Archive for the ‘literary’ Category

Sexy legal terms

February 22, 2014

Harmony between law and the carnal.

Res ispa loquita, —- clear cut, you can not deny having had sex with or slept with sometone

Ratio-Descento——reason behind, why, or how, that happened

Latches—-timliness, how long you knew her before, how long you intend It, to go on.

Mens Re——guilty conscience, for the carnal act. Particularily considering what you intended by the act, as opposed to harm caused by the act.

Perogative, Sovereign right———to such intercourse, or what ensues of it

Acquiescence——critical silence

Proximate Cause———- the proximate cause of something is what is really behind intimacy, and not, the reason for it.

Reasonable, doubt, beyond reasonable doubt———-regretting the act, not regreting the act…..there is a certain remoteness to such consideration…all is not forgiven, what is, is not unconditional.

Actus Reus———————-The act itself, upon which its matter hinges

Acts of God——————-The legal system is based on an erroneous consideration of a gross act of god; Sexuality is in context of a greater act of god.

Negligience ————-Negligience allows to grow what then will turn on one; negligience by design; artful, creates.

Contributory Negligience ———allows it to get worse

Audi Alteram Partem ———–allowing the other side to speak, in disputes, in general,

Quid pro quo ——————–symbolic sex

Liability——————-Liability will stress a relationship into ending

Rainbow stuff

September 3, 2013

It gets so dark at night in the white mountains, it’s like the darkness has a thickness. And the only reason they call it the white mountains, is you can imagine the little bit of white llife, everyone has inside.

I’ve been to nineteen rainbow gatherings. Alabama Talladegha National forest, April 94, Ithica Aug 94, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Kentucky, Ithica, in 95, Osceola 96, Ocala Fl, 99, 2000, 2002, & 2006. Ithica, 97, 99, 2001, 2005, Allegheny, July, 1999, and 3 New England ones. These are hippies gathering in the woods, away from cars, feeding and sharing for free, in different national forests through the year. By far, the new england gatherings have been the worse, the bottom three, the top 15 rival each other in spirit and lessons. The world is far more sexually abused than admitted, and the rainbow takes on probems, the world ignores, so maybe obnoxiousness is this, and the point, to help.

I should also mention I haven’t been to a rainbow gathering in seven years.lll

The rainbow has two issues, amid its myriad of circles and lessons. It discourages alcohol, for which alcoholics congregate near the parked cars, begging for money, extorting alcohol, and often ènough threatening or enabling violence. And this last is what may get the rainbow in trouble; insofar we have no leaders, nor anyone to represent us, and refuse to sign permits; yet sued for “A-camp” liability, policies we endorse or take no action on, everyone one of us will be named a defendant.

The other issue is “The National”. There are smaller regional gatherings of ten to 2000 jan through October, yet every July, usually in The Rockies, or western states. There is “The National, which draws 5000-20,000. I propose having three summer month rocky mountain regionals, rather than one, possibly too big gathering.

The rainbow is not a vacation, but about improving yourself, others and the world, through skills and experience of the rainbow. The gathering is not about running from your problems, but being in a place that can help you deal with them.

My friend Tommy and my dog traveled with me, to the white mountains shadows of Mt Mouisilauke where the rainbow gathered. By shadows I mean, the mountain is so immense as to cast shadow and not be seen, throughout its valleyes, as if the leaves glimmer and resist some far off huge peak between its rustle casting a daunting spell more unseen than seen as daunts.

I told Tommy, these NERF (New England Rainbow Family) gatherings are the worst, boring and stuck up and without spirit, more like private school, than some eternal avante guarde to prophicize the promised land inherent in the rainbow metaphor. I told Tommy, we can’t be separated,that they are jealous of truly good friends, that you must run interference, and help me capitalize on the abused situation, for the obnoxious are always secret victims of abuse

Yet as soon as we get there, parking along The Swift River, than we seperate. Tommy is alcoholic. We both have alcohol. I just knock on wood and sneak it in and share it quietly or take a taste of it now and then, but not loudly party or be irresponsible therein. And they never mind that. Its the babylon of drinking they don’t like, when people use it like cowards to run away from, or start to talk babylon on it, out of pressure to sound fun. Babylon is what they call the world that doesn’t make sense. Is what they are against. In this sense they merge with Reggae, or rastafarianism, and their love of drum circles and making acoustic music in general, and cooking and setting up kitchens in the woods, and sharing, and having some blessing or affection from the state they are in. For instance, Mississippi blessed us with busloads of Christians from a megachurch. Ithica tended to have more poets. Florida has lots of younger people.

Anyway Tommy is scared to pass the “No alcohol” sign at front gate. From front gate to the campsites and main meadow, is two miles. “A-Camp” would as I said, stay near “front gate” and try to be consumed by alcohol. However, at this gathering, there was no A-camp, so Tommy staked this claim, and waited for “kegger Dave”(who is sober now) and “Two Tokes” (who is bad) and “bald head Hawk” (who is good) and “Little Hawk” who is dead, to show up, having been last seen by Tommy in the early nineties.

Fine, so I hiked down the lonely path alone; and towards the end past the campsites, all off one main path, I camped on the hillside side of the path, not affixing as the suburb of a kitchen, as one may do, prefering to be alone and old, until the situation settled.

In truth, there were people panning for gold, just a river curve away from the established fire pit, Tommy propitiously found, right near, where we parked, and he soon wanted to pan for gold and gem hunt, and brought back pounds of rocks as if the car had the payload, and also I felt bad taking minerals from “The Granite State”. I kept the car locked. I didnt want him bringing attention to me. But he cooked and slept in the bushes propitiously near. I hiked enough to see a sign that said, “no sleeping or camping on this side of the road” in the process of getting to “The Benton Trail” that explored up Mt Mousilauke. And the cops or rangers came round that night at 2am knocking on car windows, that if answered, were hit with a fifty dollar fine. I heard they specifically looked for Tommy, at his sight, with search beams, but he had luckily chosen to sleep under a boulder near where he had found some gold flakes numbering about a $1.82, and their lights couldnt see him, and they didnt go trek-look in person.

There hippies who think it is Ok to take rare minerals from national forests, or anywhere.

One can’t escape the sensation, one must better quiet down, to take in the conscious life about, the press actively detracts. Ultimately, that’s what a rainbow gathering takes in, that’a how we are not political but spiritual, and gives us faith.

If you can define “civilized” as being removed and far from truth, from the centralized removal of government, media, corporation, than we should all take on the “barbarian” identity. The barbarian, is more enlightened, than the civilized, being closer to earth, less religiously limited, (by which I mean, more religious), and proner to community, and group-thinking. You can say to a barbarian, that you know they know they didn’t get a life. Indeed, they respect that integrity, its proximity to success makes it vital. And yet, in writing, where it is harder to simply mute, writing exudes civilization.

The rainbows, are more exquisite than the Romans, in their ritual of noon circles, and welcoming strangers into the circle. The tradition, of the barbarian in the woods, the ritual necessary to it, is far more exquisite than what is required to subsist in a day in babylon. Where closeness requires skill, so sophistication, is born. On world which believe in the world, as it is on paper, is less sophisticated, and cruder, than a polity aware of higher power. That higher power is hard to discern, makes its acknoledgement more skilled, than the ignorant. That’s what “enlightenment”, is all about. The rainbow is where the promised land, might be prophecized.

Barbarians have realized the world is better, working together. i would bring over long fallen over thin dead trees and dèposit them near the kitchen “Wanna Burn?”. They had a talent show one nìght, cooked for main circle where evenings, food was distributed; did fire dancing, and I met one fellow from N.J. Who skateboards across the country, states, at a time.

The galls, were the most famous barbarians, and probably because nights were cold in north italy and the alps, they counted nights, and slept days, and so the rainbow it seems, rose to socialize at darkness, and all night, the drums could ring. Also it is customary to yell, alone or enmasse, from campsite and campfire, whatever was wanted to yell. I yelled, “rainbow zombies” and “mind control”; indeed tried to talk about the obvious mind control that created the gathering, and creates politics and tv. And mind control is good to talk about.

A sin of the world is isolation, and rainbow has the potential to bring people together for the numbers wisdom requires. Thats part of the genius of the pagan and classical and tribal world, rainbow adheres to tribal principles, and civilization has removed from us. The press, and government, is far from us; whereas, of rainbow, it is near, if at all. Groups can unleash the power that recognizes the world as ongoing victim, individuals, can’t. It is very easy to say, “mind control creates the world we see” but requires people to see where that mind control comes from, and how..

Rainbow embraces, what the competitive nature of the world might disable; Rainbow enables recognition of what more truly is. People are hurt, betrayed, violated. Where is the place, the community, to admit it? Where does the fulcrum of enlightenment lodge?

People are encouraged to bring at least ten pounds of food to share with the kitchens to prepare and distribute. This is a fairly delightful ceremonial first thing to do. One wants to dispense with the food stuffs as soon as possible, it’s added weight to all the camping gear. So you can walk around and visit kitchens and donate a bit of this and that to everyone, or all to one particular kitchen.

Main circle is where noon council is. It’s also a place where perhaps the most serious and important conversations may be had. I missed the noon councils, and in general did not find much relief in the form of people or circles to engage. There is a snobbiness to the New England Rainbow, the other tribes and regionals don’t have. Maybe the rainbow movement has been seen as the subversive type it is, and infiltrated by those who control it to keep it from being what the rainbow is. While most regionals are two weeks, the New England is only one, allowing less time to work it out. It’s one of the few gatherings that has auspicious worship of a few older people. Most gatherings are like the explosions of leadership by the young at college. I searched out people at main meadow, several times, and cleaned it, two mornings, but found no one. Once people started a guitar circle, which was replaced with a drum circle, which can go on all night around the large main meadow fire circle. In other regionals, people would collapse and sleep right there.

Rainbow and tribes are not about the concentration of power, and its corresponding effect of so much pressure upon the official he/she doesn’t really know what is going on. Moreover they provide the opportunity to discuss the creation upon us with many, in circles, when the isolation and distraction of the more sinful world, circumvents this.

But, if a movement or tradition, is corrupted, the easy access to other people, serious problems require, can be shut down. Though I did not interact much with people, the sheer camping out was calming and a great feeling. I really needed to rise and watch the sun circle round the mountain rim shadowing me, a couple days. It was nice turning off the clocks and going by the sun. Likewise, being in the white mountains of New Hampshire, put me close and hiking trails. There was one night, it thundered, but rained very lightly, and another, that didn’t thunder, but rained long and steady, dampening parts of me trying to sleep, seeping through my tarps. There was also a wonderful consortiums of dogs.

There was one moaner. Ok, passing moans coming from a tent is not something to joke about: It makes you wonder whether every girl passing is a moaner.

I was not able to engage in capfire circles, or hang out near the drums, nearly at all, or as I remember in past gatherings, except two other nerf ones that came to mind, where this impediment exists. Knowing what I suspect of private school, by being aware of the prevelance of sexual abuse, be it naturally under god, or as mere contrivance, or actually mistranslated into society, had I placed that thought prominent, I could have stepped past their features, to the circle, and waited it out to lay it on the line. But I didn’t.

The ideas I wanted to discuss were

The Story of the Universe that gets us here.
Really simple, bad evil universe not into good ole universe, demands sacrifices, pagan culture, for which we create kingdom of god, and society that masquerades covert saccrifice.

Wè as the barbarians, are more enlightened than the civilized, as civilization is the process of moving us from truth.

The afterlife, or remaining consciousness, is no picnic.

The obviously is mind control in the creation of the rainbow world.
This went over the best, so true and within what sounds reasonable the most easily.
Almost sure T.S. Eliot meant, “In the rooms, the women come and go, talking about mind control”
Always others from N.J. At gathering who eventually befriend me.

There was something democratic machine about it, something supposed to be fore the people, corrupted away from the people, and as community is a psychic sense, so there was something psychic to the totalitarianism, as what is constructed, is mind control, the control of what is in the realm of society.

Rainbows should put in time in commerical agriculture, or on large farms.

It takes many to realize the loss, the many is one thing, the rainbow offers.

Seems like upper and middle class sells soul for money and or good job. Bars can not get as serious as campfires.

Hard but good hiking in white mountains all around; if wasn’t so tired and needing to get away.

Sensations, there’s not much life in each head, but a little, to feel
Sensations, the kingdom of heaven does see from inside or through the eyes of the kingdom of god, and even, surrounds the kingdom of god.
Sensations, all our heads are together in mind space

Additional notes, 1) lots of activity, at night. Also, lots of periods of quiet during the day. Gallic tribes did same strategy.

2) No rich people at gathering, fairly put, a lower class thing, very few people with middle class jobs.
Also, regarding NERF, (new england rainbow family) gathering, no pick-up trucks, the rainbows haven’t picked up the red neck pick-up truck charactor they are prone to. All I’m saying, pick-ups, are like the high cavalry of the lower class;

the drums have barbarian beats.

