Saturday, October 29, 2011


Co-authored with Sodium Boy

With all the OWS talk going around, I feel the need to clarify my position on capitalism.

At an OWS demonstration recently, someone put up a sign saying, "It's because the 1% do most of the thinking."  The arrogance and entitlement behind this type of thinking is mind-boggling!  This is how some of them rationalize the theft of the people's money.

I think many people are making mistakes in arguing this subject, resulting in circular debate, animosity, and confusion.  Some people on the right accuse OWS "complainers" of being unpatriotic, ignorant, and lazy.   It is proof that they do not think.   Some people on the left complain about capitalism and its "evils".

I have noticed that discussions and comments on blogs exhibit a kind of angry, terse concision, which doesn't allow for the development of a set of common operational definitions.  I've noticed also that commentators and debaters often jump to conclusions and make generalizations about their fellow commentators that are false and sometimes even derogatory.  Obviously, this type of communication is not productive.

For example, when I argued in sympathy with the OWS, I was called a "lefty" by one responder, when in reality, I am on the left on some issues and on the right on others.  It is unfortunate that many who consider themselves to be on the right politically tend to brand others who do not believe as they do as “lefties” or "socialists" which is false.

In my opinion, discussion such as this does not lend itself well to emotionally charged quips.  Most people have emotional attachments to their particular social and economic preferences and are emotionally reactive to certain words, causing them to veer easily off course.  As a result, most discussions end up in misunderstanding and frustration.

One of the best things about the video I have posted below (by Mr. Griffin, a Libertarian) is that he brings out the issue that people often do not have common operational definitions of words like capitalism and socialism, etc., as a base from which to discuss these subjects rationally.

As I see it, the basis for the OWS movement is simple:  As with religion, most people also are most comfortable with the political and economical system into which they were born.  As long as they are comfortable, they usually do not question their country's economic system.  However, when people suffer, as they do now, they begin to rebel.

I agree with the point of view of some critics who say that some people in the OWS movement are ignorant of important facts—how our system works vs. how it should be working—causing them to come to erroneous conclusions derogatory of capitalism.  Many of the 99% also have difficulty explaining what they think should be changed because they are not accustomed to speaking extemporaneously.

However, I believe the corporate media shows these negative examples, rather than positive ones, to degrade the integrity and validity of the OWS movement.  After all, part of what the OWS movement wants is for media to stop highlighting what is most shocking and entertaining and reporting what is factual and relevant.  I also believe many more OWS supporters do know what is wrong and what they want changed.

Most of us hope, or even assume, that those who see themselves as individualists, understand that individualism means recognizing that others are also individuals.  Respect for individuals means respect for the needs, desires, and aspirations of everyone.

Unfortunately, most of us who also see the obvious benefits of individualism in our culture are naive and blinded by the individualist vs. collectivist arguments of some vocal right-wingers.  Again, our lack of operational definitions leaves us without a solid base for discussion on individualism.  Sadly, most of those who tout individualism are actually autocrats—they like individualism as long as they can be the "individualists" who get to tell everyone else what to do.

For example, in a business situation, an individual owner would see that his/her individual employees would have the best management equipment and pay that he/she could give them while still making a decent profit.  Many privately held companies in the U.S. operate on this level.

Many wealthy people (not of the 1%) who have privately owned companies are not on the stock market.  Yet they provide jobs without the machinations of Wall Street and the government.

Unfortunately, the usual models we see are publicly held companies whose policies are dictated by stock-owning shareholders and are represented by a board of directors.

In this model, we understand that there is a natural antipathy between owners and labor.  The first concern of a publicly held company is profits, not the good of individuals.  Therefore, in my opinion, these publicly held companies are collectivist in nature and engage in a form of theft from the stakeholders of the company (i.e. the INDIVIDUAL workers).

An ongoing argument from the right is that capitalism creates jobs and investment creates wealth.  Why demonstrate against those aspects of our economy?  When they make such statements, I am often shocked when realizing the ignorance of people in the throes of their personal beliefs.

