|
† January 7, 2010
Give Me an Honest Thief On December 3rd I attempted this journal entry on honest thievery with the subtitle "Out of the Closet". During that somewhat failed attempt I temporarily lost my ability to express myself. This happens sometimes. And I will excuse myself for the lapse in the ability to express because sometimes it all just feels for naught. I am sure I am not the only person to ever feel this way. That is one excuse for having abandoned the entry. Now that Obama has accepted his Nobel Peace Prize and I have read the acceptance speech, I see that if I had continued with my line of insight I might have regretted what I would have said. Anyway... here is how it started and following this short cue from my journal entry of December 3rd 2009, I will continue with how I feel today. ~ † Excerpt from December 3, 2009 Journal entry. Having glanced over my last journal entry (Kults, Krackpots & Kreeps... dated 10/1/ 2009) I see that I can start this one where I left off with the other. In two months not much has changed but stayed the same and the world has gone just a little bit more insane. Let me start with Obama and his latest dilemma. What to do about Afghanistan? After months of consideration and deliberation he has made his decision, and guess what? No one likes it. The left, the right, they all have their heads up the same asshole. The only difference being, from different positions and directions. And the conspi-racists, well we all know what they paint with, so we don't even need to go there. Anyway... I told my nine year old daughter that now everyone hates Obama for the decision he has made and she asked me, "What do you think?" ~ What do I think? Well Samsara, what I thought then is not quite the same as what I think now.
At the time I felt that Obama was being genuine in his decision because after all, he did run for and get elected saying that he was going to get out of Iraq and take the fight to Afghanistan. As it turned out and much to the dismay of some who voted for him, he wasn't lying. I will give him that. Along with that, I do recognize the history of that country (Afghanistan) and how all this got this way in the first place. A short history lesson is needed here, bear with me for a moment I will try to be as brief as possible. Once upon a time the Soviet Empire wanted to stretch its boundaries to include the region of Afghanistan. Originally purchased politically, when a U.S. inspired civil war ensued within the region of Afghanistan, the Soviets chose to send in the troops with guns a blazing. It was the time of the Cold War, and the U.S., guided by Cowboy Ronnie saw an opportunity to break the back of its Cold War rival. A war of proxy ensued. The U.S. supplied the Muslim Holy warriors known as the Mujahideen with all sorts of goodies, the most impressive of which was the anti aircraft heat seeking Stinger missile, which ended Soviet air superiority, the war, and consequently the Soviet empire itself. Job done, America lost interest in Afghanistan and left. Thing is... having fucked around with Afghanistan, they gave birth to some illegitimate offspring. It was through this U.S. adventure in covert promiscuity followed by familial neglect that al-Qaeda, bin Laden and the Taliban were born. The Soviets may have obliterated the landscape turning farmland into opium fields, but by walking away from a mess they helped to create, the U.S. left fertile ground for beards, burkas and blown up Buddhas to be the order of the day. This choice would later come to bite the U.S. in the ass, and the rest, as they say... is history. So whether you believe the 911 conspiracy theories (that the Twin Towers were brought down by the Bush administration) or not, either way, the tragedy of 911 was directly or indirectly the result of actions or inactions perpetrated by the U.S. government. Some will argue this point but I summed it all up in a paragraph and if one is interested I am sure there is more to the story. My point in bringing it up is purely to illustrate that the U.S. in its misadventures is in no way innocent. No matter how much it may like to play the victim, more often than not, America is a victim of its own design. This fact I had always thought, taking into consideration that he seemed a conscious individual, Obama would be aware of. The fact that through sticking their weapons in other people's businesses and through the actions of their leaders, America has inadvertently brought the "chickens home to roost". But then again, maybe he really wasn't sitting in the pew when Reverend Wright laid out that politically inconvenient truth. But I still had hope. I still had hope even when Obama decided to send 30,000 more troops to the heroin producing capital of the world. Something has to be done about that, I have seen friends fall to the needle's false promise and it's not right. I in my naivety thought that perhaps he came to this choice because he was aware of past sins performed covertly in the name of his country. That he didn't want to leave that country behind one more time, like an open wound upon the earth left to fester with infection. In fact, I am almost certain that when the Iraq war was waged by the Bush, Obama's reasons for not supporting the preemptive invasion was that it would create more hatred towards the U.S. and hence more so called terrorists. That kind of wise reasoning sounded familiar to me. It sounded familiar because it was steeped in the social philosophy of an inspiration of mine, named Gandhi. With regard to Afghanistan I thought perhaps he felt an obligation to clean up the mess that through past transgressions his country co-conspired with the Soviets to create. Then I heard a snippet of the speech he gave in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize entitled "A Just and Lasting Peace". The CNN soundbite I heard was, "For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world." And I thought, 'Holy fuck that sounds just like Bush.' The old simple minded perspective rears its ugly pinhead again. And the next thing I hear through the CNN filter is some Bushite (I believe it was Ed Gillespie) saying how wonderful the speech was and that it is good he (Obama) has finally come around. My heart sank. If what Obama is now saying is true, "that evil does exist in our world", then I would have to say it resides and haunts the halls of the house at six six sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C. But I will leave that conjecture for the conspiracists to fondle. As for me, I am seriously starting to wonder if that white house is not akin to the Overlook Hotel in Stephen King's novel The Shining, and that "all work and no play" has made Barack a dull boy. 
