a big log

Right now in Iraq there is a collision of two Words. The word democracy and the word dictatorship.

Iraq wants to make its own government, not build on a government given to it by the United States.

Although the Baker report by the bipartisan US Iraq Study Group raised significant points about the issues in Iraq, and seemed to provide good solutions - such as recruiting surrounding countries, and giving the Iraqi government ultimatums about what they should do, or else we leave - it was vehemently rejected by the Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. An article from the Guardian outlines why:

At his heavily fortified residence on the banks of the Tigris, Mr Talabani told the Guardian that the key suggestions of the long-awaited report by James Baker and Democrat Lee Hamilton were “the wrong medicine for the wrong diagnosis” and called them an unwarranted interference in Iraq’s internal affairs that undermined the war-torn country’s sovereignty at a crucial time.

The proposed sanctions, which I previously referred to as ultimatums, were taken as an “insult.” Because the comments come from the president, they have a gravity that they would not have, and did not have, coming from members of the press or lower-level government officials. Talabani said he would propose alternatives, allegedly having a better idea of his country’s situation than the committee that commissioned the Baker Report.

The Iraqi president said he would send a letter to President George Bush outlining the government’s thinking about “the main issues” contained in the Baker-Hamilton document.

He was most concerned about Iraq’s sovereignty, and made several comments on the issue of its absence. The troops were commanded by American officers, the government peppered with American officials - the Iraqi hand, he claims, feels constrained.

Mr Talabani insisted that violence in Baghdad could be stopped if the Iraqi government was free to exercise its proper authority.

“We can smell the attitude of James Baker in 1991 when he liberated Kuwait but left Saddam in power,” he said.

Bottom line, he’s suspicious of the Baker Report - he doesn’t agree with its proposed solutions.

There is no polarity. Things are black and white, like zebras, but concepts are not. Issues are not. The mind thinks in colour.

We can’t have State uninvolved with Church.

What Science doesn’t want to learn is that Religion is also true.

It seems that some people don’t want religion to be taught in school - but religion has been the teacher since deep before school ever was. It has far better lessons than school ever will.

State is made up of people, people are made up of spirit, and so they turn to Church, where they no spirit is. Those who don’t belive in spirit or church can feel full, and alive, but only if they fill themselves. Individuals are spiritual, they seek guidance, they go to church - so statesmen go to church. Then how can we seperate church and state? Maybe only conceptually - but the problem is, the concepts are intertwined. The first state was created by church. State grew in the womb of church…I guess now that it is born, it feels like it is time to cut the proverbial unbilical cord. But the two cannot seperate - the mother and fath will always nurture their child, especially when it is so young and out of control. State has much more to learn than Church does.

Science and Religion both seek truth, both know truth, but one refuses to accept that of the other.

Church knows State. It birthed it.

Why separation? Why not symbiosis?

Why do they have to learn to be apart - why not learn to be together? 

Education is still an issue - uneducated poor, uneducated you, uneducated youth. This is my stance: most of us are not educated enough. Those who want to learn have to teach themselves. Most are caught in a life they didn’t create, told what to want, where to go, why they shouldn’t stray.

I want to learn how to love, how to live, how to be a man, how to dance, how to play music and make art - I want to learn things that change how I look at the world, things that give me power over myself, knowlege of myself, acceptance of myself. It seems like i’m taught to not accept my life, but to always be looking for something more - money so that one day i’ll have a safe and soft place to be. But i’m not taught to be, i’m taught to become. 

The world today does not know enough about what matters. We don’t know how to live without watse. We don’t know that we don’t rule the world. Mankind was not meant to be king, we put that on ourselves. And that has brought us problems. We live like the earth is ours to use, like the earth was made for us to live on it, like we know now how to live, as if we know what is best for us. “There is no higher power than man” we say, and so we guide ourselves, as if we know the way to go.

We don’t, but we can learn.   

Reagan was focused on the supply-side of economics, on supporting the rich and having prosperity trickle down to the poor. Labeled Reaganonmics, it had many similarities to Thatcherism, Margaret Thatcher’s English economic policy. It focused on low taxes and small government, but with a big defense budget and subsequent big military.

Bush also supports tax cuts: as can be seen here

To address this faltering economy, President Bush proposed accelerating and making permanent his 2001 tax cut. In addition, Bush has added additional elements to his initial plan which will bring the cost of his proposal to over $700 billion.