The proof is all around us:

The investment money is not trickling down.
There are not enough jobs and/or well-paying jobs.

The inflated economy and poor paying jobs force most households into two-parent incomes. Quality of family life is sacrificed.

Many people are working 2 or 3 part-time jobs with no benefits just to scrape by.

Insurance rates are too high because medical costs are too high.

Wall street is rigged in many cases...(illegal stock tips are rampant)

...and The Fed is making money just by printing it, without backing, and making loans. We are trillions of dollars in debt.  In debt to whom?  To what?  To The Fed, a privately owned central bank.  This private business essentially "owns" most of us.

Banks are giving credit cards with outrageous interest and deceptive policies, and granting mortgages to people they know cannot afford them.

Due to the incredible inflation of higher education, in order to get a degree, most people are now forced to take government loans.  Ultimately, most of us are becoming slaves of debt--to the system.

Our government and banking is "doing the thinking" on how to make money--off the backs of most citizens working hard to pay bills and loans (actually creating real money) plus interest (creating more real money).

So what else is wrong with the system as it is now operating?

Here is a clue:  The upper 1% is comprised of bankers, investors, government officials, and lobbyists who legislate on their behalf. These facts are not generally disputed.

The nature of money creation (fiat money and fractional reserve banking and interest—or usury) is "the 900 lb gorilla in the room" no one wants to deal with.

Unfortunately, the economic problems we are seeing in the U.S. affect the entire world.  The economies of almost all countries whether communist, socialist, monarchical, or capitalist are run according to this private central bank model.

That brings us to another clue: “In the words of Niall Ferguson, of the House of Rothschild:

There are now only 5 nations on the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank [LIKE THE FEDERAL BANK]: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya.”

We can cross Libya off that list now.  What country is next?

I accuse the 1% of breaking the law.  Most of them did not get rich through the design of capitalism.

For example: “Old" money was often made through monopolies, stealing patents, government back-handing, favoritism, and other kinds law-breaking (like the Kennedy’s bootlegging).  That gave these so-called capitalists (who are really autocrats!) money to make even more money.

The top 1% DOES NOT TRULY CREATE; they make money from money off the backs of those who work.  They especially make money when the stock market goes down.  There is evidence to show that they manipulate stock market crashes. There is no legality or virtue in that. These 1% are the underbelly of capitalism.

The OWS phenomenon is not mainly about who does the most thinking; it is not really about class, about poor vs. rich.  Their argument is not even about our basic system of capitalism. 

The argument is about the perversion of capitalism!  Why?  Because the 1% grease palms, become bedfellows with politicians, and create unethical laws enabling them to steal money earned by the majority.  Capitalism was created to be a system whereby most people could have opportunities to do well economically.  However, that is no longer happening.

I hope this information clarifies my position—and perhaps the thinking of  some of the 99%.


Monday, October 24, 2011


Is this good news for the field of psychology?  We have been often told that we can develop new thought patterns and new habits from anywhere from 21 days to 3 months, depending on which "Guru" you believe.  

Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) has been popularizing this concept quite a lot lately. This includes motivational speakers like Tony Robbins.  (Warning:  NLP is not without its strong detractors. Listen carefully to their views before you make up your mind. In my experience, they often snatch ideas from other psycho-therapeutic modalities and claim them as their own.)

It is really possible?  Neuroplasticity is the latest buzzword in believing in change.  Have you heard about it ? Do you believe it?  

There is evidence to support this theory; though I doubt that such changes are usually accomplished in such short time spans.  It sounds positive and hopeful, and perhaps that, in itself, can be a boon to the field of Psychotherapy (and Coaching)

Article from:
by Elisha Goldstein, Ph.D.

"If you’ve been following recent developments in the field of psychology or neuroscience or if you’ve been following my postings, you’ve heard the term neuroplasticity before.

This term refers to the discovery in recent years that the brain is actually malleable throughout the lifespan and we have the ability to grow new neural connections. This has tremendous implications for our mental health and anything that has to do with human training, both hopeful and detrimental.