There is a real line of quiet, under there, is quiet.

The rainbows howl at night. Good reason to not smoke.

Not burning man or shows, or costs money, but hippie chill quiet, a big part of which being in the woods, outdoors, beautiful and public setting.
It’s not some “Hey Amigo” “What’s up” but about reaching the back nine of society better.

A big part is getting into the peace and quiet of camping.

Barbarians have realized things are much better, working together

Julius Ceasar, or Jesus Christ?

May 6, 2013

Julius was assassinated, by widespread conspiracy, about 12 years before Jesus was born. Both had “last names” that were not real last names, but adopted. “Ceasar” is a name for “king” or “Dictator” and “Christ” is a name for a “real” or “saved” human. “Ceasar” might imply a certain genius, “Christ”, a more active state, than “being”.

Now whereas Jesus was born and heralded and searched for, as King of the Jews; Julius had to scrap and commit crimes and bribe and fight, to attain the position, Governor of Gaul. And whereas Jesus’s being King of the Jews, might have automated so ordaining of power and destiny, Julius had to fight 7 years in the gallic mountains against unruly, at least according to History, Gallic, Germanic, and later British Tribes. Nevertheless, Jesus, in his element, reigned as Supreme as he was, and Ceasar, defeated Gallic insurrections, each year, poising him to unite a fractured Rome, warring against itself, as other generals commanded their troops, to such loyalty as to fight other roman generals, commanding their troops, specifically, Pompei and Octavius. Thus while the faction of John the Baptist, pressed forth, to herald Jesus to greater success, the factions of Pompei and Octavius, pressed and forced Julius to triumph.

And yet both were pyrich victories. Jesus, led to Christianity, Ceasar, upon his death, to a Roman Empire; both of which had the same subtle historical goals of declining tribal life; of declining the paganism, that relied on tribalism, to be effective, and a real metaphysic. Christianity, accepts the state, as that contrary faction it may in theory overcome, and the Roman Empire, spiraled out of control and into the lower standard of polity, which to this day, good Christians, and good service, tries to oppose and forgive, in a more natural and godly morality, than an atheistic state.

John the Baptists heralding of Jesus, as more accepted holy men may do; is like Pompei’s mentoring of Jesus, until they were forced to fight, decades later. And yet it may be undeniable that life was better, before Jesus and Julius, that times under Pompei, and with John the Baptist, freeer and better. That both Julius and Jesus were vehicles that led to further oppression by historical structure, that while they were both very superior to their competitors in spirit and war; among if the greatest, of what they do, of all time; you can not deny, the Roman Empire, Julius enabled by holding together a Roman Republic fracturing apart from it’s size, was far worse than life in the republic; and that though Jesus be the perfect leader we sought; there have been no perfect leaders since then, so tight his domain he left..

John notes the Pharisees and vipers; pompei notes Rome fracturing and fissuring from powerful generals gaining loyalty from troops, via plunder of war; and both led to one greater and eclipsing. John reminds all of their common ancestor of Abraham, the good roman generals, reminded the people of the morality and diplomacy of the Roman Republic which united and created them. When Jesus was baptized by John, a dove flew by, saying, you are my chosen son, and Heaven opened up. Under Pompei’s mentorship, the governorship of Gall opened up for the politician and official, Ceasar, that would lead to his saga of holding together a republic growing too large, and prone to horrible civil wars because of it. Thus, their mentors, associated, with the path before their protégés. Ceasar was like the holy ghost compared to Pompei, and Jesus, to John as well, for they both had historical destiny before them, to become the best there’s ever been; even while that cult of greatness, in both case, had the tragic downside of making the known world inferior, to its pagan and pre-empire polities.

When Jesus says, “It is written, man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that precedeth out of the mouth of god.” 1) He reminds us both Julius and Jesus, were established through books, gospels, and in Ceasars case, the notable history he kept and published of his gallic campaigns. 2) It evokes the sieges armies back then go through, the lack and primacy of food, and how spirit, and favor of higher power. It evokes how success is grounded upon the greater godliness; and that an army winning on its stomach, only half true; Spirit and divinity, being the other half. As Ceasar tried to subdue Gaul, where they lived on corn more than grain, he was not tempted to live and let live; but grow the republic for the glory of Rome. The Devil urging Jesus to prove himself by jumping from a cliff; very much the military axiom of Not doing the foolish thing. Jesus is all about resisting temptation; which a prime tenet of good generals.

Who can not see the similiarity between the Devil taking Jesus to a high mountain, and offering him the world, would he submit; and Julius, scaling the alps where the galls live and don’t like Rome, and wondering what to do. As Jesus chose the Lord, the jewish lord no less, and resisted temptation again; so Julius consistently reminds himself to behave, and not let the cruelty of war, enact his vengeance upon gallic towns and cities. Jesus offered a light, to the way of death of society; To be sure, Roman encroachment upon Gall, was no light, but a false one of historical significance, and yet Ceasar, did lead Rome to a pacified Gall, and then Rome herself, to civil order under his reign, upon defeating the other generals.

Jesus takes fishermen and makes them fishers of men. Julius demands soldiers and makes them soldiers. Jesus went to synagogues around Syria and Galilee and preached and healed. Syria was a known spiritual religious proud place. Julius went to Gall and Germany, france and Britain, not healing and preaching, but putting down insurrections and organizations and villians against Rome: Two totally different natures. Jesus, for his victories and demonstrations of Spirit, soon had people following him. Julius tried and did make friends with the numerous tribes of Germany and Gall, one by one. And yet, they would fall against him, under the leadership of militant bararians who would annually rouse against Rome, and did the people following Jesus around Galillee, continue to follow him? And weren’t the tribal distinctions to be dissolved by Rome, more and more, by state; and weren’t the people’s of Syria, uniting in following Jesus, and so forgetting the tribes they come from? In this sense, Jesus ruled not the jews, but peoples of Syria. And Julius, not the people of Rome, at least not until the tribes of gall were dealt with. Multitudes of people followed Jesus. Multitudes of soldiers, Julius. Jesus said, blessed were the meek. Julius, blessed loyalty and fortitude, with reward. Jesus blessed the humane and human side of character, the mourning, the hungering for righteousness, the merciful, and pure. Whereas Julius valued, strength, endurance, faith, and loyalty. And here they differ. The Julius men were about restricting themselves to prevail, doing great things, by being less; such; whereas Jesus proclaimed passion and character and fulfillment and manifestation, into the greatest and richest parts of character. Jesus was not about the sparse, but those living fully; whereas the roman ethic was quite a paucity, a hardship, a tradition of the nobility of less; that allows a constrained morality, wants propriety and form; has an absent dimension, to be sure, where Jesus had a dimension of spirit, so important to his followers, to transmit spirit further; yet the spirit of Rome, was to spread. Needless to say, the spirit of Rome, equated with the spirit of Christianity, equals the end of, and removal of, old ways; from hundreds of tribes around Europe, to medieval dark ages, why they called it the dark ages, no more tribes around Europe; and from hundreds of religions, a pantheon of palpable quiet phenonoma to unify and query, to the under ten major religions we have now. Needless to say the gospel is the story traveling, by foot, around the middle east; and Ceasar;s history, regard his traveling around northern Europe, with thousands of soldiers. So they say. So it is written.

So what is the relevance of this literary, historical irony? Coincident initials? Or historical design, revealing a pointed creation of history with irony in mind? Karma?

The forebearance, resourcefulness, spirit and discipline of Ceasar; the purity of Jesus: The Kingdoms of God and Heaven are important. The KIngdom of God, explains how History is possible. History might not reveal the Kingdom of God, and survive, in its nature; and that makes Jesus the potential gamechanging transcender he is and we aspire to; The Kingdom of Heaven, which John preached as well, as near, whereby, repent! for history is over soon, for a new reality, say you as an individual are done, and part of larger mind now. But the value of understanding Ceasar’s rival currency, is he is dealing with Crime; at several levels. War is a crime, making men soldiers a crime, plunder, keeping plunder, using it to bribe, to buy off whole people’s in exchange for their favor and popular reflection; Ceasar is about crime, and the perversions of politics war reflects. Now if we look at the earth and human beings about us; contradicted that be by media; there is not only the domain of the kingdom of god; apart, dwarfing, making irrelevant any other societal impression or creation; for in that ghostly so reality; all the crime, perpetuated upon, and corrupting perversity, that holds back the higher classes from a more sensitive history and ability; is within the ghost of the kingdom of god as well. Where John may preach the kingdom of heaven is near; and try that ploy to reduce society to pure righteousness; The proclamation of Jesus baptizing with the Holy Ghost, is the promise of the revelation of the kingdom of god to people, and that ghostly state revealed; for the kingdom of heaven lives in and with the kingdom of god, going all through earth’s diurnal course, minute and second by minute and second together, a great big one of humanity, living on its limitations together, both after and physical life.

We claim to look at this ghostly life, or at least feel its ghostliness; in that ghostliness a totally different way; a way as it really is, a way of less, but also a way where and how crime and all the bad things and bad ways and negative and way of dying, society and history be full of; even as history not reveal the kingdom of god, and therefore the extent of crime, perversity, and degradation unrealized, and yet to be revealed, as a political concern and reality; it must be seen as parcel to a spiritual reality, parcel to a state or kingdom of still, ghostly, being. All sorts of things are done to this state; things that are secret, like that state itself, to history, ostentasibly: Nor can that state rise above itself and confess or take responsibility; for it is not allowed, and frustratingly denied, as contrived status that is.

Thus, were one, to confess: to me: I would help show how it involves the many in this state. Any confession to me, of guilt, responsibility, would lead to an exposure of the way and whole, and a whole network of worst crime, enabled like history and society through the kingdom of god that can put on the show, humans can not; would cease. We live in a world, where crime is all about, classes, allegedly controlled, jobs based on conforming to this way; pornography, and all that is unknown to the media, yet is; and though these offenses exists, parcel to a state of the kingdom of god, that is not spoken of, they are almost not felt, or revealed: because they are not known by media, and media sets the dimensions of discussion. So how can one confess, even the sins upon me, let alone all, unless Heaven allows it, or the requisite seriousness conducted?

Must it be done in the highest rarfied echelons of Society, like the judiciary, or pinnacles of religion, or town meetings? For society flows from there, what trickles down, or has trickled down, like it or not, we subsist on. And what seems and is said to be, really isn’t; and what and how really is, not known. Oh, there is negotiation, I pray to Heaven, but what exactly do I pray for, and how can the haze occur? On the one, I pray some reveal the wrongs put on through them, put on because they are the kingdom of god, and many are implicated, and so they will need help, and so I will show them what really is, and possible know how to create some better reality. This is the metaphor for ceasar,trying to work with the different tribes of Europe, trying to gain movement, through this and that that may enable it.

The problem is that there is no confession, for such the way, of crime, behind the scenes, critically unreported, through further control, would cease, and a new reckoning again. The tribes, though, Ceasar faced, fought, made friends with, their names suggest own pagan ways. The Nervii, well, focus on the nerves with friends and what makes seem, and what shock the pressure upon the heart. The Aduei, can we say good by and stay, can you leave? For from there, that salvation, not of justice, but pure, but Christian, and of terminology, rather than group discussion.

So one knows of bad things I may reform; But one is hard pressed to say so, not out of fear of implicating many, not out of lacking trust in me; not in the illness and finess of creation; but in that the way, outside History, but secretly effecting History cease, and a new reckoning begin. Julius would look at the world and try to straighten it out, figure out what is really going on, be motivated by the recognition and knowledge, crime goes on through the kingdom of god, reform and spirituality go together, a spiritual nondeceptive government is possible. Jesus would look at the world, see the dualism between god and man, see the skitzophrenia, the knowledge of a secret world, osmosized with God causes; yet critically have, not necessarily the divinity of a winner, but the ordination of Heaven that comes with the Jews being the father of your creation and design, the lord intervenes for Jesus, whereas Ceasar represents, like John the Baptist, the sweat of the brow, the innovation of the man, the feeling and compassion that leads to success; should we generalize.


Healing, jesus, conquer, fortitude, governor not gall equals campaign. divinity close to chest.
Healing people through Syria, like conquering galls, fortitude and skill, superiority, divinity. The aquitani: To acquit someone, basic justice, basic spirituality, point out kingdom of god, the body, how it’s controlled, so individual, 1, a part of everyone, and 2 not that body, or at least merely operating that body. Likewise, the belgae, the beautiful, if one is to be beautiful, one must be explaining how earth and humans really are. This honesty is pagan essence, or foundation to there thereof, and you explain to someone how no one did it. To get out of the state of injustice to the state of justice. Ceasar and Christ, their world hasa proximity to themselves, close to them, their world emenates from. How do you describe the world in appealing terms. It is more the lack of apprehension by the listener. There’s a lack of apprehension of the same thing, beauty describes. For the individual today, is bogged down, in his primary identification as a reproducer, without apprehending what is reproduced, maybe that is the context facilitating ablest communication, and yet that is hard to apprehend, what we do as reproducers. Reproduction, is what we are resisting, a knowledge of what we reproduce.

