HOW TO HONOR THE WAR DEAD

                                                       

                                                                            

The best way to honor those who have died in the belief that they were defending freedom is to work to end war. If ending war is Mankind’s greatest dream, why have we come so far from realizing it?  I can remember thinking how cute I thought it was when young women competing for beauty prizes would say that there greatest wish was for world peace. It was so common that it was a cliché. I knew that for most, they were saying what people wanted to hear. Few who claim to want peace go on to work to make it a reality. So it is with most of us.

The greatest challenge to peace is the widespread belief in the self-fulfilling prophecy that it is not possible. If enough people rejected the belief that peace is impossible and worked for it, war would become unthinkable. If we want to assure that those who died for noble beliefs did not do so in vain, we must start by taking an honest and unflinching look at some of our beliefs and attitudes that are incompatible with being true Soldiers For Peace. It begins by making sure that we really believe that peace is possible. Otherwise, we are just going through the motions and cannot possibly see how it is possible.

Paul Chappell has written stirringly in Will War Ever End? how most soldiers do not fight out of hatred of their enemies but from love of their families, nations, ideals and most of all, for the sake of those who face death fighting beside them. Those who are motivated by hatred are those who suffer most from the psychological wounds of war. It is unnatural to regard other human beings as nothing more than threats, deserving only of death. Only through careful indoctrination their commanders compel a human to kill another without hesitation. As Dr Ed Tick has written in War as a Soul Wound, it is the unconscious or conscious recognition after the heat of battle of the humanity of those they have killed that tortures their souls.

Soldiers For Peace must learn from the insights that combat veterans learn at such cost. We must avoid the reflexive urge to regard those who actively promote war as our enemies, proper targets of our hate. The war to end war must be fought with love, not hate. From a place of peace within, not anger. In the end, our task is to bring about reconciliation between enemies. We must learn to see them not as “the other” but as brothers and sisters who have been led astray. It is up to us to bring them back into the fold, welcoming them as fellow member of our common human family.

As a member of Veterans for Peace, I often encounter fellow veterans who think they are waging peace but who regularly succumb to the impulse to identify which side is responsible for any given conflict. They fail to recognize that it is our desire to establish blame that promotes the idea of “the other.” This is the root of the problem of our failure to teach our countrymen that it is our indoctrination to regard our fellow men and women as members of an alien tribe that allows us to accept the unacceptable reality of war. To combat this, we must train ourselves to forgive the aggressors even as we work to stop them. They are like our children. Our job is to provide boundaries and make sure that they do not hurt themselves or others in their ignorance, driven by base impulses toward anger and aggression.  If they must be punished, it must be done so that the lesson learned is that all humans are deserving of the same respect that we would expect from others, even if their actions anger us. Violence in any form is unacceptable, for unchecked it only leads to an endless cycle of hatred and more violence.

In my experience as a family therapist, I do not look for who is at fault in a family conflict. It is my job to study the family system to see how it promotes the conflict, then work with each member and the family as a whole to help each of them understand their role in the family drama that maintains an unhealthy pattern of interactions. I do not have to succeed with all of them. I merely have to reach one, motivate her to change her behavior. My job then is to help the family change the script so that harmony can be achieved and love becomes the driving force that guides their actions. On the scale of the human family, this is the only path to peace.

We must learn to forgive our enemies before going into battle for their hearts and minds. David Patreus, while accomplishing nothing that advanced world peace, once said that he considered it a victory if he goes to bed with fewer enemies than he had when he awoke. He was not referring to how many enemies had been killed, but how many allies he had made. A general has to keep in mind that the ultimate objective is not to kill as many as possible but to achieve a just peace in the end. That minimizes casualties among both those in his charge and those they face on the battlefield. He knows that in the end, if peace is to last, our children must live with theirs.

If our politicians shared this goal, they would never send our children to kill and die in war. Their objective is not peace through justice but to conquer and subjugate the enemies that they have created in the service of their Puppetmasters, the war profiteers who are ultimately responsible for creating our current global conflict. As citizens, it is the duty of each of us to let them know in no uncertain terms that they do not have permission to wage war in our names. To truly honor the victims of war on both sides, the soldiers and civilians, we must all become Soldiers For Peace.

A COLD DAY IN HELL

To assure an American Spring, we must first assure that the American Revolution outlasts this, the winter of our despair. Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots must continue to press the cause of liberty and justice for all through the cold months ahead. Our youth will man the front lines where they can find refuge from the assault by the growing police state that America is becoming.

The senate bill to allow violations of posse comitatus and the violent suppression of dissidents in the US is a direct threat to the democracy we are fighting for. The internet is under a concerted attack, our young are becoming economic conscripts in wars for corporate Empire, our economy is devastated and too many of the 99% support policies designed to benefit only the 1%.

