The police state lockdown

Americans love to believe that their country is a beacon of liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness, but in reality, it is not any of those things in the 21st century, as citizens have again and again, ceded their rights, or had their rights ceded from them, so that, in effect, America is a police state, in structure, but not however a police state all of the time and everywhere; at least, it isn't, not yet.

While there are a lot of ways to create a police state, America, uses the most basic one which is to take an event, typically, real and at least somewhat germane, and manufactured into a case in which the citizens, for their "safety," need to be on lockdown, and that the police in order to "protect" those citizens are given carte blanche to conduct their business any way that they see fit, for as long as they determined that they need to, or are instructed to by those that actually commandeer the policing arm of the state.

Further to the point, a lockdown is only as good as the personnel and equipment so provided, of which, American policing agencies, alongside of American military forces domesticated to perform actions as instructed by authorities beyond judicial reach, have not only as much weaponry as they could reasonably need to draw upon, but also enough personnel and infrastructure to do so in a very comprehensive manner, for an extended period of time.

If one looks at recent lockdowns such as in Boston, Charlottesville, Baltimore, and Ferguson, the lockdowns themselves did not a single thing to actually catch the perpetrators or to resolve the very reason for the unrest or civil disobedience within those cities and often times exacerbated the disorder even further.  What the lockdown did do, though, was make it very clear to those that lived within those areas, that their lives were no longer under their own control, and that the permission to go about their business or to conduct their business, was done only under the express permission of those in charge of that lockdown.

Unfortunately, the rather sad thing is from a law and order perspective, lockdowns actually work; that is, a lockdown means that far less crime is committed such as murders, rapes, robberies, and thefts, with the only crimes going up being those crimes committed directly or indirectly against the authorities in charge of the lockdown.  This means, that those that want the masses to be under control and under guard at all times, are the biggest proponents of lockdowns, because lockdowns do not happen in their neighborhood, and will in all probability not meaningfully impact their business or their source of income. 

What lockdowns accomplish, and the very purpose of the increase in police state lockdowns, is to keep the masses in their place, all under the guise, that this is necessary for their protection, from enemies foreign and domestic, and that lockdowns that are done often enough, and in particular are done on a massive scale, will, in all probability, be eventually accepted as the "new normal" by the middle class of America, who will have traded their freedom, choice, and liberty, for safety and security, never seeming to realize that they have betrayed America and its ideals, by being complacent to the American totalitarian military-industrial police state.

The unvarnished truth

Most people have a very strong tendency to see themselves in a more positive light then they really are; not necessarily because they have blinders on, but more often, because they are far more generous in forgiving their own sins and faults, as well as seeing their intentions in a manner that reflects favorably upon them.  Perhaps, in its own way, this is good, but only in the sense that mankind has enough oppression and heartache to deal with on a daily basis, that to overburden one's conscience, may indeed be a burden that is too heavy to handle in everyday life.  Yet, truth is truth, and those that take something that isn't really truth and pretend or actually believe that it really is truth, have deceived themselves, for no real good purpose.

In point of fact, mankind does not challenge itself enough to verify that what they are doing, thinking, and accomplishing is actually of real import, but rather, too often, mankind simply does things because that is the way that those things have always been done, or they have been taught that way to get things done, or simply because that is the way that they want to get things done.  All of this, misses the very point, which is, there is nothing more important than actually doing, thinking, and accomplishing things correctly and for the correct purpose, of which, this takes appropriate forethought, in addition, to the strength of character to change things, even things of long standing, to align to what it really ought and should be.

Rather, far too many people, justify what they are and what they are doing, so as to make themselves look better than what they really are; as if fooling their fellow sojourner, signifies that they also have fooled their Creator.  Unfortunately, this sort of outlook, is debilitating, for all those that bend right and truth to their selfish version of those things, have not actually changed right or truth at all; but have created a construct in which they falsely believe that they have done correctly, but have not, and further, deep down in their conscience, they know that they have not.

The bottom line is that those that do right and are right in their purpose, welcome wholeheartedly the unvarnished truth to be in their midst, for this is exactly what they are about.  On the other hand, those whose purpose has the aura of right but are not right, most certainly fear the exposure that the unvarnished truth will display about them, and to clearly face that truth, is often something that will ultimately humble them in a manner that they previously have never reckoned with.

There are many people that believe or profess to believe that all they want is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, of which, the truth of the matter is, they want that truth exposed only for others; for when that scintillating spotlight actually turns and thereby does shine directly upon them, exposing the shocking truth of who and what they really are, this will have them scurrying for the shadows just as fast as they can run, for in reality, they cannot handle the unvarnished truth about themselves.

When you are in the right and the established law is in the wrong

The majority is not always right, our parents are not always right, our teachers are not always right, our politicians are not always right, our justice is not always right, and established laws written and applied are not always right.  Most people, intuitively understand this, just based upon the fact that there was a time when it was orthodox thought that the earth was flat, or that the earth was the center of the universe, or that blacks in America as ruled by the Supreme Court had "…no rights which the white man was bound to respect," and so on and so forth.

However, just because an established rule or law is wrong, doesn't mean that it is necessarily right or even appropriate to try to enlighten the rule makers or law makers of their error.  In fact, doing so, depending upon how minority a position that one is in, could lead to one's death for heresy, blasphemy, being an enemy of the state, or whatever crimes that those in authority wish to paint an inconvenient dissenter with.  That is why, children, even when they know that they are being dealt with unfairly or unjustly, and know for a certainty that their parents are materially wrong, are often careful not to assert that they are right, because the punishment is in all probability going to be worse, for the fact that they were insubordinate, disobedient, and rebellious, for it takes a big person to swallow their ego and thereby admit that they are wrong, when they have already gone on record that they are right.