Able communication is like moving to a new area, which is what the warlike helvetti did. The helvetti,has rich men, 12 towns, and 400 villages, if you believe history.

A subtle shift in leadership, from one unruly gall to another, can make a difference in the heart. Perhaps it is shifts in the heart we seek that understands what we produce. A shift in heart to certain understadings, whereby the listener, hears better, as my heart climbs up to my left ear. We understand speaking truth is important. An evil rich man, tried to lead to the helvettie to war, and they found out he was crooked, the penalty for which, being burned alive, in chains, his ten thousand supporters came and escaped him, but he apparently soon committed suicide. Perhaps this requires a magistratial air. THis removed sense signifies the literal difference, a bush or Obama can have on our herts.

The change in heart, that realizes a criminal doesn’t have to be caught to talk. ANd yet this way, of sacrificial justice, is exactly that. It goes on, they get caught, and then they need help. IF only we could have a change of heart and talk about this, before their claim by history is manifest. So the Helvetti journey, ornery, strong, looking for trouble, leaving their homeland to look for trouble, and take over somewhere, and Ceasar governor of gall, hears about this, and like a juvenile outwitting a nine year old, takes out a bridge, intending to cut them off, and so, we try to shift in our heart to a more apprehensive place, my god the word apprehensive itself, needs to change, letters drub off my heart, congeal have to talk, yeech————————————————-How to change my heart?

As predicted, CEasar, in third person in book, told their envoys, who got the job, if you can consider it a job, their richest men. Don’t know why they didn’t send the poor and normal. Probably because this is historical, and history, when not flowing through the state, flows through the rich upper class, so the upper class is more corrupt, and prone to controls and marks, that may make them prone to war; having been hurt as a child perhaps; So Julius, who is probably doing this for profit, but it’s his history book, says, no, you can’t march through provence; I don’t trust you, and you guys were rude to a counsel of mine a few years ago, nor nice to one of our armies, now that I recall. Now if the envoys were poor, they might have given their word on safety and the oath mean something; or gone back and said to the guys, we should go home, or sneak by another day, though that may have effected their pride; lord knows how played historical tribes can be.

But what happened, Ceasar fortified the river area, and the Helvetti, had to say “hell” and go through the mountains, on a path so thin, it required the attention of the sequestri locals there, who declined to give it as well, perhaps Ceasar coerced them? Would it be in his history book? The helvettie, appealed to the adieu to help. And this is where it stands. Hell of course, a horrible ejaculation, insofar it’s hard to escape, which is why treat yourself well. Now, this is what happens. There are people all around they are moving them. This is some bypass of vic

It being Ceasar’s first year on the job, he still doesn’t like them coming closer to the subjected or conquered French lands of tribes, and quickly home to rome and back with a few more legions. A few gallic tribes try to stop him on the way back, they merely delay him a week. When he returns, the helvetti are pillaging everybody, several tribes, in each direction. Is this pretext romans make up? Are the helvetti condemned and doomed to slings and slingshots whose volley return are boulders of Rome? Is this sacrifice of an army? Is that the metaphor? or dark etchings upon roman brick rock? Step into the earth? Chilling, the sense of the metaphor, history, we’ve become numb to.

The plundered tribes appealed to Ceasar for Help, according to ceasar, and Ceasar defeated them, and they took and eventually ceasar tracked em down, and they sent their rich envoys again, offering, we’ll go where you tell us and stay there for peace. The Romans, and Ceasars great uncle had suffered a defeat by then a few generations ago; so like Iraq, this might have been of payback for fighting Iraq 1, Bush’s dad.But he l

Ceasar doesn’t let it go. The condemned tribe is very sad. Ceasar admits he is indigant of the defeat some generations ago. But he laughs off the haughtiness with the old, canard, fortune piles high upon the wicked, so when fortune changes, they will be hurt more.

So the Helvettie take off, and the romans follow 4-5 miles behind; one rear guard, and the other advance guard, skirminshing along the way. The morale that one false victory, does not equal a stronger team; when their rear quard defeated roman calvary; tended more battle, than wise for the helvettie, who should have just led them on a long march through the woods of Germany into Russia or something. So the cars are spent by. Obviously some rate inside my head needs to be typed tobe true.

We must spend an evening, evening a shift in my heart. We must spend an evening, how easily death can be accepted, we must spend an evening acquitting everyone. This is serious, and now that I’ve got tommy, we’ve got explore; yet there is noTommy. But today we feel the frank damage to earth, environmentally, pressing up against, as if that is where success is grounded in, and that is where we go; restoring a natural world. ……

The adieu tribe, says goodbye to the people for the world of the mind about that must help

Polybius on How Rome Defeated Carthage

February 9, 2013

Polybius seems to have psychologically unconsciously channeled the glorious mythology of Rome’s birth, through Mars, and a Vestal Virgin, and Twins, who, raised by wolves, led other wild youth into the Juvenal Glory that might pass for the emergence of the Roman Republic; Aggressive and Wild, as such Dominance, a model for Hegemony and The Imperial: (Polybius unconsciously channeled) the mystery of The Republic’s Emergence onto Grecian Compass, with the mystery of where Romans came from, and how they took over. He ignores Romulus, and focuses on finding the date Rome became a real threat to Greek Politics; which he calls, her emergence as a world power.  In some ways, this is a vain and annoying, Greek historical perspective. (sexually abused bully and straight a, school) (Think about the similarities between wild youth and imperialism. Conquering Western America, brought with the wild west. Roman Consolidation of Gaul brought yearly armed opposition, The U.S. in South America, and Communism in General, imperialism, in general, creates wildness, senseless conflict, more damage; True maturity, is nothing like the imposition of imperialism. This New World Order, is imperialism, not order, wild excess, dominance, imposition; there is no order to it; even the order of the rich benefitting from the poor is ridiculous. There is an order to the taxing of our resources. We live in an ordered world. The order is the beyond, governing here. Thats the way the order is, thats what the order is. Thats what we live in, what we have to accept)

For example, it is annoying, Polybius praises the Roman policy of killing soldiers who leave their posts, as innovation and genius and superior, to the more common and fearful practice of either running or giving in, or hoping the attack stops, as you are not into fighting back. This is a very rank attitude. Survival is worth less than winning. It makes war bloodier and less safe. We may classify the psychology of his history on the Roman Republic’s press into Sicily and beyond Italy, as taking on the North African Carthaginians, who ruled Spain, large parts of Sicily, and mediterrian islands like Corsica. This undoubtedly irked roman tendencies of expansion further. Carthage, with its navy, had much more influence over Grecian affairs, than Rome. Polybius saw Carthage defeated to Rome. Who he prefered, can we say, because History chose the right answer for him, vexing as that loss of free choice may be.

His introduction praises Historical Record, without mentioning how History contradicts Earth and Truth. He is praising the record of Sacrifice on Earth. He writes that the way to learn is from the past, even though history is historically formulaic, and seems to repeat itself often. Surely Historians can not say History is Formulaic because The People don’t know History, for that would be the Job of Historians.  Rome keeps expanding, Spartans and Athens continue to feud, democrats and republicans, continue to feud, America extends it foreign Policy. Nothing changes, yet there have been Historians all along the way. Yet how classical is the expression, the greek bonne motif, of Historians condemning the Ignorance of the People.   Yet the anxiety of the Greek enjoys these subtle colorings, delighting in confusion, foil. Historians faulting The People for Ignorance, rather than Historians for failing to communicate History, feels like an old anxiety. The success of a Historian, should be measured by his transmission of powerful knowledge to the People.  But here, The Greek, is measuring the success of a people.

“The only method of learning to bear with dignity the vicissitudes of Fortune, is to be reminded of the disasters suffered by others” While this necessarily reminds us Recorded History, has always had low standards at best; it is by no means vital and a necessary therapy to dealing with one’s contemporary History.  Psychologically, such claim is little. In point of fact, tragedy is tragedy, and stands on its own; whereas improving society, benefits from Historical Comparison. I herald classical history as offering improvements upon the Present. And yet, think again, the troubles we and every age suffers, should we look to Heaven, and see those whose problems lasted longer: Is that not the nature of The Mind? That all apart are in it together, and able to bear because they see others bearing it? Strength does come from competition. Our eyes see ourselves, yet to see another going through same, must be very therapeutic.

Moreover, what is obscured here is that Unrecorded History had higher standards than Recorded History: That History, which led to today, continually encroaches upon the Tribal. That this Greek World and History in general, a record of sacrifice and stupidity, story and creation, vehicle and demonstration, game and automatic, requiring grains of salt and truth, to salve: This past History, as some comfort, as if the Peloponnesian wars, makes our Iraq intervention more acceptable; this is irrational, ridiculous Greek thinking we are reading, or if you prefer, it is Polybius selling History, as something it substantively and absolutely is not. At best this is some buy-in to classicism; but at worst, it is the opposite of what it claims; History is something so convoluted and manufactured, understanding such is essential to understanding the Greek metaphysical creation of History.

The theory goes that in pagan times of Tribes, actual ancestors, genetically linked to their present tribe, decided the fate or history of their tribe in negotiation with the remnants of other tribes on earth. The movement Greek and History symbolizes, is away from this simplicity, to a much more extensively, and not openly, sacrificial History, through elaborate designs and means of Society, whose form a great deal of earth’s human, has been locked into since. As far as I can see, this is due; to how little the universe is, compared to Earth. It is senseless, so we make ourselves senseless. Somehow this is desired, and yet, not enough. Relate to the Sense, Earth, is one of the greatest things around; humans and life, far surpassing our nearby gorgeous planets. Saturn might mark our solar system, but Earth would have its own consideration.

The transition, of course, involves the satisaction of conflict extending about, if one can believe, a time, where some tribes were less sacrificed than other tribes, indeed, wonder whether secret favored tribes can be today. That we know nothing about, because we are the sacrificed tribes. Now, rationally, this does not seem true, yet pagan tribal times, such as this race war, of Romans, who seem to have come for the north, and North Africa, battling for Europe, may have had ways of deciding, what is decided today, that was more complicated and involved.

His history involves from 264bc to 146bc, and he was born around 200bc. The Romans attacked the leading Greek Power, of Perseus, described in surviving volumes of Livy, and Polybius particticipated or was embedded in that war. To Livy, Perseus was described as a very wealthy King, through the mines he owned, and traveled about trying to defeat the encroaching Romans, with lots of gold and silver, with which to bribe local armies into fighting with him, one of the weaker enemies of Rome, compared to Sammites, Vulcans, Etruscans, especially Gauls, Sabines and Carthoginians, and Germanic Tribes.

In his history, “it is precisely the elements of the unexpected which will challenge and stimulate everyone alike”. Now there is something Greek, to the unexpected. Certainly Fortune has dealt me personally a great tragic unexpected blow, and 9/11 was totally unexpected by the public, as has been Arab Spring, and even the nature of Obama and G.W. Bush, unexpected in their lack of transparency and seemingly doing the biddings of evil influencers in their court. Using surprising shifts of fate, as an organizing mode for History, though, is different. In History, and personal life, hindsight shows how and why, the unexpected happened; and the account and cause, secrecy, both of the criminal out of necessity, and the warlike, out of evil code, as well.

Polybius in his introduction wonders what government Rome had that enabled it to be the dominant power on earth, in 53 years. “Is any task more important, than to acquire this knowledge?”  So Roman might, to Greek might, is unexpected to him, the twist of fate upon Greek Life, and unexpected because Italy is far from Greece. Likewise, there is almost an insidious envy of a roman government that apparently achieved what Greek Confederacies long failed. And that Roman form was a republic, and form America is based on, Polybius sings a shadowy paean upon the moral ambiguities and liabilities of America.

Graciously referring to Roman Dominance as a “spectacle” he necessarily compares it favorably to Persian Hegemony, and Spartan Hegemony. For the Persians failed outside of Asia, The Spartans only ruled 12 years, and Alexander, ruled a compliant Asia, without challenging Sicily or European Tribes, which would have been harder tests.

Historically the culture of the Roman Republic was steeped in military domination.  News of Rome’s ascendancy in Italy was not reported in Greece, obviously, until her conflict for Sicily, with North Africa. So we must ask ourselves, do we truly know everything? What is unreported to us? Rome’s quality for expanding their interest is true.  What are those qualities? A history, pointedly moving away from tribalism; over time, moving away from paganism, to sacrifice through history, through state, not tribal domination. It is probably Rome’s republican nature, dwarfing and impressing, the Greek way of city states and confederacy; much the way, in the decade between breaking from England, and The Federal Constitution, we had a confederacy, overawed, into Republican Understandings, causing the fascination and corbain to Rome.