Obama came to town arm and arm with Gandhi and King to the tune of Bob Marley's One Love One Heart. I've heard that in the Oval Office he replaced Churchill's bust with Martin Luther King's. I guess with words like these (taken from the peace speech...) "As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life's work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak - nothing passive - nothing naive - in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King. But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: evil does exist in our world...", it might be time to put Dr. King's bust back from where it came. And as far as Gandhi's picture ( I heard Obama has displayed in the Oval Office) if I were him I would do the proper thing and toss it in the garbage where my picture of Obama ended up. For make no mistake: when he says, "I face the world as it is..." he is indirectly saying that Gandhi and King did not? And when he says "I cannot stand idle", he is saying they did. Wow... I didn't see this one coming. The truth is, Gandhi and Dr. King both gave their lives and died "facing the world as it is" Mr. Obama, and idleness was not in their nature. To say or infer anything less than that truth, in an attempt to justify actions contrary to the principals they espoused and lived by, is not only disingenuous but something I find downright repulsive. Hey Barry, who do you think you are? The President of the United States or something? Oh yeah right... you are. But then occupying that office in itself doesn't mean much these days does it? After all, a peabrain by the name of G.W. Bush managed to steal and hold onto it for not one, but two terms. And Bill Clinton thought the oval office was a good place to get some head, leading to queries as to what the definition of "is" is. But you have to give Bill credit for one thing, at least he didn't lie his way into the deaths of countless innocent civilian Iraqis. So yeah, Bush offered proof that anyone can become President and that's why Sarah Palin scares the shit out of me. ~ "Don't
you know there ain't no devil, it's just god when he's drunk † Heartattack and Vine ~ Lyrics Tom Waits ~ Evil as a force outside oneself. Interesting primeval concept of thought, that throughout human history has been the crux of human suffering. For if truth be told, in all war, does the other side not hold the same notion? I thought Obama was smarter, more conscious than that, deeper in his observations of humanity and life. Claiming to hold Gandhi and King as heroes, I would have thought it impossible for him to see the world through such simplistic terms as black and white cowboy hats. But I guess, as the Rockman said in Harry Nilsson's The Point, "Say babies, ain't nothing pointless about this gig. Thing is... you see what you want to see and you hear what you want to hear. Dig?" I must be guilty of that crime. Because in listening to Obama's race speech I heard a man aware that evil, negative forces or Hitleresque attitudes along with Christ like qualities live within us all. No exceptions, at least not at the time he gave that speech, not even his grandma Toot was spared way back in those days of hope. If you care to check through some of my most recent journal entries you will see that early on I was a very strong proponent of Obama. After the race speech, I truly believed that he was different. I invested my emotions and good judgment knowing full well that I ran a risk of having them turn bad and in upon myself. When Obama ran for office and actually got elected, I truly believed that there was a shift of consciousness happening. It wasn't that I saw him as the "messiah", or that through his election all would magically be right in the world. No, I saw it as just a sign. A slight hope. I saw the world event as a symbol. Just an optimistic indication that through someone not unlike myself, from my generation, sharing the same heroes (Gandhi, King), being granted the position previously occupied by a moron, that doors would open. That just maybe people like myself who have worked most of their lives in the pursuit of uncompromised truth and principle, would finally catch a break. That through paint, words or whatever chosen medium, we would be seen as having a point and become relevant contributors to society. For me personally, it has been a long journey through the pointless forest and I thought that perhaps finally I would be welcomed back to the "Land of Point",* rewarded for simply having stuck with it. And that just maybe, my daughter's future held a little promise. Now I am not so sure. Before Obama entered the stage, when I looked out at the world all I saw was this: I saw that positions of power and influence were, if not always, more often than not, occupied by the least deserving of us. As an example, George Bush was just a cherry on top of that sad but obvious observation. I'm not the only one to notice that through the world economy, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and Wall Street thieves walk away with bonuses. Political war criminals (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld) escape judgment of crimes against humanity, and the upper echelon of liars within the military are generally promoted. Then Obama came along and I thought that perhaps the tide was shifting. That just maybe those who should, actually will. Now I am doubly doubtful that anyone worthy will ever be allowed to truly offer the world hope and change from this position. That's the worst aspect of all this. I cannot possibly be the only person on the planet who is beginning to feel this way. All the young, the disaffected, poor and disenfranchised, the people who like myself had given up long ago on the political process as a means to bring true change, through Obama were inspired. What are we to think now? All those who were encouraged by a young man of mixed race to participate in the last U.S. election, what is left, if in the end all remains the same? What are those young Americans to deduce? What I see is that those who were previously merely apathetic, their next step on the same old road leads to a turn of absolute cynicism with no way back. And although I have recently tried to quiet my conspiratorial mind, it now rears its ugly head with thoughts like, perhaps that was the ultimate goal. To get those without hope to hope and then just as they get to the car leave them behind in a spray of rocks and roadside debris. A hitchhikers guide to politics if you will. Perhaps we are better off to keep our thumbs tucked in and walk the road alone, not expecting a ride at all. It might take longer to get to our destination but at least we have a better chance of making it with our personal validity intact. ~ This is quite possibly the hardest journal entry I have ever felt the need to write. I not only restarted it after saying I was going to stop writing but while writing it I have felt like giving up. I write in hope. Without hope it is hard to write. This entry has a bad habit of turning in on itself. Canceling itself out before I even get started. What is that? Paradox, irony, a black hole? I don't know. All I know is, I hope (there's that word again) that you realize what you are playing with here Barry. When I share this altered Obama view with people, invariably, I hear how he inherited a mess created by Bush. This is true. But as I have shared in this entry, American politicians have been making a mess of things longer than the Indians care to remember. Afghanistan, Iraq, these are just the latest theaters of justified war crimes and the financial crisis, well the rich have become richer for quite some time now. The fact that Obama has been unable to expedite change as promised during the electoral process, is not what has caused my hope to fade. A chaos of intended confusion, which has been years if not decades and centuries in the making, cannot be rectified in a year by one man alone. Those with the power are not going to give it up. Worldly power in its nature is incestuous. With any hope it is also cannibalistic and will feed on itself until it is eventually powerless. We who are not interested in the egocentric self satisfaction based on financial worth can only hope. 