We must take heart in the fact that as fascism in America affects a growing number of the complacent and those fighting for corporate privilege through the Tea Party are awakening to the fact that we are all in this together. As we gather around the fire to stay warm in the winter, let us remember to let into our hearts and our homes those who have forgotten the true meaning of America, the shared sense of responsibility and destiny to be a beacon of democracy for the rest of the world. It is this that has enabled us to overcome adversity throughout our history.

Despite a growing awareness that the people of the United States must demand a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood, most people seem to think that the abolition movement has about as much chance of victory as a snowball has of surviving the fires of Hell. I believe that these skeptics need a lesson on the physics of snowballs. After all, we cannot win if the members of the resistance give up hope of achieving the first and most important objective in the war against fascism in America.

The abolition movement can grow as easily and rapidly as a snowball rolling downhill if only enough people start pushing. The movement is on a downhill path and can only gain momentum now that we have gotten the ball rolling. Like a snowball, as the movement grows the rate of growth will increase. Just as the area of a snowball grows by the square of its diameter, so does a movement grow faster and faster as people see that it is building enough momentum to sweep any obstacle from its path.

The corruption of Congress has led many people to think that it will be a cold day in Hell before Congress will pass a constitutional amendment abolishing corporate personhood. They have written off the prospect of democracy in America as doomed. If democracy is dead then I say bundle up its coffin ‘cause its crazy cold way down there! Believing is seeing in that until we believe that victory is possible we cannot see how to achieve it. In the end, the difference between the optimist and the realist is whose vision prevails.

Those who lack faith in our collective ability to Take Back America must open their eyes to the progress we have made recently. If they open their hearts to the idea that the last, greatest hope for Mankind depends on their decision to join or sit out the coming struggle then they can be a part of the solution. It is an essential assumption that democracy depends on a People good enough and wise enough to rule itself. Each of us has a duty to our children and to generations yet unborn throughout the world. When we awaken to our collective power, victory over the oppressor is guaranteed. A People of the world united shall never be divided. This is the hour of our liberation and we hold the key to freedom in our hands.

Last week, Democratic members of Congress who have taken a stand to end the madness of corporate control of elections were joined by the first Republican cosponsor of the McGovern constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood. In typical fashion, some in the abolition movement have downplayed the importance of this accomplishment They correctly point out that it is less than ideal but fail to acknowledge publicly that this is a breakthrough in raising public awareness that there is a solution in sight.

So many have given up on Congress that they are missing the fact that some members of Congress actually represent the interests of We the People over those of the international corporate terrorists so many of their colleagues depend on to maintain their personal wealth and power. They are not alone in their cynicism, however. This is a fundamental challenge to the creation of a unified international front against fascism and war that is necessary to unify the Left in the United States who are competing to be the leaders in the New World Order all are trying to create.

The anarchical Occupy movement is faced with a dilemma. How does it move forward with a democratic structure that empowers each member to be a leader? The answer is to be found in studying the anarchical network that is Soldiers For Peace International. We are activists around the world each working on what we feel is most important to further the cause of liberty and justice for all. We choose our own missions and work together as individuals and members of groups to support the efforts of all our comrades worldwide to promote justice and peace in their communities, their nations and the world at large.

The American front of the war against fascism is the critical one upon which the success of the worldwide Revolution depends. The international corporate terrorists that control its government use its legislature, judiciary, military, intelligence agencies and the power of the President to wage war on the poor and middle class of the world. Only the citizens of the US can Take Back America through the electoral process and establish a government of, by and for the People. The key to success is to overcome the artificial Left-Right divide that keeps us fighting each other instead of the real enemy: fascism in America and the world.

Winning the war against the 99% in America will require a coalition of the willing to make support for a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood a campaign issue. If leaders in the abolition movement can overcome ego and the desire to compete for the limited money our supporters have to offer, together we can build the grassroots movement that will end corporate rule in America.

Those of us fighting for universal health care, environmental responsibility, the end of war, government accountability and economic justice are beginning to understand that success in any of these efforts depends on getting the corporate tools out of government. The only practical way to do this is to force every candidate to publicly declare whether they will support an amendment to abolish corporate personhood. Those who are with us will replace those who stand with the corporations only when we use the Pledge to Amend campaign to sort them out.

There was a day when Americans thought of themselves as having a common interest despite political, religious and cultural differences. We who are fighting for social justice in America and the world must help our fellow Americans understand that in order to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare, we must all learn to think of ourselves as Americans and citizens of the world before all else.

WINNING THE CLASS WAR FOR THE 99%

There have been a slew of constitutional amendments introduced in Congress recently, each claiming to “reverse Citizens United.” This is the result of pressure from activists passing resolutions around the country calling for an amendment that would actually do this, which none of the amendments introduced to date would do.

