That's right! The subject was cheat codes, and the linguistic fuckery that is more than prevalent in MSM, so much so that Hunter's Laptop was "Russian Disinformation" only until the crime boss could begin pretending to lead the United States. In less upright sectors of the legal profession, it is called "terms of art." The lies we have uncovered (together) are too numerous to review. Their deceptions create dragons, imagined and real, munching mushroom clouds on the world stage. Their stratospheric falsehoods wear legal trappings, sheepskin garbed, traps to hypnotize, pervert, and enslave our sad, opiated, and most of all, unthinking fellow human beings.
I have no doubt that you folks, you, the rational, and the rest who cannot care less about political agendas, have long disspelled the notion that legacy mass communication contain a shred of reliable or actionable information. Simple truths are outstanding mental floss. Try them.
Yes, you are a force for human liberation. But with great Freedom comes great Responsibility. No "RIGHTS" at law can be recognized as valid or enforceable without corresponding "DUTIES." Simplistic aphorisms resonate as applicable truths because they are expressly derived from natural existence, and common experience, not from some synthetic form of hubris. This explains why a semester of introductory economics can be compressed into the saying, "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Or more succinctly, "Know Supply and Demand." I would add, "Do the Math."
For
those of us seeking to establish some baseline for determining the validity of news reports through analysis of data sets, here is one, graphically represented in Cartesian
coordinates, expressing degrees of thought and expressions of information and descriptions of events, plotted
along the XY quadrant of a multi-variable function.
Oh, and thanks, Trigonometry.
One look at that chart, and you know, here comes trouble.
This week, I will simply add to our roster of linguistic cheat codes, the ones that slip by so easily amidst the booming buzzing noise of daily life, permeating our consciousness and sub-consciousness. These are the programmed phrases, playing on Repeat, leading future generations to a Never Never Land of snowflake nirvana, where accuracy in reporting is sacrificed at the Altar of the Unthinking, and zombie-like trance of shit posts, dumb tweets, cowardly commentary, and unbeareable hypocrisy. This is the final highlight reel of well-used weasel words that boomers should find particularly irritating, if not outright malevolent.
OK, Boomers.
"Long story short." -- [translation: "Forget
the details."] Making a long story short is a great time saver, and it
is also a way to hide the devil, who as we know hides in details. Or was it god who hides in the details? Oh well, long story
short, watch out if someone is communicating to you, yet finds they
really don't have the time to share important or unimportant details of
the narrative. Real, lasting content is in fact comprised of long
stories. They are called epics. Be epic.
"Thoughts and prayers." -- [translation: "I'm online and I really am a good person."] This phrase has become recognized as the epitome, and early expression of "virtue signaling." So prevalent in the world of online social media, "thoughts and prayers" is a sad by-product of our digitally induced shallowness, whose insincerity is soon to be surpassed by the currency devaluation of the phrase "Thank you for your service."
"Social Justice" -- [actual meaning: "collective retribution"] Justice is experienced on an individual level. The concept of "Social" Justice is mob justice, a shakedown, and a money-grabbing ruse for the race-baiter industry. It is one the biggest frauds out there, and an insult to the proposition that we are judged not by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character. If you are a "social justice warrior," leave me out of the guilt-tripping 21st Century revenge fantasy against my counttry. YOU are the real racists. Period. Dot. Fin.
"Follow the Science" -- [actual meaning: "It is immoral to disagree with me."] We decoded this one in a previous post. The realm of science is the least capable discipline to determine social policy. It is the least capable to form precepts to guide benevolent human conduct. "Follow the Science" is the reason we needed the Nuremberg Code. In fact, the classical origin of being "scientific," means being a skeptic, not a sheep.
"Trope" -- [???] I am seeing the increased usage of the word "trope" as a shiny debate tool growing in popularity among the internet
generation. A trope was a figure of speech, a metaphor, when the writer employs a word that is used in a non-literal manner, e.g., through irony, hyperbole, liltote (opposite of hyperbole), metonymy, or synecdoche. It is particularly fascinating as, perhaps, the word "trope" is not so much a linguistic cheat, as much as it is a definitional error, and its rise in usage (to dismiss potentially valid propostions before examining the proposition) supports my favorite trope generator: Wittgensteinian analytical philosophy. Put simply, he says that regarding language, Usage trumps Definitions, and not only that, Usage creates Meaning. Humans play Language Games. As I have seen it, some folks think an idea can discredited by calling it mere "trope." Actually, when someone says, "Oh, that's just a trope," they probably intended to dismiss your idea as cliché, and that could be a valid point. But by no means should a concept (or policy preference, for that matter) be dismissed merely because it was expressed creatively. Enough on the difference between "trope" and "cliché." I rant.
In closing, as an homage to being a North Carolinian for 28 years, here is one of my favorite linguistic decodes, courtesy of comedian Jon Reep. If you have lived in the South, you already know this.