Again that word, it just won't go away. And that is where my problem with Obama lies. Since he got the job it (hope) the word itself has been fading. Not unlike how through the Bush years the word "freedom" ceased to mean anything. With benefit of the doubt given, I think,well, maybe it's just me. When Van Jones (Obama's green job man) calls Republicans "assholes" and is consequently let go, you could say (even though it is true), well he shouldn't have said that. When Yosi Sargent (Obama's choice for communications director for the National Endowment for the Arts) says something in a conference call that catches Glenn Beck's ears, consequently having himself demoted, my reaction is, not again. But then when I hear that General Stanley McChrystal was instrumental in perpetrating the lies of omission regarding Pat Tillman's death through friendly fire because it was politically inconvenient during Bush's re-election, I have to take note. If I am to believe Jon Krakauer in his book about Pat Tillman entitled, "Where Men Win Glory", during that time in the Afghan war McChrystal knowingly withheld information regarding the truth of Tillman's death. According to military law, he committed a military crime, deserving of not only demotion but jail time. And I think to myself, if I know this, me, Pate Boots, Canadian living in the backwoods town of Apsley Ontario, Obama must have a clue as to this guy's indiscretions, and yet who is running the show in Afghanistan for Obama? McChrystal. I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't made it up the ranks since he played a crucial part in the attempt to use Pat Tillman's death as a political ploy for Bush. I remember those days during the 2004 election and it was obvious to little old me that Tillman was being used. Since I became aware of McChrystal's involvement in the obvious attempt to use Pat Tillman as a political pawn, I have read Jon Krakaur's book and here's an excerpt which caught my ear. "Major General Stanley McChrystal was in charge of the high-risk counterterrorism missions undertaken by Navy SEALs, Delta Force operators, and Army Rangers. Exceptionally capable, unafraid to bend rules to get results, he commanded the guys who'd rescued Jessica Lynch," (Another war story glorified by people working for Bush.) "as well as the units that would later capture Saddam Hussein and kill Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi." (Two more events used to bolster the war effort.) "He was politically shrewd. He worked under the radar. Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld kept in close touch with him and trusted him absolutely." Really? Rumsfeld and Cheney? Hey President Barry, don't you think it would have been wise to replace this guy, instead of making him your top man in Afghanistan? No I guess not, you chose to honor his request and follow his advice by sending in 30.000 more troops. Which now makes that decision suspect, and the benefit of the doubt I gave it, void. So what do we have here? McChrystal in direct defiance to the laws his powers are governed by and which he is to uphold regardless of political affiliation, is not only kept on, but promoted to running the whole Afghan show. Reverend Wright lays out some unpopular truths questioning the American ideal and eventually Obama disowns him, although as he said in the race speech "it would be like disowning his grandmother". Van Jones and Yosi Sargent say some things that are politically inconvenient but no less true, and it's to the sidelines you go. The side effects of those two firings make Glenn Beck feel more self-righteous, like he needed inspiration to be self-righteous. Which takes us from the "race speech" to the "peace speech", where Obama, with political finesse and subtlety, tossed Gandhi and King onto the ever growing political pyre of bothersome truths and the bearers thereof. And why stop with people and the things they say or believe? Might as well throw the pubic option (government provided healthcare insurance) on the heap, because good kindling is not something you want to waste. Say what they will about Canadian socialized healthcare, truth is, the less fortunate of Americans will never be so blessed as to benefit from a system such as we now take for granted. Is there an undeniable exceedingly familiar pattern emerging here? I had written in a previous journal entry that like Gandhi, Obama would most likely be taken down by his own, meaning his fellow Democrats. Now I tend to see that not unlike America itself, he is his own worst enemy. Simply put, the Obama of today is not the one I got to know through reading books bearing his name as author. And what of his speeches? Does he even write them anymore? Having gone over the "just peace" speech some disturbing quotes I will now take out of context. Here are a couple of innocent and yet convenient words stealthily placed between a couple of commas. Whenever possible. They can be found in a paragraph where Obama ponders the justification for a "just war". Here they are in the context I found them. "... suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional, and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence." Same sentence without those words. "... if force used is proportional, and if civilians are spared from violence." Two words. Two words that make the difference between an innocent child having it's head blown off or not. A couple more out of context quotes by way of Obama and the "A Just and Lasting Peace" speech. "A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince Al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism - it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason." "The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance." I could argue these points but I will leave it to those I consider wiser than myself to speak for themselves. "I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill." ~ Gandhi "When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it -- always." ~ Gandhi "Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern world that we must love our enemies - or else? The chain