contain his intentions with the release of the deserter Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap for five Taliban Guantanamo prisoners. The story will come out with time, and it is without question that Bergdahl identified with his captors and will for a long time be a domestic threat. When the exchanges with the father prior to the desertion are considered, and the way the father behaved at a White House press conference addressing Allah with a smiling Obama looking on—there are serious questions that must be brought up—which are being universally ignored. This prisoner swap was not so much about releasing the last American POW from a long war, but something else—something more elusive. The first hints of it were the strange way that Obama led the mother Jani to the press conference, with his arm around her in an intimate way—not the customary open hand in the center of the back the way a man should treat a woman he is not familiar with. Instead, Obama’s hand was around her waist, just above her buttocks in a way a mating partner might handle a woman—which nonverbally speaks volumes as to what was happening.
Clearly Obama and his White House staff knew what they were doing. They saw the reports, they understood the situation for what it was, and they had talked about it with the parents based on the comfort level between Obama and Bergdahl’s parents. Obama technically should find the parents repulsive since they had homeschooled the American POW—if based on the way the administration went after the German homeschooling couple who sought protection in The United States from the German education system. Obama pursued deportation of the family personally. Yet here is another home school family where the father was speaking the native language of the Taliban and paying reverence to Allah with Obama handling the man’s wife as though she were a gift.
I knew a radical Muslim once who invited me to his home where he had a very beautiful wife. Even though I disagreed with this Muslim’s religious beliefs, he was a hard worker, and we had that in common—so he invited me to his home thankful for my appreciation of his efforts. I stopped by to let the guy know that I was willing meet him informally, mostly out of politeness. I thought it would be nice to stay for an hour or so to strengthen my relationship with him as he was a generally nice guy with far more positives than negatives. He on the other hand liked me a lot and made sure I knew it when he greeted me at the door. His wife showered us with food and courtesy for well over an hour as I spoke with the man. After a while, the man instructed me that he wanted to be brothers with me and suggested that I take his wife into their bedroom to seal the deal.
This of course was not something I was going to do, so I declined, which he was greatly insulted. It ruined his evening and put a strain on our relationship that lasted for the rest of the time that I knew him. I will never forget the look on his wife’s face when he offered her up, she gazed down, never making eye contact—perfectly in submission to her husband’s directions. I couldn’t help but notice the sadness on her face and blank emotion. She seemed relieved that I declined. However, many other mutual friends took him up on his offer which was made to all his friends who came to his home. Watching football games at the Muslim friend’s home was a popular activity and many co-workers did sleep with his wife who was offered out of friendship in the same way.
The point of the story of course is to reiterate that not all cultures view things the same way—and the whole world does not see women as objects of worship, but tokens of appreciation between friends. When I saw Obama handle the wife of Bob Bergdahl I saw a similar behavior—a man treating a woman the way a man might drive the car of another man out of friendship. That doesn’t mean that there was sex between Jani Bergdahl and the President. I’m sure the mother just wanted her son back. Her dedication is obvious from the website she maintained dedicated to his release. She didn’t care if Bowe was a deserter, an assassin, or a Muslim infiltrator—or even if he was just an aloof philosopher at odds with the world—she loved her son and would do anything to see him home.
Obama on the other hand and Bob Bergdahl seem to have a different understanding. If that were my wife being handled like that by the President, with his hand just around her waist with the last few fingers of his hand upon her ass, I would have interjected and broke it up for the obvious ownership which it represented. Handling a woman in such a way shows possession in the sexual game of human beings, and there is something to it not spoken about in the deal. The President obviously needed a way to repair his reputation after the VA scandal and thought that by giving the Bergdahl family what they wanted, it would improve moral among military veterans and help them forget about his mismanagement of their health care issues. Where the Bergdahl family is traumatically, they are likely to say yes to anything, and Jani let herself be handled however the President wished because he had the power to bring home her son. They were invited to the White House to make the announcement—which backfired because Bowe Bergdahl had been in captivity for so long mostly due to his own actions. Nobody in their right mind could justify rescuing him under the conditions for which he left, leaving him in political limbo—until Obama needed a public relations card to play—which he did. But Bowe Bergdahl was not sick and dying as Obama had stated—instead, he had other problems which will be embarrassing to the President.
Now out of captivity Bergdahl has asked to be addressed as Private First Class, according to sources, as he was promoted to sergeant while in captivity. “In his mind, he’s a Pfc,” an official with knowledge of Bergdahl’s current status told CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr.