As you and I keep calm and cope with corporate media dialectics, staying the Babylonian money magic stream of lies pitting:
left against right,
conservatives versus liberals
male versus female
black versus white
and of course, the currently popular diametric Russia versus Ukraine,
that old imperial strategy seems destined for failure. It is time for the causes of our national malaise to fail, and to fail in catastrophic ways.
"Choose a side," they implored us.
"Don't worry," they assured us. "We can fix this. Yes, we can."
Well, sorry, Your Highnesses, but that divide and conquer strategy is old and worn. It is dead. It started to die at Runnymeade. It got worse for you in Trenton. Your destiny was sealed in the fields of Normandy and the streets of Moscow. The kids watched you from the living room TV, as you lied and killed your way through the jungles of Vietnam and Nicaragua, sacrificing youth and energy in the deserts and mountains of Iraq and Afghanistan. But you are done. We have devolved, and our constitution is being restored.
Sure, you have made futile attempts, temporarily derailing humanity's quest. Your litany of falsehoods includeds last-gasp efforts over the millennia -- sinking the Lusitania, followed by the Titanic and more.
But we have long since connected the dots . . . between FDR's foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor ... JFK's monetary agenda ... the fake news from the Gulf of Tonkin ... the dark history of Bush family ... 9-11 truthers ... and now ... the plandemic Covid-19 (better known as the Biden election strategy.)
Many youthful researchers doubt the seriousness of your Georgia "Guidestones," dismissing them as an obscure art project by some wealthy nut job. The kids may be right, but try asking the people of Hiroshima or Nagasaki whether there exists a certain faction of world powers and principalities having an express, and very clear, depopulation agenda.
With eyes wide open, to them it's no joke.
But it just won't work. They are destined to fail.
Sure, ordo ab chaowas a nice, catchy motto back in the days of Manifest Destiny, when you could opiate the masses and conjure hellscape visions with technological spell-casting, hypnotic images of horror broadcast to make us afraid. You have harvested natural Caution to exploit irrational Fear. Your lust for the blood of innocence inflamed your hatred for Truth and the Beauty.
Little Lambs became Terrible Tigers, burning bright in the forests of flyover America. And our people perish for lack of knowledge. But now, we know. We know your methods, we know your goals and we have learned your ways. Your time has come, you pinkie-sucking, narcissistic, silk-tie wearing monsters. Your days are numbered.
This week I commend to you an article from The City Journal, a literary organ of the Manhattan Institute.
The piece was written in 2014 by Eugene Kontorovich. At the time, Kontorovich was Professor of International Law and Constitutional Law at Northwestern University Law School.
I had no idea that this symbol, used by Mussolini's fascist regime in Italy, is now plastered all over the architecture of many Federal office buildings in Washington, D.C.
Fascinating.
The fasces symbol may be less notorious than the swastika, but I find it no less detestable. It's meaning and symbolism elicit, in my view, the precise opposite of American ideals, especially the Emersonian ideal of self-reliance, not to mention the concepts of inalienable rights and natural law.
Let me explain. As Professor Kontorovich put it:
"In republican Rome, the chief magistrates were protected in public by lictors: bodyguards who each carried a fasces, a bundle of 12 rods tied together and surrounding outward-facing axes. The lictors used this unwieldy-looking scepter to chastise wrongdoers, and it came to symbolize the coercive power of the consul."
The symbol of the fasces represented magisterial and priestly authority in ancient Rome, symbolizing "strength in unity," the way a bundle of sticks is harder to break than one single stick. The strong implication is that the state power is a derivative from corporal power, the power of physical punishment, and the authority is based in a collective, bound together to (unthinkingly) enforce the will of the ruling class, its media, and entertainment outlets. Essentially, the fasces is a weapon, in Latin, a "bundle," that represents the imposition of authority . . . just because . . . well . . . uh, let's see . . . because a large mob of people say so?
That coercive aspect offends me. Coercion, done by goons, hired by effete elitists. It is what makes fascism so repellant to American sensibilities, yet it is so similar to current events, namely, greater central bank control through militarization of local police.
And yes, the Founding Fathers did have admiration for the ancient Roman Republic. One of the first official acts of Congress was to adopt the fasces as the emblem of the Sergeant at Arms.
The Professor again:
"Fasces were part of the standard visual vocabulary of classicism. Like the lamp and the scales, they represented a particular attribute of the classical view of justice: physical power or the ability to impose order."
"When he came to power in Italy in 1922, Mussolini resurrected the symbol and employed it to represent the strength and unity of the Italian state. Political fascism made physical power and the ability to impose order central to its ideology, and so the term “fascism” quickly became synonymous with authoritarian regimes. Mussolini made the fasces symbol almost as common in Italy as the Nazi swastika became in Hitler’s Germany. If people associate the fasces with fascism less than they associate the swastika with Nazism, it may simply be because Il Duce’s historical infamy pales beside Hitler’s [and our WWII ally, Stalin].