reaction of evil - hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars - must be broken, or else we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation." ~ Martin Luther King "Everyone concerned in the better future of mankind must be deeply moved by the tragic death of Mahatma Gandhi. He died as the victim of his own principles, the principle of nonviolence. He died because in time of disorder and general irritation in his country, he refused armed protection for himself. It was his unshakable belief that the use of force is an evil in itself, that therefore it must be avoided by those who are striving for supreme justice to his belief. With his belief in his heart and mind, he has led a great nation on to its liberation. He has demonstrated that a powerful human following can be assembled not only through the cunning game of the usual political maneuvers and trickeries but through the cogent example of morally superior conduct of life. The admiration for Mahatma Gandhi in all countries of the world rests on recognition, mostly sub-conscious, recognition of the fact that in our time of utter moral decadence, he was the only statesman to stand for a higher level of human relationship in political sphere. This level we must, with all our forces, attempt to reach. We must learn the difficult lesson that an endurable future of humanity will be possible only if, also in international relations, decisions are based on law and justice and not on self-righteous power, as they have been up to now." ~ Albert Einstein ** ~ So the hero Obama once told a child named Lilly *** would be the one he would most like to have dinner with, he now considers impractical. "Impractical" in our modern age of shoe and underwear bombers. Impractical because (leaving the only atomic bombs ever dropped on anyone to history's dust) he says, "Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale." To this date, and short of the holocaust which spanned years in the making, I would hazard to guess the world record for most killed with a single bomb is still held by the U.S of A. And even with that accomplishment complete, another was dropped for good measure, even though Hitler had probably blown his brains out already and Japan had surrendered. But lets not forget Hitler, for he remains to this day the ultimate justification for all "just wars" in our modern age. He's the devil manifest. He's the devil we can pull out of the closet when we need to circumvent our principles and the Christian moral of "Thou shalt not kill". Thing is, when Gandhi was busy putting his life on the line to test the waters of non-violent protest, Hitler was still kicking. That is to say, he did not use Hitler as an excuse to justify violent retaliation towards an oppressor. And he wouldn't even have had to rummage around in the closet of human history to find him if he thought it necessary. Justified war and violence, "... whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence." If war can be justified by one, it can be justified by all. As mentioned previous, when evil is placed outside oneself all manner of abhorrent hypocritical acts of retaliation can be deemed reasonable. The truth is, justified homicide leaves no one safe. For who is to say who is right, Mr. Obama? Not unlike bookends, the so called terrorists obviously share the same mindset or they would not be able to validate their homicidal acts. Are you so sure you are on the right side that you would offer up someone else's son or daughter for the slaughter? Are you sure you can live with that Barry? Have you managed to quit smoking? I haven't. ~ "What difference does It make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction Is wrought under the name of totalitarianism (terrorism****) or the holy name of liberty and democracy?” † Mohandas K Gandhi ~ Who would Obama choose to have dinner with now, Lilly? At this pointt, it would seem he has more in common and would feel more comfortable in sharing a snack or having brunch with Mr. Bush. Maybe they could compare notes over a bowl of pretzels and beer, while watching the Superbowl. Forgive me, out of disappointment and disgust, I jest. Humor, even sarcastic or cynical, is the coyote's medicine of last resort when faced with seemingly insurmountable odds on the path to enlightenment. Or, sometimes you have to laugh to keep from crying. Speaking of humor, before Obama lost me with the "evil thing", I would be put off when Bill Maher criticized him for being a war President and not living up to his promises. I would cringe when on the Daily Show, Jon Stewart would do his bit showing Obama speeches matched word for word with those of George Bush. I guess some people would have stopped watching, ignored the truth, reasoning that Jon Stewart and the like are just moving on to the next political comedy victim. Even though it hurts at times, I continue to watch the political jesters, and I now see that if Obama had not spoken the words, no comparison to Bush could have been made. All this started with just a little hope. Am I stupid for that? Was I a fool from the beginning to have hope that someone who shares my world view would actually want and get the job of President of the United States? Was little Barry from Hawaii duping us from the start as the conspiracists would profess? Is he the King of the Lizard People, the reincarnation of Hitler or was he always a card carrying member of the Bilderberg Illuminati shadow world government? I can't believe that shit, brother. To believe that crap is to give up all hope. If I could buy into any of the conspiracies, I would be more inclined to believe that shortly following the election, Obama and all members of his family were cloned. But I can't buy that either, and tend to believe the Barry who was raised by his conscious mother and guided by his loving grandparents, has simply lost his way. Forgotten why he wanted to be there, he's gotten lost in the thick of it. Then again, perhaps I just want to see it that way for my own self interest and ego need. No one wants to see themselves as a fool. It tends to put a damper on self confidence. 