Polybius refers to Italian Celts. Livy, to the best recollection, did not mention them. I have heard of the British Celtic Tribes. Is this gap some Greek reference to the Romans migrating to Rome from Britain; alongside their brother Tribe, the Celts? The first Romans were known for being blonde and red-haired, who, in peaceful agreement, soon merged with The Sabines; a merger which consolidated and increased Roman power. Look at the statues, in Rome, their faces are like us, like the faces in medieval paintings, western qualities, even if classical times had sculpture prowess and not painting.

Livy’s research and development, refers to the yearly annals Rome kept that marked History with pomp and circumstance, and, sometimes stories of people who heard stories from their grandfather; as well as accepted renditions of stories; But Polybius, was not only a statesman, and power concentrated in him through his influential Greek and Roman contacts, as today’s culture concentrates power or prestige, compactly, in a very small percentage of individuals, high doses, in something very little; in the entertainment industry, politics, academia, trade; Polybius was like that, he knew people, and traveled, and also per coda of the powerful performing at the fronts of wars, not only lived through the encroachment and ascendancy Rome upon Greece, but experienced firsthand campaigns between the two on the other side of the Adriatic, against powerful Greek kings, disputing Roman Hegemony, and failing, per this or the other.

So he has this Greek kinetic quality, visceral, sensation-oriented, (Look, he was so taken aback by the rapid roman growth, he felt compelled to write about it, some Greek ode to Roman Might, a culture supplication, a Greek supplication hoping for Roman kindness; the way people diplomatically bring presents to people they hope like them; even though presents are functional, and Polybius’s account, possibly guilty of pandering; yet who can fault those petrified in the roman shock waves?) And yet this periperiatic, panoramic, searching for inner harmony, questioning divinity itself, movement of Polybius’s account, is a Historical Anxiety, Creation; perhaps more so than human itself; leaving us to hope it is the broad breadth of a total comprehension of History, more likely to offer a human feeling, or metaphysical relation; than individual, isolated bloody accounts; For the Greek View of History, and Plays, come heavy with annoying level of violence, and annoying level of bemoaning the violence that happens anyway; Symbolizing the sacrificial, inhumane issue of History.

Polybius starts by talking about some things already encountered in Livy’s volumes; such as the Roman encroachment on Greek political senses were symbolized, enacted, through their conflict with the Carthoginians for Sicily. This conflict mandated the Romans to build their Navy, enabling them to cross the Adriatic and attack the Aegean mainland. Their naval dominance, according to Livy, was secured by building a long mast with a spike that folded out on top, but it wasn’t a mast, it was a pole, and they’d straighten it up, then tip it over when they got near an enemy boat, which could sink the ship, and let the men run across the pole to the enemy ship, where Roman hand to hand skills could be tested.

Herodotus also employs this brand, of, the very simple solution, as to why something happened; particularly, Herodotus’s moral of the story, as the orient might rejoin, is the Greeks won the last decisive battle against the Persians, because the Greeks had armor, and the Persians, leather. Now I doubt Polybius is going to have simple brush strokes. But he does first write about how Sicily for a long time had divided and shifting allegiances to both the north African, and the Roman league; and he writes about the relatively well-known historical fact of Hiero, who is described by Livy as one of the greatest faithful useful helpful rulers to Rome; whose City of Syracuse, was second only to Rome, and maybe Carthage, because History also records Carthage as second or maybe better, than Rome; Polybius does not glorify Hiero like that; being a contemporary.

Polybius is refreshingly simple in referencing the several tribes and divisions within Sicily. This tribal practice generally means one tribe stayed in one area: And inbreeding, normal. That is the major difference between then and now.

Polybius writes of Roman Genius and Might, consistent with Historical Propaganda instilling visions of Roman Superiority, morally ambiguous a claim that may be, and yet; He writes of a defeat or two; of Carthaginian Sicilian Forces, getting their act together and shoving the favored Romans back. And he writes about a very long siege of a Sicilian Port Town, where the supplies were stored, and what has to be understood here, is that sieges were so popular then, because they were easier on the soldier, than battles. In other words, it’s hard to escape the reality, no one wants to fight: Unless one understands the Léger main of Grecian ways to landscaping the lawns of battle, with gods and goddesses representing different battalions, and higher ideals somehow represented, by Troy, and The Hellenes, say.

Polybius’s description of the warfare on Sicily is coolly unique and relevant; in his basing of divisions or regiments moving per accordance with Supply Towns. They fought over, conquered, reconquered and moved on to the next, Supply Towns. This is an important Grecian Way of trade and import facilitating their necessary diet upon the sparse dry world of Attica, of Imports, causing craft and skill to trade for the food Attica could not grow, step farming hills, and lord knows doing what for irrigation. The primitive, or ancient, or classical supra structure of food organization, was overtly primal enough, to step aside from History’s Senselessness, and feed the people, however that was arranged, sophisticated ways and means, there wasn’t abundance, back then; that simplicity, was a structure, that limited History’s imposition.

There were laws in ancient Greece about this, to show you food concerns stood out. If you traveled abroad, Greek law required you carry back some grain and food. When Ships of Grain came in, and this will show you the vulnerability of Attica, the Ships of Grain, could sell their grain, for what the market would bear; yet those who then distributed in to the Greeks, very limited in the profit they were allowed to make.

My understanding of the town by town battles for Italy, in ensuing the Punic wars, were they followed a north south or east west route; Hannibal went where he wanted, and the romans chased or followed him cautiously. Here in his account of Sicily, Polybius asserts the contested towns were supply towns. Sicily is also very complicated, because it is a three sided island, and while yes certain towns and their neighbors were for Carthage, others, Rome, it’s much more complicated than that, because each town had pro-Carthage and pro-Rome factions; Thus alliance was about particular factions ending up on top, as much as Roman or Carthage armed might.

Into the mix is also a famous story about a Roman division gone bad, rogue, outlawed, condemned, doing things in Sicily that ultimately conflicted with Roman Policy. But there is a new anecdote here, to me, that Hiero, who seized power in Syracuse through a uniting of brigand and proper elements, worried about mercenaries mutinying, led them to a battle, to purposely wipe them out in, through attacking a nearby tribe.

The first issue of that Punic war, out of the Sicilian conflict, was whether to be able to fight the Carthaginians, who controlled most of Sicily, through a tribe there, The Campanians, the problem being, that tribe was guilty of immoral conduct in their foreign policy, and any value of their strategic alliance, would be lost in Roman compromising of morals. This is what America debates, whether to support Bin Laden against the Russians; Whether to support a militaristic right wing, in South America. But the Campanians sent envoys and made offers of support to both Carthage and Rome, to see which offered the better deal. People say the red state blue state issues are about values, and allegiance, but they are about sensibility, different sensibilities. Of course, though, it was the idea of plundering Sicily, that economic boon, that got the necessary votes in The Roman Senate to send support to the Campanians and protect them, and take what they offered and more. Livy, concerned with projecting a moral storyline, never explains Roman expansion as Greed. He does accept campaigns pay for themselves with plunder; here Polybius is saying otherwise, that the people voted for Greed, much the way Athenian Assemblies would decide the fate of captured leaders of islands foolishly loyal to the Spartan League. Greek History is composed of corruption of the people and democracy, while Roman History, relentless expansion.

Hiero starts out allied with Carthage. “Allies” doesn’t mean natural friends united in a just cause, like in world war two; nor can one side of warring parties not be composed of allies: “Allies” means peoples not necessarily friend, but rivals, aligned for expediency, by undesirable situation.

Burkhardt makes the hard to see, but obvious point, that no Greek inventions held up over time, that Greek Thought and Creativity was overrun by Judeo-Christian near east cultural qualities. Pagan ways, oracles, myths, plays, overrun by Christianity and Statism.

Polybius’s concern, with where Rome begins, to the Greek, where the roman dawn, finally reveals what rising Rome is; is the clipped polite Greek accent, supplicatory, trying to be a good influence. Yet while Polybius teaches battles must be about the supply towns, that if out of several towns, one is where the supplies imported tend to arrive, that is how contested towns are chosen. Logically, besieging a town with no supplies, will not concern nearby towns, whereas sieging a town with supplies, will.  But really the overarching lesson a written vehicle conveying a warning or story of what Rome is capable of, to those farther away. The teaching about trade routes is very unconscious, not highlighted,  though a mode History often conveys in.

But there are firm reasons why the Greek thought didn’t fight back and survive. Tribal pagan experimental, less culture, more controlled culture, less encroaching, distance, ability; too large a ship too wield against government media dominance without tribal good things like ceremony or holy meeting grounding in truth.


Polybius has short chapters on the charactor of Hannibal, and Scipio, and chilling military customs, such as conscription, which are more familiar with me than The Battles for Sicily. It was very interesting to read that by this time in Roman History, an infantryman must serve 16 years in the military by age 46, and calvarymen, who were wealthier, 10. A minimium ten years service was required for public office, you could begin at age 17. This chilling detail of Roman Conscription; such ordering of men to appear each spring, and towns and cities and tribes under some dominion, required to supply so many, on their own, being at an appointed place in Spring; this is a greek dramatic focus on the anxiety of war. There is an atheistic obscuring of the I think obviously Sacrificial Design of History through warfare; and regardless how it is one thing to write something, and another for it to happen; those moments of conscription, are chillingly told. I think a truer propoganda, wouldnt attribute roman might through cold conscription, but the two are rightfully linked by Polybius.

The amazing capacity of Hannibal is also surmised. It is obviousLivy got his description of Hannibal, from Polybius. It is delicate issue, the public portray of Hannibal, so important over a large area, and he took on Rome, out of Pride, and could have won. Cannibal

Polybius charactorizes the Roman Rise upon the Greek Consciousness as “Unexpected”. Even though he preaches learning History should empower a resistance to its formulaic follies, so perhaps, seeing the rise to the west, like the rise from Persia, Rome wasn’t hard predict. Thus, we ask, is History today, unexpected, or formulaic. Polybius inplies History has an innate unexpected quality worked into it; yet students of History, shouldn’t find things unexpected. Arab Spring, mirrored Praugue Spring. Dissatisfaction with Romney Republicans, a tradition of weak republicanism. A black president, breaking the color line, like Jackie Robinason.

Let’s move on to a chapter 2, as Polybius, to set the stage, for whatever grand lies ahead, depicts Roman involvement with Illyria, which is above Greece, and modern day Yugoslavia, I believe, the story he tells of the pretext for Roman involvement from across the way in Italy, some two hundred years before Christ, gives up the opportunity for discussion.

It starts out with the overconfident Aetolians, being surprised by, but still fighting, the Illyrans, and despite confidence and self-esteem, were defeated. Polybius echoes to his harkening theme of the unexpected, upon the vain and comfortable and skilled Aetolians, as History, unexpected; like my life where I find suspicion over my mother’s death and apparent loss of fortune; entirely unexpected, I very like the Aetolians; to a theoretical point of being despised by those made to crime; It is in this context Polybius starts a story, like he just did previous, a story regarding Sicily, battling between Carthaginian and Roman surrogates. Polybius reminds us, “We are no more than mortal men” Expect gods to rule us.

Another Greek hallmark is shared, next in this story; A leading king of the offending alliance, is so pleased, he drinks himself to death. Insofar these characterize Greek events; so mine strange fate, a Grecian Urn; of Grecian Design; defined as of the mind; of the mind controlling the subjective; so that Crime, is done; and if you’ve read Greek History, like the demise of the Aetolians, Crime, was the core of Greek Politics; attainable only by mind controlling the subjective.

Then the story has Greek Mysongony, a leading Queen, mistakenly lets her victorious fleet pirate and scare about; and they rally at an island with a wealthy protected town, make a deal with a detachment of 800 gauls paid to protect it; and walked off with a lot of loot. The mistakes my mother made; were we to learn; was not relaxing with drink enough; or truly knowing what the Kingdom of God was enough; In the process of Polybius drawing the lesson of The Epirots, who lost their town, making a stupid mistake they can only blame themselves for, hiring these gauls, who had been banished from the entire of Italy by the Romans, for they deserted from the Carthaginians, after the Carthaginians found them stealing what they were supposed to protect, and making deals with the enemy; And upon deserting to the Roman side, and doing Roman bidding, they continued their ways; so that as soon as the Punic War 2 ended; that gallic contingent banished on a ship never to return to Italy, anyway; and yet somehow the Empirots hired them to protect their wealthiest town.

How could the Epirots be so stupid? The mind controls the greek, the greek mind as they say. How could the gauls be so stupid and brave to bandy around like that? They are the cultural relatives of the Greeks; with purposeful less subjective; as evidenced by their lack of fear; and willingness to gamble. I see a distinct compensation for Greek uptightness, with Gallic lovability.