Kontorovich's piece is titled "When Fasces Aren't Fascist. The Strange History of America's Federal Buildings." As I read it, he is rationalizing the existence of fasces in the halls of the U.S. Congress.
Kontorovich is attempting to render palatable the disturbing prevalence of that symbol as merely a cultural speed bump, an almost quirky artistic preference. He says the fasces symbol "had no nefarious connotation before Mussolini."
I beg to differ. The swastika had no nefarious connotation before Hitler either, but we don't see it emblazoned anywhere except those flags hanging on basement walls of shaven headed kook jobs.
Or Buddhist tombstones.
Symbols are powerful. Symbols will be their downfall.
Indeed, the Founding Fathers adopted elements of a republican form of government when they formed the United States of America. However, the idea that governmental power should be dispersed between three branches, and that man's utter depravity and corruptible greed necessitated a de-centralized form of government is a basic American precept that FLIES ON THE FACE of opposing ideals expressed by the symbolism of the fasces. The Sergeant at Arm's actual job is to enforce the rules of the House, so in a small way, the image of the fasces was an appropriate emblem in 1789.
However, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms is NOT the government of, by, or for the People.
The use of the fasces as a symbol in American public architecture did not become prevalent until Mussolini made it so in the 1920's. Fascism was seen as something "cool" in the period of time between the so-called World Wars. Mussolini was admired for getting Italy back on its feet, just as Hitler was admired and promoted by financial interests which included the Bush family, The New York Times, and yes, the Vatican. The fasces symbol, and the philosophy it represented, became so trendy during that period of history that architect Cass Gilbert, and his disciples, imported the "gospel of fasces" into American public life.
It is sad to see how far we have strayed from our Founders vision. That symbol of collective authoritarianism (OK, dictatorship through corporal punishment), expresses ideals antithetical to our foundational precepts. Do I need to repeat the first three words of the preamble again?
OK, Boomer. Let's leave it at that.
I have a medical appointment to deal with some knee pain.
Part One of this series adds context to my deep concern about what I call "linguistic cheat codes."
Picking up where we left off, I present to you my Top 5 language cheats as part of a new drinking game. How many cheats can you catch while listening and watching the globalist spin doctors and sociopathic corporate lawyers battle for control over our hearts and minds?
Listen for these:
1. "Honestly," --- [translation: "I'm lying."] This cheat word slips by listeners so often, and so subliminally that, honestly, speakers will drop it when they are making an especially weak and invalid point. Honestly, if you hear it, just know the speaker is scraping for words to convince you of something, but unfortunately, the absence of merit in their argument and speaker's lack of veracity suggests they are not being forthright. They know you are not buying what they are selling, and (honestly) you shouldn't buy it.
2. "The American people" -- [translation: "my sponsors and contributors"] This cheat code is particularly loathsome. Alarm bells should go off in your mind -- letting you know that before you is speaking a pitiful politician, on full display, confidently engorged, spewing tripe. The level of arrogance and condescension required for a speaker who deigns to know the policy preferences of a heterogenous nation like "the American people" is staggering. They use the phrase -- "the American people." When you break the code, you know that they really mean -- "all those suckers who give me money."
3. "At the end of the day." -- [translation: "stop thinking and obey."] "At the end of the day" is a time warp code. It suggests you do not have the time or the mental capacity to fully consider the speaker's point, thus your independent critical thoughts must be put aside . . . because . . . it is the end of the day. The speaker is suggesting you have no further alternatives; therefore, you must accept the argument, i.e., your time for deliberation has expired. Using the phrase "at the end of the day" is intellectually lazy, an appeal to convenience, and at the end of the day, just another linguistic cheat code.
4. That being said," -- [translation: what I just said is irrelevant] When you hear this phrase, the speaker has just negated every preceding statement. "That being said," means the speaker is ready to make a point directly contradictory to "that being said," and now they are making their actual point. Everything before the phrase "that being said," is an effort to lull your critical thinking skills to sleep. The validity, the merit, even the truth, of the opposing point, "being said," is now rendered meaningless. "That being said," when used properly, should emphasize the strength of the point to follow, which in this case is that corporate and mainstream messaging is likely a form of deception on demand.
Finally, we have the weasel word that has become one of the most prevalent in recent times:
5. "Misinformation." [translation: "LYING"] Rather than address the merits of an opponent's reason or assess the evidence presented, word weasels and spin doctors dismiss it as misinformation. Misinformation is close cousin of "conspiracy theory," in that it attacks the veracity of the opposition arguments. These are Langley-level cheat codes because it deflects critical thought from the consideration that persons making the accusations are themselves hiding the truth. It's spooky. Rather than making a direct accusation (i.e, "you are lying!"), and allowing a detached listener to determine for themselves who carries more credibility, word weasels call it "misinformation." It softens the accusation, making seem as if you are gently correcting. Nice touch, however, adults say what they mean, and what they really mean is "lying."
There you have it. Those my Top 5 cheat codes for talking heads.