The bottom line, is that while truth ultimately triumphs over falsehood, and right supersedes wrong, when those in power or in authority, are the very ones that adjudicate truth, falsehood, right, and wrong, then the end result is that all those that challenge those authorities for being wrong and false, are going to feel some real heat for exposing those in that authority for being wrong.  This then means, somewhat unfortunately, that it isn't good enough to just be right, but rather that it is absolutely critical to win over influential others that are on the wrong side, to the acknowledgment that they should definitely consider amending their position, because, in many cases, numbers and voices working together, are the very things that matter most and are often mandatory to effect change.

To a very large extent, established law is unmovable, so to succinctly point out their errors isn't going to do much of anything, because established law actually doesn't care all that much about whether they are in the right or in the wrong, and even appealing to the better angels in established law's character, won't do much of anything either.  What does matter, though, is getting enough people of influence and of power to move the needle in the direction that will overcome that wrong, and in order to do that, the prevailing sentiment must be won over in order for that to be accomplished.  For, being right, when the established law is wrong, is a frustrating construct, because established law is much more about power, then the seeking for that which is right, and those that are in power and are in the wrong, will willingly cede little or nothing to those that are in the right.

Every person is guilty for failing to do all the good that they could and ought to have done

Most people, when looking upon their own lives, like to believe that overall they are good, and certainly believe that in most instances and interactions that they have done good.  To a large degree, this is self-serving, since most people have a strong tendency to believe the best about themselves as well as their intentions; whereas, they can be rather harsh in regards to other people regarding their actions along with their supposed intent.

None of the above really means much of anything, because a fair judgment has to be made and can really only be made from a party that has no "skin in the game", that thereby impartially renders a fair decision, based on the information so presented and displayed.  In these cases, all those that believe that they are good, or sort of good, should, in fact, get very, very nervous, because actions, intents, words, omissions, commissions, background, and everything else of relevance has a material impact upon a decision so rendered, and most people, well-nigh all people, will probably be found to fall far short of being all that good.

For instance, choices are presented to us all of the time, of which, for many a person, more times than not, a selfish choice is made, which does not make that selfish choice necessarily evil; but rather, there is a strong tendency for selfish choices to be deliberately selected because it is beneficial for the self, with some slight recognition that by having done so, it has come at the expense of another decision which would have done some good for another.  Therein lies the rub, for though it might be said, we haven't directly done wrong to another, so too, we haven't directly done right to them, either; even though, we could have done right for them, but have consciously chosen not to.

Indeed, it is a very hard thing, to actually do all the good that we could do, and certainly a very difficult and challenging task to try to attempt, let alone, to accomplish.  Yet, it must be asked, for the question is reasonable, ought not we to do all the good that we can, if we believe that our purpose in life is to make this world a better place for us having been here?  If the answer is no, then quite obviously, you cannot be that good of a person, because those that deliberately do not do all that they could do, to be good and to do good, are clearly living within a construct in which a pretty good effort is good enough, and typically those people that believe that pretty good is good enough, live fairly comfortable lives in which primarily they don't want to see their peace and quiet disturbed.  That though, is the very problem, for the more that people have, the greater is their obligation to do good for others, because those that have the wherewithal as well as the opportunity to affect positive change but turn their backs upon doing so, should have and ought to have done so much better for others.

Hope and hopelessness

People wonder why there is so much hate, violence, and disorder in society, of which, the most obvious answer is that those that have  lost all hope, are going to express themselves in a multitude of ways, of which some of those ways are going to be by being hateful, violent, and creating disorder.   The thing is that as long as a person has a reasonable hope that better days lay ahead, then they are often willing to put up with an incredible amount of privations; or if they believe that their duty to others, such as loved ones, stipulates that they should sacrifice themselves for their future betterment, then they will do so; but absent of those factors, those without hope are not often going to make for good and productive citizens or people.

Any society that is structured in a manner which is unfair, corrupt, deceptive, and utilizes all the myriad forms of violence and oppression against the mass of its citizens, are in their way, killing hope; and by killing hope, they are creating the environment in which things will not get better, but will, in fact, get worse.  In order for positive change to take effect within any society, that society must believe that changes will be made which will provide them with hope, and thereby this hope replaces their former hopelessness.

One of the more significant reasons why people turn to drink and drugs, is that they are unable to face themselves as what and how they appear to really be, and thereby turn to those substances in order to silence the mocking voices in their mind, or as an escape from their life which is most often characterized as being brutal, disappointing, and hopeless. 

A country and a society that wants to be a true exemplar for the world, has got to be a society, that offers hope to all of its citizens, or as many of those citizens that can be successfully reached, and a lot of that hopefulness, comes from a society that truly does provide a fair deal, equality of opportunity, good and safe housing, good schooling, and the absence of a stifling police state.  The whole point of government in the first place, is not for that government to protect and favor the few and elite at the expense of the many and common, but to see that the playing field of life is leveled to such an extent, that all have a reasonable chance at the starting line of life.

The most hopeful society is a society that is inclusive, caring, transparent, open, and determined to be something that is of substance; whereas societies that are exclusive, non-caring, opaque, closed-minded, and parasitic are not going to be good and hopeful societies for most of its people.  So too, those that are in relationships or situations that are destructive to their hope, are in relationships and situations that are inimical for their good development, of which, the hope crushers of life, should be seen for what they really are; the very epitome of those that destroy the life force of others, so that those others will not be able to ever be hopeful.

There are no drunks in Heaven

There are no drunks in Heaven, of course, most fundamentalists instantly agree with this, because they wrongly believe that there are no drunks in Heaven, because all the drunks are actually in Hell; of which, it must be said, there are also no drunks in hell, or heroin addicts, or cocaine addicts, or sex addicts, or any addicts of any kind, are neither in Heaven or hell.  The thing that needs to be understood is that the reason there are no drunks in Heaven, has naught to do with drunks, but rather it has everything to do with the physical body, for the realm of where our soul dwells, has no physical body, and drunkards, as well as all other addicts, without a body, no longer have that addiction to those substances of their previous earthly plane.