Bergdahl’s refusal to accept his new title is consistent with other updates on his status, none of which have offered any sort of timeline for him to return to the United States. Officials in Landstuhl, Germany, where Bergdahl is being treated say that he appears to be improving physically and is in stable condition; however, he is “not ready psychologically or emotionally” to return to the United States. He has told those with whom he interacts in the hospital that the Taliban kept him locked in a cage for extended periods of time.
This is strange behavior for a fugitive from Taliban custody, and it is likely that he is being kept in Germany to reduce the embarrassment of the situation when the American media gets a hold of the story. It is likely that Bergdahl was tortured and abused, but already had an inclination to Islamic faith and that the rough handling was intended to toughen him up as a potential insurgent. It looks as though these last few years were among friends in the Taliban—not enemies—and without question the White House knew the briefing reports—yet they released him anyway.
So purely from a conspiratorial point of view—for those who think that Obama is a Jihadist insurgent surgically implanted in American culture by radical terrorist to destroy North American imperialism, there is more ammunition now for their theories. Obama gained six Islamic radicals out of the deal, the five prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay and the one who converted as a deserter of the U.S. military raised by a father who told his boy to “follow your conscience.” In front of the world, Obama gained support for Islamic faith with a grieving father who did not throw stones at the captors of his son, but supported them. Obama showed his comfort of the situation by the way he handled the Bob’s wife—like a token of friendship between two men who wanted similar things. Because the Bowe Bergdahl case is so inflammatory, all other news topics have been pulled from the table, including the VA scandal—as planned, and it has positioned the Jihadist argument on center stage to be argued by different factions of civilized society. The little smile Obama gave during the speech by Bob Bergdahl comes from knowing that the Overton Window of radical acceptance of Muslim extremism has moved deeper into society. The terrorists won on all fronts, the war in Afghanistan, the release of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners, even the domestic terrorists seeking the complete destruction of American society. I saw during that interview a mother in Jani Bergdahl who like the wife of the Muslim friend, had relief on her face, and a yielding to the forces around her who are really in control of her fate.
I felt sorry for her. All the men in her life have let her down, leaving her only to yield to their power—which Obama was obviously happy to exploit. You can always tell. A man does not put a hand on another woman’s ass unless he is showing his possession of her. And that possession comes from controlling all the aspects of her life, which the President had gained in the deal which put more terrorists for the cause of Jihad into the world than there were the day before. That is the real story—of course the one that nobody wants to talk about.
One of my son-in-laws worked very hard to become an American citizen. I still believe citizenship is a concept worth fighting for in spite of the obvious criminal takeover of the government by con artists and thieves. That is not an inflammatory statement, just a fact—the evidence is obvious. So I am torn by what I think is right and what might strategically make sense—which a close friend of mine has done—and is technically one of the freest people on earth. He is now an expatriate—otherwise known as a tax exile. I’ve known this friend for over 40 years now and can state emphatically that he is more intelligent than a room full of $500 dollar an hour lawyers. He knows law better than any person I have ever met and has technically been an outlaw most of his life and has only been caught by the legal system once. Getting caught is what happens when living life half in and half out of what many in the sovereign citizen movement call “The Matrix” occurs. You can’t really live half in half out and not have the two worlds mix in a way that gets you into trouble. So my friend learned from that experience and is now 100% out and living free. He is offering his vast intellect to others who wish to do the same and follow suit.
Should you dear reader wish to quit the world as you know it in favor of freedom—real freedom—you can contact him to receive these services through me. If you so desire, I will point you to him, and he can help you become a tax exile. This friend of mine could easily argue Supreme Court Law with any sitting or former judge, he could argue law against any lawyer in the country right now, so his services should be expected to be rated as such. He is an eccentric in all the stereotypical ways, but he is a certifiable genius and has successfully beaten the legal system to arrive at a status which grants him the following abilities.
1. No more TSA, go around them at airports.
2. No hassle at Customs anywhere on Earth
3. No more Social Security (FICA) taxes
4. No more Income taxes
5. No more Public School Taxes
6. No Property Taxes (you decide if you want to pay for fire, ambulance)
7.No Traffic Tickets (unless you injure someone or drive super fast) They can still issue citations against you for public endangerment)
8. No zoning beyond ridiculous fire hazards etc.
9. No public officials may come on your property (some exceptions such as your house is on fire AND about to catch neighbors house on fire, then they can intercede.)
10. No prosecution or fine, or Incarceration for victimless crimes.
11. No child Protective Services or requirement for public schooling
12. No forced injections
13. No FEMA camp for you or your family
14. You can exchange your Equity in the United States Corporation as desired for the products, fixtures, “things” you need or would like to have instead of what the State thinks you should have.