Now, this isn’t the first time this idea has come up. In the late 1800s, Freud hypothesized about this calling it the law of association by spontaneity, and in recent years neuroscientists have come up with the catchy saying, “neurons that fire together, wire together.”

In other words, how and what we pay attention to has tremendous implications for how our brains grow.

Or as Dan Siegel and Rick Hanson have been saying, we can use our minds to shape our brains to help our minds. Read that over a few times, the clouds will begin to clear up.

I was just at a UCLA psychotherapy conference with psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Norman Doidge, author of The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science, and he made it very clear that the advent of neuroplasticity isn’t all good news.

He has the analogy of a mountain with fresh powder being the brain. The more often we ski down the mountain, the more snow packs on certain trails. As we continue to ride over those trails over and over again, the faster we begin to go down those trails.

In other words, the more we practice reactivity to our fears (e.g. from small fears to PTSD), the stronger the neural connections in our brains become that make us more likely to be automatically reactive to our fears. Or, the more often we practice automatic negative thinking, the stronger the neural connections become that lead to more automatic reactivity toward automatic negative thinking.

The other part of this news is that our brains are wired to look for danger and pay more attention to the unpleasant than the pleasant. If I were to pay you 10 compliments and then say something judgmental or critical, you are more likely to remember and ruminate about the judgment than the compliments. As you practice this, your reinforce the neural connections that reinforce the auto-pilot reaction.

So, this is where mindfulness comes in: the practice of nonjudgmental awareness to the present moment. We can have an understanding of how our brains operate and see the automatic reactivity for what it is. When we do this, we are present and can make a choice to pay attention differently and rewire our brains.

We can begin to notice pleasant events too, and in order to balance the brain’s tendency to focus on the negative more often, we can bring mindfulness to the pleasant event. What does this mean? This means really tasting in the moment how the body feels, what emotions are present, and what thoughts are here. Maybe there’s a sound and beginning to close the eyes and listen. Beginning to rest in the moment or linger for a bit longer, soaking it in. That’s all, it’s a practice.

If at the end of the day you automatically remember more unpleasant than pleasant, take another look and ask yourself, where were the pleasant moments today? This is not to discount the unpleasant, but more to bring about some balance as it is the brains tendency to give more weight to the unpleasant for evolutionary and adaptive reasons.

So, be aware that our brains are constantly being shaped and when we are present, we have more choice as to how and what we’d like to pay attention to for a healthier brain, which in turn will create a healthier mind. This has implications for how we react to stress, anxiety, depression, addiction, parenting, and certainly in our relationships."

Mindfulness is an ancient, but relatively recently studied subject in psychotherapy.  There appears to be much evidence for its efficacy; however, jumping into any program espousing Mindfulness can be dangerous without accurate and careful mentor-ship.  Just like any practice of meditation...

...we need to be careful to choose one that uses the time-honored methods and work at it.  Good rarely comes easily.  It seems every good has a negative side, a trap, of which we should be aware.

Mindfulness is a "revolutionary" concept helping people heal from depression, anxiety, and various other mental illness ailments.  There is much evidence to show that it is successful in helping people, especially those with anxiety disorders.

Check Jon Kabat Zinn's book on Mindfulness.  It will tickle your brain receptors.  (Warning:  Do your homework before you delve into a Mindfulness program.)


Saturday, October 22, 2011


The current US economic conflict reminds me of the time I worked in Greece.  At first we lived with 20% inflation!  You might understand how crazy that was.  However, the money we made went SO much farther than many years later (when inflation was officially 2-3%-though, in actuality, it was really much higher) when I left.  When change comes too quickly, people rise up.  Change, especially negative change, is difficult to assimilate.  

The gap between generations is felt much more than in other Western countries. Advances are moving much more quickly than in other western countries. However how are they responding politically?  They are responding in the traditional democratic way, a way they are very proud they initiated!  Evidence:  the regular and frequent demonstrations held in Greece. In this effort they seem united.