This means that for everyone, upon death, all of their physical infirmities will no longer exist, because they are now outside of this earthly realm; so too, those of fine physical form, that died for whatever reason, no longer have that physical form as their identifying marker, because, in essence, we take upon earth, our physical bodies in order to experience material life on earth, but once those bodies die, then we return to what we really are, which is an existence without physical form, which is therefore no longer subject to material laws, or material time, but exists outside of both time and physical form.  

All those that have had substance abuse problems or temper problems or other issues within their existence on earth, will not, however, magically have those core problems and character flaws corrected upon their death; but at the same time, they are no longer enslaved to those negative passions.  This then presents departed souls a renewed opportunity to reform themselves in such a way, that they can make it their mission to help to build and to aid in the bringing forth the enlightenment for others that too have lost their way; for the very purpose of our existence on the earthly plane in the first place, is to make that plane a better place for our having been part of it, and until such a time that such is accomplished, then no life, is wholly completed.

There are plenty of people that try to escape their earthly existence through substance or other abuses, never seeming to realize, that this is not a constructive way to accomplish anything of value, and that problems that are not faced and resolved in this material life, will still have to be resolved, mitigating circumstances or not.  In the drama of life, the structure is such that challenges are issued, and it is in the overcoming of those challenges that the prize is fairly claimed.  Those that depart from the straight and narrow, through drink or salaciousness or whatever, will find that all that meandering and wrong turns has taken them far away from their true purpose and their proper destination, and will have to, work diligently to find and to scrap their way back to where it is that they should be in the first place, and true clarity of thought is needed in order to do so.

More stocks should pay out bigger dividends

Investors and institutions invest their money into stocks for all sorts of reasons, but certainly the primary reason for most everyone, is to make or to earn money on that investment.  When it comes to stock investment, common stockholders seldom have much of a say whatsoever as to what a given Board of Directors or the Executive office, will or won't do; however, there are fundamental ways to protest one's dissatisfaction with the current state of things, of which, one of them is to pay more attention to the dividend payouts, if any, and the amount of such to stockholders.

The reason that dividends should matter to investors is that as shown by advisorperspectives.com, the total returns for the S&P 500, "… with a 20 year holding period dividends account for some 60% of total returns," which is an astonishingly high percentage and demonstrates the incredible value of stocks that do provide dividends, of which, it is estimated that in total, only about 40% of the stocks publicly traded currently offer dividends.  However, the thirty stocks that represent the Dow Jones index, which are considered to be a fair cross-section and fair representation of the most valuable stocks representing the U.S economy, every one of those stocks, currently provides a dividend.

Every public company has both income as well as expenses, of which, those corporations that are profitable, have a conscious choice to make as to whether to pass on to their shareholders in the form of a dividend, some of those profits, throughout the year.  The advantage for a stockholder receiving a dividend is that the money received represents real income, of which, people will utilize those dividends to help make ends meet, or to increase their assets, or for additional investments, and so forth, of which, all of this happens, without the stockholder having to do a thing, other than to maintain their ownership of that particular stock.

Another thing to consider about dividends for companies issuing them is that, dividends can be suspended or reduced, as need be, per business conditions, so that, companies, recognize that, if necessary, they can reduce their expenses, by reducing their dividend payout.  Of course, many companies make it a point not to reduce their dividends at all, and rather try to actually modestly increase them each year, recognizing that stockholders truly do appreciate consistency and reliability.

Of course, there are plenty of companies that could pay out dividends that do not, or could pay out bigger dividends but do not, of which, the most common excuse for not doing so, is that they need to take the money earned and instead such must be prudently re-invested in the company; but that is often belied by the staggering amounts of liquid money that companies such as Apple has, with an estimated $237 billion of cash on hand, of which, they could easily reward their stockholders with bigger dividends, but have not done so.

For those that invest in common stocks, there are only two ways that money will be made, and that is through stock appreciation and the other is through dividends received.  The thing about stock appreciation is the money "made" is the proverbial money made on paper, whereas dividends are real money received by the stockholder and as that bird in hand, should not be discounted in its importance or its value, and therefore should be the focus of any good investor.

Economies expand faster because of credit issuance to worthy recipients

Most countries are very concern about their economic growth rates, in which, impressive positive and improving growth rates equates to employment, wealth, and stability; whereas, lack of growth, or uneven growth, leads to unemployment, poverty, and instability.  This thus means that countries spend an inordinate amount of time trying to manage their economy, as well as their interest rates, along with virtually every facet that a government believes that it needs to have an impact and an influence upon, all under the assumption that these governmental decisions will lead to higher and more consistent growth rates, and to better prosperity.

Yet, despite all of this knowledge and all of the analytics, economies still suffer through booms and busts, of which, some of these cycles, are especially enervating, leading to a significant swath of the population thereby losing their jobs, their homes, and their joy, when those seemingly inevitable recessions and depressions hit.  While there are all sorts of theories and studies in regards to how to best grow an economy, as well as to help smooth out the economic ups and downs within economies, none of this has actually been proven to work in the real world for even a generation, let alone, for generations.

Perhaps, the most significant problem that governments have is the fact that they are unable to recognize that the biggest contributor to the downfall of economies is actually mal-investment; in which monies and energies are put into industries, companies, and people that are not worthy recipients of that money.  Further, to the point, the cost of money being borrowed, most definitely plays a material role as in whether a particular company will or won't be successful, for if that company is fundamentally sound in its business, but its debt load is too heavy, than that company will often fail or become unstable, because it does not have the ready capacity to pay back what it owes.

In point of fact the best way for economies to grow on a consistent basis is to provide credit issuance at a fair rate to those that are worthy recipients of that credit, whether these entities are governmental, non-profitable companies, individuals, or for-profit corporations.  This signifies that before credit is issued, whether private or public, that due diligence is necessary in order to allocate these funds into areas of most worth, as opposed to monies being loaned to those that are simply well connected,   or projects that are favored in order to unfairly benefit specific entities, at the expense of the general public.