Each of these amendments is limited to giving states and the federal government the right but not the obligation to control the flow of corporate money in elections. It is preposterous to expect that a Congress dominated by corporate money would even consider using such a power if by some miracle the thing were passed. Do not be fooled by these generally well-meaning efforts by members of Congress trapped in the mentality that they must work on only what is possible now. The fact that they are working with colleagues who have accepted the self-fulfilling prophecy that they have no choice but to sell their loyalty to the highest corporate bidder is no excuse. While some willingly sell their loyalty, others feel this is the only way that they can make a difference in Congress because they have to be re-elected to do the public any good.  

The 99% cannot give up on the electoral process if they want to effect real change. They need to recognize that we do have real representation in Congress, but they will only take risks when they know we are backing them. Some members of Congress have been elected and re-elected without being tainted by corporate money. Senator Bernie Sanders comes immediately to mind as an example. We have to ask the question why is he afraid to do what must be done: introduce a constitutional amendment that would abolish corporate personhood outright? He knows as well as anyone that only by ending the power of corporations to buy members of Congress can we hope to elect those who will put the interests of We the People over those of They the Corporations. The answer may seem clear but it is not as simple as many people think.

Although Bernie doesn’t rely on corporate money to run, he has to realize that planting a dagger in the heart of the corporatocracy would invite retaliation, making himself the target of right-wing campaign PACs like Karl Roves’ Crossroads. In addition, he would be setting the corporate Democratic leadership up by making support for the amendment a campaign issue. We all saw what happened to Dennis Kucinich and Anthony Weiner when they dared challenge Democratic leadership to put the interests of American citizens over those of their corporate Puppetmasters: Kucinich was marginalized even by real liberals in Congress like Peter DeFazio of Oregon, while Weiner was left twisting in the wind when he got caught in a scandal that had nothing to do with the performance of his duties as a Representative.

As long as Democrats and independents in Congress are cowed into following the Democratic leadership in lockstep toward the Right, voters will continue to abandon the party in disgust. Many are concluding that a party willing to be led by the nose by the same corporate entities that have wholly bought the Republican Party is not worth their support. The perception is that the difference between the two is not important enough to fight for. The Democratic Party has not so much been abandoned by their supporters so much as they have been abandoned by it.  

Democrats supporting the amendments presently in Congress fall into two categories. There are those like Max Baucus who have long ago sold themselves out to corporate interests, and those who believe that incremental change is their only choice. Baucus took in over $6 million dollars in the election cycle preceding the Democratic effort to bail out a failing medical insurance industry that was cynically labeled “reform.” The resulting gift to the corporations that comprise the medical-industrial complex was obvious. What was less obvious to many is that this was the intent of Democratic leadership when they decided to take on the issue. There are lessons here we must heed if we are going to get a constitutional amendment introduced and passed that will accomplish what the members of Congress proposing the current bills claim.



Prior to the public debate about the public option and its far worse alternatives, Rahm Emanuel put Democratic leaders on notice that single payer was off the table. Inside sources say that Howard Dean was told that he would not be a player in the debate if he could not get Democracy for America to support the public option bait-and-switch. DFA responded by claiming that their million-plus members supported the public option strategy when a simple poll would have proven otherwise. In getting other progressive leaders and members of Congress to fall in line, they managed to sell to the Democratic rank and file the self-fulfilling prophecy that single payer was “not politically possible.” 



This Machiavellian plan to satisfy corporate interests in the name of “reform” was reminiscent of the Bush Administration’s marketing of the Medicare Modernization Act that appears to have been designed to kill Medicare by establishing an unfunded prescription benefit plan whose costs were deliberately and grossly misrepresented. Among other gifts to the medical-industrial complex, pharmaceutical manufacturers were given the power to set their own prices by a ban on the government negotiating drug prices. In what came as a shock to those who are unfamiliar with how some Democrats receive underserved credit for being “liberal,” Oregon’s Senator Ron Wyden crossed party lines to cast the deciding vote for this bill that is putting the viability of the Medicare program at risk.



Not surprisingly if you follow the money, Wyden introduced the only serious competitor to the public option plan, the Healthy Americans Act. It was so bad that it received bipartisan support. While quickly shelved, key elements of this mandate plan were quietly put into the Orwellian-titled “Affordable” Care Act, including massive cost shifting to the consumer that was not taken into account in the CBO analysis. As a result, health care costs continue to rise even while the Democrats proclaim victory in producing health care ”reform.” 



The bait-and-switch going on in Congress now is even more insidious and dangerous. If we do not call on these members of Congress to abandon their effort to placate the public while doing essentially nothing about the problem, the movement to abolish corporate personhood will be split and a historic opportunity lost just when the economy, the environment and the families of those serving in wars for corporate personhood cannot stand the delay. 



This is a call to action for those who understand the difference between abolishing corporate personhood and enshrining it in the constitution through an amendment that would validate the doctrine by recognizing that Congress should have the power to regulate it. If corporate personhood is abolished then there is no need to regulate corporate money going to campaigns because it will be illegal.