Come on, Barbie! Let's go party!
I dare you to play this new drinking game, with or without friends. The Next time you are plopped in front the TV watching or streaming some representational eggheads bleating propaganda, have a slug every time you hear those cheating word weasels use one of these codes. I dare you.
From the bimbos at Fox News to your favorite podcaster, to your favorite echo chamber, and even your best friend, whatever your information source . . . everyone is doing it!
How many of us dozed off in the middle of high school English class whenever we had to read Shakespeare, or Milton, or especially, Dante?
Not me.
I knew that the Adam West Batman accessed the Batcave through Shakespeare.
This week I'm focused on a particular line from the play Hamlet, where the protagonist Prince plots to avenge his Father's death at the hands of Claudius, the terrible uncle who then married Hamlet's mother -- after killing Hamlet's dad!
Jerry Springer must have studied classical literature, ha ha. Interestingly, Hamlet's father's name is also Hamlet, but in the play, whenever he speaks he is called "Ghost."
Here's the full quote in context:
"Out of my weakness and melancholy, as he is very potent with such spirits, abuses me to damn me. I'll have grounds more relative than this. The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King [referring to Claudius]."
What the heck is he talking about?
"Ain't it just like a friend of mine ..."
I'm going to assume you have a passing knowledge of the plot, since it is at its essence a story of revenge sought by a character whose mind is conflicted, indecisive, and therefore, paralyzed. He asks for all of us, the legendary question, whether "to be or not to be?"
As he goes about proving his uncle's guilt, Hamlet arranges to perform a drama before the king's court. The play is written in a way that portrays the actual killing of his father, and Hamlet believes that in examining the king's reaction, he will prove his case.
Hamlet's father was poisoned while sleeping in his garden. Likewise, the play was written to portray just that event. It (the play) is high art, to me, in that it presents an artist's reality, and serves no purpose other than to obtain knowledge from its audience.
Unsponsored art is inherently subversive.
Sponsorship, OTOH, requires the artist to encode his message, because I believe, the ultimate aim of the artist is less the object, less the painting, the sculpture, the movie, or the novel, he/she creates.
What is being overtly created is a REACTION. For the artist, what happens on stage is secondary to how the audience reacts. Such is the "theatre" of war, but more about the Ukaranian money-laundering, drug-running, and child trafficking, anti-Nazi clean-up operation later.
This is oversimplification. Hamlet's use of a stage play as subterfuge for detective work is a topic covered by shelves and shelves of volumes of scholarly studies regarding Shakespeare's work, and the deeply humanistic questions posed by the characters and events in not only Hamlet, but WS's entire body of work. The play has been studied and interpreted over an over again, yet it remains rich with material profitable for reproof, study, conjecture, and revelation about our human condition. What a piece of work.
If you caught the reference, then you truly belong here, because some things are just True and they stay True. So I will keep stirring the swill here at Boomers Anonymous -- in English.
Let me paraphrase:
This goodly frame, the earth, is more than some sterile promontory, and this most excellent canopy, the air, this brave o'erhanging firmament, this majestical roof fretted with golden fire will appear to you -- and be more than just a foul and pestilent congregation of vapors.
I'm efficient, and to some that looks lazy. Of course it doesn't help to be middle-aged and (slightly) overweight. Some stereotypes are justified. But even if 60 is the new 40, that doesn't affect my work.
I happen to think that stereotypes serve a comedic impulse. Unfortunately, when misused, they exacerbate improper discrimination. Clearly, a person's immutable physical attributes are an awfully unreliable predictor of their attitude. Fellow Boomers, my prevailing attitudes about life were shaped in a crucible of American military tradition.
Have you identified your crucible?
This week's comment (BTW, yours are welcome, too) deals with codes. No, not the millions of lines of mathematical computer codes that people smarter than me write in exotic languages like Python, Perl, Pascal, Forth, Frink, Erlang, Haskell, C, C+, C++ (D), Eiffel, Oberon, Occam, ChucK , or one of many scripting codes such as Beanshell or Mondrian (a combination of Haskell and Java). These codes, whose names resonate like Pokémon creatures, are written to create the programs and algorithms that let us play video games, text messages to friends, schedule dental appointments, write blogs, surf porn, order sandwiches, and catch car rides via your computer, telephone, and tablet screens.
I'm talking here about linguistic codes, utilized by so-called humans, media types, and public policy advocates. You know. The "cheat codes" are used formally and informally, suggesting a manner that is, let's say, less than direct, and often misleading. Weasel words, wiggle words, any way you put it, abuses of language, forked tongues using cheat codes are the oldest tool the devil uses to deceive and defraud.
The unwary must suffer the swampy mendacity of professional psychopaths who conjure black into white, up becomes down, male and female become indistinguishable, putting future generations at risk. And probably the worst effect of all is that evil and corruption disguises itself as something worthy and good. It is a way of talking without speaking. It slips past your common sense, hypnotically. It washes brains clean of natural caution and slithers into the listener's unconscious mind to open paths for itself, turning half-asleep audiences into victims of mass fraud and craven deceit. (Hello, Doctor Fauci.)