After all, there are millions upon millions of ideas and projects that can be funded, for mankind's imagination and reach is well-nigh unlimited, but not all of these ideas and projects are actually a good idea to fund; and the misallocation of that investment, is a double loss, because that money is placed into the hands and areas that should not have it, as opposed to the hands and areas that should have it.  The decisions that governments and companies make most definitely matters and the best decisions for economies are those decisions that place the faith and credit of those issuing such into the areas that are beneficial for the public at large.

Afghanistan: War without end

The highest law in this land is the Constitution, of which, the President of the United States, has the explicit duty to protect and to defend that Constitution, but apparently those words are just words, because, the only body in America, that can authorize and thereby declare war, is actually Congress; but yet, America has been in numerous non-congressional authorized wars and is today, still at war.  America would not be at war with Afghanistan if it was not for the Imperial Presidency that marches in lockstep with the military-industrial complex, and furthermore, it does not apparently matter as to the party of the President in power, for President Bush declared war on Afghanistan in 2001, of which, he served two terms, whereupon President Obama came into power, and also served two terms, and fought the very same war, and now President Trump is in power, and the war with Afghanistan has still not ended.

In point of fact, at a minimum, 50% of Americans, could not point out where Afghanistan is on a map, mainly because Afghanistan is more than 7,000 miles away from America, and furthermore those same 50% plus more, could not succinctly give the reason as to why we are at war with Afghanistan, unless statements such as "to get the bad guys" are considered to be an informed answer.  The fact of the matter is that Afghanistan is absolutely no threat to America, and wasn't a threat to America, back in 2001, when war with Afghanistan was first declared.  Afghanistan, itself, has a population that is less than the population of California, as well as being a little bit smaller in area than the State of Texas, yet, in seventeen long years, America, alone, or with its coalition partners, has not defeated Afghanistan.

All of the above, serves to prove the point, that the reason that this endless war remains endless, is that it's good for the military-industrial complex, and also because pretty much all that occurs within the borders of Afghanistan is effectively ignored by the compliant mainstream media, which thereby allows that military-industrial complex to pretty much do whatever that they so desire, without any consequences or negative feedback.  So too, wars are always a good excuse to keep the population somewhat unnerved, and in this case, the sanctioned orthodox position is that amorphous terrorism can strike America at any time, at anywhere, so that the population must recognize that measures must be taken to defeat the enemy far away from our shores for our sound protection.

The true bottom line, though, is Afghanistan never was a threat to America and America therefore really does not need to bother with Afghanistan, especially in consideration that if Afghanistan really wanted to strike back, it would in all probability, try to strike back against western targets in Europe or possibly to attack Russia, which are much easier objectives to try to strike at, rather than America, because this landlocked country, would be hard pressed to effectively reach America by any means of sustainability or impact.

The fact that Americans are fighting and dying and getting wounded in Afghanistan, is an absolute disgrace, because those lives as well as the effected lives of all Afghanistan citizens are essentially being wasted so that the military-industrial complex can make their blood money.

Corporate lies: "Don't be evil"

Public corporations are primarily in the business to benefit their investors, stockholders, Board of Directors, the Executive office, as well as their employees.  Additionally, public companies that are traded on the stock exchange are very cognizant of the fact that their growth, profitability, earnings, gross margin, and future projections, absolutely matters to those that have invested their money into that corporation.

As might be expected, corporations that are under the tight control of management, and especially those corporations that are privately held, are able to perform and to do actions within that corporation that the outside world will typically not have much of a material impact upon, because these corporations are often privately held, and thereby answer primarily to just those owners, for better or for worse. So too, by definition, non-profit corporations and non-profit institutions, by virtue of the fact that they are not in business to make a profit, but rather are in business to provide a service, typically are companies that do not need worry about making their quarterly numbers, because their mission statement is something that supersedes being measured by money.  On the other hand, public corporations, despite how lofty or noble their mission statement may sound on paper, and despite well-meaning souls within that corporation, recognize explicitly and implicitly that the fact that they are public entities with investors and stockholders that demand performance, intuitively recognize that these are the people that they need to please, which often puts immense pressure on their lofty and noble mottos.

Corporations such as Google, which for a long period of time had the corporate code of "don't be evil," perhaps meant well when they took on such a code, but to believe that in practice, that is how Google actually behaves in fit, form, and function, would be to deliberately deceive one self, for Google makes an incredible amount of money, essentially off of advertising, and all those billions of dollars that comes into Google's hands from advertising, is the end result of the gargantuan amount of personalized information that it has on each of its users, which it has aggregated, analyzed, processed, stored, and sold so that ads can be generated for its users that are specific to that user, which is what advertisers absolutely desire.

While it might not sound like evil, to merely passively store information about individual users, that isn't really the actual case, for that information is deliberately analyzed and thereupon distributed to advertisers specifically so that they can sell their wares to their intended target audience, thereupon allowing Google to make their billions.  Additionally, information is power, and every Google product allows Google to know more about that user, of which, that information could easily be transferred to other agencies or companies for a price, or could at some point be compelled to be provided to the national government, so that government could thereby control, manipulate, and penalize individuals within that country; of which, a disingenuous company, might still somehow say, that they themselves did no evil, but the fact is that those that create things that in the wrong hands could create all sorts of oppressive, diabolical, and evil things, without doing everything in their power to preclude such, are themselves, evil.

The real world bullies

Bullying in one form or another, has probably been around forever, and especially for certain unfortunate kids going to school, bullying is an unwelcome rite of passage; though bullying is certainly not limited to just school, for it can occur in the work environment, home environment, and really just about anywhere where people congregate together.  One of the reasons that we have been hearing so much more nowadays about bullying is the fact that cyber-bullying makes bullying that much more malevolent, for while it is bad enough to be physically and mentally bullied, it can be far worse to have to deal with social media bullying which can be absolutely relentless in its effect and impact, because it is seemingly inescapable and inerasable.

