Desire

   I sort of puzzle in a way over the desires given about the world.  How is it that we are conformed or less conformed?  How is it that we desire to have what others supposedly have that we don't have, or that we should desire having what others have, and then having leads us to any existential despair.  Some assert that we are happiest when we live in fulfillment to materialistic needs, and if it were so it could be consequential to the despair of attainment loss, that is, if objectified loss in some material, some trophy leads to despair, but if we value the means more than the ends, that is, by the process of experience, as opposed to the end products, we might not feel as depressed when the end results seem nominal or seemingly without so much merit...I pull a Tony Robinson here...although it seems I am honestly a bit dishonest about this whole charade, we are meant to entertain in life.  It is all about the process of putting a smile on another faced potentially with another doomed certainty:  you may wonder if it is quite necessary to remove the clown shoes, the nose, the makeup...in  Aberdeen, yes, someone says, 'Put on the nose guard.'

Of course, I might be expect to say one thing or another.  Vilified?  Well that completion sort of ended to my guess sometime ago and systematically dismantled over time.   Maybe more humanly seen, or at least approaching to some zero sum level, remembered little in a way, blacklisted in other ways.  I am not certain any clear end goal were in mind.   A process should be meaningful one might expect.   Logical progression leads in the way that repeated excess are so obvious as to be ignored and might generate enough negative consumer backlash...maybe in a idealistic world, or maybe something else occurs.  Someone states that you live in a world given by future possessiveness, and that there is a psychological disorder given by focus to the here and now, but then you are reminded that this is likely coming from the AMA...which is basically governmental mouthpiece, or at least if given to the centred psyche much of the animal kingdom operates primarily in the here and now, not as much future or past.  Desire is given to simplicity more often in these modes of thinking, it isn't overly complicated or contingent on decades of work, albeit I appreciate also the results of a New Horizons mission as much as anyone else, but I am thinking, it is also about the present tense process that one finds labor of love.  It is to love going to where one is going on a daily basis repeatedly and this whole process that keeps us doing what it is we do, and maybe we hadn't thought so much about the daily struggles leading to the end results.

The meaning to everything has been answered already...

The meaning to everything has already been answered.  I have received the long awaited phone call that I have expected.  I know what my calling in life is given by.

Machoism and stupidity

   Macho ism, bravery and stupidity.  It seems to be a present theme of sorts I see recently.  So?

Honestly I could care really less whether I were personally branded a coward, or that some macho ass thinks the better with taunts and threats.


Macho ism can have you sent to the meat grinder.  It is potentially to have oneself put in the classification of being herd fodder.

Just remember WIMPS form the back bone of this universe.

Go Set a Watchman Harper Lee sequel

Go Set A Watchman

Harper Lee sequel unpublished for decades finally being published.  The Telegraph review describes her prose as 'pedestrian' although a quick glance at the first chapter doesn't convey this.  I would agree that the shift from first person to third person provides a distinct narrative shift that loses a reader's closeness, and what goes beyond the original?  

American Revolution a Mistake

American revolution a mistake

This is pre supposing that Great Britain would well be headed on the track that it were headed revolution or no revolution.  The problem here is that the American revolution encompassed so much more than its own revolution along...for instance a seed aiding in the revolution and liberation to follow from the royalists in France, and potentially down the road to changing geo political cosmology elsewhere in the world.
If the British empire were more heavily invested in the Americas might they have had less power economic impetus to invest less in slave trade, or domestically have worked as hard as they had to the abolition of slavery in its own rule of sovereignty on foreign lands where political control were ever as tenuous and frontier as could be had?  Its also harder to understand how socio economic and political cosmology of trade would change if political gravitational counter pulls weren't occurring in like kind.  The American Revolution was good for changing Great Britain and aiding in the political evolution of its own thinking.  All the revolutions around this time were likely having tremendous impact and creating political influxes and changes in political and social thinking even as horror were also being created in like kind.  If they hadn't happened old socio economic system may have likely persisted and enlightened thinkers might have been less influential to the degree of the expressed 'universality' of the rights of men...and in time given to a stronger universal notion of ethics and human rights as expressed in political thinking.  The Bolshevik revolution may never have occurred if it weren't for the American Revolution and likely Dostoevsky's writings may never have been born into existence.  While we think of the modern day out comes of Canada in the Americas, I think it is a mistaken assumption to state in a manner of continuity that all would be the same.  Revised thinking seems to assume and replace a modern state having evolved magically and mystically as it were destined as though one element were much superior to the rest.  Great Britain relatively speaking might have considered itself superior on the matter of thoughts and ethics in general, but revolutions past certainly had the effect of shaping its own modern future.  As to the old phrase historical revisionism, it seems the effect were much the same with respect to the civil war in the United States, if war hadn't resulted the South would likely have a system of slavery having gone the path of extinction anyways as has been argued at least in its horrific end what likely might have resulted were a group of humans pushed further to the brink of intolerable production quotas still not in keeping to machinery.  However, it is also possible that the Southern states may have lashed out as the northern states, or that trade relations between Southern states and old world economies may have changed in less than normal ways relative to previous times, and perhaps technological adoptions in agricultural technology may have been stymied in so far as agricultural scientific processes.