Sure, we are all guilty from time to time, but when you realize the extent to which language is, and always has been, manipulated for nefarious ends, it's easy to become disheartened. Again, I emphasize that we are all guilty in limited and varying gradients of degrees, but here I hope to wring out some of the most obvious examples, if for no other reason than that someone may spot them in common parlance. If you find it helpful, humorous, or even enlightening, I am so good with that
Anyway, stop calling me lazy. To do so would be a grave mistake of ethnic proportions. Thirty years after passing the California bar exam, I am confident when I assert that corporate lawyers are overpaid tricksters, playing games with language cheat codes. And to me, that has been the cause of even greater harm than the current digital "pandemic." And as for you medical doctors, I say, "An apple a day."
I no longer seek clients, but Idid notquit"the Law." I just changed my number and address. So here goes.
Whenever you hear the phrase:
"With all due respect,"
. . . simply substitute this phrase:
"I do not respect you,"
See?
Once you break their codes, then the true meanings become clearer.
I am talking about cheat codes for language games. Contrast oxymorons, which are combinations of words with opposite meanings. Language cheats are those occasions where weasely lawyers, and their ilk, use words in seemingly complementary, but ultimately meaningless, fashion. Spin doctors and lawyers can amplify, but more often they obscure, true intentions and hidden agendas. Language codes are a purposeful, sinister, spell casting, dark, political, art.
And the Road to Hell is paved with . . . good linguistic cheat codes.
Wise Men Still Seek Him
Now you may ask yourself, how do I discern a speaker's or writer's truthful intended meaning?
Aye, there's the rub! Before say, 2001, we could pay closer attention to a person's non-verbal physical cues. Full body, face to face, implied meanings carry great effect when your are in person.
However helpful, those non-verbal cues only matter when your gather with other humans, outside of digital space. We are destroying humanity, one cyber-meeting at a time. The Spoken Word carries subtle and I think unmeasurable variations of tone, volume, pitch, and inflection, some are obvious, most are subconscious. You don't receive the full import of that from a Zoom call or a chat room. We can talk about the tyrannical impulse of muzzle mask mandates, and the unhealthy effects of remote learning on child development -- later.
Whenever you hear, "It doesn't matter." Be careful. Be very careful. It might. And you may someday have to justly and precisely assert why something does. And unless words matter, all Honor is lost.
Our multiverse is baked in with innumerable message transmissions which are accessible or inaccessible at different levels of reception. Decades ago, TV and radio broadcasts of "Your Show of Shows," "I Love Lucy," "Happy Days," "Charlie's Angels," "Mission: Impossible," "Paul Harvey,""Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C." or more recently "Breaking Bad,"Game of Thrones," and "Super Bowl LVI" were transmitted and continue to transmit their electromagnetic wave signals throughout Space.
Ham radio hobbyists, walkie-talkies, CB truckers (!) and two cans on a string -- all have provided a method for humans to transmit messages across the divide, messages now ethereal, persisting long after their senders have exited the stage. Waves and particles from the past are now light years away.
The intention of the sender's message becomes less urgent as Time passes and Nature reclaims.
The emotions and the agendas necessitating cheat codes dissipates. Motives die.
All that remains is Content. Thank the Lord.
Discern for yourself whether or not to give credence to random speakers to whom you may be listening (including me). Whether they come from the left, right, or center, whether justified or wrongful, whether on-screen or IRL (in real life) -- the fact is, if you pay attention, you will spot the lies.
OK, Boomer, do you remember this MTV hit by the band Crowded House?
That song, "Don't Dream It's Over," used the same words as those in the title of this post. Because we are speaking and writing in English, spacing and punctuation rules are less strict than many other languages. Unless we practice writing in Far Eastern or Cyrillic characters, we don't have to bother much with diacritical marks, where, for example, the French circonflexe (the little hat) means the difference between jeune (young) and jeûne (fast). More on foreign tongues later. For now, let's just agree there's a place in the world for old and slow.
One dot, one period, one space bar, one programmer's keystroke, and POOF!, meaning changes. A glitch occurs in the matrix, and hordes of weasels begin to libel and slander your character. What's worse is they openly criticize your hair color and tan lines.
Meaning is interpreted through a reader's preconceptions. So if a single dendrite misfires in the synapse between pen and paper, between thought and expression, the message is too often received bereft of the writer's intended meaning -- a variant of the writer's idea, if you will. One fat finger fault can lead to a divine comedy of misunderstanding. As the eminent writers Page & Plant once put it:
"Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven."
Other times, fortunately, the reader or listener indeed "gets it."
And the messenger lives.