The story then goes, that now the entire region of Illyria, was in fear, of the new liscence given mauradeurs and brigands. Previous, the greeks would attack and steal crops, like Herodotus writes, they would steal women and queens, and this a much less measure than war; but now, people were worried about their lives, not their crops.

One must see the nature of thievery to this, as a part of political pattern of Greek History today; One might notice a thievery to our courts today; that’s a greek trait; and the greek culture of talking about greek issues, greater than what America, and hence us, might cover. The Epirots, then make another mistake; rather than complain about being looted; or just be thankful their lives spared, The Epirots, as the violated compelled forward by faith in the fall of the violator, patti hearst, stockholme syndrome like, send an army to help the Queen randy about, threatening; and this Polybius says, makes no sense, is folly.

And this was how Roman influence crossed the Adriatic; the pretext for hegemonic expansion of The Roman Republic, was now these ships went around stealing from Italian merchant ships five fold, and whereas before, the Romans always ignored the complaints of these merchants off the eastern shores of Italy, now they sent two top politicians to look into the matter.

Then these special envoys seeking to stop her sieges and preyings, upon greek towns and Italian merchants, mouthed off to the Romans, saying brigands and privateers, were not traditionally stopped here. The Romans politely answered the point of the state to protect against injustice. This flipped the queen out enough to try to assassinate them on their way to their boat. When the Romans heard about that, they detached some legions.

To understand the Greek mind, Burkhardte writes, like the modern world, the Greeks were healthy, lived a long life, thrived in old age, (as did my mother). Thus the submission, seen on earth today, of the subjective to the mind, perhaps correspondent to material comfort; though too much, at times, and not enough, some other ways.

It’s taking a little while to enjoy the style of Polybius. Chapter One, or Book One, was about what went on in Sicily and Rome and Carthage, both huge players on the world scene, went at it. While there is a concise schema of events in Sicily related, the next chapter is about Roman involvement across the Adriatic, how the Romans got there, what was the pretext. And it’s similar to book one in format, a long story, with many tidbits, about what led to Romans having to cross the Adriatic to instill Roman order. It’s a greater, less complicated story, than the story about Sicily, maybe because it involves Greeks, and Polybius was Greek, and nearer to home in Illyria, than Sicily, no doubt. So the form starts to be long stories of intricate, and news worthy, plots and narratives.

Let’s cover some Greek issues, relevant today. What is not discussed in History and Politics and Justice, is hard to be discussed by People, because it is not covered by their culture. And this is a focus of Greek culture. The Romans, like the courts today, will search for a pretext to be mean to do you, ultimately, subversively in the name of imperialism, statism, reduction of pagan tribal ways. And in that sense, we are mere Italian Tribes, waiting to be overcome, or forced to work with Rome, in their Future expansion and ways. And yet, as I pursue my mother’s death, and she was a good kind active special and uplifting woman; not without faults, but diligently working on those faults, and waiting and hoping for breaks and improvement, which routinely came, over the years, as reward to her concern and diligence; and I feel the courts, which like ancient Greece, and perhaps democratic machines, is far more organized crime, than Justice; in that way, of earth, a planet, flying round the sun, spinning, exposing itself to the universe, and the universe demanding a price, compelling the kingdom of god, which pagan tribes might have dealt with incarnate, that now we don’t.

And as I feel the court, scouring my filing for pretexts, like the romans, to advance and anilhate my efforts, they find nothing, because I try to be godly, and have learned you don’t gain through anger, but diplomacy. But nor to they take and construe fodder, and that is because they recognize me as Roman, in a way; that I follow the code; of knowing the system is sacrificial, and evil, and those who play in it, like myself, require a negative self-identity. They see that negative self-identity in me, that awareness of how horrible things are, and I more like a colonialist long ago who made it in Gall with the tribes, than someone anti-roman. Likewise, there were a few Italian Tribes, like the Etruscans, who it seemed, had something on the romans, and were able to secretly control Rome, as an erstwhile, estimable, meritorious Tribe, and I feel that as well.

The more I focus on the sun and moon, and Earth reflecting outerspace at night; which were ancient occupations, the more I see the balance of everything, transcending, any matters. And this sense of balance, hinges from the balance of the one amazing thing; the sun hanging in the universe like that; earth’s not plummeting, is our weights attraction absorbtion by the much greater sun above; but how does the sun just hang there? Is there some weight to the space, supporting it? But that kind of simple palpable focus, transcends little things, into a general roman understanding, the sun and earth and moon going around earth, is the greatest thing; that assholes don’t want to be assholes, and it has something to do with the earth moon and sun.

War is somewhat like the Greek night, and actually a way to sacrifice, we’ve incorporated as History. The Roman take on war, is necessary evil. The Greek take, with it’s city states and islands, seem more about crime, than plunder. Yet the crime aspect is secret, and not addressed, but just underneath and a motive; Like Judges today, so, are unknown, as agents to a totalitarian mode of sacrificing judiciary, ignorant of the kingdom of god, truth, enabling crime, and yet they are completely controlled by mind to be such. Totalitarian order, claims crime to facilitate its order, but is run by The Kingdom of Heaven; and discounts subjectivity, and ability, of individuals, who, as I say, are not about to discuss, what their media doesn’t. Thus crime is secure in its secrecy, as the removed domains of reporting, to not cover them, being removed, being easy to be controlled by higher power, or Creation, that writes History. It is that order throughout, and not secret bogeymen, who still need to be marshaled by Truth, Spirituality, that control the crime to the Illyrian, the Romans came to complain against, and their envoys, threatened; which in itself, sounds pretextual.

The Illyrians, under their queen, then with ships, besieged Corcyra, and deviously attacked empaudaus, pretending to be a merchant ship; but despite their guards being slain, they rallied and drove the Illyrians off, who then shipped to help the siege of Corcyra. Both attacked towns complained to the Aetolian League, and The Achean League, and those two states unites and sent ten ships. This plan failed, as the Illyrian allies, who sent them ships, and the acheans battled to a harmless draw, the Illyrians attacked fiercely, ramming ships together so as to jump on the enemies ships, and with superior numbers, take the ships. So the corcyrans gave in, the Illyrians controlled their own, and the illyrians took off to resiege empaudorous.

At this point, the romans took off with 200 ships and a land army. They went to Corcyra, which was delighted to see them, and the man the Illyrians had put in charge of their garrison there, had already offered to give in to the Romans; So the Romans were quickly able to add Corcyra to a list of islands friendly to the romans. Epidamnus soon followed, as the seiging Illyrans took off and fled, upon learning the romans were coming.

Many towns off the Adriatic there, gave in unconditionally to romans, a few held out and were defeated, one caused a lot of damage to the roman forces. Still the Romans roughed up the privateers, and gave amnesty to Illyrian soldiers loyal to the man who gave up Corcyra upon running its garrison, Demetrius, and put Demetrius in charge of the area. Tribes placed themselves under the protection of Rome. Queen Teutna fled to a well-fortified interior city. The end result, was due to a brutish queen, Rome now protected most of the tribes on the other side of the Adriatic and islands therein. Of course, with the pretext or actuality of History about, one can not blame individuals, and yet one tries to promote the morals and savvy that keeps romans from furthering their hegemony. The queen quickly made a deal with the romans, to keep only a few choice places, and limit her ships to certain distances and might. Polybius says the all the greeks were happier now, for the roman influence now at hand, as they all disliked the illyrians. Corcyra is a huge long island off the northern coast of Greece, and Epidaumas, is a much smaller island close to shore, about 75 miles north; off modern day Albania, or Yugoslavia.
Chap 3
Now having concluded his tale off the eastern Adriatic, Polybius spends a page or two on Spain; mainly to say it was controlled by Carthage, of North Africa. While Greece, the hellenes, had some islands in the meditarrean under Carthage control, as was Sardinia, Corsica and a good part of Sicily, Carthage never took over Mainland Greece, or Italy, except during Hannibal’s 20 year invasion, which is still coming up, being led up to, by Polybius; who says the Romans let Spain go, regretted not increasing their influence there, and had to do so as to focus on the warlike Galls, or Italian Celts; and secure northern Italy, before being able to influence Spain; so they concluded a treaty with Carthage, whereby neither side was allowed to cross a river, armed. This let them focus on the galls, to Rome’s North, out of Northern Italy, the alps, and southeastern France. Spain, I say, is different from Italy and Greece, then, by virtue of the African hegemony imposed. Modern day Greece, is a very polite place; Modern day Italy, is rough, tragic, but there is a rich system to learn, that is worth a lot, and Italian understanding. I have not been to Spain, but a willing to bet, if it is substantively different than Italy and Greece, it is for that reason.

A little further note though here on Illyria: When the illyrians took empidanmous, or Corcyra, I forget at moment, notes here for future edit; they stationed a garrison there, to rule the place, and put Demetrius in charge, who sold out to the Romans, and later, put in charge of a large portions of lands in the eastern Adriatic. Conquering, then establishing a garrison, was commonplace back then. If one walled city lost to another power, that power established a garrison there as part of the peace treaty. Things were peaceful, there was a garrison, if there was no danger of losing the city back to its people, through solid alliance, the garrison left. And this should have been the model for Iraq, if we ever really had to go there; in that sense it was a greek war about making money, then a roman war designed to effectively increase alliance into a United States true order. For really, our military example, encouraged the militarization of the Shiites and Sunnis, against each other; perhaps through a defense industry, through an outlet of bagdad, spreading its wares quicker, with the U.S. military so there. Really, Iraq would have been so happy to have seen us go, that we could have left a garrison there, rather than a whole army, and the arabs would have behaved more as we wanted, out of the threat of our returning if they didn’t. With us gone, there is an incentive to behave so we won’t return. With us there, things are so demeaning and gung ho, there is little incentive to behave in our interest; the threat of our occupying our land, is not something to avoid with good behavior; the occupation thus is demoralizing enough, to cause further war. Regardless of the ethics of the Iraq war, and there is little, the stupidity it led to, is further condemning of any claim to righteous foreign policy. We should not finally establish it was an unjust war that shouldn’t have happened, we should establish, it caused a civil war, and made things less secure and orderly, the opposite of its errant calculation; or the design of defense industry all along to sell more weapons to warring parties of Iraq.

According to Livy, Rome goes on to war a Macedonian ‘evil” king, who is able to be effective in a criminal, not military way. He controls wealthy mines north of Greece, and large amounts of silver travels with his conquering army, so it is not just his army, but his ability to bribe, and buy short term mercenaries, that made him dangerous. Thus, this selling out of the garrison by Demetrius, and the suspicious way he ended up in power shortly after the 200 roman ships sailed around; that never happened in the over 40 books on Livy’s Roman Republic; garrisons were debated, as the Romans often won; And the people had a say, on whether the newly conquered deserved a garrison or not; but garrisons were never lost to deceit, that I can think; and almost universally served their purpose, or on occasion, overrun by the people of the walled town; Thus the roman garrison policy works, and the greek garrison policy a joke in comparison, certainly here; because the Greek Culture has an undercurrent of crime, and the evil of money, and treachery of bribes; whereas the Roman Culture, is about domination, effective foreign policy, which while surely may contain crime, is not the surface and focus of Roman history and culture. Things are a little more above board, and at a level, more what they seem to be. This Greek effeteness, is a touch of Greek mind, whereby dealing with crime, to turn the tables to Truth, and rectify, at least as an individual; is a way different than the straight out seeking of salvation and rescue, one hopes is possible in an orderly society. And certainly the latter may be more endemic to tribal living; whereas the imposition of History and State upon Greek tribes, is then more logically consistent with crime; whereas Roman imposition, is just less turgid and factionalized and cleaner.

Now Polybius starts to talk about the galls, how they had to be subdued before they could take on Carthage; how they purposely strove to avoid a situation of several wars at once; They as you may know, sacked Rome in 386bc, etching a fear of galls in roman mind, for some years; they failed to take the capitol, on a hill in Rome though, where the romans holed up, and eventually left. They were known as bigger, and longer haired, and wilder, and more prone to drinking and eating too much. Livy says they left Rome to return, because they stupidly burned down the granaries in stupid celebration taking the city; thus both sides didn’t have enough food; and that because of the warm weather they weren’t used to, they got sick. Polybius writing a hundred years before Livy, in 125bc, doesn’t mention those reasons, saying they left as their homeland was vulnerable to other attacking gallic or venetian tribes. It is also confusing, that Livy does not refer to Italian Celts, but galls, through and through, whereas Polybius mentions both tribes, as different, and overlapping, and it is confusing. That the Celtics had several tribes in several regions of Europe, may indicate a certain masterminding enemating from them; wheras the galls were of northern Italy and beyond. I see the galls, literally speaking, as compensating for the uptightness of Greek Culture; should you find their vicious class warfare, omission of tribes, and philosophy of disproving, love of boys, per Plato, uptight. The author of history seems to say, I made the Greeks uptight, I made the Spartans more conservative than the Athenians, I made the Romans, while big government and state regulation, easier, than Greeks, but still pocked with the inferiority of the dominating power; as evil expansion, and conquering tribes, not good for a true spirit, of people; And so they made the galls, to compensate for the greeks; the galls, used as mercenaries by Carthage and Rome; the galls, who Ceasar and Livy describe as loveable hill billy large long haired rowdy hippie, prone to vice and gambling; Polybius, as the more uptight Greek author, describes them here after listing the various names of their principle tribes.