It is easy to blame Greeks for the economic problems; they are generally disorganized (they are not Germans).  Tax evasion has been joked about as being the national sport.  There are very understandable reasons for this, however. 

These economical problems were a long time coming from outside of Greece, from the European Union and banks. And now their backs are really against the wall.  Most Greeks did not want to be a part of the European Union.  And now they are paying the price.

Greeks are not naive.  They are aware of the rampant corruption in government and big business.  Small business is being driven out.  (And small business is a strong tradition in Greece!)

Greeks feel they are slaves to the current system!  Their attitude is:  why should I pay taxes when most of it goes into the pockets of corrupt politicians and business owners?! Time and time again, Greeks have been proven that they are correct in this assumption.

I believe in these instances they are generally right. Greeks are a very proud people and have no compunction in doing whatever it takes to survive.  And more power to them!

Some Greeks are holding on to a beautiful lifestyle with money earned during times of prosperity. However, as usual, the middle and lower classes (economically speaking) are suffering--really suffering.

This level of this poverty is difficult to imagine for a European.  The primitive level lifestyle in some areas, especially in small villages, can be shocking to the average US citizen.  The positive side is that those poorer people living in the far off places in Greece know how to survive!  (How many of us know those skills?) 

This is a culture that does not often censor their thoughts.  They are passionate and vocal.  As it fits my character, I admire those national characteristics.

Greeks fight back.  They want to be free.  They may not know very well how to fight, but they are not cowards.  They have the small country mentality of fighting to survive, knowing that they are essentially alone.  (That is why their sympathy extends to other small countries, like Palestine that they support.)  Being an "underdog", they know what it is like.

What is their Achilles heel?  Their individualism is so strong that strong organization  becomes very difficult.  (They are, admittedly, not without their faults.)

I say, Bravo to the Greeks!  They lived under a veritable system of slavery for over 400 yrs. under the Turks and were only relatively recently “liberated” in 1922--and they don't forget. The country was only formed as it is known now at late as 1957.  Their memories are relatively fresh regarding how they suffered slavery.

I have never known a country to be more obsessed with freedom, at almost any cost.  They may not understand always the best way to go about keeping it; but I respect and admire them for their drive and ideals. 

Being under the thumb of Turkish domination has affected the Greek culture immensely.  Being at war in WWII and later in the civil war, the older people have not forgotten their trials and have passed on their memories to younger generations.

Now Greece has a strong youth culture that is in rebellion against outside forces that are threatening to ruin their lovely laid-back lifestyles.  A beautiful lifestyle.  A healthy, happy lifestyle.  It grieves me that they may lose it!

They may not be as strategically important to the US as Turkey or other countries, but it would be a great mistake on the part of the US not to value and preserve what Greece has to offer!



“Those who regard philosophy as a ‘soft’ and unscientific discipline, in contrast to the ‘hard’ and scientific fields of mathematics and physics, have accepted a Big Lie. The ideas of mathematicians and physicists can be no more objective or certain than the philosophic ideas on which they depend. Philosophy is the discipline that tells us how to be objective and how to achieve certainty. Without a theory of knowledge, how would mathematicians or physicists know the relationship of their concepts and generalizations to reality? It is the inductive science of philosophy that teaches the ‘hard’ scientist how to be scientific. ~ Leonard Peikoff in The Logical Leap by David Harriman

Death of physics

Regrettably, the inductive principle of natural philosophy has been dismissed in the ‘mob rule’ culture of science today. And modern philosophy may be the culprit. The corruption in philosophy seems to have spread from Immanuel Kant’s 18th century philosophy that led to ‘positivism,’ which limited the goal of science to merely describing regularities in the behaviour of appearances. Peikoff writes:
“When, thanks to Kant, the most advanced science departs from the proper method—for example, when physicists renounce causality in the subatomic realm and revert to the menial job of ‘saving appearances,’ or when they entirely detach theory from reality and wander around in an eleven-dimensional geometry of spacetime—the cultural consequences are devastating. People hear about such views and conclude: If this is rationality, who need it? There must be something better.”
Stephen Hawking (correctly for once) declares in his latest book, “Philosophy is dead.” But so is modern physics, and for the same reason, although the corpse refuses to lie down. Kant’s influence has morphed into the oxymoronic “thought experiment.” Science has become surreal and illogical with the sainted Einstein as its exemplar and holy relic. A return to classical natural philosophy is urgently needed to restore sanity. 