The truth is that it is likely not well known what may have happened in time if the American revolution had not happened, but I suspect the modern Great Britain we see today could have differed and maybe enough so, so that the outcomes of slavery were still the same as were the genocide of Native Americans.  

The Mist Movie Review

The Mist

   The movie's adult cold war Jurassic Park existentialist narrative gives all the convolutions that a Stephen King nightmare would have in a Maine small town. A structural literary critique is in order, firstly, given that the lead protagonist David Drayton is confronted by his particular selfishness, 'I have my own children to look after'  while in story time hours to follow is given to a fit of selfless heroics at least momentarily enough in searching out a nearby pharmacy even if all others were warned not to leave.  Religious fervor and zealotry and schisms all play out in quick order as one hysteric (Marsha Gay Harden) is quick not only to pick those for the sacrificing to beasts and urging in time followers that non believers are to pay with their lives.  The story is played out rapidly as into a great chaotic descent leading to a disconnect between the character's and their personalities.  On the one hand, David Drayton urges a badly burned man to hang on for his life as drugs are sought out, while neither sparing others of his own personal hopelessness and loss of faith especially given to fear of potential suffering.   David's own convoluted sense of fear seems in a way more literary weakness more so than a character flaw or something intrinsically psychological if it were clearly so much cowardice, the trip to the pharmacy never would have happened, and given to all previous elements of survival in place, it is hard to see at the convenience of an empty tank that a world would end at the convenience of a hand gun.   The moral of sacrifice itself plays out the woman Drayton turned away for help stares with her children in arm from the perch of an army rescue escort while much is too late for Drayton otherwise, and with this telling a testament of faith or lack thereof.  Drayton if ever in a moment of clarity might have recalled his view of the religious hysteric in so many words leading having her followers in Jim Jone's fashion drinking cool aid ironically so and unfortunately Pascal's metaphysical consolations coming much to late.

Referendums, good or bad thing?

  I've seen at times a greater share of referendums placed in the context of democracy.  For instance, Monorail initiatives, or state based local health care reform.  The monorail initiative as it turns out, as I had found out from long term residents had repeatedly found its way onto voting ballots.  It would pass, only to be rescinded by another referendum, owing to likely socio-political and economic vacillations, or if given something in the first place statistically marginally passed, all the difference between win and defeat is given to the day of a passage, and as for referendum processes there could be another day simply to defeat what had been passed.  In other cases, I've read through the often verbose and at times, even for lay language, legal creep appearing in referendum measures.  For instance, if you understood one part of health care reform as given to reducing legal liabilities and malpractice, you might have read this in some way as potentially a conservative based 'initiative' as opposed to typically a democratic one.  Although for the hood winking where less political theory has been explained, or why one particular political ideological camp may be supportive versus less supportive of other types of measures, the problem with initiatives and referendums alone is given to a line item displacement of passing something that 'sounds good in theory' until you really consider the details.  Such as you might be able to get all sorts of initiatives that 'sound great' to people popularly, that could literally sink a state's coffers if fully enacted, but who is to inform people wisely?  Of course, we assume that people read the details, the fine print, understand what it is they are doing, and if a career politician/lawyer introduces the legislation and presents his sets of views, one might expect something of a counter to it.  In theory, what descends down the pipeline are interest groups and advocates alike that spread any education on a given initiatives for those whose livelihoods may be at stake, or maybe someone is a consummate local news reader.  The initiative/referendum process bolsters political leadership when it is clear that a leader has been not only popularly elected but also has a 'mandate' to state that he/she is leading for a people on a given cause, but what happens when the leader promises something that may not ultimately be there, or that others would be fully obliged in providing?  That is promising something knowingly destined to failure.