“They lived in unwalled cities and had no knowledge of the refinements of civilization. They slept on straw and leaves, ate meat, and practiced no other pursuits than agriculture and war, their lives were very simple, and they were completely unacquainted with any art or science. Their possessions consisted of cattle and gold, since these were the only objects they could easily take with them whatever their circumstance and transport wherever they chose. It was of the greatest importance to them, to have a following, and the man who was believed to have the greatest number of dependants and companions around him was the most feared and powerful of the tribe.”

While warring is always inexpliquable, only explained by higher power; a statement the greeks make when their Trojan warriors represent various gods; agrarian simplicity is wonderful. The last part, about the greatest entourage commanding the most respect, is consistent with Livy and Ceasar, who add that they did not believe in heridatary wealth, the merit of present generations, must come into play; and he who is most successful, deserves, most respect; and success to them meant, making the place better, by solving conflicts and running things well; an essentially nonhereditary, authoritarian agrarian polity. Literarily, their agrarianism, contradicts the urban and cultured Greek way. At some point soon, they scoot around the Adriatic to attack Greece, but are unsuccessful.
Agrarianism counters greek and history

Polybius describes the Italian Celts as landing in Italy, terrifying gallic tribes, and making alliances with them, before sacking and holding Rome for a while; whereas Livy says it was the terrifying galls that came swiftly down from the alps upon Rome, before the Romans knew what was happening. Polybius says 30 years later, they advance to the alba river, and the Romans wouldn’t fight them, because the Romans weren’t ready. But 12 years after that, it was tried again, and the Romans had advance word and so marshaled their allies, who were naturally roman allies as well in shared fear of the Italian Celts. Polybius also further distinguishes between Italian celts and galls, saying the latter would raid the former, out of jealousy for their prosperity. Livy may say the Galls, not the Celts, invade Rome, because one of the mysteries is where the red haired and blond haired romans came from. Regulus and Romulus were raised by wolves and fathered by mars, and took over the local people into kingdom, but really, where did those expanding people come from? They were white skinned. Might it have been one of the celtic tribes? And if so, they would have had the karma to dominate rome initially as they did; attributing such to the galls, the polybian distinction between prosperous celts and their jealous gallic allies, might give away something to close to home for Roman historians to reveal. Polybius writes, “However, twelve years later, the Celts made another attempt to invade in force. and this time the romans had intelligience of their attack. They mustered their allies and marched out confidently to meet them, for they were eager to engage them and fight a decisive battle. The Gauls took fright at their enemies advances, and meanwhile dissensions broke out in their own ranks; finally, as soon as darkness fell, they made off for home” Careful reading shows the Gauls taking fright, and the Celts having internal dissensions; and yet such disorder is similar and linking; and Livy, does not distinguish between Celtics and Gauls, attributing it all to Gauls.”After this alarm, they kept quiet thirteen years, and then as they saw the power of the romans growing fast, they concluded a formal treaty with them, and faithfully observed its terms for thirty years”.

Distinguishing between Celts and Gauls, is an important act of Polybius, as he then notes, the gallic tribes threatened the Celts, the celts bribed and manipulated them to ally with them in war, and the galls raided Italy to their south, without the Celts, as well. The Celts had intermarried and were kin to the Galls, by this generation, and Polybius cites the dissension and disunity from the drinking and gorging that follows returning home from plundering. And soon the Galls went to far, killing a roman envoy, violating truces, and the Romans took them, and established their first colony in gallic land.

In the Roman world, you could “sue for peace”. Which, as gallic anger subsided to Roman might, the galls did. Suing for peace, obviously is where the defeated, go to the victors, and ask what it takes to get along with them to a peaceful future; I;m not sure the greek world had this easy diplomatic tradition. Where crime is involved, you can’t ask criminals what it takes to get along with them; they may take further advantage of you and mistreat you further, which is not an effective suit result at all; or feel so bad about what they did, they remain removed from you, much the way America’s officials and media are removed from the people, signifying a facilitation of crime; whereas in Rome, the tribes, over thirty of them, had a say through the coda; or rather, one nation could ask another, what peace takes, and there’d be an answer, it would be considered fair, and upheld, without treachery; yet with the theme of crime, and control of mind that enables crime, one can not sue for peace without the resulting expectant being remorse, and apology for mistreatment, and an almost Christian bowing to the oppressed and hurt; and thus the roman propaganda is consistent with suing for peace being about an essential righteousness of both parties, whereby the pretext for conflict is upheld and justified and facilitates peace; whereas crime per se, exposed as such, makes that hard; without a conversion that would take one outside the box of History.

Polybius says they no longer feared the galls, and were seasoned athletes for their gallic conflicts, that manifested easy victory over remaining distant tribes that dared encroach them. The galls went on to cause trouble in Grecian areas, to no success, and then were peaceful 45 years, but then became headstrong again. Upon further demise from then warring among themselves, the Romans took the land they had taken from the Semones, and divided it up among the Roman People, previous it had been controlled by the wealthy few, and when this shift happens, the upper class Polybius says it was quite demoralizing, as when the rich controlled it, there being a few rich, it was mellow, but when it was divide up among a many people, the increased intensity of activity, had a negative effect on Rome, the more outright, less covered up, dominion of this land, the negative spirit of imperialism, more apparent, and this is a moment, as Polybius looks for moments, whereby, Rome begins its decline in spirit and morality.

Now the gauls organized for Rome, out of fear of further expulsion and even extermination; though Rome had an admittedly gentle policy for a warlike people, of making allies of the conquered, and not effecting the autonomy of their policy making, or who their kings or senators were. But seeing the Roman people moving into their terrority, may have had this effect. This galvanized many northern tribes against Rome, and this preoccupation kept the Romans from dealing with the Carthaginians taking over and ruling Spain. Yet it did militarize them and their numerous tribal allies, into a census of 700,000 infantry, and 70,000 calvary, to be applied to the even larger looming conflict with Carthage; and yet Hannibal, soon came into Italy with only 20,000 men, and lasted twenty years.

So a great battle between the galls a celts and romans and their allies was fought. Polybius makes note that the romans were motivated by the plunder the invading galls had amassed so far; yet upon a final and difficult victory, the romans returned the property taken by the invaders, to those it was taken from. Likewise, as America had guns, the Indians, arrows, and per Herodotus, the greeks and armor, and the Persians only leather; so in this battle, the roman swords were able to cut and pierce, while the gallic swords, only cut.

From here Roman policy could righteously and ably seek to control the po valley of northern Italy, and they began invading celtic and gallic territory. And the romans were good about making allies with some celtic and gallic tribes, while dealing with the remaining unfriendly ones massing and raiding against them. These northern tribes worshipped the goddess of war and victory, Minerva, and Polybius goes on, the romans were learning that the blades of the galls dulled after the first blow, and bent and had to be straightened out by the foot against the ground often, and this gave courage to Roman soldiers. So the Celtics sued for peace because slashing swords had no effect at super close range, whereas piercing swords worked. The tide having turned, the romans denied peace, more gallic defeats followed, and thus the only option, complete submission, rather than a negotiated peace treaty.

Polybius concludes this chapter, pointing out how reckless and uncalculated the galls were, so that civilized people should not fear the onslaught of barbarism, but know it is not made to last long, but seem initially furious; and in soothe, this is how I feel about crime upon me and mine; the longer time heals, the calm and reason are the only paths to prevail; fury and plot, stiffness and rigid control, does not last long; the romans seemed better organized and thoughtful, or so Historians have said. In this sense, foolish foreign policy ventures, are doomed to failure, through the unexpected, through coming upon the reasonable and determined. The Gauls went on to attack Greece unsuccessfully in Polybius’s time, and that, he said, is added important to the reason for this part of his history, as he sets the world stage for conflict with Sparta, detailing events in Sicily, across the Adriatic, to the north, via Celtics and Galls, now turning to Carthaginian affairs in Spain.


Herodotus, and Polybius, unlike Livy, don’t just write about the Persian War, and the Punic Wars with Carthage, but its context of the world. 70% of Herodotus sets up the scene of the Persian War with histories of Persia and Egypt that led up to the invasion of Greece. So Polybius, over 200 years later, first has a chapter about Sicily, and a chapter about across the Adriatic, and a chapter with a history on the galls, interspersed with two two page updates about the ongoing carthiginian statement in Spain, aka, Iberia. Whereas Livy, writing a hundred years after Polybius, wrote a few hundred short books on the History of Rome, of which 42 survive, and He does nothing to set the stage, focusing fairly strictly on what the republic is going through. There is an increasing crescendo and intensity to the momentum of Roman Centuries, whereas ye old Greeke World goes back and forth, to and fro. They unite to defeat the Persians, then turn shortly and fight each other; they are city states, a league of professional polities, bent more on historical entertainment, than historical statement. Late in the game, after colonizing a part of Italy less reached by Rome; the Achean League forms, grounded in Equality, to all states that join, and Free Speech; these cultural sophistries, are sophisticated enough, to defeat the galls through a cultural rule of History, demonstrating the galls, as a possible lovable, but definitely second- rate power. When one controls writing, and is favored by the gods, removed, so history is controlled by that culture; why the leading class of galls would march on Greece, or war exist regardless, bespeaks metaphysical compromise, at some faint, and scary, level.

Anyway, I too, would essay a worldly style a better spirit would let to this situation, whereby I include the Isreali context, to the further southeast of Greece. I mean, you gotta ask the lord, lord, what do I gotta do? And the Lord said to me, you know you got to know there’s something living in your brain, and it ain’t you. So then I go to my brain, and I look all around, and I see my brain is everywhere, or ok, maybe not everywhere, but more than enough around me, and wherever brain is, brain lives, and it’s clear, the brains, where they are, are clear, and you gotta wonder, just what the heck is going on to be in all those brains, so all faint and clear; And then I realize; Everyone’s brain is everywhere, And something lives there, and it’s faint, and near death earth.

So allow me a little perspective: here, The Isrealites, hiking from Egypt and construction, to some land promised by a leading cloud, they gave a tent to; had 12 tribes. And the Romans, though they added more, and started with less, are regarded as having around 30 tribes, comprise it. In today’s world, the Jews are like the last tribe in the sophisticated era.

Yet the Roman Era, the republic, to the west of Plato, surprisingly, had a political system, whereby, per federal checks and balances, the tribes of Rome, had a say in ratifying policy, and correcting legislation; Each tribe had one vote. Each tribe would meet and discuss its vote and aye and nay on the subject. In today’s world might this translate to different nationalities counting as tribe?

The Old Testament, which can be construed as primarily a history book, maybe more a literary history, or a history with creative beginnings open and meant for interpretation, while Roman History mentions its tribes; generally, I’m not sure the old testament history cites the jewish tribes registering votes upon Jewish policy, though maybe this is referenced once or twice; Judeasm, like History, focuses on the leading actors, the celebrities, of politics, government, fame, and the people, or tribes, if we know, relegated to the background, subject, at length, and absent, closer; Therefore Jesus may be seen as giving cause to organize and gather and discuss what’s truly up in some ancient context of peaceful assembly. People gather round Jesus preaching; but the point is, they stand for reasoning together, when they come together, around Jesus; Indeed, the Romans are taking over Isreal, because the Isrealites did not make their people happy enough, to resound against the romans; It can be said, the Jewish People, of the old testament, not their kings, and prophets, come across as docile, as someone’s whose History is written for them, and this age of writing pointing them in the direction of literary analysis, reason, and the kindness provided via detachment therein. The Romans triumph in their state activism, upon the vulnerable languid quality of sophisticated culture; as they have conquered the pagan worshipers of the phenonoma.

Salvation through Judeasm is possible; the natural interpretation of literature creates a thinking people; Knowledge becomes aquainted with public good; and so we see how we may free ourselves from the yoke of history, by simply reasoning together; even though Jesus only offers a service on the subject, like some kind butler explaining how and why things are so bad.

