Powered By Blogger

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Baltimore Riots: Backlash to White Manifest Destiny?



Manifest Destiny and Modern White Supremacy

In his video (taking points, see link below) O'Reilly is espousing a type of manifest destiny for whites. It is a similar version of  manifest destiny that was applied to Native Americans. He seems to believe that whites have a god-given destiny that is different from the destiny of Blacks. He also seems to believe that (1) whites have superior virtues that are not shared by blacks, (2) that whites must continue to remake America in an effort to achieve the white American dream (destiny), and  (3) that this destiny is in many ways irresistible and must be accomplished as part of god's grand design for whites in America.

In other words, O'Reilly appears to have come out as a white supremacist, which goes far beyond the racism, of which he is frequently accused. As you may recall, manifest destiny was the foot in the door for the first American genocide, what O'Reilly appears to endorse is the foot in the door for  justification of the next American genocide.

The current GOP represents the dark, disgusting political and social forces needed for such a second genocide. I don't think it is to much of a stretch to say that these forces have been seen before, both in prewar Germany and in the apartheid movements of South African and today in Israel. In that sense O'Reilly is simply hooking his horse to a wagon that has a long history and is already rolling. While it appears that he is coming out of the closet as a white supremacist, I suspect that it is more that we are now starting to see the forest behind the trees.


http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/04/29/bill-oreilly-who-is-big-loser-in-baltimore-riots/


Keywords: O'Reilly, racism, white supremacy, supremacist, apartheid, genocide

Saturday, April 4, 2015

Freedom From Religion; Freedom from Delusion

God's law vs. Democratic law

There is an old saying that "just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean that people aren't out to get you." What if it turned out that biological evolution selected for a type of delusional thinking? A type of delusional thinking that was initially adaptive and brought about significant technological innovation and advancement. What would then happen if technological and intellectual evolution started taking place faster than natural selection could remove the increasingly maladaptive delusional thinking? In my opinion, it would result in the world you see around you today. A world in which we build particle accelerators to look at the beginnings of the universe 13 billion years ago while claiming that the universe is only 5000 years old.

We live in two worlds!

In one world we use our brains to push the limits of science, medicine and technology to create better conditions for humanity. In the other world we used the latest advances in technology to broadcast the murder of students trying to get an education, or people who believe in the "wrong" god.

At the moment humans are dividing along a profoundly disturbing continuum. At one end are those who seem to be largely free of the delusional thinking that was common and adaptive during our early evolution. At the other end are those who remain extremely susceptible to the early, though no longer particularly adaptive, delusional thinking of our earliest ancestors. In between are those who are not ruled, but also not entirely free of prehistoric delusional thinking patterns.

Delusional thinking manifesting as religion.

Of the 7 billion people on the planet, it is safe to say that of the adult population, over 85% still manifest the delusional thinking typical of our early human ancestors. Today, that delusional thinking can be called religious thinking. In its early forms it was pagan or polydiest thinking. In its more modern forms it is monotheistic, but with different gods for different people.

Religious thinking is delusional, almost by definition.
“A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture or subculture (e.g. it is not an article of religious faith). When a false belief involves a value judgment, it is regarded as a delusion only when the judgment is so extreme as to defy credibility. Delusional conviction occurs on a continuum and can sometimes be inferred from an individual’s behavior."
This definition, offered by the American Psychiatric Association in the DSM IV, conveniently excludes religious thinking as delusional (the green text), but that's to be expected since there is a very high probably that it was written by people who where directly or indirectly influenced by religion. I think this dates back to the idea that those who live in a glass house shouldn't throw stones.

Religious Thinking is Anti-Democratic

The modern idea of democracy is built on the idea that laws created by the rational mind of man are superior to god given laws. There superiority is axiomatic, since god is a delusion. Therefore, those who seek to govern America using god given laws are anti-democratic. The purpose of the First Amendment to the Constitution was to prevent the imposition of religious laws over rational law. It is a clear statement that claims that in America, rational law supersedes god's law.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Religious thinking is a delusional state of mind, which I fully accept exists on a continuum. A continuum that ranges from the innocuous to the dangerous. At this time I am not concerned with explaining the mechanism, for the mechanism is extremely complex. However, I am concerned with its functional impact on society and democracy.