Consider then a point in which politicians say and make promises and explain what it is they are and aren't doing, although it seems that this is never all always accurate, or that passage of legislation is given to any level of political accountability.  Here the expectation is that the voter does her homework in studying relevant issues to his personal life, and then suddenly a new learning curve is sprung on a given population.  Yes, to understand issues here more deeply with a given side presenting a 'pro' case, versus a 'con' case.  The learning curve as it turns out, perhaps, may have been a bit steep and deliberately obfuscating language presented in the matter of not explaining what it is that were going on.  One might be reliant on a conservative 'No' vote for a measure when something isn't so clearly and well understood...this is political statistical work.

The problem, however, with an initiative or even referendum is that 'mandate' aside, if cost overrides result from miscalculation with respect to the original direct vote, as it turns out the reality could also be rescinding, something of the referendum killing stratagem, I've seen in the past.  It seems as likely true if there are nearly equally enough opponents to a given measure, perhaps, at times there are many pathways to killing it.  It seems there is a possibility that one votes for something that one may not be getting, or as it turns out in other cases, the construction of law by referendums and initiatives were poor in the legal context...court systems, for instance, over turn a particular proposition in the past.  Sometimes modern political parlance attacking judicial branches claim that democracy is strongly vested in the people solely, and decrying similarly the limitation of the rights of courts saying otherwise.  Court activism used to be more commonly regarded in the lower judiciary echelons at least more vociferously in certain media while taking advantage of  the notion of 'democracy' in the creation of initiatives and referendums.  Does the legacy of an initiative last for several months, years at that, or is it slated to failure in the long run?  Here when a popularly perceived piece of legislation is declared unconstitutional (in the referendum context), it may be declared invariably as given by an activist judiciary by others.  I mention this aside since it is important role and relationship in the functioning of political activists putting forth such direct mandate.   As maligned, for instance, that some may have decried legislation put forth amounting to tens of thousands of pages of documents with a given bill, it is also at times more difficult to encapsulate in precise common language the elements of what should happen next.  The lesser seen view of this is that problematic details may have emerged later, how much is required in saying precisely limitations of damage for malpractice...is one size fits all going to work with respect to the limitation of damages?  I recall a reading of an initiative that I believe failed to pass of this type, and I voted against it, only riding on all the hidden details running in mind that were absent in provisioned language on the bill.  On the other hand, one might suspect any number of minds out there feel reticent for any after thought with respect to the minimalist approach to finer print.  Here, as it turns out, a politician him or herself may or may not read the entire contents of what were being voted on, or perhaps, had a series of advisers explaining things that everyday lay readers would be less accustomed to.  A senator may want to know what exactly appropriations are given in the way of scientific research, and then translation between science work and lay languages is another matter, but at least politicians have the position of reading and understanding what it is they are doing in so far as governing as a sole occupation as opposed to one given by a likely incidental reading.  We elect people to do their jobs as politicians that is understanding the issues that concern us, not merely to have us claim erroneously that we alone are empowered enough to make decisions in a world that filled with a tremendous number of decisions to be made.   One might expect a given politician not to have people deciding line item on the finer points of failed negotiations here in a given mandate, or attempting to coerce that.  When politicians fail their mandates, as in either do too much or too little, it is usually given that political repercussion results.  As in the recent Greek debt crisis and upcoming referendum vote, I am not certain what leverage the Greek pm really has to gain, however...if people vote pro union then he has more to lose than gain.  A confirmed vote one may wonder may not hold way to solidarity of views in certain respects...anti unionism...not necessarily according to recent polling...anti austerity...yes...but this one should imagine perhaps, heavily nuanced at times especially in consideration to changing gravity of matters.  It is a cheap shot to the notion of 'democracy' that poor language results in the construction of a referendum equally devised in a way so as to manipulate people not for 'democratic' betterment, but in manipulating people.