If I could only have the President's big ear, what would I say? My first piece of advice would be, standing in the middle of the road will only get you run down by traffic coming from both directions. Choose a side and let it preferably be to the left, for the right has had it their way for far too long. If there is to be balance on this planet, power must now be placed in the hands of those who care about the earth. I understand that the status quo will thwart your efforts, but if you should bend over to the point of impotence that will be your undoing. You might as well go for it and change the system, ignoring the so-called patriots and nationalist tea baggers, for if you don't, you will be a one term President regardless. As it is, righting the wrongs of history is going to take longer then eight years anyway. So choose a side to stand on. If your choice is war, then don't pretend to adhere to or even admire the principals of Gandhi. No matter what you say or how you rearrange the words, peace can and never will be attained through acts of war, seemingly just or otherwise. When fundamental opposites clash, the only chance for real peace is if one should choose to make a real stand and stop. And who would that be? The truly fearless one. The brave one. This brings to mind a story I once heard. A story that still rings true to me. Paraphrasing, it's a story of a (more than likely Tibetan) monastery of monks which was going to be overrun and invaded by an army (possibly the Chinese). Aware of what was coming all the monks fled but one. Having cleared the monastery with the exception of this seemingly obstinate monk, the soldiers reported back to their Commander. Upon receiving this information, the Commander, a warrior of ruthless repute, took matters into his own hands. Upon reaching the monastery and facing the monk he bellowed, "Don't you know who I am? I could take this sword and run it through your heart without blinking an eye." To which the monk in soft spoken certainty replied, "Don't you know who I am? I could have you take your sword and run it through my heart without blinking an eye". Who's the insane one? Who's the brave one? Who is the truly fearless one? In truth, I must be honest. In sharing the story of the fearless monk, I wonder could I be so brave? Would my convictions expressed here in the abstract, match with reality if say... my daughter's life was in danger and the only way to save her would be to kill another? I don't know Mr. Gandhi, and through that hypothetical example, I understand Obama's, and for that matter, humanity's predicament. It seems to me that only if one has an absolute, and for atheists among us, seemingly insane belief in life beyond this world, that one could just stand there and take it. Perhaps the monk had touched something most only dream of. And perhaps in dreams we find the proof that we do exist in realities other than this physical one, which seems so real and final. We can only hope. ~ "If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province." † Mohandas K Gandhi "It is not enough to say we must not wage war. † Martin Luther King Jr. ~ Am I wavering in my harsh judgments placed upon the President? Perhaps, but the last thing I want to do is lie. And least of which, do I want to lie to myself, but it does feel a little like I am painting myself into a corner of contradictions and hypocrisy. Unlikely as it may seem, perhaps I can elicit the help of Mr. Quentin Tarantino to get me out of the corner without stepping on and ruining the paint I have already applied. Last night I watched his movie "Inglorious Basterds". It's a fantasy which takes place during World War II and (spoiler alert here) in the end Hitler and his cronies all buy it simultaneously, in effect ending the war. Considering what I have been writing about, I felt conflicted through my enjoyment of such a violent film. Most of Tarantino's movies are violent to the extreme but I appreciate his work no less and like watching them. Not unlike the fact that Stephen King is one of my favorite authors, and his genre is horror generally perpetrated through violence. But to discount their work merely through judgment placed upon their chosen and often grotesque discipline, would be to miss out in my opinion. More often than not, there is a deeper meaning within the stories they tell. Watching "Inglorious Basterds" brought to mind the question of our age. If you had the chance, knowing the horrors that he would perpetrate, would you kill Hitler? Not only that, but what am I doing enjoying such violent films when I consider myself a strong proponent of non-violence? And can I live with this internal hypocrisy? Perhaps it is just justification in action, but I personally feel violence experienced through movies, or for that matter video games and sport, is a safe outlet. Without their presence in "civilized society", it is quite possible that the human race would have annihilated itself long ago. The truth is, that not only this earth but the universe in it's very nature of creation is a very violent place. And no matter what we might like to think, we are not divorced from our environment. We have an impact on it and our environment has an impact on us. I have heard it said, that breathing air in itself is a violent act. It's in our DNA. We may be "stardust and golden" but that stardust came by way of the mother of all explosions. And I don't know if you have ever witnessed a birth, but the act is anything but passive. No lies, it's within us, now what do we do with it? Pretending it away will not work. The question would seem to be, has evolution given us a choice now? We are conscious animals that can to a certain degree, foresee the consequences of our actions. I personally feel that our evolution has moved from physical adaptations inward, and that with hope, subsequent generations will be able to predict the future with a greater degree of accuracy. Which brings me back to the question, would you kill Hitler if given the opportunity? In the larger scheme of things, would it be the right thing to do? And how would you know? If what the scientists say is true, that on a cellular level we are all made of the same stuff, then in a way we are all connected. Connected not only to each other but to the very universe we inhabit. Take that logic a step further and this saying is truth. "Not a blade of grass moves that it doesn't affect the entire universe." A concept more commonly referred to as the butterfly effect, where immediate actions taken lead to consequences not instantaneously foreseen or desired. And knowing that to be true, again, the question, would you kill Hitler? Who's to say if you should, that he would not have become a martyr and spawned a thousand more just like him, or even worse? Maybe it would have taken 12,000,000 Jews to die for the world to see what prejudice will bring. It was probably best that Hitler blew his own brains out. Because the truth is, violence begets violence. To truly put an end to conflict, one of us has to stop. Who among us will be the brave one? The irony of our age is that the closest place on the planet we now have resembling a World War II Jewish ghetto or concentration camp is Palestine. If the west wants to make peace with the Arab world, I would suggest that this is the place to start. More walls, checkpoints, homemade rockets and illegal settlements are not going to lead to a just and lasting mideast peace. I find it bizarre, that a simple solution to all this crap should be found in an Adam Sandler comedy. But I suppose the ending he envisioned in his movie "Don't Mess with the Zohan", would be seen in the political