Those of us engaged most deeply in this modern abolition know just what is at stake. In our educational efforts we need to let the public know the danger of supporting this pig with lipstick. We can pass an amendment abolishing corporate personhood outright and win the war being waged against the 99% if we focus our efforts on making support for a proper amendment a campaign issue in 2012 and beyond.

VETERANS FOR PEACE-THE SILENT MAJORITY

I live in an area of rural Oregon that like most or rural America has a history of producing more than its share of volunteers to serve in the military when their government calls. Most of us who have answered the call are proud of our service, but those of us who are not proud of what our country called on us to do are Veterans for Peace. Whether we served in war or peacetime, in combat or support units, inflicting our treating the wounds of war we are bound by our mission to stop the madness of war through purposeful, nonviolent action.

VFP Chapter 141 in Bandon is a small group of veterans in a much larger and largely neoconservative veteran community. As everywhere, the local posts of the VFW and other veteran service organizations are dominated by the Vietnam veterans who have come to outnumber the veterans of previous conflicts. These men and women by and large are proud of their service and their country to the point that few publicly question the role they played in establishing what has become a fascist neocolonial Empire. 
 

After coming home from war many Vietnam veterans found themselves shunned by “the greatest generation,” who were angry that the US had unequivocally lost in war for the first time. Just as did many in the peace movement, so all too often did veterans of previous wars blame the warriors and not the war itself. It was decades before those who had fought in Vietnam were generally accepted into the band of brothers that are all veterans of foreign wars. Now that the Vietnam veterans have been accepted into the larger community of veterans, the tradition of glorification of military service has been passed to a new generation.

As a former VA psychiatrist who practiced in that community I have a good idea how many of these veterans truly support the actions of the US government in times of war and how many are opposed, whether or not they are willing to admit it publicly. Most veterans in this community would be surprised to learn that privately, the majority of those who served in combat not only realize the criminality of the government’s actions in Vietnam but are opposed to the current wars. Most of these are also opposed to all future wars.

There are many reasons that Veterans for Peace are a small minority in this and most communities. Aside from the fact that many veterans have never questioned their role in promoting the imposition of a fascist New World Order, the most important reason is peer pressure. To understand why grown men and women are so susceptible to influence commonly assumed to affect only teenagers, you must understand the consequences of trauma on human development.

At the age that most are recruited or drafted into military service, a sense of self-identity has not yet been fully established. Teenagers who become part of the military are still struggling to define themselves. When they are trained to ignore the basic human prohibition against killing, their self-image becomes distorted. When they are forced to kill and to watch their friends be killed, the trauma reinforces this distorted self-image. The severe nature of this type of trauma has the effect of arresting further development until it is fully processed, which sadly occurs all too infrequently. 
 

Just as the chronically sexually abused child often grows up without resolving the basic task of individuating from the abuser, combat veterans all too often grow up without having accomplished the basic developmental task of creating an integrated identity and remain susceptible to role confusion. They may feel ashamed, unlovable and unworthy of forgiveness. They are often incapable of living up to their own expectations as spouses, parents and members of society. For them to truly come home they must come to terms with what they did and what they were a part of. Being a member of Veterans for Peace is one way some find their true selves.

You might ask why so many veterans who did not serve in combat adopt the same pro-military, anti-life positions. The answer is rooted in the same explanation. Those who served during or around times of war know service members who died or were irreparably scarred by combat. These veterans identify with and empathize with their peers. To publicly challenge their beliefs takes a stronger sense of self than most people are capable of.

The pain of that empathetic response to the suffering of their compatriots is so unbearable that the emotion often turns to blind anger. Such an attitude primes these people to prepare to accept the next war for Empire in the disguise of fighting whatever “enemy” the state determines most threatens the interests of the international corporate terrorists who control the Puppets in the US government. This is how those corporate politicians are made to dance to the drums of war when so ordered. To refuse would be seen as weakness. The corporate media that is also owned by the corporate war profiteers makes sure of that.

The groupthink that causes noncombat vets to unquestioningly support war for corporate Empire can be seen more generally in the larger society. The vast majority of Americans have friends, relatives or ancestors who have served or are serving in the military. Every generation has had its war and each has contributed to the myth that wars are necessary to assure our “liberty.” Now we are in an era of what could become endless war.

If we do not mature individually and as a society to the point where we are capable of making individual decisions on right and wrong, the self-fulfilling prophecy that war is inevitable cannot be challenged. If we do learn to think for ourselves and to speak out when we see injustice, then surely we will stop the madness of war, the ultimate injustice.

There are no longer any innocent bystanders in war except the children whose future war is ostensibly to “protect.” Each of us has a moral responsibility to ask ourselves why we are at war and what we can do to stop it. Simply refusing to participate is not enough. If we pay taxes we support the war. If we do not we risk losing the means to fight back, either by foregoing the income necessary to wage our personal war on fascism or by being neutralized by the state in being prosecuted for tax evasion.