The Dangerous

My concern lies with the dangerous end of the spectrum. In a secular democracy, the rule of rational law is intended to supersede all irrational laws, i.e., god given laws. Currently, in America there are a large number of organized groups and a disturbingly large number of individuals who believe that the rational laws, freedoms and liberties set forth by the United States Constitution are secondary to the laws handed down via their particular god. In an effort to circumvent the secular nature of the US Constitution, in particular the part of the constitution intended to protect US citizens from the imposition of religious laws on their daily lives, these groups and individuals advocate using their numerical majority to take political control at the local, state and federal level, with the goal of undermining, the secular freedoms and protections established by the Constitution of the United States.

In an assault that requires almost daily documentation, state legislatures and the US Congress have begun to systemically roll-back protections from religion and replaces them with overt restrictions, stemming from biblical law, on personal freedoms and liberties. Religious laws, are in many cases, directly opposed to the values of a free society and the principles of democracy. To put a slightly finer point on it, imposition of religious laws is anti-democratic and contrary to the natural evolution of free, fair and just societies. One need look no further than any society, historical or otherwise, based on a theocracy to see the failures of enforced delusions.

Those on the dangerous end of the spectrum now openly advocate repellent views on important domestic and national policies. They are, not only supporting, but leading the way to the reemergence of homophobia (Indiana Religious Freedom Act), racism (New Jim Crow Laws), anti-intellectualism (Climate change deniers), misogyny (anti-abortion movements), narcissism (God favors the rich), and nationalism (God is an American) in America.

Conclusion

The currently accepted idea of religious tolerance must be reexamined. Instead we must consider it as delusional tolerance. Those who are most seriously affected by delusional religious thinking must be recognized for what they are, evolutionary throwbacks with a dangerous vestigial form of delusional thinking. Simply because they represent a sizable number of people doesn't mean we should accept their condition and let it ruin the future of America or the future of our species.

Most religious people are only slightly or mildly affected and have high level functionality. It doesn't mean we, as a society, shouldn't try to help them, but they are not the real and present danger.

The real threat comes from those who have other personality disorders that are compounded by archaic delusional thinking at the extreme end of the continuun. Those with natural sociopathic or psychopathic tendencies, when also burdened by deeply delusional thinking, represent a significant threat to the future of a secular, free America. Especially when there seems to be a natural tendency for those with these very specific personality disorders to be attracted to politics and positions of power.

If you look at the current contenders for the GOP nomination for president you should be both amazed and shocked. They, without exception, are opposed to the founding principles of a secular nation that is free from the imposition of a national religion or religious view point. They also fully embrace and support the reemergence of those most horrific anti-democratic values mentioned above.



I fear that America is losing the battle to remain free. When the Pence's, Huckabee's, Perry's, Cruz's, Robertson's, and Bush's of the world openly threaten to take away the democratic principles of freedom and liberty on which America was built, we had best take them at their word and believe that they will try. It's time we start to question the mental stability and soundness of those who would place the rational law found in the Constitution of the United States of America second to the non-existent laws of a god that arose as a delusional by-product in our pre-human ancestors.

Interesting YouTube videos addressing the delusion of religion.

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Marty Stout and Glenn Ford

30 Years on Death Row

On March 30, 2015 The Times published an apology from the lead prosecutor in the 1984 Glenn Ford murder trail. As you may know, evidence was eventually produced that proved the Mr. Ford was innocent and he was released from prison on March 11, 2014. Glenn Ford had spent 30 years in prison for something he did not do. Probably because he was poor, Black and left handed. As of this writing, the state of Louisiana was fighting to avoid paying Mr. Ford any type of compensation. However, that shouldn't be surprising to anyone.

This essay is not about the death penalty. Those who favor it represent the worst our species has to offer and I wouldn't waste one second of my time trying to convince them of their breathtaking stupidity. Instead this essay addresses two other issues. The first is the Louisiana prison system, and the second is the apology itself.