The original song meaning, as I heard it, was one of uplifting encouragement, a hopeful message in the face of numerous and divisive intrusions. The artist is telling you in so many words, "Don't give up. Keep on going, even when you are surrounded byidiots trying to separate you from the bonding spirit of family and friends. Despite forces rending your true soul from your original self, despite day to day annoyances like fixing the hole in the wall, towing your car, rumors of war and waste, despite all that, they won't win. The world comes in, like a deluge to build a wall between us, but they won't win.
There is Freedom within, there is Freedom without.
Play.
But then --- one dot and one space --- and the message changes. Punctuation turns something once promising and hopeful into a sad anthem of disillusion and finality. We boomers, we've been there and done that.
IT'S OVER.
Don't dream those dreams . . . of long-haired hippies . . . of chimeric Lennonist utopias.
Get back.
To life.
Get back.
To what is real.
Put simply folks, in order for us boomers to mature gracefully, we must own our generational bias. Step up to your chronological demographic. Challenge the invaders, embrace your misanthropy, your latent liberal racism, your depleted sexism, and hilarious homophobia. Recognize those so-called social injustices of which you have been accused wrongfully, and sometimes, accurately. Pay them no heed. And if you are game, prepare yourself for an occasional slice of humble pie.
Same goes for the kids out there. Romantic ideals are dead.
Don't dream. It's over.
Let Truth be your Master, not pixelated myths from the Reagan era. The Eisenhower era may be okay. Either way, past presidents become dead presidents, but your Time is always your Money. Isaiah 11:6
EVERYONE DISCRIMINATES. (but not everyone is prejudiced).
To discriminateis to select. Discrimination has been vilified, though merely an expression of intent.
Prejudice OTOH assumes facts not in evidence. It's an infantile state of mind, a sort an inverse Dunning-Kruger situation, where a person jumps to conclusions with faulty logic or false facts. Or narcisstic hubris. (Hello, CNN)
Well, the music break is done.
It's been so long since I'd seen the ocean, I thought I should come to California. As is so often the case, the best expression about my trip borrows from well-known lyrics.
Watch the video (3:58) and see. We can ALL see through the corporate bullshit -- it's over.
I'm visiting the Golden State right now. So this message is pre-programmed.
Singing starts at 2:10. "Mexican Reggae" was a tentative description of the song before the group settled on "Hotel California." There is no real Hotel California. The building on the album cover is in fact the Beverly Hills Hotel on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles.
I lived in Los Angeles from 1988 to 1991. Growing old ain't for sissies.
"Some of the wilder interpretations of that song have been amazing. It
was really about the excesses of American culture and certain girls we
knew. But it was also about the uneasy balance between art and commerce."
Then . . . she lit up a candle and she showed me the way
There were voices down the corridor, I thought I heard them say:
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)
Such a lovely face
Plenty of room at the Hotel California
Any time of year (any time of year) you can find it here
Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, she got the Mercedes Benz.
She got a lot of pretty, pretty boys, that she calls friends.
How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat.
Some dance to remember, some dance to forget.
So I called up the Captain, "Please bring me my wine."
He said, "we haven't had that spirit here since 1969."
Wake you up in the middle of the night just to hear them say
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)
Such a lovely face
They're livin' it up at the Hotel California
What a nice surprise (what a nice surprise), bring your alibis
Mirrors on the ceiling, the pink champagne on ice,
And she said, "we are all just prisoners here, of our own device."
And in the Master's chambers, they gathered for the feast.
They stab it with their steely knives, but they just can't kill the beast.
Last thing I remember, I was running for the door
I had to find the passage back to the place I was before
So, a great French comedian once said, "Zee timing, she eez evereething."
I Think, Therefore I Drink
Based on that, I think once a week should be the proper dosage of this comic relief, plus or minus a paragraph or two. If you could just help me calibrate it . . . if you don't mind . . . that would be great.
We are hunkered down in the Carolina Piedmont, stocked up with white bread, toilet paper, and almond milk. We got hit by a full inch of snow and sleet, just before MLK Day. Then we got hit again just this weekend.
And the NFL isn't rigged. Hmph.
I can hear my Yankee friends laughing scornfully at the Southern facade, the genteel, neurotic, Prince of Tidesmachismo, panicked at the prospect of driving in icy conditions. It's hard.
Speaking of scornful mockery, I will do my best to never mention or use the disrespectful term "President Brandon." Never again. So how's that working out?
And as for you little vegan fairies, stop drinking so much damn soy milk and grow a pair! Tits or balls, I don't care. Wait 'til this summer -- when I'm 64.
There is a reason for stereotypes, regardless of the hundreds of millions of counter-arguments put forth by We the Feeble, We the Sincere, We the Pitiful Bloggers trying to set the record straight. Pay no heed to the boomer behind the curtain. Most of us are probably a lot like this guy anyway --- insofar as having a penchant for quixotic rants.
Speaking for most older bloggers, I don't want to set the world on fire. People just need to have their say, and . . .
Oops. Strike that.