Profundity.  The statements found in these paragraphs are rocking my world.  I'm rarely sure about anything, however, the article espouses a fantastic and interesting view of science and philosophy! It makes a lot of "common sense".


A fellow blogger and I have been debating lately about the scientific method, reliability in theories, especially conspiracy theories, academic standards, ways of explaining the paranormal and the "uncanny".

My blog friend is in graduate school studying psychology; he is very bright but also very entrenched in academia and "proper" research methods to find conclusions for his hypotheses.  

He seems to be adamant about following the rules as he has learned them.  This I understand very well.  When I studied counseling, they drove into us the importance of using evidence based methods, the perils of falling outside the laws of ethics, and the price you pay for stepping outside academia. If he wants to do well in the eyes of the school, he is on the right road.  I only asked him to consider other options but was not very successful, I think.

At my graduate school they tried to cultivate critical thinking--to an extent.  However, challenging was not part of the curriculum; most teachers don't like to be questioned and they especially don't like to lose a debate to a student. I knew what was expected of me from the beginning of my studies and "kept my place", making excellent grades and building a good reputation.  (I learned many hard lessons from my previous work experience dealing with clinicians and other employees in a mental health center.)  I played the game quite well.

So when my friend began to argue for the scientific method as the only reasonable method for finding truth, I began to push back.  I was surprised but not shocked at his resistance to finding any validity in my arguments. 

He was well conditioned by his academic indoctrination. He was also very passionate about his approach to his thesis.  When I asked about his strong reaction to my challenges, he could not fully identify what emotions he was feeling and why they were triggered.

This experience reminded me of a great quote found in an article by Wal Thornhill.  In this piece, he discusses the relationship between astronomy and philosophy, addressing a few points in my argument.

How can science be so far ‘off the rails’ when it is supposed to be self-correcting? The mistake comes from believing that science is a perfectly rational human pursuit, unlike any other. The polymath psychoanalyst Immanuel Velikovsky was perhaps uniquely qualified to declare in an interview, “Man is irrational in everything he does.”   To restore rationality we must first understand ourselves.

In an extraordinary multidisciplinary forensic investigation, which Velikovsky published in his 1950 best seller, Worlds in Collision, he uncovered mankind’s forgotten experience of doomsday — the end of the world — and our (understandable) irrational response to the trauma. “Man is a wounded animal. His survival is astonishing. But his inability to heal his wounds is tragic,” wrote Dr. Roger Wescott.

Velikovsky Worlds in Collision

The striking red cover of Velikovsky’s Macmillan edition of his book, which was like a red rag to a bull for astronomers. The publishers were forced to transfer the best seller to Doubleday by unprecedented threats from academics.

Since Velikovsky’s discovery was a prehistoric cosmic drama involving the Earth and other planets, some of our craziest collective behavior surrounds astronomy and its antecedent astral religions. 

He wrote, “I was greatly surprised to find that astronomy, the queen of sciences, lives still in the pre-Faraday age, not even in the time of kerosene lamps, but of candles and oil.”  This referred to Faraday’s study of electricity and the fact that the cosmic thunderbolt was memorialized in all ancient cultures as the primary ‘weapon’ during planetary encounters. Therefore electricity must play a role in the cosmos, particularly at times of orbital chaos. But our high-priests of astronomy deny it. 

Meanwhile, spacecraft and radio telescopes routinely reveal magnetic fields in space, which are the signature of electric ‘dark currents’ flowing in the thin plasma. This was my point of departure into the Electric Universe paradigm.

The consequences of the false beliefs of the ‘blinkered’ herd are immense due to the widespread impact, not only on science, but on human culture too. There should be no need to list examples of mankind’s irrational behaviour. It is plainly evident in our wars, religions, politics, business, economics, etc. 