The only way to end war is to recognize that we who are willing to speak out are a minority but if we work together to educate our neighbors about the true cost of war we help them realize that those of us opposed to the wars are the majority. We can and must succeed. The future of our children and their progeny is at stake. 
  

Seventy percent of the American public want out of Afghanistan. This is similar to the proportion of people who favored the initial invasion and nearly the same percentage who do not realize that grand pronouncements to the contrary, the Iraq War continues with no end in sight. If those who want peace would become Veterans for Peace or associate members, Congress would be forced to listen.


Soldiers For Peace International requires nothing of its members but a commitment to work for social justice. There are no dues, meetings, or leadership. We were started by veterans, few of whom were willing to become part of any organization because the trauma of war had caused them to become uncomfortable with being a part of society or any group.

The difference between a Soldier For Peace and a Veteran for Peace is thus only the fact that each Soldier For Peace is in essence an Army of One, trying to further the interest of social justice in whatever way we feel capable. Serving in our virtual Army need entail no more that speaking the truth to whomever we do choose to associate with. We may choose to act in concert with other groups such as Veterans for Peace but in the end, we speak only for ourselves.

In a democracy, the People ultimately decide the question of whether to go to war and if we do, when to end it. The United States is no longer a democracy because too many citizens have given up the right to decide for themselves whether war is an obsolete concept other than as a means to further corporate Empire. We have decided that the wars for control of oil supplies are not worth the price, but until enough of us become Soldiers For Peace, our so-called leaders will continue to be Puppets on the strings of international corporate terrorists who seek to enslave us all in a permanent fascist New World Order.

Until we rise up as one People, we dishonor those who have died in the belief that they were defending the freedoms that we have so casually discarded. We cannot in good conscience give in to the belief that we are powerless. We must wage an asymmetric, peaceful war against fascism, injustice and war, the ultimate injustice.

More disgraceful than allowing the sacrifices of generations of warriors to have been in vain, if we fail to do this we will have abandoned our children to a fate that will be determined by the fascists who now control the US government. I will die before accepting this ultimate dishonor. How many billions will die before the rest of us choose to fight?

RESISTANCE IS FEUDAL

Friedrich Nietzsche wrote about the difference between the slave mentality and the master mentality, arguing that the masses display a herd mentality dictated largely by prevailing views of the relationship of the individual to society. This is the essence of the slave mentality and stands in sharp contrast to the mentality of the Ubermensch (“Superman”), who recognizes that true freedom lies in freedom of thought.

This does not necessarily lead to the idea that radical individualism in action is the highest ideal, because he warned of the dangers of moral relativism. He rejected the idea of an objective system of morality, arguing instead for a morality based on the recognition of the fact that one’s actions always affect others and so our personal morality should depend on considering these interrelationships.

Some would falsely equate moral relativity with utilitarianism, which argues for making moral decisions based on the greatest good for the greatest number.  Such people tend to argue that such a basis for morality leads to self-serving decisions that in the end harm both society and the individual who behaves according to this principle. These are those most likely to embrace fundamentalist, authoritarian ideals that Nietzsche criticized in his work. 

In typical seemingly paradoxical fashion, he argued that Christ was a proponent of the master mentality in the sense of promoting self-mastery. His famous pronouncement that  “God is dead” meant that those who had constructed a model of God and reality that encompassed the belief in an afterlife had abandoned the Christian principle of enlightened self-interest in favor of giving in to control by those whose will to power was such that it was perverted into a will to domination.

He argued that the problem was in part biological, in part sociological and in part a willingness to ignore personal responsibility. The pursuit of freedom from fear leads to the acceptance of external authority of the state and religious leaders, as Erich Fromm argued in Escape From Freedom, his exploration of the aspects of human psychology that led to the Nazi rise to power. Put simply, the herd is willing to accept a loss of freedom of autonomy as the price to pay for accepting the slave belief in the necessity of submitting to powerful leaders. This is the essence of how the ideal of democracy becomes perverted to the self-imposed slavery of fascism.

The essential problem as I see it is the widespread popularity of radical individualism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Right wing politicians, aided and abetted by a corporate media have advanced the fascist agenda through convincing enough Americans that their defining cultural value is the right to do whatsoever they please without government intervention, regardless of the cost to society or other individuals.

This dangerous notion is the antithesis of real conservatism. I remember in the 60s the anger at the hippies and antiwar protestors who were attempting to change the social order faster than conservatives could adapt their thinking. The idea was expressed as a resistance to the "anything goes" attitude of the most far-out free thinkers.

A real conservative looks at history and sees a long tradition of Americans helping each other and being protected by reasonable regulation of the corporations that have bought and now control the US government for their own purposes. This corporate coup was made possible by the implicit understanding among brainwashed neo-"conservatives" that corporations were not only persons but our rightful rulers.