Military spending, too, for the Bush administration, is very prevalent and important. While Reagan had to face the Soviet Union, Bush has to face Iraq.

Today government is larger and mroe powerful than Reagan’s, but the economic policies of the two are similar - with tax cuts, high military spending, and fallback on the budget defecit.

The new G.I. bill focuses largely on college, on getting the G.I.’s into college - perhaps because the military has realized that the people they recruit are those who can’t pay for college, can’t finish high school, drop out, have no other option.

The G.I. bill website is taken up largely by college advertisements such as the following one:

Whether you want to advance your military career or get a head start on life after the service, Golden Gate University has a program designed to fit your goals. Use your GI Bill benefits to move your education and your career forward.

Wealth divides. Because once wealth exists, its opposite has to exist. That is how it works - nothing can exist without its opposite. So wealth creates poverty. Wealth divides people.

There will always be a wealth gap, but the reasons for its existance change. As of now all of history is responsible for it, so history is responsible to the fullest extent. Contemporaty society is also responsibe for the wealth gap. Society is built on money, and with money we have wealth, and with wealth we have poverty.

But what can be done? To make the gap smaller, we use taxes, taxing the rich more than the poor. But people object to that, it doesn’t make sense - the more money you make the more you lose? It seems like if one works hard one should be rewarded.

The problem is some have to work harder than others to get the same reward. I guess to solve the problem something has to be done to equalize the amount of work that everyone has to do to acieve that reward. The people that don’t work hard won’t get rewarded, and the people that do, will. But that’s another problem, because, some people don’t work hard, get themselves into a situation where they have to work hard, and then have children. The children begin in the situation that the unhardworkers were left in, and then must work harder to get out of it. 

The solution lies in providing all children an equal platform to begin on. But this is hard, isnt it?  

The more homogeneous television content prevalent during the 1950’s seems less preferable to me than the allegedly risque content of today. Because when I watched Ozzie and Harriet i found it very boring and fake, and when i watch television today i find it less boring (but still fake).

Stephanie Coontz’s The Way We Never Were analysis of 1950’s popular culture is interesting and important for today for truth-revealing reasons. However, today, most know the truth - television does not reflect real life - and i suspect most knew the truth then. Those uneducated about the truth will find it in Stephanie Coontz’s book - an important book, breathtaking and paradigm shifting and amazingly resourceful. If everyone read this book, everyone would understand that television shows and video games do not portray real life. Imagine.

I believe no aspects of current popular culture are dangerous to society, but rather, beneficial. Society needs to explore its darkest and strangest corners. Understanding faults does not lead to danger. The riskyness is great, and super, and helpful to the nth degree.

Ashley writes, about Katrina,

Since Hurricane season is upon us and the country still hasn’t done anything about rebuilding New Orleans. If we don’t do anything to protect the city soon, all the clean-up work we’ve done so far will be wasted if another hurricane hits.

Mr. Government and co. haven’t yet stepped up to walk the walk of their ‘rebuild’ talk. But what new New Orleans needs now is protection, from hurricaines…we are well into their season. I agree with Ashley. The clean up work we’ve done so far will be wasted if we dont finish, or reach a hurricane-proof state, before the next hurricane hits.  

What is my definition of evil? What are some examples of evil in the modern world? What are some examples from history and/or literature?
All work and no play is absolutely sinister. But evil, true evil, is just the opposite of good. Evil is power without awareness. Evil is responsibility without knowledge. Expected obesiance is evil, in the expecter.Evil is one thing making any other thing do something that that thing does not want to do.

The products of evil that exist today in the world are famine, poverty, and murder. Poverty is created in the creation of wealth, so today we have wealth as an evil thing. Famine is a product of overconsumption, and hogging of food, so, the overconsumers and food hogs are today evil things. Murder happens. Regularly. And will never be stopped.

Evil in history is in the invadors, the people who arrived in a land that was not their home, but the home of other people who had been living there for a very long time, then called it their own home. Genocide has been an example of evil throughout history. When the spanish all but killed the native americans, when the brits all but killed the australian aboriginies, when the germans killed the jews, when saddam killed his own people. But war is not evil. War happens. Regularly. And will never be stopped.