War is a surrogate for doomsday, which we have a dreadful impulse to repeat under the aegis of our various gods. When faced with cataclysm, our response can be to misinterpret or to deny it. Our religions misinterpret it by anthropomorphising the behaviour of the capricious astral gods and assuming the catastrophic references are metaphors. Our sciences deny it by clinging to a Newtonian ‘clockwork’ planetary system, undisturbed for aeons, despite the clear evidence of devastated landscapes on rocky planets and moons, the Earth included. 

Meanwhile, we behave like ‘Chicken Little’ at the appearance of a comet and subconsciously find fleeting catharsis in a glut of disaster, war, and mayhem on TV and in movies.

The Electric Universe paradigm is a natural philosophy based on forensic human evidence spanning millennia. Understanding our past is the way to the future. There is no future for us if we cannot learn this lesson. ~ Wal Thornhill

Velikovsky worked hard to break through contemporary mind-sets about astronomy.  History has proved him right.  If you say that this kind of narrow mindedness in academia and the sciences does not happen anymore these days, you would be wrong.

Apart from rigorous education, it seems most of humankind needs more age and experience--not only of life but of other academic disciplines--to expand our mind to the possibilities of solutions, beyond the constraints of current academia.  And, unfortunately, even those prerequisites are not enough in some cases.

Friday, October 21, 2011



An Indian friend of mine asked:  “Is the world looking at a turbulent America?”
He stated that the world has traditionally had a perception of America as a strong, affluent, advanced nation. In addition, American has been viewed in the past as a rich nation and strong military super power.

In view of the recent Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, he asked if that image has changed? Is America at crossroads financially and politically? Is this the most turbulent times in America’s history? I believe he asked very good questions.

I believe that only in third world countries does the positive image of America exist. Unfortunately, many people in the developed world now see America as arrogant, narrow, and gluttonous.

There have been times that are more turbulent in American history, but not with the potentially wide-reaching devastating effect of today’s “small world”. This fact creates fear and anger toward America. The consensus does not appear positive.

Another young woman gave answers that struck me as naïve and uninformed. This woman, an intelligent, outspoken, hard right-winger, dramatically insisted that the fall of America will be inevitable when Americans are criticizing free enterprise and business. (Some younger people are very opinionated. The less they know, the more they know.)

Of course, what we are actually protesting against is a system where free enterprise is disappearing and the cards are unfairly stacked against us by the elite 1%. I believe, if someone does not see how we no longer have a truly free economy and that the elite are stealing from the 99%, they are in deep denial or blind.

For good measure, she added a personal attack on “those Americans” who support the Palestinian cause. If we show any sympathy or support to the Arabs, we are truly lost! That statement struck me as highly ironic considering that it is our adversarial stance toward the Arabs and support of the Zionist state that has stirred up Arab resentment and hatred against us.

Are there faults with America and its economic and political policies?  Yes, yes, yes!  However, they are not so easily classified. The reasons for our declining position as a super power is a subject of great debate.

Another person remarked, “I think the idealistic image of America is gone and, like a Polaroid film camera, America needs to reinvent and re-market itself in order to stay relevant to modern times.” Yes, the image is fading, but the solution will not be found in better publicity and marketing, but rather in clear actions that are beneficial to the world.

If you are a super power, you are under scrutiny. You are vulnerable to much criticism. Some driving forces of criticism are jealousy, but mostly others are because of America’s attitudes of entitlement in other countries. (No country really likes foreign bases on their soil. Put yourself in their shoes.) They view American politics as dangerous—and I understand their fears. People tend to hate what they fear.

Yet, there are other foreigners, those who gain from American expansionism, those who remember the young men who sacrificed their lives in Europe, those who have traveled and are more educated and sophisticated, realizing that Americans are not necessarily their politics—and that they are all different!

I believe people from other countries see America as becoming more aware of the existing problems and other problems American politics are instigating along with their global consequences.