The jackboot of the corporate state is now on the necks of each of us. The responsibility lies not only with those whose thinking was radically changed by Reagan's simplistic and radical idea of running government like a business. Putting corporations in charge required the acquiescence to the privatization of government functions and giving away our sovereignty to the WTO. Had there been more resistance from the Left in the early stages the transformation of US government into a corporate-controlled fascist entity might have been prevented. However, partisan Democrats did not do enough to challenge their own leadership when Clinton sold America to a group of international corporate terrorists by allowing the US to become a signatory to the Global Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

The passive acceptance of this abandonment of the American worker was in large measure do to defensiveness caused by the relentless attack on Clinton when he did not conform to the Republican/fascist agenda. However, the larger reason was that Americans were satisfied with the economic achievements of the Clinton administration despite the long-term costs to America and emerging nations. NAFTA led to the outsourcing of jobs overseas, loss of tax revenues from offshores, the consolidation of power of transnational corporations, increased poverty in Mexico and a doubling of the illegal immigration rate after its passage.

The problem that America must face to regain its greatness and standing in the world community is one of combating the herd mentality that assumes that our only recourse as citizens is to invest all power over our lives to a few men and women who make decisions of policy and law that serve only the self-interest of a narrow group of corporatist whose interests are sharply divergent from those of average citizens and of American society at large. The slave mentality of the average American can only be challenged if enough of us reject identification with subgroups of society and instead embrace the recognition of our interdependence that is the basis for democratic society.

The tendency to divide ourselves into more or less discrete subgroups is not primarily biological but psychological. All decision making results from considering our core beliefs and deciding on a course of action that is logically consistent with those beliefs, to the extent that decision making is logical. In reality, most of our beliefs are based on emotional considerations. Therefore, our decisions as to what is best for society are usually colored by our belief in what is best for ourselves.

This feature of the herd mentality is the product of a fundamental fact of logic, which is the basis for how we view the world. To make a decision on the validity of a concept we must consider the validity of its opposite and decide between the two on the basis of our experience. To the extent that we allow our thinking to be influenced by emotional considerations that have nothing to do with the truth of either proposition we become susceptible to manipulation by those who would enslave us by promoting beliefs that are opposed to our true self interest.

This binary feature of logic serves a purpose when we are young in that it allows us to make hypotheses that lead to conclusions about the confusing world we are trying to understand. The assumptions by which we create the reality in which we live as young persons are thus characterized by simplistic assumptions heavily influenced by our parents, our peers and the herd mentality of whatever segment of society in which we are raised. The process of maturation should be one of challenging these beliefs as we mature and broaden our experience but too often, people are willing to live their lives constrained by this childish worldview.

Such black and white thinking has led to a model of social and political reality in which authoritarian leaders are rarely challenged. The slave does not question the Master. The only recourse is to beg the Master to care for its basic needs. In modern society this means that those involved in partisan politics are reduced to begging their chosen leaders to put their interests over those of the corporate Puppetmasters who are ultimately in control of the US government.

All this has led to what I refer to as America’s borderline split. In the extreme, those who rely on emotional reasoning are stuck in a phase of early mental development in which thinking is so heavily influenced by environment that there is no stable sense of self or sense of one’s relationship to other individuals or society. Such unfortunate souls are slaves to their emotions and subject to wild emotional swings caused by forces they cannot understand. They are referred to as having borderline personality disorder. This disorder is so rampant in the US that the American collective consciousness itself has become borderline.

The solution to the healing of America is to heal this borderline split by reaching out to each other with unconditional acceptance and teaching and learning from each other how our worldviews differ. By opening our minds to all possible realities we free our own minds and become capable of the self-rule that defines democratic society. If we value our children we must treat our fellow citizens as we would ideally treat our own children, with unfailing love and respect and with the best interests of human society in mind in all that we do.

This is the way that we can all become doctors who heal ourselves and teachers who will train us to change the world. If as Nietzsche’s proposition that God is a human construct is correct, then it is our responsibility to mold our collective consciousness so that God is no longer dead but alive in our personal lives and society. If he is wrong, we have nothing to lose by trying, for either way the collective consciousness is what ultimately determines our individual and collective destinies.

ACROSS THE GREAT DIVIDE

Today's blog refers to politics in Oregon, but the lesson is one that all Americans should learn. Only the Tea Party can save the Republic. It is time that we reached out to them to work together to end fascism in the United States. The following is an editorial that will be published in Oregon in the next month.



The corporate media and the politicians who depend on it to get their message out would have us believe that Americans are sharply divided about the issues that are causing gridlock in the US Congress. Nothing could be further from the truth. Roughly 70% of citizens want out of Afghanistan, nearly everyone wants the debt limit raised most Americans agree in principle that we should work to achieve universal health care in some form and a large majority wants no cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.  The difference between what Americans want and need and what the corporate-driven Congress will give us is appropriately referred to as the “democracy gap.”