As a matter of fact, during the Summer of 2020, a small group of younger and extremely energetic "bloggers" actually did try to set the world on fire!
From THE LEFTIST HANDBOOK: "Think like us. Or else."
NOW WHAT?
It's been -- one year since we looked at the "inauguration,"
Five years since they laughed at us for saying "fake news,"
Three years since the living room TV showed a "flu" in China,
But it will still be two years 'til they say "I'm sorry, Boomers."
Did you catch the pop reference? If so, you may not be a true baby boomer. You do, however, have the ability to think in non-linear fashion, bless your heart.
And THAT, in a nutshell, is whatthe "Q" phenomenon was about ... the ability to think in non-linear fashion. The phenomenon was more than a reductivist oversimplification: "something, something, something ... politics stand ... something, something ... I love Trump." God, no.
Many others mistakenly believed it was a quasi-religious cult with dastardly racist(!) intent. On closer examination, the Q "thing" was far above and well-beyond that mean stereotype. Nor was it some "right-wing conspiracy," as it was so gleefully, so erroneously, and so fearfully, characterized.
"Luke, trust your instincts."
And for fuck's sake, don't tell me you are so gullible that you are giving any serious credence to Wikipedia, one of the internet's leading fonts of misinformation.
OK, bye. Come back soon. This topic, any discussion of that letter that rhymes with "cue" the 17th letter, creates weird somatic responses in readers, a neuromuscular, gastrointestinal reflux making pink, purple, lime-green, and blue-haired readers, even ones in pinstripe suits, abort rational thought or wear red baseball caps. Or both. I reckon if a reader is triggered by my rapier wit, I am already BLOCKED, i.e., filtered, censored, ignored, ghosted, and generally will never be heard from again by you. Bye Bye Bye.(Uh, is this a bad time to ask you to Like, Share, Comment, and Subscribe? 😉)
Science ≠ Morality
That's alright. Think of this essay as a less-explosive version of the classic millennial TV series, "Mythbusters," and in today's episode we examine the impact of asynchronous mass communication on various digital platforms manifests in the neuropsychology of users, the failure of ethics in journalism, and the national security implications of those effects, particularly those unique to American culture.
Use Ockham's Razor, apply the scientific method, stay smart and skeptical, and I promise you will overcome the initial barrage of auto-reflex impulses subconsciously telling you to reject what boomers (or your elders) say, just because a particularly effective content creator from somewhere on Sullivan Street has captured and cornered our cultural narrative utilizing this ... this ... accursed symbol from the Latin alphabet ---
"Brought to you by the letter Q."
So, back to school. Classical scientific method originated from Cartesian Philosophy, within the discipline called Skepticism. Descartes was a younger contemporary of Galileo, the person generally accepted asthe central figure of the Scientific Revolution. And you may already know the word "science" derives from the Latin word meaning "knowledge." I'm not sure why, but I just noticed that I over-italicize things. Anyway, the first step in using the classic method of applied science is to ask a question. Yes, you too, can be a conscious, critical thinker like me. That was condescending. Sorry about that. Or am I?
Oh, Ram Eye
But seriously even without Adam, Jamie, Grant, Kari, and Tory's help, we should be able to agree that proper science seeks to discover or create Knowledge, not to establish moral constructs.
Think of Science as the Yin. The Yang, the necessary opposing principle of scientific inquiry is Humanism, which seeks to define and prescribe the moral conduct of human beings. Thus, I contend that amorality, the absence of moral proscription, is a definitional, fundamental element of pursuing and having "faith" in the scientific method. Science alone is a grossly imbalanced non-humanistic enterprise.
Think of Sheldon Cooper. He's a really (really) smart character. Great theoretical physicist. To be honest, though, he is a horrible person. Great scientist. Total asshole. And we're talking legendary asshole.
Anyway ... Insofar as that absence of morality's imperatives predicates applied science . . I think . .
er . . .uh . . . wait . . . oh my . . . I'm trying not to digress . . .
really . . . trying . . . not . . not . . . oh, no . . .
... ARGGH ... shiiitt ...
the memes beckon ... the memes . . . the damn memes . . .
What were we talking about? ... oh yeah, Science. Or was it the letter cue?
Shit. I'm already approaching my word limit, which means attention spans wane at this point of the essay. Let us boil it down to the FACTS, and then we can move on to the cure for cancer . . . I mean, the Corona virus, er . . . uh, excuse me . . . I meant, the common cold. Someone stop me.
Definition #1: "Q" was a user handle of a person(s) who posted messages on the internet from October 2017 to December 2020. That user has not been conclusively identified.
Definition #2: An "ANON" is simply an individual human citizen of no particular nationality, ethnicity, or social standing, who "gets," that is, has read, understands, and acknowledges the intrinsic content of the MESSAGE, i.e., the medium, which is -- the Internet.