spectrum as simply unrealistic and naive. Maybe even "impractical". The relevant politicians would argue the complexities of the situation and through generating a gray area of confusion, the status quo would justify it's position of unending conflict, leaving no hope for resolution. Thing is, if that sore upon the planet were healed, it would remove a major talking point for fundamentalists on both sides of the issue. It would make it more difficult for Muslim fundamentalists to convince kids to stick explosives under their prepubescent balls, and it would throw a kink into the so- called legitimate nationalist call to arms. Then again, the fundamentalist Christians among us are not interested in changing the date or location of their Homecoming Dance *****. ~ "It's up to you not to heed the call-up † The Call Up ~ by The Clash ~ As mentioned, this has been a tough journal entry. There have been times when I have become so despondent, that I have lost the ability to find or string together words coherently. Sometimes I write and I think, 'is what I am saying making any sense at all?' Self doubt sets in as to whether I carry any wisdom with me at all. I question myself with thoughts like, who am I to think I know better then the Harvard educated seemingly smart black man who got the job? I can't even make money selling my little paintings. I can't even get anyone to notice what I do. I'm a high school dropout. These moments of self doubt are usually spawned through the measure of worth our world has adopted as the dominant one. The financial, monetary, fiscal, economic worth of an individual. In this predominant reality, where the economy overrides all other concerns, including the health of the planet we inhabit, we are all of us slaves, rich and poor. My only way back to feeling relevant is to remember the truth. The truth that this abstract facade of self-worth is just that, a veneer. A veneer that covers the true worth and meaning of what it means to be human. I personally look back over the years and see all the work I have produced through uncompromised principle. If I cannot sell a painting today, am I supposed to believe that all I have produced does not accurately articulate my worth and convey who I am? Not to mention, am I supposed to believe that those who inspired me to hold to truth were only kidding? And what of those hard and often painful lessons, which were through astonishing moments of clarity made bearable and even welcomed? Am I supposed to write them off for a buck, as nothing more than experiences with bad luck or unfortunate coincidence, never taking the time to fully delve into their origins as lessons in truth? I can't do that. These experiences (shared through other journal entries) which for some border on the supernatural and are therefore to be held suspect, subjective as they seem from outside, personally hold more truth than any line spewed repeatedly by any politician or pundit. Taking into consideration that I have had shared experiences rooted in so-called "normal reality" disputed as true, through the act of selective memory by those close to me (in effect dubbing me a liar), how is one to believe anyone? It seems these days everyone is more concerned with covering their own asses, the result of which makes assholes of us all. And it is one thing to infer that I'm a liar or fool, but when individuals such as Gandhi and King are relegated to the sidelines of "modern society", as having had nice ideas that are not practical in our age, I can't buy it. Gandhi and King's words may at times be politically problematic when justifying the fog of modern warfare, but if anything, they are rooted in truth and in the end, ultimately practical in their transparency. Whereas this line taken from the "Just and Lasting Peace" speech seems like it is hiding something. "But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected." I have read that sentence over and over without any luck in finding comprehension. Am I missing something? If it refers to us as perfectly imperfect I understand, but if not, with convoluted sentences like that being constructed for our blind consumption, I grow nostalgic for "misunderestimations" and a President able to read books upside-down. It is much easier to laugh at someone you never supported or believed in in the first place... and, I hate the feeling of being duped. At this point I prefer a recognizable clown, scary face paint and all, rather than hope masquerading as a long lost brother. Having had my sense of self-confidence and knowing compromised through those who are supposed to be our source of support, I have looked to those in our extended family of humanity for guidance. I may have made a mistake in hoping Obama was one of us, but I refuse to let those he proclaimed inspiration through to go down with the ship. Gandhi and Dr. King are just two of those people. Riding in on their coattails, turning them into nothing more than Trojan horses is more than I can stand. If it is one thing I despise more than anything, it is those who use half a truth to cover a book of lies. The Secret would seem to be the latest of those books or ways within the spiritual realm. When The Secret by James Ray first became popular, it was pushed my way as, "The Way". My response to those who held this half- baked truth as "the truth" was that I've been to Sedona, the American center for all those who would know more than I. Ironic, that the truth of Ray's spiritual sideshow should come into question, when devotees lost their lives in a Sedona sweatlodge. This modern age of self-help to riches through spiritual subterfuge only puts spirituality itself into question. And sometimes it gets hard to see the natural beauty of the red rocks of Sedona, for the quacks that call them theirs. Besides that, I have always thought with these self-help people having made their fortune through self-help, would the end result of their preaching not lead to an endless stream of self-help gurus selling to the sold? It just doesn't make sense to me when people make fortunes selling self-help. Anyone who truly offers help (self or otherwise) knows that they must vanish if such help is pure in nature. Otherwise, they are just snake oil salesmen, selling us back something we already own. Ourselves. Either that, or I really do need my identity of coolness defined through ownership of an i-Mac. God help us savages. Whether political, religious, spiritual or societal, half-truths would seem to be more dangerous and damaging than outright lies. When Cheney can't remember what he meant by what he wrote, you know he's lying or going senile, and either way, should be dismissed from knowing anything worth sharing. But the media seems inclined to do so again and again. Regardless of that curiosity, at least you know which side of the road he is standing on and can judge him accordingly. Cheney is an honest thief who will shoot you in the face. Good to know. On the other hand, standing in the middle of the road, all you can do is dance to one side or the other trying not to get hit by oncoming traffic. And that is what I see happening when I dissect the "Just and Lasting Peace" speech. It's a dance of words. First the words "... nothing weak - nothing passive - nothing naive - in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King." and then the sidestep of "but" or "having said that" , as Larry David (Curb Your Enthusiasm) would say, where you negate what was said previous as "not practical". Nothing weak but not practical. Nothing passive but not practical. Nothing naive... but I would hope you see what I mean. If not, here is a purely hypothetical example: "I have great respect for the Senator, having said that I will now proceed to piss on his shoes." I've heard more than a few politicians use this method of courteous contempt in an attempt to appear polite and remain politically correct. So yeah, politicians do that and I could give a shit when they do it to each other. But please don't do it to the likes of Gandhi or King. You either adhere to their principles, or you don't. You can't have it both ways. Just or not, a non-violent war is an impossibility. Tossing Gandhi in the ditch with praise as "not practical", while arguing for justified acts of war within the same speech, while accepting the Nobel Peace Prize? I cannot hold all that in my head and remain hopeful for change. I might not be the brightest bulb on the tree sometimes, but you cannot sell me an environmentally friendly Hummer for Christmas. No matter how much cash back is promised, or whether you use images of the earth to sell it.... in fact, especially when you use images of the earth. Need money to do the work. Do work to make the money. Not that it has to be, but it seems it's either or, these days. There are some things that need to exist regardless of financial concern. Human life is a good start. Then perhaps the home we all share, the Earth, should be taken off the market before we are all evicted. Socialist. Yep. When your health becomes a product for the highest bidder then sickness becomes the most profitable commodity. And that's fucked up, no matter what you call it. ~ Sometime before the holidays with CNN on, Wolf Blitzer announced that a major decision had been reached through the Climate Summit in Copenhagen. Obama has been there and he and the Chinese have made some sort of headway. Sounded hopeful. Sounded almost like redemption. Then I got the 'specifics', pun intended. They had come to a "nonbinding goal" to do something. Nonbinding goal? That's even more obscure and impotent than a non-binding resolution. The hope meter goes up just to level off at a place lower then before Wolf Blitzer made his offering. That's when I grabbed the remote and turned it off, although I could very easily have thrown it at the tube, ruining my chances of seeing a good movie later that night. Better nothing at all, than a non-binding goal. I'm not much of a sports fan but do nonbinding goals even count during the game? Do games played with balls even have them? Nonbinding goals that is? And speaking of balls, the last night that Colbert was on before the holidays his "The Word" segment was in regard to the Patriot Act (which was hastily enacted and put in law through the Bush presidency shortly following 911). As a Senator, Obama had reservations, now as President, he wants to extend provisions of the Patriot Act such as warrantless wire tapping. Not that I care, for I don't leave that much to privacy, and being an artist actually aspire to open fully through my work, including this writing. If you have nothing to hide then why hide it? In truth, and through my experiments with it, my experience leads me to see that it's usually those closest who will take advantage of your honesty and use it against you. It seems the power I freely give away through benefit of the doubt and family ties of obligation, is generally what trips me up along my chosen path. That's why, short of living in an open relationship (open relationship meaning open by way of heart and mind through complete honesty) with my girls Stefanie and Samsara, for the most part I now keep to myself. It's not always easy digging in the dirt and remaining completely open with those you love most. The ultimate benefit of absolute honesty with your partner is it eliminates outside surprises. That is to say, if Stefanie knows my darkest secrets and accepts me fully for who I am, opinions coming from outside of our relationship become irrelevant. The relationship built on a foundation of truth, lies cannot penetrate or destroy. In the end, the relationship lasts and does so because truth leads to fulfillment. What's the alternative? Living a lie always waiting for the next shoe to drop? Or cluttering the mind with useless skeletons in the closet? I am not interested in doing that, and for those who continue to do so, truth remains an unwelcome guest. So rather than visiting those who in all honesty don't really like me, I write my (edited for public consumption) version of the truth here to be taken or left. There's always choice, and besides all that, I don't use the phone to order my pot or care to ever own a cell phone. But having said that what is it Obama, that changed your mind regarding the Patriot Act? A Bush era Act, which for a number of your fellow citizens raises legitimate concerns regarding possible abuse of governmental powers. ~ "Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." † Martin Luther King Jr. "Truth never damages a cause that is just." † Mohandas K Gandhi ~
Sometimes it gets so bad bearing witness to this, that I actually long for the Bush years and look forward to 2012 when Sarah Palin will be the new American president. Wow, just in time for the end of the world. Crazy as that sounds, it's truly how I feel at times. Give me an honest thief, one that I know for sure will fuck me if I turn my back and I will at least know to watch my back. With Bush you knew what you got, an idiot who didn't really want to be on stage, directed by Cheney the puppetmaster. I mean you knew they were going to lie to you. Just look at some of their lies, and especially today, you would have to be a complete and utter nincompoop not to see through them. Weapons of Mass Destruction. As Colbert would say, "Balls". Testosterone filled balls indeed, because somehow they have managed to escape prosecution for their crimes. So what of that just war? No retroactive justice, unless of course you're a ninety-six year old Nazi. 2012 and the end of the world, I can't wait. This past week in the Apsley Voice (our local newspaper), there was a positive piece on 2012 and what it could possibly mean. This guy was of the opinion that it is simply in reference to the end of a long cycle in time and that on the other side of the road humanity will now travel. Kind of like a shift of energy from the masculine to the feminine, or right to left. In my books such a shift would be a welcome change, but I don't think it should be ushered in by a woman named Sarah. As far as feminine sides and despite recent developments, I still believe Obama has a stronger one. Her professed disregard for the mother of all feminine symbols, the Earth, does not bode well in my book. As a symbol of change, Obama's image has taken some knocks. That is where my disappointment truly lies. I never expected much from the man himself (he's just one guy), but his very election seemed to point to a window of possibility. Of course we were all going to have to do our part and open our own windows. I just saw it as a sign that opening them would bring in some fresh air and get rid of the stench. Having said that, assuming a ninety degree angle position Barry, while dancing among the two-way traffic, does not seem to be winning you any friends, or getting rid of the smell. All those who through cynicism had never put in the effort to be counted, in hope chose to do so for a change. If inspiration is quashed before they even have a chance to chip the old dried paint from around the window sill, something tells me they may just draw the blinds and go back to sleep. If a rejuvenated return to apathy and disillusionment becomes the primary consequence of all this, that would be worse then having to endure two terms of the illiterate clown and his