Perhaps they look at America now and gloat, seeing that America is struggling financially.  Just desserts?  Or they worry that, for all their antipathy toward America, they realize they would rather have America be the superpower than other options.

Then there are those foreigners that may look at the “Occupy Wall Street” movement as courageous, active people at the forefront, trying to do something about America’s financial straits. They may remember that Americans often speak up and fight for their rights.

Obviously, many foreigners agree that the OWS are on the right track. As evidence, we see other countries following suit with 1500 OWS demonstrations around the world. Both Americans and foreigners are becoming more informed and sophisticated in realizing that the financial situation is not America’s isolated problem.

Some may look upon OWS and wonder at the coming together of so many different races and religions for not only an American cause but a world cause! Hopefully, the world will see that Americans are not American politics. Hopefully, they will recognize that, in contrast, most Americans care about not only their country's welfare but also the welfare of other countries!

My hope is that, as I have differentiated foreigners in this post, they will realize that generalizations are not always true and think for themselves, leaving out party political propaganda and cultural conditioning.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011


"Why the Elites Are in Trouble"

"These protesters have not come to work within the system. They are not pleading with Congress for electoral reform. 

They know electoral politics is a farce and have found another way to be heard and exercise power. 

They have no faith, nor should they, in the political system or the two major political parties."

By Chris Hedges
Truthdig, via Information Clearing House, October 10, 2011

(It's copyrighted, so just get on the Truthdig site.  It is a really awesome article explaining the processes going on between protestors.  Democracy at work!)





Some people just do not understand why others believe in certain conspiracy theories.  The common response is to deride them, call them names, and belittle them in an effort to make themselves believe that the party-lines are truth.  Some people have made a "science" out of conspiracy theorists, creating their own theories for why people believe stuff that is out of the norm.  They have their points.

However, people who believe in conspiracies cannot fairly be lumped together.  There are also very good points for believing in conspiracies.  Just take a close look at history.  It is full of examples of conspiracies.

Weird theories are very difficult for most people to accept--it is hard to wrap your head around them.  And if they are true, they are very scary to believe sometimes.  It's easier, feels better to stay coddled in warm comforting lies.

It is true, some conspiracy theorists may be unbalanced; however, it does not follow that all are.  What are most people's response to conspiracy theorists?  It is just easier to judge them altogether, and their theories with them, and call them "kooky" or "crackpots" or worse.  That way people can stay away from some things that demand attention and investigation; that way people won't stand out from the crowd and be called names; that way people can feel safer and more optimistic.

Using Culture Theory, we can explain why there continues to be a separation between the many and the few.  Most people do not like to be on the "fringe" of society, be ridiculed and some kind of outcasts.  They prefer the sense of safety in conformity.

Using Terror Management Theory, we can explain why people shy away from believing the outrageous--phenomena that cannot be easily explained.  We like pat answers; we want to believe what we were conditioned to believe; we don't want to think that, willingly or unwillingly, our parents, our society at large, our churches, and our governments have deceived us.
We don't want to rock our worldviews.  We are all looking for security--reasons for life and afterlife.  It is our existential person hood, our basic psychology.  Critical thinking interferes with the nest of lies society has helped us build for ourselves.  Anyway, it is easier to have others do the thinking for us.  Sadly, some of us never grow up or out of that mind-set.  Terror is a great motivator to stay blind and stay in-line.

Personally, I don't know whether to believe in God, crop circles, alien interference in our world, the Lochness monster or Bigfoot.  However, there are certain conspiracies that are difficult to deny with logic.  World banking is one of them.

Some Clear Message for Occupy Wall Street By Rand Clifford, Information Clearing House, October 10, 2011 is an article I urge you to read.  I've provided a few quotes from the article to give you a taste truth and history.

"Abraham Lincoln said:

"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarch, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than a bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at the rear is my greatest foe.”

"James Madison, fourth president of the United States, called the private international banking cartel of which the Fed is a part, the “Money Changers”. And Madison said, “History records that the Money Changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.”