The Old Testament did not demonstrate the checks and balances of tribal recourse; it’s antagonists, more Hollywood-like demonstrating the moral qualities of Literature, as History; and son seen by Jesus, conquered by Rome, and perhaps He, offered as a sacrifice to Rome, alongside, his homeland. Jesus wasn’t able to save Isreal from Rome; And hailed as a spiritual hero; subtley sympbolizing obeisance to the state and removed, to the written, not the talking, that’s long gone; when people got together to be serious, not party.

I believe the twelve tribes are most referenced traveling looking for the promised land; when the manassas tribe hailed staying on the side of the river bordering Isreal.Before the tribal system was the Patriarch System; where Patriarchs, like Abraham, had dependents and organized cattle, and migration, and managed land; for hundreds, if not thousands, but rarely more; grounded in leadership and a natural merit, though obviously, subverted for evil as possible; or good, in those envelopes of Lord opening; so these patriarchs wandered about the middle east, between Egypt and Persia, I guess, their own stake of History; but they never were “real” history, because the prime difference between a Patriarch and a King, was Kings war, sacrifice through war; Patriarch’s while differing, don’t seem to war each other; kings do.

While Gall had a patriarchal system that respected the dependants and numbers of clients and helpers, determining some hilarious merit of status; because these leaders of each generation; formally competed with each other; in context of bettering gall, and here are each and all within one tribe; one tribe would have competing factions or frats or friends, as you call it; whereas in a truer patriarchal system, there patriarchs are complete enough to not withstand competition from within, except to sucession; whereas in the gallic system a tribe would have competitors that went on for life; and this latter system led to kings, ruled removed people, more removed, through a “king” uniting many factions, naturally susceptible to History, and the will behind it, How and Why, God, Creators, History.

I believe in The Kingdom of Heaven, and it’s funny they call its existence, “mind-like” because, The Kingdom of Heaven is actually brain like; that is what is all over earth and within; what lives in brains, is many; and so one today revealed always living near me; the point being; understanding is no more than understanding something lives in the brain, and the brain has many ripples and veils, and brains are all over earth, and can not be conceptualized as merely within individual heads; for their powerful chemicals enable through vision, the connection of what is, to brain, so extends brain beyond the head, sensory organs.

The powerful Greek sense of the unconscious, of differing consciousnesses, dualistic kin of perception, aware of the sympathy, from the kingdom of heaven, and knowing it controls this foolish world; so seeks some unfolding of brain whereby the investment in History opens up and reveals more and more space on earth as of some total giant brain, though really an organization of brain.

Burkhardte, asks, what are the greeks so conceited about? What are such great things said about them? They’ve invented nothing, yet are venerated beyond belief. First, let’s say, it is the nature of their city-state polity, that kept Greek History going up and down like a stock market; whereas the Roman steady ascendance, starts to shadow Greece, and Polybius, looks into the matter. Then let’s say, the great things ascribed to Athens, come from the subjugated, and examples are shown. Then of course, the conceit is an archetypal quality crime requires, a vanity, of tight control by mind intent on crime.

Athens was great for taking in foreigners, requiring trade to compensate for thin soil and steep slopes; they venerated those who died for them in war, via funeral orations; Whereas the Carthaginians memorialized their war dead by hanging black banners on their city walls; and you can see which psychology was more successful. But one has to laud the greek intellect of Polybius on three counts; He makes no scruples about revealing powerful information; the wonderful thing classical histories do; in his revelation that the decision which town to siege, is based on which town stored the most food. This I never figured, and makes perfect sense. Then, he blames the Gallic Invasion of 386bc on The Italian Celts, who were a rich man’s gall, whereas Livy, a hundred years later, seems to claim gallic tribes on toto, wreaked such havoc on Rome. Likewise, he conspicuously differs twice from Livy in this story, insofar regarding that Polybius claims The Italian Celts, and the gallic tribes, gave up the siege of The Citadel, where the last Romans were holed up on a hill, because the Venetians, were taking advantage of the opportunity of the 7 month absence; but Livy says the Galls stupidly burned the granaries where the grain was stored, and so were too low on food; because they tend to over-celebrate. And that the second reason the Galls left, was the Roman latitude was so much warmer, than the alps, that they got sick.

Polybius is also to be commended on adherence to the Herodotian model of History Books; whereas as much as the known world is possible, is raccounted to set the stage for the telling of what the History Book, precisely purports to be about. Thus only 30% of Herodotus is about the Persian war, the rest sets it up with tales of Persian history that caused Xerxes, and that includes 200 pages on Egypt as well. Polybius talks about the Romans straightening out Illyria; and The Galls attacking Illyria, and The situation of Carthage in Spain, and the ever complicated Sicilian Situation, and how Greek Colonies in Italy, had some issues; all to be combined to set the stage for the battle between the two greatest world powers so far; indeed, the point of city states avoids this kind of conflict.

Of course The Athenians had penchant for executing their own government officials, The Roman Republic pointedly averred. And also for deciding the fate of captured enemies abroad; whereas Hannibal, famously set his prisoners free, so no hard feelings. The warlike nature of Athens, chose to venerate its dead in funeral orations, thus creating a land people died for culture. How can you improve something people died for? Look at Carthage with its funeral black flags; regretting death, thus open to change and reason; so the perversity of Athenian Politics. The notion Athenians, were the ideal, was never far from the Athenian, psychologically justifying foreign policy; Thus something very stiff about the Greek, whose historical will, pushed on a general, group will; that made Athens like a ship, to sail together, requiring many in unison, and not individual freedoms and tendencies. Experience is dictated by the mind, this is more admitted or reflected by Greek Culture, and second rate powers such as Gall, even Persia, defeated. And empathy, in general, omitted.

The nature of bad foreign policy in the ancient world, was that it doesn’t stop, it keeps going, it plays upon fears, or is tightly controlled, and removed from the people, who must obey it. They were venerated by the submissive through passionate sophistry. Burkehardte cites excessive litigation bring down Athenian culture; yet isn’t lawsuit where change comes from? Wouldn’t that have been the means for a reform of uptight Athens?

Hume writes in history of England, that either The Gauls or the Italian Celts, moved to Briton and became the Britons. So he was aware of the difference and issue of Italian Celts and Galls. Where Livy says the galls are all gall, Polybius says the Italian Celts were superior, and leaders; But Hume says it is unknown which move to Briton, and unimportant; siding with Livy in glossing over that distinction. “all ancient writers agree in representing the first inhabitants of Britain, as a tribe of the gauls or the celtae. Now the Galls were most favorite, just north of Italy, for from there they pushed off to ascend to the meteoric fame of sacking Rome and besieging the citadel. But apparently they arrived in Northern Italy, not from being pushed north by the Romans, the way the etruscans were pushed to fertile Tuscany, but from the france area; to the east were the gernmanic tribes, and to the west, the Iberian tribes, prey to North Africa. Apparantly, perhaps pointedly then, History is saying the Germanic tribes did not move to Briton, the gallic tribes did; the Germanic tribes then possible manifesting the destiny of scandanavia to their north.

Where Livy romantizes as does Ceasar, the galls into these lovable fools; Polybius, is more condescending; and Hume dismissive all together snobbily of second rate barbarian powers whose history is so impulsive as to teach us nothing about order; which strikes me as quite the cozened thing to say; false, predatory; And yet Polybius, in defining History as unexpected, per color of Roman expansion; surely somewhat accounts for the impulsive and second rate. Hume says the galls divided up naturally into tribes, and relied on cattle, forest huts, and nomadicism, wore animal skins, and liked to war. From here some insight is surely spread, upon where the Romans came from, inquired into earlier; the anthropology, where one tribe or group comes to a land, multiplies and divide. Maybe Romulus came about ruling a people who separated from the origin due to reproductive over population, even designed for the history of sacrifice; pointedly, like whites, raised to a contorted violent history-vehicle of sacrifice.

“The Britons were divide into many small nations or tribes; and being a military people, whose sole property was their arms and their cattle, it was impossible, after they had acquired a relish of liberty, for their princes or chieftains to establish any despotic authority over them. Their governments, though monarchial, were free, aswell as those of all the Celtic nations; and the common people seem evern to have enjoyed more liberty among them, than among the nations of Faul, from whom they were descended. Each state was divided into factions within itself. It was agitated with jealousy or animosity against the neightborig states. And while the arts of peace were yet unknown, wars were the chief occupation, and form the chief occupation, and formed the chief object of amibition, among the people.”

This is a slightly Athenian bent, with snobbery to the barabarian; and a people, who freed from great authoritarianism, still like to war, and kill. Whereas, one would think, liberty, and its enjoyment, naturally counter the will to war; today’s liberals, while complained of; have no desire to put to death conversatives, and very content, it seems, to let them live, should they be converted or reformed or regulated; but it seems the Athenians and brits, much more warlike than today’s liberals; even while both suffer the difficulties of their age.

See, the Athenian Game was setting up democracies, and those democracies being crooked, controlled by their Athenian founders, or facilitating crime, for proper forms. But the greeks were city states, and so ebbed high and low, much away from the culture of ever growing super powers like Rome and America. People forget how easy it is to control democracies, and barely may remember kind monarchies as superior to crooked democracies; let along flat out tribal pagan society with as little state and history as possible; for these latter conceal sacrifice through war; and lack of safety; wheres the point to the physical today, is to discuss these things.

Here the justice system carries out an immense amount of sacrifice; hard to break; not protecting anything; being alienated from spiritualities, that secure. But lets see how America, Rome and Greece or Athens, are similar. Do they execute officials. In Athens did, sometimes all of them, because they knew closest and first hand, how vulnerable placing power in the few, makes these men to crime. It’s easy to control people and society, so because we have been altered, to be controlled, for design above; it goes on, because we are not. There’s a consciousness to the kingdom of heaven, that knows, this, but not to the artificial world. The Roman Republic seems purposefully designed to protect officials from executed by angry people. The people and tribes, might have had more freedom, yet less expression—in structure different to taxed Athenians, of corrupt officials, in idealized or propagandized democratic polity. Certainly the liberals of today are not string em up and kill em down; there are no crowds demanding death to enemies of the state, beyond Bin Laden, perhaps; if anything the conservatives, are perhaps more frustrated with liberals than vice versa, if only because the liberals are on automatic; yet if conservatives are more bloodthirsty than liberals; when the Spartans, conservatives, more peaceful and let live, than liberal Athens; we may see something. And if Rome, there was the right to jail, fine, and even execute the worst officials, that was an important part of the Roman Constitution; that it is not right for senators and consuls to go unchecked, for crimes of power to grow and foster; thus historians make a specific point, that there was very little executing public officials in Rome, I’ll roughly say not even one a decade; and yet in Athens, executing a dozen a year, well, that was a bad year; but their policy was to execute officials caught of crime; and create a system that facilitated crime; through regulating prices, and catering to foreign merchants, for instance.

Now lets turn to comedy. Does the American State allow teasing of itself? Yes, on late night tv, everywhere media is about; Same in Athens; in fact, Athenian Comics differ from Leno and Fallon, in that they also tease the people and populace; for being emasculated by the powerful. And this is an interesting take; the Athenian comics would yell at those complaining about the 1%t that the 99% are weak and its their fault and they have no balls nor brain regarding how to get out of this situation. In that sense a greater comedy ruled Athens, “official” and yet it took on the people, provoked rebellion, and …….Rome had no great comic sense; kind of staid and warlike, whose chief moral purpose be to be moral; after all the immorality of Greece and other excessively sweet and sticky civilizations.

Now lets briefly look at self veneration. Rome historically venerated itself, as its people looked upon itself morally ambiguously; this is a prime reason why the people of rome were seen as superior to the powerful, and its domestic history and story of that anthropology; played out in Sparta v Athens and Republicans v Democrats; and yet the people, of Rome, ironically till they got to much power, were fairly acknowledged as superior morally, like America today. Athens certainly venerated itself as the greatest place in Greece and history, and that pride a big part of its downfall; the hubris of Greece, is just Athens falling to due its miscast self images, probably due to lying about its homosexual, pedophiliac axis. For those things are much worse or bad, only if lied about. Thus duplicity and vanity; not one’s own self opinion. And America venerates itself through its land, that it has lost through lack of care, in centuries, and most notably in NYC due to its media empire, clamoring to itself in constant reinforcement of its magnitude and stupidity, famously venerates itself; nor is NYC not a city to love. And I love NYC as do all I know. But Let’s note the history that venerates Athens, and the media town fame of NYC–while derived from architecture, art, and sophisticated political culture–embed a value in the removed quality of media and history; contrasting less statist, more tribal societies, where decisions were closer, if not in the hands, of the people, and media much less necessary and apparent, to spread the news of the few; like the old testament historical focus on kings and prophets, rather than the people, as if they all did what the kings said without debate; or whether the lack of covered debate, and structure of Jewish society, reflects the inability of humans to control history, and we are primarily pawns for the negative designs of history.

