The Sly Man Game

I focus on ways to deprogram ourselves from psychic poisons coming from both internal and external sources.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

U.S. Government Policies and the Subconscious

There has been, for some time, evidence that key elites in Washington and Israel are what was once called criminally insane--I believe that Hitler/Stalin/Mao who created the standard for depravity and evil in the world are the models for these people. I know this sounds like hyperbole to you but I believe it is true. Look at this honest quote that shows the Washington mentality when Secretary Albright was interviewed by Leslie Stahl:

"We have heard that a half million children have died," Stahl said. "I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And -- and you know, is the price worth it?" Albright replied, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."

Think of it!!! And think of the result. The result was that people died and suffered only to die and suffer even more a decade later. Why did she conclude it was worth it? Not because she necessarily thought it would, eventually, improve the life of Iraqis, but because it was an assertive and forceful expression (the policy) or U.S. power and might. It is akin to the headmaster of an orphanage beating to death one of the children and asserting that it is right because it severs the use of intimidating the others to stay in line. If you carefully analyze what U.S. policy has become, on a bi-partisan basis, you have to come to the conclusion that the dominant goal of that policy is to intimidate other countries. Now, this is not unusual of a great power in the European tradition and it wouldn't be particularly noteworthy except for a couple of problems. First, and most obvious, it runs directly counter to the stated intentions of U.S. policy, public opinion, and the stated intentions of the Founders; second, it has proven to be clumsily and stupidly applied in a cowardly and half-assed manner (by historical standards); and third, it runs counter to any rational analysis of the actual world situation and future needs of the United States as a government and a people.

Given the opportunity, this government (I include all of the Washington elite and media) would commit almost any atrocity--I believe the "decency" of American policy makers so much talked about by the media, by Washington insiders is a misreading of human nature in general and the individuals in particular. I've met some very violent characters who are very personable and sympatico--but when you cross a certain line something else happens. I remember Norman Mailer once noting that one of the most remarkable traits of Americans is their claim to wanting to do the "right thing". This may be changing now as the population is increasingly brutalized. This notion of being virtuous and right, despite the evidence, is very interesting. Nowhere, in the mainsteam media, have I seen an expression of regret and shame over the possibility of 400,000 to 900,.000 deaths in Iraq or the complete destruction of Iraqi civil society that the U.S. has brought to one of the oldest continuous civilizations in the world. And nowhere do I see a clear-headed analysis of the underlying reasons why the U.S. blundered (again on a bipartisan basis) into this insanity of a war. The irony is, and I can't emphasize this too much, is that the criticisms written about U.S. policy during Vietnam and after by alternative scholars and writers were just as valid today as they were then--if fact, the analysis was deeper then that it is now, as I recall, by that same community which now tends to demonize Bush/Cheney and imagines that a change of regime will change the fundamental policy.

I say Bush/Cheney attitudes (force first, intimidation second, and diplomacy to make it look good) symbolize and personify the subconscious attitudes of most Americans. We like to think we are civilized because we put on a veneer of smiles and optimism and cooperative attitudes but the subconscious contains other kinds of creatures. In some forms of psychoanalysis the things lying in the subconscious are not necessarily "repressed" urges but, "undeveloped" personality fragments that never were able to find full expression--thus in certain situations we may each act in very immature and undeveloped ways. Sometimes this comes out in sexual expression, particularly in the whole army of paraphylias that are well-represented on the Internet, and also in situations of intimate relationships, someone saying something insulting, cutting you off on the road, and so on. These situation will all evoke a relatively unsophisticated response because whatever aspects of the personality these things represented were not brought out (educare) in our upbringing. This is why I say that in order for things to improve we need to understand our psychic make-up individually and collectively. This is hard at first but one gets the knack of it if one is supported by others--otherwise we just fall back into our habitual patterns.

I say all this because I think it is important to understand that the Israeli tendency towards ever-increasing brutality tells us something. They use the Holocaust as a justification for whatever they do. We use both 9/11 and the fact we believe that we are the saviors of the world to justify whatever we do. This is a collective psychological illness of both these societies--it is an illness because if anyone rationally pursued the statement: "Past actions made against us and "good" intentions justify any action and any sort of brutality even in situations that may have nothing to do with those past actions" there is no way that any rational person could justify that--yet, rational people in the press, in government do actually justify that statement every day.

The Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11. The Palestinians had nothing to do with the Holocaust. Think of the madness of it! Joe beat me up last week, so that justifies the fact that I beat the crap out of Jane because she insulted me and refused my kind offer to make love to her (and everyone knows what a privilege that is).

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does consciousness create reality? Is what we see outside of ourselves just a reflection, or a projection, of what lies within? If so, should the battle always be fought from the inside out?

Does what we think about grow? If so, does acknowledging tragedy and horror cause it to increase? Does harping about someone's flaws actually perpetuate them? Is "positive thinking" denial? or is it a solution?

Does resistance cause persistence? When does acceptance become acquiescence?

Would it be a selfish or selfless act to spend 20 years in a cave becoming enlightened? Would the world benefit more from that, or from activism?

Is anger ever righteous? Is violence? Is hatred for a behavior different than hatred for a person? Or is hate, hate?

Just wondering.

12:54 PM  
Blogger Christopher said...

If you follow what Aldous Huxley called the "Perennial Philosopny" Consciousness is the source of everything. In the Bible this consciousness is called "I am that I am" and you know it very well because it is you.

Really, there is no difference between inner and outer is is all one.

To find out if what we think about grows or not we have to look, we have to observe--it is very interesting.

Acknowleging tragedy horror and everything "bad" is proper if you say "yes" to it all. Everything is what it is--why argue with it? How can we each tell that it ought to be any different? As for focusing on flaws whether your own or someone else's--does it make you happy? does it bring you or the other person anything?

Resistance is, essentially, the big "no" to life. Why resist? What is the alternative? Things are as they are--looking deeper and with surrender gives us room to see the full picture--because normally we see through a glass darkly as St. Paul said.

Acquiesence is a kind of masochism--surrender is fearlessness.

To find out if it is selfish or selfless to spend 20 years in a cave one would have to try it. The world benefits from each of us realizing the truth of our being. For some it involves activism, for others it requires silence and solitude--each of us knows what works for us.

Anger is righteous if we do not attach or identify with it. When anger is expressed with full consciousness it has no ill effect because it is only an appearance of anger--one is not swept up by it rather it is another color on the palette another part of the sitcom. Anger that is bent on hurting others on squashing and repressing is like swallowing glass--it makes us bleed inside.

Hatred, because it is so much a function of the ego causes suffering because it creates a set of phenomena that are "other", that do not belong, that ought not to be--but they are! Full consciousness accepts everything as it is and says "yes and no" meaning that there is no division.

Now, as a practical matter, most of us will find certain activities, practices and "stances" in life help us see clearly others confuse matters. We all have the capacity to see as we should--the problem is that we get caught up in whirlwinds of emotions, in our own conditioning, in our egos (the false self that is a fictional story or narrative that we tell ouselves as a substitute for being truly present here, right now).

Watch what happens, cultivate inner silence--then you can hear the music better.

Chris

2:56 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home