cronies. Truth is, Bush and his band of bunglers, as a consequence woke people up (it took two terms mind you, Americans seem to be heavy sleepers) making Obama's election even possible. Strange how what could be deemed in the world as evil, when it comes full circle, essentially works for the enlightenment and evolution of mankind. Is that it? With my tendency towards seeing the details do I need to stand back from all this, take a breath and look at the picture as a whole? As Jon Stewart asked during an interview with David Plouffe (Obama campaign manager), is Obama really playing it like some Jedi warrior? Is he a political pool shark, lining up shots well into the future, while appearing not to know any better? Is he playing the game in some weird guru way, that is not obvious on the surface? Is he truly looking towards the long haul? If so, you are our last hope Obami Wan Kanobee. So with all that said, come on Obama, prove my latest observations wrong, or prove the latest mantra true. That it takes time to make lasting change. Please don't use the cloak of time as another excuse for ineptitude and perpetual grievance. Because if it is one thing I truly despise in this world, it is when people use and prey on the hopes, dreams and deeply held principles of others, in order to further a twisted agenda. Especially when those banged, bruised and tender principles have endured abuse of historic proportions. When someone uses the human need for spiritual sustenance in order to line their pockets, spirituality itself becomes suspect. When people try to sell you crap art cloaking it in feigned importance, true art and those practicing it suffer. It's a small step from "yes we can" to "yes we can't". And all that is left in its wake, is more confusion fed suspicion. At this moment in time, the last thing this world needs is more negative examples pointing the way to what's just. The dark force of habit within us is strong and all the young people who came out feeling less apathetic, even hopeful, are just a click away form escaping back into their X box. Even I, in the act of self preservation, have cancelled my subscription and turned away from hope that change can come from within the system. Does it really have to come down to the "see, I told you so, he is just another politician like the rest of them" people being right? In effect leaving them to feel good about being right about humanity's hope being wrong and that the end is truly near? I hope not, and as Bill Maher said in his movie Religulous, "There is only one thing I hate worse than prophecy and that is self fulfilling prophecy." ~ "I
am a Sagittarius. † Jim Morrison from An American Prayer ~ 
One last thing before I look for something else which needs to be done around the house. I might even be so bold as to take a look under the sheet, which presently covers my painting. But best not to get ahead of ourselves. Anyway, having a fascination with mountain climbing stories since I did a project on Sir Edmond Hillary for a school project, I have come to appreciate the work of Jon Krakauer. He himself is a climber and also a writer. The first book I read by him was "Into Thin Air", the story of a disastrous attempt to summit Everest in 1996. Krakauer was one of the fortunate climbers to have survived. Not that I put death on the line, but I can relate to the experience of mountain climbing through my work, the latest piece is Everest in nature. At times it's seemed like trudging along, year by year, step by step, through psychic sludge all the while carrying someone in my backpack saying, "What are you doing that for? You're crazy." Mountain climbers and artists can seem crazy at times, to do either, requires a certain self obsessive sensibility. My guess is that quality of doing something outside of the norm initially drew Krakauer to write a book about Pat Tillman. Giving up a lucrative career in professional football to join the military by choice, can seem as crazy as say... climbing a mountain. Where's the money in it?
Of course like Pat Tillman, the story of Pat Tillman has more to it than one might assume. It's the story of a war, and one of the "just" ones at that, where justice was blindsided and sidelined. I'm not into football, my sport is motor racing, and at first I thought, what could I possibly have in common with Pat Tillman? First of all, I'm an obscure struggling artist who would find it near to impossible to kill for any justification, and he was a professionally paid football player who by choice joined the military. At this point, the only thing we seem to have in common is crazy. In reading the book I would find out that he was a staunch atheist, whereas I believe there has to be more to this mortal coil. But then we both shared the same disdain for organized religion. And through his own path, he seemed to enjoy digging in the dirt of consciousness searching for truth. He kept a journal. He put everything he had, into whatever he did. Maybe in the places that count, we were not so different. What initially brought me to the book was the controversy surrounding his death through what was determined and much later reported to have been, friendly fire. But in reading the book and finding out who he was, the tragedy surrounding his death moved to another level. He did what he did through a belief in the value of human life beyond financial concern, and to this I can relate. One other curious connection is that Pat Tillman loved climbing the red rocks in and around Sedona, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out if we hadn't crossed paths already. Where Men Win Glory (The Odyssey of Pat Tillman) by Jon Krakauer. ~ Just one more...
~ * As with the Rockman quote, more reference to The Point by Harry Nilsson. Its the story of a boy named Oblio who had a round head and seemed to not have a point in a land where everything and everyone else did. In this land people had pointed heads and since he did not he and his dog Arrow were consequently banished to the pointless forest only to find out that everything and everyone has a point. Having stumbled across this story as a youth, it remains relevant to my life's experience as an artist to this day. ** Albert Einstein, as quoted in Mahatma Gandhi and the U.S.A. (1949) by Pasupuleti Gopala Krishnayya *** Full excerpt of Obama's answer to Lilly's question "Hi I'm Lilly. And if you could have dinner with anyone, dead or alive, who would it be?" Included in my journal entry of October 1 2009 entitled Kults, Krackpots & Kreeps (Leave your white cloak & hood in the closet boys... here's the new K.K.K.). **** I added the word "terrorism" to that quote. Somehow I don't think Gandhi would object and think that if he were alive today he would have included it. Words change but the truth remains the same. ***** Reference to the Rapture. The Christian fundamentalist believe that in this area of the world Jesus will make his return engagement in a clash of Third World War proportions. ~ Disclaimer: Use of images and quotations on this page are meant to illustrate and enhance a personal point of view and in no way indicates or infers the individuals depicted or the photographer's or artist's support of any opinion or statements expressed by the author. ~ Note: To reach other entries of the past just use the Index on the right by choosing the date, a flyout title will also appear to help in your inquiry. Or click here for Page 14 of the Journal. ~ |
|
In depth clarification for busking the internet: Donations and Net-busking Statement. 
Except for individual private use, all rights reserved Copyright © 2010 by Petrus H. Boots
|
Buddha
sculpture in Afghanistan