As bad as bullying can be, and especially as bad as cyber-bullying is, there is almost unrecognized, another type of bullying which most people, especially those that conduct it, don't typically recognize, or refuse to recognize as bullying.  While it is fair to say, that most people do not have particular sympathy or much empathy for a bully, it is surprising how many people are actually bullies, in the real world, but somehow still remain blithely unaware of it.  It must be said that bullying, can be defined in a number of ways, but a very basic definition of a bully is a person or an organization that uses their superior strength or superior position to intimidate or to harm or to force someone else that is weaker or in a poor position, to adhere to that bullies' will and desire.

So then, all those that exploit and take unfair advantage of the weak and vulnerable, whether they use force or not, are, by definition, bullies.  That is to say, most people believe that if two people come to an agreement, whether that is employment or some financial transaction, and that neither person is coerced into doing something against their will, that all is fair.  Of course, forgotten within these so-called "voluntary transactions" is the inconvenient fact,  such as if one person or organization has an immense amount of knowledge or understanding about a given transaction, of which, further they are aware that the other person does not, than quite obviously such an advantage allows them to bully over the other person.  So too, all those that are lacking education, experience, citizenship, viable options, and so on, are often going to have to make the best deal that they can under the most unfavorable conditions, and that deal, more times than not, isn't going to be fair on its merits, but rather the party with the advantage will be bullying their way to an unfair deal, simply because their position of strength is unassailable.

While a physical bully exploits their strength against their weaker target, and a cyber-bully uses the social media as a cudgel to beat down their thoroughly outmaneuvered opponents; these are not the only bullies in life, for the reality of the situation is that bullying is all around us, and anytime that someone is unfairly taken advantage of by someone else, of which, the exploited person, through no fault of their own, lacks the fair capacity to do better, that is exploitation, and exploitation is a form of bullying because it is essentially getting someone to agree to do or conform to something that is inimical to themselves and advantageous for the bullying other.

The Democrats kill the unborn, while the Republicans kill the born through wars and incarceration

The two major political parties don't seem to realize the contradiction and hypocrisy that each of their respective party positions actually represents.  For instance, the Democrats are known for being pro-choice, and believe that it is a woman's right to choose as to whether she desires to give birth to her fetus or not, for her body is her own.  On the other hand, the Republicans equate abortion to a form of murder, and wish to overturn Roe v. Wade, and have made significant inroads upon the ease of women being able to avail themselves of their Constitutional right to an abortion, as rendered by the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. 

The contradiction of the Democrats for being so vehemently pro-choice is that they have to a very large extent bought into the construct that the only children that should be born into this world, should come from those that are emotionally as well as financially fit for the preparation of having those children.  The problem with that construct, is that America is in practice, absolutely economically unfair so that the very people that are needed to effect change, which are typically those that have been historically oppressed, are voluntarily killing their own potential offspring, and thereby actually reducing their democratic footprint, under the false guise, that one day, things will be better, failing to somehow understand, that democratic voting is most definitely a numbers game.  As for Republicans that take the apparently noble position, that all human life is sacred, belie that noble sentiment, by treating those that have been ill treated throughout American history, as people that are undeserving of liberty, opportunity, and hope; and thereupon utilizing the police and justice system as a form of oppression to incarcerate primarily minorities at unprecedented levels that no other western nation, even comes close to approaching.  In addition, America has the largest military budget that dwarfs all other countries, and insists that it needs to stick its nose into all sorts of military adventures and misadventures, in which those with boots on the ground, who are often minorities, are the ones that have to bear the consequences of those military interactions.

The Democrats believe falsely that the greatest right for a woman to have is the right to choose, but really the greatest right for a woman is having a fair and equal say at the table of opportunity, in regards to housing, schooling, and employment; of which, if this was done, the need or desire for abortions would plummet, for those with good housing, good schooling, and good employment, typically make the necessary decisions and exhibit the mature behavior which often precludes an unintended pregnancy.   As for the Republican position, in which, they desire that abortion essentially becomes illegal or that abortion effectively becomes severely restricted, such a position, only makes sense and can only be considered humane and noble, for those yet born, if the construct of America is reformed to such a degree that those previously denied good housing, good schooling, good employment, and a valid seat at the table of opportunity, actually get those very things.  Instead, the Republican Party is the party of exploitation and incarceration, in which, an abundant supply of the poor and disadvantaged, allows those at the highest echelons of Republican power to make their money and live well, by wringing their dollars from the sweat and blood of those that have no say.

The great sin of the silent majority

Most people, want to at least consider themselves to be good people, and most people want to believe that they are just in their decisions and in their actions; but, all this is belied by the great injustices that we see displayed in this world, time and time again, along with the fact that if this world was actually full of basically good people, we wouldn't need to arrest, incarcerate, and go to war, as often as is done, and all this is done all of the time.

Too many people, make it a basic point to live to their own self, or to live within their familial or social structure, and make it a point, explicitly or implicitly, to not get overly engaged in things which are outside their familial or social milieu.  While to a certain extent, this is okay, as well as the fact that people are entitled to make their own decisions so as to congregate with those that they wish to be with; there is also a fundamental problem, for society, by definition, means that we cannot and should not behave in a manner in which, each of us is our own island; but rather we must recognize the truth of the matter, which is that all of us are absolutely interconnected, and therefore the closing of our minds and the closing of our eyes pretending that we do not know or do not see things which are out of order and are thereby wrong and unjust, is a great injustice that we have done to others, because we have not done things that we could do and should do to ameliorate the injustices which are right in front of us, but effectively, ignored.

Those that do not speak out when they see injustice, especially those that believe that they need not say a thing because it does not directly or indirectly effect them, are wrong for their silence.  So too, those that do not speak out when they see injustice, but explicitly or implicitly know that they are in some way, form, or manner, somewhat guilty of that injustice continuing, have done wrong by being selfish, and thereby turning their back on helping to alleviate that injustice.  In all of this, the great sin of those that do nothing is not that they have directly contributed to that injustice, but rather, when given the choice to do something constructive to ameliorate that injustice, have chosen to do nothing.