15. You can live where you want, do what you want with your property so long as it doesn’t harm others.
16. You can travel Freely.
17. You will have standing to remove and severely punish public officials or corporate officers if they do you harm. There are two different court systems one for free men and one for slaves (U. S. citizens)
The list goes on in that fashion extensively.
Part of the journey toward this tax exile status is that you will have to go to the State Superior Court in your State. You must “show up alive” and claim title/execurptorship over your Estate -self rule. Basically you declare to the judge, “Hi your honor, reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.” His typical response will be, “My God we have another Living Person!” It is a kind of behind the scenes code that is available to anyone who wishes to cross over in this fashion. After a lot of reading and forms to fill out mostly by mail you become a statistic published by the Treasury Department under U.S. Expatriations. You will then no longer be a “child of the State” and will no longer be treated like one. It takes a few months of these form exchanges, but it is certainly possible. It is much easier under the guidance of my friend than trying to go it alone. He is offering himself as a guide through that process to make it not so scary.
If I didn’t know this person so well, and have seen him in action so often, I wouldn’t believe any of this was possible. This is the same guy who as a 23-year-old guy stood in front of the Mayor of Cincinnati, all of city council at the time, and every powerful builder and developer, instructing them brick by brick to build what is now The Banks Project in Downtown Cincinnati.
The construction for the new riverfront area between the two stadiums is the result of a public participation planning process officially began in October 1996. Hamilton County and the City of Cincinnati engaged Urban Design Associates to prepare a plan to give direction in two public policy areas:
To develop an overall urban design framework for the development of the central riverfront which would capitalize on the major public investment in the stadiums and structured parking.
A Riverfront Steering Committee made up of City and County elected officials and staff was formed as a joint policy board for the Central Riverfront Plan. Focus groups, interviews, and public meetings were held throughout the planning process.
A Concept Plan was published in April 1997 which identified three possible scenarios for the site of the stadiums and the development of the riverfront. The preparation of a final Master Plan was delayed due to a November 1998 public referendum on the site of the Reds Stadium. Once the decision on the Reds Stadium was made by the voters in favor of a riverfront site, Hamilton County and the City of Cincinnati appointed sixteen prominent citizens to the Riverfront Advisors Commission who were charged to “recommend mixed usage for the Riverfront that guarantees public investment will create sustainable development on the site most valued by our community”. The result of that effort was The Banks, a September 1999 report from the Advisors which contained recommendations on land use, parking, finance, phasing, and developer selection for the Central Riverfront. The final Master Plan includes The Banks recommendations from the advisors. But where did the advisors get their idea from—this same friend during the winter of 1993. It took them half a decade to let it sink in, but they eventually implemented almost every design proposed by my “genius” friend. Go back and watch the tape from that period in the records at City Hall. Nick Vehr knew him, because Nick was there, before he tried to bring the Olympics to Cincinnati then started his own public relations firm.
The only reason to name names and places in this situation is to confirm that this offer is real. My friend is a tax exile—as he always said he would be. After thousands of hours of reading and arguing against his Social Security number—which has been a life long obsession with him going back into his grade school days, he has succeeded. He used to have epic arguments with his elementary teachers over Social Security responsibilities before most kids could read the “Tom and Jane” books of early learning. He read all the Encyclopedia Britannica editions over a single summer before the fifth grade. If there is anybody on earth who understands law and the loopholes in it—it is this guy—and he has quite a track record that has pissed off a lot of people over the years. Because he doesn’t care about terrestrial concerns in the way average people do—a lot of people have taken credit for his ideas without a challenge from him—because that’s just how he is.
He has been after me for a long time to take the same path as he has. I have been reluctant for obvious reasons. My American citizenship is of sentimental value to me—and it would appear that this is purely cosmetic—legally. It is a willful illusion these days—but one that I wish to defend. He on the other hand is not about illusions. He is a fact based analytical thinker with more processing capability than most computers. And if you lean in his direction, he can help take you where he is currently. Just let me know by leaving a comment on this page and I will put you in touch with him and you two can take it from there.
It is a big, scary decision—but it is an option. In a world where options seem limited, this is one which works in your favor if you are willing to drop illusion and embrace reality for what it really is, not what you hope to make it into. So before hopelessness carries you into despair, contact this guy if you really want out of the loop. You don’t have to be ground into nothing by a system of tyranny designed to consume every last essence of your being. You do, have choices, and now you dear reader know of one that can dramatically change your life and fortune—for the better. All you have to do is have the courage to ask.