Louisiana Tortures Prisoners

This text is taken directly from Mr. Stout's letter.
Mr. Ford spent 30 years of his life in a small, dingy cell. His surroundings were dire. Lighting was poor, heating and cooling were almost non-existent, food bordered on the uneatable. Nobody wanted to be accused of "coddling" a death row inmate.
The idea that an influential member of the Louisiana justice system can casually acknowledge that humans were, and probably still are knowingly and routinely kept in conditions unsuitable for animals fills me with almost uncontrollable rage and disgust. The fact that I firmly believe that Louisiana is not an exception, only makes things worse. Mr. Ford was caged like an animal 20 years before Guantanamo was a sparkle in Dick Cheney's eye. Guantanamo did not appear as an abominable anomaly, it was born out of the depravity and sadism of the American Justice System. A system of such malice and cruelty that it is now the subject of Human Rights organizations.

In its World Report 2014, HRW singled out the U.S. criminal justice system as a major source of human rights violations, thanks to systemic problems that range from severe sentencing requirements to the misuse of solitary confinement. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. While the overall U.S. population has decreased over the past four years, some 1.6 million people were incarcerated in federal and state prisons at the end of 2012. An additional 700,000 were held in local jails.

I will not attempt to deal with the racism that is deeply entrenched or the prison for profit system that turns humans into slaves. These will be topics for other days, since there is little risk that they will disappear soon.

What Mr. Stout's letter tells us is that the United States of America is now part of the problem and  not even remotely part of the solution. Like so many other deeply flawed and repulsive governments that we commonly berate for being backward, America has a Criminal Injustice System and it seems very, very proud of it.

A Self-serving Apology

Mr. Stout appears to throw himself on the sword of public opinion. A sword known for its dullness and malleability. He describes himself and his role in the conviction of Mr. Ford as follows:
In 1984, I was 33 years old. I was arrogant, judgmental, narcissistic and very full of myself. I was not as interested in justice as I was in winning. To borrow a phrase from Al Pacino in the movie "And Justice for All," "Winning became everything."
After the death verdict in the Ford trial, I went out with others and celebrated with a few rounds of drinks. That's sick. I had been entrusted with the duty to seek the death of a fellow human being, a very solemn task that certainly did not warrant any "celebration."
In my rebuttal argument during the penalty phase of the trial, I mocked Mr. Ford, stating that this man wanted to stay alive so he could be given the opportunity to prove his innocence. I continued by saying this should be an affront to each of you jurors, for he showed no remorse, only contempt for your verdict.
I have to say that I find Mr. Stout's 30 previous years of silence to be both odd and telling. For me there is little doubt that his apology is conveniently timed to get ahead of what will likely be a shit-storm of publicly, especially in light of the recent Texas case in which evidence withheld by a prosecutor likely resulted in the execution of an innocent man; not that Rick Perry would lose any sleep over such a barbaric act.

I don't believe that a self-confessed narcissist changes. Narcissism is life style as well as a psychological state of mind. Narcissist don't stop being narcissist any more than psychopaths stop being psychopaths. Maybe he has been actively involved in trying to get Mr. Ford released, however, such activity was conspicuously absent from his letter of Apology, which is way I think the apology is insincere, at best.

I think Mr. Stout knows that America loves it when someone apologizes. Americans love to forgive. It is perhaps one of the country's most noble characteristics. However, in this case, I suspect that Mr. Stout, as a good narcissist, has calculated the benefits and risks of an apology and found that a heart-felt apology would very much be in his own best interest.

I too like to forgive, and would love to have to change the ending of this essay. If you know of a kinder, gentler side of Mr. Stout, a side that suggests his soul is and has been as tortured as Mr. Ford was for the past 30 years, then send me the information and I will gladly rewrite the ending.

For those of you interested, The Young Turks did a nice video on this subject. It's worth watching. Their conclusions were much less cynical than mine.

Post Script

Above I mentioned that the state of Louisiana was fighting against providing any type of compensation to Ford. Despite the fact the Stout, the subject of this essay, came out strongly in favor of some type of restitution. The battle is now over and the state has successfully avoided having to pay any amount of compensation.  Mr. Ford has late stage lung cancer and is likely to die soon. I think it can be argued that had Ford been free for those 30 years, the diagnosis of cancer would have occurred earlier and it is reasonable to assume that his life might have gone on longer than it will. In essence Louisiana did successfully execute Mr. Ford. They just took 30 years to do it.

The judge in the case used Pre-Crime to say that the court thought Ford was somehow linked to the crime despite the lack of evidence for such an assertion. To the very end, the criminal justice system of Louisiana his going to stand tall with its boot on the neck of Mr. Ford, and they intend to keep it there until he draws his last breath. How proud they must be.