The mistake that people make again and again when it comes to injustice, is not taking a step back and seeing the bigger perspective, which comprehends that an injustice that is not dealt with forthrightly, is an injustice which can easily metastasized in a manner in which it will eventually reach even those that believe that they are immune to it.  And when that happens, those that have been silent and now have found their voice, will often find, that nobody will heed to their call of help, for in the end, those that formerly stood idly by, will reap the harvest of what they have truly sown.

Penalty Major and Penalty Minor in Soccer

There is not a lot of scoring in soccer, of which, it is estimated that the average amount of goals scored in a European match is around 2.5 goals, and about 7% of those goals scored over an entire season, come from the penalty spot.  Additionally, about 75-80% of penalty kicks are converted, so that, in a game that is low scoring, being rewarded with a penalty kick, is hugely influential in the result of any given game; and thereby, not too surprisingly, there are players that employ theatrics and trickery in order to procure a penalty kick, over and above, that split second decisions, about whether a penalty should or should not be given, is not always that cut and dry for the referee.

As currently constructed a penalty decision has a huge influence on the outcome of a given game, so that, dubious or not, questionable or not, when a penalty decision has been made, it is highly meaningful.  At the same time, some referees will be reluctant to call a penalty, especially in games that are tied, or quite competitive, because they do not want to see the game settled on a penalty decision, when there is still time for the game to be decided through open play.  The very best workaround for the way penalties are currently constructed in soccer, is to subdivide penalties into major and minor, in which major penalties would be ones that to the referee are absolutely clear-cut, with no equivocation in the referee's mind, that a player has been clearly fouled in the penalty area, and therefore that penalty should be treated as it is currently, with a spot kick 12 yards away from the goal line.  On the other hand, for infractions that are not as clear-cut, and are questionable at least on some level, these would be designated as a minor penalty, but still subject to a penalty kick, because the foul occurred within the penalty area, however, the spot kick, rather than being taken from 12 yards away, would be taken instead from 18 yards away, which is the very outer edge of the penalty area.

The distance for the newly designated penalty minor, would be six yards further away from the current penalty spot, or an increase of 50% in distance, so that in all likelihood the amount of spot kicks that would be successful from that distance would drop to somewhere around 45-50% because of that distance.  This new designation of a penalty minor in soccer would be a fair solution to the current problem of games being decided over fouls which are questionable to begin with, and having this replaced instead by a penalty kick which has a much less likelihood of succeeding, would be a reasonable solution.  While, no doubt, with this rule, there would be more penalties called overall, that increase would probably be relatively slight; yet, the outcome of having many more penalties kicked from 18 yards out, would mitigate the extra penalties called, and make for a fairer outcome.

While soccer is not known for making any dramatic rule changes, the best way to implement this rule, is to try it out in one of the lesser leagues, or during exhibitions, so as to see how it plays out in the real world, and then have those that manage the sport to vote upon it.  It would certainly seem to be a change whose time has come.

True religion

Many governments fear religion, unless that government is theocratic in principle, for governments fear all those things and beliefs that they are unable to control or successfully manipulate, and religion, is one of those beliefs that can readily supersede one's loyalty to one's nation, if a choice must be made.  So too, much of mankind fears religion, for the sovereignty of the individual must often be surrendered to that religion; or the danger of being on the wrong end of whatever is the prevailing religion of that community or country, as well as the punishment for failing to adhere to a given religion, which may cost a given individual their livelihood, their opportunity, their education, their housing, and even their life.

All of these various things are reasons to be wary of religion, but no matter the government, whether it be communistic or an anathema to organized religion of any type, or the punishments meted out to those that have unorthodox religious beliefs, people have a natural affinity to seek that which is the truth beyond all truths, and innately recognize that religion often is the instrument that helps to bring forth enlightenment, as well as the recognition that those of similar faiths are able to help one another, as if they are family.

While estimates of how many religious faiths there are in this world, is probably in the tens of thousands, there are in actuality, not a terrible amount of religious faiths of any real popularity and prevalence, of which, most people are well aware of those religions.  So too, while the color of our skin is something that we born with; religious faith, is something that people should they be inclined, can change their preference or desire for as they best see fit, or convert to, as necessary, even at the point of a sword.

While there are many religious faiths that have all sorts of tenets, restrictions, codes, and instructions, all of this, has a tendency to divide and subdivide people one from another; especially when those of that faith insist that their belief is the only correct belief, or that their prophet is the only true prophet, or that their God is the only God, and all others are blasphemers or apostates to the faith.  All of this really misses the forest for the trees, for the whole point of religion and religious faith is not to have mankind go at each other's throats, as blood-thirsty savages, insisting that their God must be avenged, but rather that religious faith at its core, is all about taking disparate people and circumstances, throughout the world, and having a coming together of all people, so that together there is an acknowledgment, as much as it is possible, that each of us as a human being, has the exact, same Creator, and therefore we are all brothers and sisters, of one extended family.

The purpose of any good religion is for that religion to be inclusive, so as to bind together people, and especially people, that previously did not bind together at all; so that as fellow believers, each will see the other as having worth and value, because each of us is of the same created worth and of the same created value.  A true religion will not leave even one person behind, for a house divided, cannot stand; so that, we are either all sons or daughters of the one true God, or we are truly lost and do not know who we really are.

Globalization is imperialism

The word, imperialism, for most people, especially people of a progressive nature, has negative connotations associated with it, primarily because imperialism, depending upon the nature and the extent, can signify the taking of, explicitly or implicitly, foreign sovereign territory, as well as having undue influence upon economic and trade policies within other sovereign nations, so as to favor the imperialist power at the expense of that domestic nation.  So too, the power of imperialism applied, almost always means the corrupting of the subject nation under the implicit threat that those that do not kowtow to the imperialistic power will suffer the indignity of dismissal from office from their respective nation, irrelevancy, imprisonment, or even death, unless they comply.