What was quickly forgotten by the corporate media and largely by the “alternative” media is the fact that nearly 80% of both self-identified liberals and conservatives are opposed to the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. Recognizing that giving corporations carte blanche to buy the politicians of their choice to serve their interests in Congress is a dagger aimed at the heart of democracy, Americans across the political spectrum were momentarily united in the common cause of defending the possibility of true representative democracy. Unfortunately, the point was lost to most as the story was quickly buried in the 24 hour infotainment cycle.

The significance of the Citizens United case is not just that it is an outrageous step closer to fascist control of the US government but lies in the possibility of using the nearly universal anger toward it to build a bridge across the artificial divide between those who regard themselves as liberals or conservatives, Democrats, Republicans or independents. We the People now have an historic opportunity to create a truly democratic Republic in which the interests of the citizens of the US take precedence over those of the corporate Puppetmasters of Congress. All we need to do is to heed the lessons of 1775 and come together to fight for liberty and justice for all.

There is a growing movement to abolish corporate personhood and overturn the Supreme Court in Citizens United by working together to get a constitutional amendment introduced and passed in Congress. Oregon’s own US Representative Kurt Schrader recently took an important first step in introducing an amendment that would give states the power to regulate corporate money in elections. While still falling short of the goal of eliminating all “rights” granted corporations by an Imperial Supreme Court, has the potential to lead to the end of corporate control of the US government. If enough in Congress are willing to step up and support it, the issue will finally get the attention it deserves in the so-called “alternative” media.

Imagine if Peter DeFazio were to support the Schrader amendment. It would shine a spotlight on the issue of where Robinson gets his campaign funding.  Last year he came from nowhere to raise $1.3 million dollars, much of it as soon as he announced his run. That’s pretty good for an unknown. Apparently he is not unknown to the big money interests who supported him and other ostensible “Tea Party” candidates. As was pointed out by a member of Americans for Prosperity in the district, he cannot be both a Republican and a Tea Party candidate, since the Tea Party represents those to the Right of the Republican Party. Similarly, Sharon Angell challenged Harry Reid and almost beat him, Rand Paul was actually elected in Kentucky and other candidates who were marginal at best were elected with sophisticated and very expensive corporate-funded propaganda campaigns.

In 2008 DeFazio won with 82% of the vote.   In 2010 he won with less than 54%. Despite his liberal voting record, he has historically been supported by conservatives in his purple district because of his staunch support of veterans and his principled stands with Republicans when the Democratic leadership is on the wrong side of issues such as the first bankster bailout. In 2010, amid wild charges of socialism by the Robinson camp, his re-election was seriously challenged for the first time in years. The corporate money behind Robinson financed a very successful propaganda campaign that convinced many self-described conservatives to place a false ideological principle ahead of their own interests and that of the people of Oregon.

Interestingly, when I asked Robinson in Roseburg at one of his mock “debates” why he referred to a government that funneled taxpayer money to corporations “socialism,” he had a momentary lapse into reason. He shouted “You’re right! It’s fascism!” Then he expounded on the point for a full five minutes while I listened in amazement. Of course, by the time he got to the real debate in Coos Bay he had returned to the script written for him by his corporate Puppetmasters. If even Art Robinson recognizes that allowing corporations to buy Congress and dictate legislation and policy amounts to fascism, why don’t more Democrats capitalize on the fact when running for Congress? Neither Defazio nor Merkley take dirty money. Making their support of a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood would not only be principled but would tap into the truly independent voters who want to see something done about our system of corporate welfare.

Some time ago I wrote an editorial for the Advocate in which I argued that the key to saving the Republic is to get Tea Party supporters to join the effort to abolish corporate personhood through a constitutional amendment. Many of my friends scoffed at the idea. What they seem to have forgotten is that these people are more highly educated than the general public. They are not stupid, just misinformed and thus unable to see that the solution to our woes is not fighting the imaginary specter of “socialism” but in fighting creeping fascism. It is our job to educate them of this fact. They value democracy as much as the rest of us do. I spoke to Jeff Kropf, former state director of Americans for Prosperity about this. He was intrigued by the idea of working together to restore our democratic Republic through the process of constitutional amendment. He also confirmed my impression that although the Koch brothers initially provided funding for Tea Party events, the state organization is now self-funded.

Tea Party supporters are actually ahead of the political curve in one respect: They have rejected both Republican and Democratic politics as usual and are seeking to create the change America must see to save itself from economic, social and moral destruction. While I remain convinced that they are going about it in entirely the wrong way, they will be key allies in the fight to end corporate rule in America once they understand what Robinson in a rare moment of honesty admitted: Fascism is the enemy, not our fellow Americans. Partisan Democrats can take a lesson from the Tea Party. If they learn to put America before the Democratic Party, they can join in common cause with the Tea Party to rid Congress of the corporate tools who are destroying the American experiment in democracy.