"President Monroe signed into law the charter for the Second Bank of the Untied States on April 10, 1816. This bloodletting also came with a twenty-year charter—at the end of which, President Jackson was able to disengage Bankula from America’s throat. Later, when asked what his greatest accomplishment had been during his two terms as President, Andrew Jackson replied “I killed the Bank.”

He stopped charter renewal of the second Rothschild-controlled central bank. Jackson even has “I Killed The Bank” written on his tombstone."

"In the words of Niall Ferguson, of the House of Rothschild:

There are now only 5 nations on the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya.”"

Are you getting the picture?  (The article will fill in some blanks.)
Knowing these facts, do you wonder why some people believe that The Fed is involved with Israeli politics?

With world politics?

With world economics?

Do you wonder why some people believe there is a relatively small group of powerful people pulling political strings?

Do you still wonder why we "Occupy Wall Street"?

Saturday, October 15, 2011


Many people believe that Einstein was in favor of the Zionist state and was a strong supporter in its creation.  These beliefs are far from the truth.  Please read the quote below; it will give you a deeper and more detailed understanding of Einstein's viewpoint on Israel.

 "I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. …the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power…. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain – especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks…" ~  Einstein speech in New York, 1938


AWFULIZING:  is the belief that it is unbearable when things do not go as you want them to.

Anything which takes effort is awful.  If something is awful you have the right to not bear it and to act out in any way that you want.  If ‘A’ happens, then ‘B’ will happen; then C.......the world will end.

            Example:  It is awful that my husband forgot my birthday.  I can’t stand the pain of it I need to feel loved.  Therefore it is okay for me to have an affair... or drink...or spend $600.00 at Nordstrom's.

            Payoff:  You do not have to deal with anything that you label as awful.  You do not have to be uncomfortable.

            Consequence:   You never learn to solve problems or to tolerate discomfort.  You are dependent on other people and/or actions to make you feel alright.  You rarely complete a task since the work involved is too awful to undertake.  People avoid you because you complain so much.

AWFULIZING is also the tendency to think of the worst case scenario and focus on that possibility, leading to unnecessary worry and stress.  How many of you have NOT ever "awfulized" in your life?

This TE is also called "CATASTROPHIZING".  Another example:  "If this happens, then that will happen, then will be horrible--I can't stand it!  Give me a drink!!"

People with Histrionic Personality Disorder often do much catastrophizing!  (Or they are Italian, Greek, or Jewish...  ;0)



In trying to post something on psychology and in light of the recent posts on the Arab-Israeli conflict, I thought a re-posting on this thinking error was apropos!

Power and control is most often used by very entitled people:  narcissists, anti-socials, borderlines.  

Why do people feel entitled?  Usually because of deprivation, abuse, cultural beliefs.  P and C thoughts often begin with, "I deserve this because..." or "They deserve this because...".  P and C is also a way of convincing yourself that you do not need to take accountability for your actions.

But this thinking error is common to most people who have used it at one time or another.  It is also common to people who have had other people power-thrust against them, resulting in feelings of anger, fear, revenge, pain, sorrow, frustration to name some of them.

Is wanting power and control in our lives a bad ambition?  No, not necessarily.  It can be very good when we use it ethically and for the good of ourselves and others.  It becomes negative when used against others, to hurt others, to manipulate others...

Politics is a super common arena for this thinking error!

POWER AND CONTROL:  You expect to control others.  Since you are special you think others should obey you.  You use power thrusts (getting over physically or psychologically on another person) to get out of "zero state"--another TE.  Getting over on others, lying, manipulating are all good ways to control others; they do not have the right to make any demands on you.

            Example:          You tell a country that it had better give you what you want, because if it doesn’t, you threaten it with violence and coercion.

            Payoff:              You get people to do what you want.  You feel superior to others.  You do not have to do what others ask of you.

            Consequence:   You do not know how to have a relationship with other countries (due in part to your selfishness).  People avoid you.  You do not know how to meet your own needs because you are used to other people meeting them for you.  People only respond to you out of fear and do not trust you.