In today's world, we do not often hear the word, imperialism, but instead we hear of the fact that the entire world is now interconnected, and that the globalization in which trade is conducted by nation to nation, is supposed to be of a great benefit to mankind.  While to a certain extent, globalization has its place, especially in the sense that trade can be a wonderful tool, to expand markets, as well as to provide potential cost savings to countries as well as people; the actually globalization as is currently exercised between nations is not now, actually fair in structure, or fair in its benefits.

In point of fact, those that make the rules of globalization are those that benefit the most from globalization, for many reasons; such as, for instance, domestic industries, especially those domestic industries in smaller nations, which do not yet have the infrastructure or capital to expand such, leaving them oftentimes eviscerated by globalization because modern nations have both the infrastructure and capital to significantly undercut domestic industries, so that, the importation of those goods into the subject nation, effectively puts small time operators out of business and out of employment.   So too, even in industries that benefit from globalization in the sense that more business is generated, and/or more exports are created, don't necessarily benefit as much as they could, especially when the lion's share of profits and benefits actually goes to the country that loans out the money, or sells the equipment, thereby leaving a much smaller piece of pie for those that actually take the risks and exert the labor.

The thing about globalization is that it is all about expanding markets, primarily and specifically for domestic industries of the global behemoths, so that those industries can thereby expand their profits and benefit greatly when other nations open up new markets and new opportunities for them.  So too, globalization allows the extraction of mineral resources of poorer and undeveloped countries by richer nations, in which, the nations with the knowhow, equipment, infrastructure, financing and connections are able to structure the business deals wholly in their favor, all under the aegis of providing material aid to those that do not yet have the wherewithal to do any better.

The true bottom line about globalization is that the rich and powerful nations see globalization as a construct that will permit these nations to continue to be rich and powerful, at the expense of smaller and unsophisticated nations that are treated as countries to be exploited and globalized for the expressed benefit of the imperialistic powers.  The fact of the matter is that if globalization was actually a level playing field, meant to give all countries a fair and equal opportunity to market their resources and capabilities, then those countries with historically low GDP rates would be accelerating their growth at astonishingly high rates, but most are not, because globalization as currently exercised is a form of exploitation, and those that exploit, unfairly augment their growth, at the expense of those that are exploited.

Don't buy where you can't work

Boycotts can be extremely effective against businesses and industries that are dependent upon, all races, creeds, and genders purchasing or utilizing their products, for very few businesses and industries have an interest in turning down dollars from those that wish to procure what they are selling.   Boycotts that took in account, that black people, for instance, were denied employment or fair opportunity, have been a part of social protest since 1929, and were an integral part of the foundation that created the civil rights movement, which culminated in the success of that movement in the 1960s.

However, despite legislation which has been in effect for decades, stipulating that discrimination is not legally permitted to exist in America, and despite legislation such as affirmative action, and all other progressive legislation passed to be of benefit for those that have historically been left behind, or denied fair opportunity, America, quite clearly, is a country in which, the dominant power is still contained with the dominant race of that country, which is white.  While, that should come as no big surprise, for those in power, seldom voluntarily relinquish it; it is important to keep on shining the illuminating light upon institutions that clearly favor some, at the expense of the many, as well as to fight back in non-violent ways that will effect change, against hiring practices that are discriminatory and are wrong.

In the kingdom of capitalism, no country stands taller than America, so that, the very best way to make an impact upon that kingdom is quite obviously to hit them back where it really hurts, and that is in their wallet.  Everybody in America has some degree of money, and everybody in America, has choices as to where and how that they spend that money, of which, while small amounts of money may not appear to matter much, when those small amounts of money are multiplied against all those millions of people that have so little; the amounts in play become enormous, which literally amounts to billions upon billions of dollars, and where those dollars go, most definitely, matters.

That is to say, before a person spends their money, a fair question to ask in a country that is supposed to be the epitome of fairness, is whether or not that business or institution represents a place in which, the people that work there, from the executive office, to middle management, to the average employee, represents people that are recognizable, from your community, or from your school, or from your background.  In addition, the question should be asked as to whether that particular business or institution is hiring or has hired people from your community, or from your school, or from your background.

If, in fact, these businesses have not hired from your community, and do not care to hire from that community, and pretty much run their institution as a place that will not and does not represent a place that you or similar people can work at, then they quite obviously are not deserving of your business, so then, as much as it is possible, they should be boycotted, until such a time that they constructively create conditions for people of your community to not only get hired, but to actually hire them.

After all, if you can't work there, why would you ever want to actually buy there?

Plea bargains are not part of the Constitution

The Constitution is the supreme law of this country, and anything that circumvents that Constitution is anathema to the citizens of this fine country.  The problem with the justice system doing something that is wrong, or is a shortcut, or is a convenience, or is a power play by prosecutorial agents, is that if it is not stopped, it has a strong tendency to morph into something that thereby becomes unstoppable, and further to the point, becomes something that clearly supersedes Constitution law. 

Plea bargains are a bastardization of anything even approaching justice, of which, the whole point of an open court, and each side being represented by their own attorney, as well as being judged by their peers, is to create the very foundational basis of justice.  Plea bargains are essentially between someone that wields incredible power and is a professional in their industry; that is, the prosecutor as well as their agents, against often individuals that either have no representation, or a shadow of any real representation.  The prosecutorial agent exerts considerable pressure for a deal, under the threat, that the power of the state, will crush that individual in court, by utilizing the full power of the law as a cudgel, necessitating that a prudent person will see that a deal  need be brokered, of which, not a whit of this approaches a fair and open process, on either side, with absolutely nothing presented to an impartial jury of one’s peers, or the case, on its merits actually being examined, questioned, and debated.

Further to the unfairness, is the fact that a significant amount of plea bargains are done by individuals that have not been able to post bail, and hence, are already incarcerated in which, because their case appears to be in some sort of limbo, or like something out of Kafka’s “The Trial”, are in no position, to do much of anything, but make a plea, so as to at least know exactly what they are facing and to thereby close a deal.