SWIMMING WITH SHARKS

Imagine a vast cesspool teeming with hungry sharks and you have a pretty good idea of what it is like to be in Congress these days. The stench became too much for a principled senator like Byron Dorgan, who got out of the pool just in time before the Supreme Court dropped chum into the filthy water in the form of Citizens United. Now the sharks are in a feeding frenzy, fighting to get to the source of their sustenance: the corporate money that feeds them all and whose waste is the stuff that they swim in. Unlike predators who are careful not to excrete their wastes in their own habitat, these foolish and short-sighted men and women are quite content to live in the foul environment they have created.

How is an honest politician supposed to survive in this putrid environment? It is not true that there is no such animal. Bernie Sanders, Jeff Merkley Peter DeFazio and others are all in the fight, but not for themselves. They understand that they were elected to serve the People, not the voracious appetites for wealth and power that impels others to swim with the sharks.

Regardless of the risk of being soiled with the excrement of their colleagues they hold their noses and do what they can in the clear knowledge that if no one does the wealth of the nation is inevitably going to become food for the sharks and their handlers, the international corporate terrorists and war profiteers who feed them.

This is all to the good, of course. The thing about a feeding frenzy is that in the end, the sharks end up feeding on themselves when the chum is exhausted. The wounds can be fatal. Survivors can be injured to the point that they can no longer lead the attack on the common man on whom they depend to stay in the pool.

The only question is do we provoke the feeding frenzy that will eliminate the sharks and leave honest members of Congress the biggest fish in the pond so that they can clean it and take measures to assure that it will never be polluted with corporate cash again.

It turns out that the solution to this apparent dilemma depends on honest politicians being smarter than the carnivores whose only interest is to feed themselves for the benefit of the corporate Puppetmasters whose pets they have become.

Fortunately, sharks in a feeding frenzy are focused on only one thing. Normally that is the smell of warm blood but in this case it is the smell of cold, hard cash. That makes them easy prey for the smart fisher of men. The astute politician will protect him- or herself by supporting a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood.

Not only will the voters finally have a simple issue by which to choose the politicians who will work for We the People and not to make us shark bait, but by creating the conditions necessary for honest politicians to live and work in a healthy environment, they will in the end be able to not only survive but to thrive in the newly created atmosphere of a democratic Republic.

We have to ask ourselves why it is so hard to convince our fellow Americans that this is the only way to restore democracy to the United States. There are many factors to consider in the ecology of American politics but in the end it boils down to a few variables that We the People can control if we can learn how to work together in the common interest of ensuring that our children grow up in a rational and sustainable world.  

First and foremost we have to redefine what it means to be American. The corporate media would have us believe that the singular American virtue is self reliance. Nothing could be further from the truth. The American Revolution would have turned out quite differently had the English colonists not recognized their common interest in shaking off the oppression of British Empire and working together to fight the corporate Puppetmaster behind the throne: The East India Company.

The equivalent enemy today is Goldman Sachs and its fellow criminal conspirators in the international banking and financial community. Britain ruled the waves with the backing of the corporate war profiteers of the day until they were challenged from within by a newly awakened People that was determined to shake off the chains of colonialism and determine their own future.

In putting aside for the moment the political and economic interests that divided them they came together to fight the mightiest power the world had ever known they secured for themselves and prosperity the opportunity to create a more perfect union where all men and women would eventually be treated as equals.

In the end the Revolutionaries  realized that they could not win this war alone and so reached out to other foreign powers who had waged a losing battle against the British corporate Empire. With financial help from the Dutch government and military and economic aid from the French, in the end the cause of freedom prevailed. 

America became a beacon of freedom and hope for the common man by demonstrating that a People united is more than a match for international corporate terrorism. The American Revolution inspired the people of France to rise up against the oppression of their government and to overthrow the royalty that had until then deluded the masses into believing that they had a God-given right to sovereignty over the People.

The revolutionary idea that a People could rule itself became the dream of all oppressed men and women everywhere. Unfortunately, the realization of that dream has been blocked by the rise of corporate Empire in the United States, now working in tandem with the economic royalty of the United Kingdom to enslave the Peoples of the world in a fascist New World Order.

The time then has come for the Peoples of Earth to form a united international front against fascism and war. When Americans once again taste the sweet flavor of freedom other Peoples will have the opportunity to do the same. In removing the threat of corporate control of the American government we will free ourselves from the rule of the self-appointed Masters of the Universe.

No democratic nation has ever fought a war against another nation. A free America will thus guarantee the realization of the dream expressed in the Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

If we end America’s Civil War and fight together to finish the Revolution, soon the valleys and hills across the nation and throughout the world will ring with the cry “The King is dead! Long live We the People!”