Definition #3: Distinguishing from the first two definitions, "QANON" is a resultant vector. It is a descriptive noun, invented to capture and communicate to non-readers something they have not personally experienced, but is occurring in the offline world. "QANON" is a MSM entity, borne through manipulation of language, primarily by corporate network gatekeepers, a noun adjunct modifying a manifestation that has had tangible and significant psychological, spiritual, cultural, political, and global impact. The manifestation, the phenomenon, is more simple --- real Anons are people who have read Q posts, and have "heard" the content (well, technically, they "read the message") and have encouraged others, readers and non-readers alike, to think for themselves and make up their own minds regarding the messages. The term "QANON" was put into popular vernacular to be intentionally pejorative and misleading.
That's all, folks. We're talking about asynchronous multi-vector content messaging
. . . and bullies. (Hat Tip: Nikola Tesla and H.G. Wells)
Like Mercutio, I dislike binary political constructs, formal organizations (save the Bar), and their 501(c)3, 501(c)4 quislings. A lot of boomers have been online before AOL and BBS. We had dial-up the internet on x286 processors. We can spot a shill from ten hyperlinks away.
I'm a lot like you.
Not many boomers hang out on the so-called "dark web," although I concede that shit on 4chan and 8chan can get pretty dark. But we're way past cat videos.
Here's the point. To discredit certain informational content, because you don't like the source is simply killing the messenger. It's bad form.
Processing information nowadays, with the massive reach of modern telecommunications technology, demands that users be their own psychological filters. The sources might be lying. Everyone seems to be lying. Online messages are not useful until properly and accurately received. We are programmed to receive. After one receives (sees, reads, or hears) the message, only then can one decide whether the content resonates - True.
We are programmed to receive.
Here's a useful analogy, themovable-type printing press. It really was the Internet of the 15th Century. Gutenberg published the Latin Vulgate. That was, in fact, the actual content, the message in the medium. The Reformation was a cultural phenomenon that came about because of technology, because content became self-filtered. Individuals had to learn to read content that for centuries had been spoon-fed by Father Pete or Friar Tuck or Sister Mary Elephant. Likewise, from 2017-19, we have experienced the Q "thing" with differing degrees of tolerance, humor, fear, and yes, Love.
Your digital device = Gutenberg's press, right?
Now what?
Heck, movable-type printing explains how 600 years later, a Catholic Filipino raised in an American military family identifies as "born-again Protestant polytheist" despite years of institutionalized learning from anally-retentive sadistic nuns, and enduring false accusations of chemically-induced mental illness, overcoming shame of being cast as an inferior heretic who should instead be making proper tribute by confession, by eating wafers and drinking wine with celibate, globalist, perverts in robes reeking of incenst. Spell-check is so wrong.
Dark web, indeed. How's your "compliance" now, Agent Smith?
Mainstream sources (friend, you are now far far away from the mainstream), those entrenched, anti-American forces, apparatchiks protecting their bureaucratic Swamp turf, for whom free spirits and independent thinking pose an existential threat, respond to Q messaging with ad hominem fallacy, followed by implementation of the Saul Alinsky playbook, maliciously characterizing thought-provoking and intelligent content as something "spooky," something to be immediately dismissed as nonsensical and pointless.
Yes, it is valid to point out the cryptic nature of the Q posts, the messages, their inchoate character. And it is correct to say reading the posts are almost or exactly like reading your horoscope. That is a moot point. As with everything internet, there will be encryption. Them's the rules. (sic) "Would you like to play a game?'
For the sake of Science, or more specifically, Social Science, ask this:
How did non-linear, cryptic posts on some innocuous internet message platform used primarily by masturbating teenagers evolve into a consciousness-raising, race and gender inclusive, global movement that allegely threatens the existence (and operations) of the "Deep State?"
Why would powerful internet platforms and corporate network broadcasters censor the content of some dude or dudette's rambling internet posts? Jesus, have you been on the internet lately? Admittedly, the corporate gate-keeping could be done better, and by better I mean worse.
What is more puzzling is this -- the extent to which Anons (not QAnons!) are vilified as unintelligent, and violence-prone, when 99.9% of civic violence since 2017 has been carried out by their opposition.
"But what about January 6th?" you say.
And to that I say, "What-About-ism is intellectually dishonest."
And reasonable minds can agree. Special Counsel Durham's work is not done yet. The midterms lurk.
Put it another way. What IDEAS pose the biggest threat to the world's most powerful elite, not just in America but throughout humanity? Science has been completely divorced from Morality, yet people with little or no knowledge of Virology or Immunology talk and act as if they truly believe they are morally superior to people who are just uncomfortable in face diapers, or who don't want to participate in a genetics experiment, or simply don't like needles.
Even if the abyss between Morality and Science is philosophically irreconcilable, what makes the reconsideration ofmoral precepts so frightening to certain factions in the War of Ideas?
Well, I'm hungry. It's time to end this.
Mark 8:36
"We understand you don't like our censorship policy. But it's for people's safety."
"Fuck off, Liars."
It's not too late, America. Step up. We didn't start the fire.