Those that wrote the Constitution, debated upon the Constitution, put forth the Ten Amendments to that Constitution, and ratified the Constitution, believed that by doing so, that this Constitution was good law.  This thus means that plea bargains, which are an abomination to the Constitution and the principles of which that Constitution stands, needs to be either seriously amended or simply struck down as unconstitutional.

The chances of any Supreme Court having the courage to actually strike down plea bargaining, are virtually non-existent, however, the Supreme Court, when evaluating plea bargains in regards to Constitutional rights that all are entitled to, could, should it desire to do so, amend the rules of plea bargaining, so that, the absolute power of prosecutorial authorities would be terminated, and replaced thereby by empowering an impartial jury to hear both sides of a potential plea bargain, and then to have that jury be the ultimate arbiter of what deal could be constructed that would be fair, through a unanimous vote of that jury,  of which, all of this, would be done in an open court of law, rather than behind closed doors.

No doubt, even this fundamental re-structuring of a plea bargain, would be subject to abuse, but at least, making all plea bargains public and allowing the jury to be the conscience of the community would be a very welcomed and justified change.

Pharmaceutical Nation

As reported by  the book, Dark Ages, America:  “children in the united states now receive four times as many psychiatric drugs as children in all the other countries of the world combined.”  It would be one thing if all these psychiatric drugs produced better students, better grades, better SAT and ACT scores, healthier children, and a better America, but all the evidence to date, shows either the very opposite or, no improvement, whatsoever.

Of course, the medical and psychiatric industry wants people to believe that because of the advancement in knowledge and understanding of the human psyche, that this dramatic increase in prescription drugs is all for the better, because the children need it, in order to properly function in this world.  If, psychiatric drugs actually had the same sort of efficacy as inoculations which clearly save lives and are necessary, than those that prescribe psychiatric drugs should be commended and applauded; but, the prescription of drugs, especially the prescription of psychiatric drugs over an extended period of time, of which, the beginning of such a prescription is initiated while the recipient is still an adolescent or even younger, merits a comprehensive, thorough, and detail review by independent authorities, as opposed to some sort of blind and meek acceptance, that these drugs are an absolute good, when, in fact, they almost assuredly are not.

While the blame for all these psychiatric drugs can be laid at many feet, such as the medical industry, credulous parents, and the pharmaceutical companies, the easiest way to find where the primary blame lies, is simply to follow the money, and that money clearly shows that pharmaceutical companies makes millions upon millions in the selling and distribution of psychiatric drugs, and the doctors that prescribe them, or over-prescribe them, are absolutely complicit in the whole affair.

America has been duped by the pharmaceutical industry, which is a mufti-billion dollar profit-based industry that insists that for every little problem, real or unreal, that there is always a solution that is just around the corner, which a little prescribed pill, at a profitable price, will alleviate.  The fact is that life necessitates challenges, heartbreaks, and things that upset people, young as well as old.  Additionally, children that are labeled as “problem children” or “hyperactive” or any other label, which pins these children as being out of the norm, and therefore necessitating prescription medicine is usually not going to actually resolve the problem, but rather masks the problem, or creates a new and worst problem, or simply tries to solve a problem, which will actually solve itself, over a given period of time.

If, the medical profession, in conjunction with the pharmaceutical industry, were regulated in the sense, that their incentives were aligned with the patients that they see, then, for an almost certainty, less psychiatric medicine would be prescribed.  However, instead, the pharmaceutical industry literally makes their dollars by pushing prescribed pills on children as well as adults, of which these pills, are given the aura of being necessary or good, by virtue of the fact that they are medically prescribed, but the results of all these prescriptions indicates that this story is an absolute deception.

Suffering and redemption

Many people ask the question all of the time about why there is so much suffering and hurt in this world, irrespective of whether a God does or does not exist, of which, the most straightforward answer is that there is suffering because too much of mankind is selfish, greedy, deceptive, and mean-spirited.  That is to say, basically all the ills of mankind can be laid at the very feet of mankind, for doing wrong to each other, and for doing wrong to their neighbor, of which, those wrongs will create suffering.

Despite the fact that suffering is due to mankind’s abuse of one another, many people somehow still believe that suffering in and of itself, shouldn’t be permitted in this world, or any world, and at anytime.  If this would be true, than mankind, would have to forsake its free-will either voluntarily or by compulsion, and indeed, without free-will, and assuming there was a benign God in control, or some other benign-being, than there indeed would not be any further suffering.

However, as good as this might sound, an even better good, is for mankind to actually have free-will, and from that free-will to thereupon make decisions that are freely made, of which those decisions would make for a better world.  This would then demonstrate that the proper use of free-will is a way to prove that mankind has acted in accordance to truth, justice, and liberty, in a manner that bestows the ultimate respect and tribute to its Creator.

So then, it is fair to say that the suffering that any person, or peoples go through, is an opportunity for those that are suffering to challenge those that are creating that suffering to become a better person, by them ultimately recognizing that what they have done is wrong.  Further to the point, this is also an opportunity for those that suffer, to demonstrate that the correct response to those that create such suffering is not to match evil with evil, or wrong with wrong, but to endure the injustice and to keep on striving to see that such injustice will eventually, no matter the length of time, or no matter the cost, be overcome, by staying true to the course, and thereby acting in the face of adversity with courage and integrity.

Again and again, injustice happens all of the time, but that story does not end, not even through the death of one individual, or even of millions of individuals, but rather the story keeps on repeating itself, till time immemorial, until it is corrected and thereby becomes correct, no matter, how long that time is measured, in mankind’s terms.  This then means that the point of suffering is to have that wronged individual demonstrate their courage to maintain truth, fairness, and justice in the very face of untruth, unfairness, and injustice, and to be unrelenting about doing so; until mankind rouses itself from its slumber of ignorance and willful stupidity, to recognize that mankind’s conscience must be awakened, so that right and justice, will have its illuminating day, and thereby suffering replaced by unspeakable joy.