And lastly let us ask are good people kept down? Let’s note a few things about Athens. Burkhardte laments, with some poignancy reflecting his own times, how Athenians could become rich through law suits; the sign of an unfair criminal justice system. One would the Justice system be where truth enemates from. This being a world of lies, currently, when I wrote this, the justice system be the first corrupted, yet still the nexus and locus entrusted with sanity and ethics. So it must be very strange how crazy this world is. The notion, of totalitarianism, is consistent with heaven and earth, the physical world, bound up in some contract, which to free itself from, the courts make logical opportunity as an investment in critical searching; yet vulnerable to crime, and so Athens, and criminals must consider the control of themselves by mind to vehicle of society’s design. Justice should start to realize the fallibility of history and corruption of society; starts from an admission of wrong, the state is hard to do; not apprehending its own corruption, as psychologically beyond the consciousness that takes in History; even more is aware of little or nothing, better to do the insensible work of state, within the structure of society.

They don’t understand it can be done quietly; is more an issue of mental health; for the crime, Athens possessed, right under the surface of officialdom; quite like today, no one reasonable could want to subject themselves with; this quest for money, without regard for mental health, and logic, and what would and must be experience, the lack of natural organization to society, makes each a mental health victim. Everything is wrong, this can be clearly seen, yet the state and media, history, has all the power, and is the most ignorant enemation, of many agencies, domains, that transmit and express, what is wrong. So the mind clearly expresses what is wrong through the state apparatus, or media, and media is everything expressive, and these forms and faces these expressions go through, pointedly designed to lie and not know, and thus reform never happens; yet it would be through the courts; if judges and principals, where the worst parts of lies have run, can recognize the need for this discussion, see it is in all interests; and move through; but the lack of this catalyst is evident in Athens and American vexing, strict legal system, that has not reduced crime: The bottom line is seens as business the system has not reduced crime, where the business model is to grow every year, or barring market increase, decrease the work required to meet market, every year, through increased skill, knowledge and facility. The business of justice then, would be to lower crime every year, and to lower the costs of lowering crime every year. That this safety we seek to guard, is not reduced, at least on paper, shows something is clearly wrong; cleaning up community would involve community circles, people talking about security, the issues criminals go through, and how to facilitate harmony becomes an active concern of all. That can not be broached, the absence of community activity, is necessary for the design facilitating crime.

So these systems keep down good men. The better brothers are swindled by judges in totalitarian mind league of making the world worse. The finer charactors not trusted because they wouldn’t submit to the biddings of the organization hiding behind them, or even know those demons are fiction upon earth, for totalitarian design, not free, or even subjective will, but the will of History. In the roman republic, the separation of Plebes and patricians, with separate parts of the city, the activity of the many tribes consolidated by Rome, allowed avenues through merit into the tribes, but effectively kept the good from ending the yearly wars, as the powerful, rising through the society of Senator Families, and esteemed venerated lines dating back to the founding; this conservative aristocracy ran things as some group whole with a perennial concern of order at home, and imperialism, just about as much as possible, very view years, if any, except for the reign of their second king Numa, no wars for over 40 years, there was a war, a short one, often enough, every year with some tribe, that then would be added to the number of tribe loyal to Rome; whose original tribes were the romans, named after Romulus, under who the first walls were built, and they soon made an alliance with the Sabines, and then, in their age of kings which lasted five kings before the senate took itself into prominence, the Tarquins. Today, the meaning of those words are not studied.

Burkhardte complains in Athens, how the system kept down the good men, and thus the viscissitudes of Athens, its falls into disgrace, its rises, through the great personalities that sustained it, Pericles, Themestones; arguing for war, and admiral.

I often wondered if atheism was grounded in some psychology relating to the druid pagan frequent sacrifice of animals and more. I have recently been commending liberals for responding well to a poll, that showed none of them were in favor of executing conservatives. Indeed, slanderous it may seem, conservatives, so frustrated by liberalism to vitriol, more rancorous than ye olde atheists incessantly not getting anything beyond what is on paper. Yet say we lived in pagan tribal times, where sacrifice of animals and more, combined with routine duties of the state, and theoretically necessitated regardless? Say some people have to die tonight, say; then would democrats vote to make those sacrifices republican if they could. I’m well apologetic for the black humour here, seeking merely to explain how liberal Athenians, liberal enough to gay relations with teen agers be a norm; liberal enough to regulate the price of bread, and at the same time trek to Delphi to ask questions, relax a week or three, and get a poetic answer, but that was Hellenic culture rising out of Greece, despite statism, and statisms use of sacrifice as normal rational thinking. The romans wouldn’t go to war without seeing if the sacred geese ate, or to battle rather, without killing something, and see which way the entrails spilled as called by specialists in the profession of interpreting spilt entrails; Obviously the highness of Greece and rome, is versed in leaving a religious culture, and unknown by history, for a statis history, that leads to todays lack of safety. Yet as soon as liberals accept sacrifice of animals as a key to health in a dark universe of mortal terror, they cease to be atheists; may still rally violently against conservatives, but out of a liberalism grounded in pathetic yet true, sadness over the sacrfices, over the necessity of sacrifice, rather than there being nothing more than earth’s physique, the contemporary irrelvance of the universe, causes atheism, but liberalism still exists with an awareness of the dark might of the universe, in the form of obeisance to what that metaphysic requires.

And then let us say the world in Athens, officialdom contained and concealed crime, as does western justice systems. Ok, so no one in their right mind would want this, this is a phenonoma of metaphysic not free will, shows we are dealing with god, or how god controls man, than anything else purported, which purport is designed consistent with this control, not choice. Now we look back at Athens and say, yea crime was rampant they dealt with crime a lot, they would execute their officials, but the next batch, be just as bad. Now we look at America, and the problem isn’t as recognized, nor punished with death; but recurrent, not stopping, structured in, by constitution, unrecognized by media, and so festering prevalently. Yet when History is able to say this about the west, its judiciary, then history will say this is the dominant feature defining Society. Yet we don’t know it.
When does America become defined by a criminal judiciary, as Athens has become known so, Burkhardt’s The Greeks, and Greek Civilization. And how could Athens be known as such to its people, and incapacitated, managing its reforms to reform so?

Its widely accepted judges today are corrupt and side for side with more power and overly punish without reform and crime continues, because the whole system and due process is alienating, and wrong or not manifested and there are easier more natural ways to reduce crime and treat problems, grounded in truth, in truth of the kingdom of god frankly, a truth we require more education about; now the Athenians knew the nature of the officials, and many played that game; and the media of Athens knew, and they’d execute officials, and things wouldn’t change; the way we elect new politicians and things don’t change right; but here today, we don’t address our judicial structure, where criminals of the worst sort, can hide behind power concentrated in few judges; yet if the media became aware of it, it would be addressed; and yet unlike Athens, we’d have to realize right, the point is not raising the punishment to execution, but addressing the structural problems causing such. Thus it is amazing the media or consensus was enough to address the issue, without correcting it effectively, merely leving harsh punishments, to no change in the culture, as ironically, our legal system essays today.

The Athenian prosecution of crime in the judiciary and government; and structurally, you see our constitutional structure purposefully designs a system that can’t work; government can’t police government. The Judiciary, such a dominant set of government, can neither protect, nor reform itself: And it hasn’t. The Athenian prosecution of vast government corruption, had to have been thwarted, by never getting past condemning the officials, to the criminals and organized structure that logically lies behind government, and tells and threatens government what to do. When we end judicial government corruption, and the veneer of government over crime; the officials will have to tell us who is behind them. That has to be a logical conclusion; judges wouldn’t do these crimes their power enables for themselves, they have to have been co-opted long, and placed in power to do such bidding; of network and rings existing in behind the scenes world of crime, where diplomacy and détente, of greater allegations. Do get behind the officials to the crime ring; officials must be seen as victims, coerced; whose lack of revelation behind them, lie in the mystery of the organizations that hide behind government. The mind controls everything; the kingdom of god easy to move by faint organization. So to reach the nefarious behind the fronts, and those accepting blame; they need to understand the sympathy, and be explained the craziness of this situation no one chooses; that probably breaks upon communication and subjective; then they can lead us to the behind the scenes apparatus, or more so, what the apparatus is doing and stop further damages.

The Romans at least created the institution of Tribunes, in return for striking soldiers returning to their command, as a specific judicial check upon the crime and corruption of senators and presidents. To be sure, the depth of crime is not cited, nor in the background, nearly as much as in Greek History, and to be sure, the roman history nor its annals, discusses criminal networks behind the scenes that control senators and the families, and even the lines of those descended from the original senators, which the romans placed such stock in.

WE must say the Romans did not venerate themselves. Historians venerate them for not venerating themselves. Their state was capable of achieving diplomatic peaces, and ending conflict through international police actions; but the people themselves, though with a pride from military victories, saw themselves appropriately with moral ambiguity.

In America, and Athens, because these civilizations have states grounded in a lie about humans and earth; and so whose business, abetted in dominating factor by media and news, engaged in negative, destructive mechanisms; there is no true honesty, and therefore, the sense of work isn’t true; and you see this societal value upon not truly working, but getting paid more to do something arguably less necessary. Work and physical labor, goes from healthy, wholesome positive experience, to something else; and the dreamy days of office work drift on without memory. America deals with a Mexican issue, by their hoarding of restaurant and landscaping jobs, in time of tight economy; while the Athenians importation of Grain, contingent upon foreign growers, gave the whole critical trade unto the hands of foreigners, and somehow our hotels and convenience stores, owned by people who did not go to school here. So what was the point of our going to school? Enabling further subjection? Being an object of teachers, rather than subjective capable of managing motels well enough to thwart those with some strange need to leave their country we can’t relate to; or hold as starving, when this isn’t studied or verified, or addressed as the problem; good work is being subjucated, that is the point, of this world of several levels of consciousness, and reality.

We have to conclude, the nature of these physics can signify a society not grounded in merit, but complaisant to criminal, deviant immoral order; which also must be tied to deviancy, and sexual abuse that can’t translate over the schism between God and Man, and State and People. Corrupted people are wanted and needed and created, to produce the order, crime dictates; even as the record of history doesn’t record the undercurrent of crime, to this day, it can come out, in future histories of America, and yet that this hasn’t come out, and basic natural treatments, totalitarian suppressed, by definition by higher power, easily ordering history and society; what is its metaphysical make up? The Legal system, in Athens, Burkhardte is grounded in exploiting the immoral to further immorality, and why Athens, such a taxing unpleasant place; crime runs the world, through the court system; the courts system would court truth; it makes no sense this goes on; so something more is at play; what is it? The mind running Society, as it does, maintaining the Kingdom, as it does; yet somehow, I have the chance to stop it, and save it, and this is my story, or case summary, if you will.

work, my story, 92, 2003, true? intertwines, others, systemic want people who do bidding of criminal hire criminal, yet good people would know, come out, not a big deal per se to people on earth, just to control. Something talk would reconcile, and is just an added part, to an already tight control, from where resolution of the whole may come. Sister, 92, mean no ill, can talk about, would.

Something Greek about this; Different fraternities of the kingdom of heaven, fraternities of form; OK and Greece, one of the last links to the universe; so as we float around the universe, well, we cant get the metaphysical control, from outerspace, to leave, and end the projection of lies. The Greek civilization is superior to the Roman Republic, in its more extensive culture. Also, the system of Italian tribes in Italy, absent of, before, and concurrent with, The Roman Republic: is similar to the city state system; the tribes, seemed to recourse senate systems, though not universally, and have the old senate v. good monarch issue. But is it possible something come up upon earth, after certain times on earth? Is there something we harken to in Greece, that may save us, or reveal control, through older mind, whereby a new era begins? There is a violence to Greece, we see in The Boston Marathon. Indeed, Marathon is a greek reference. And here’s a kicker. We all remember where we were when 9/11 came. I was to pick up my mother at JFK at 2pm, her return flight from Europe, was diverted back to the continent. I was in my basement reading a History of Greece by Edith Hamilton, and saying to myself how violent it was; to a point of unpleasant; differentiating between History and Actuality. And now I am reading and really enjoying writing about Polybius, and there is terrorism at the Marathon. And it is the same behind the scenes, irrational forms of violence, the tragic greek history engaged greeks in. The sacrifice of lives through other than war. Is there a connection between me readiing Greek History and Terror? Also the earth sign is chilling. And the lack of safety in our world, designed for nontribal times, is evident and manifested. So this is something to work through and get to the bottom of;

Also, the corruption of my family, and officials, may be consistent with sexual abuse and start young; and a hallmark of an upper class; preposterous as a situation, yet ordered, as History, secret history, a history this way, the lack of safety, which is important to; where the lack of merotcracy is consistent, even as undesired by earth, and the thinking; so thought is limited, a precious commodity and yet, contradicting the official way, difficult to assert, or if presented with, necessarily adhere to. So I asked my closest friend from HS, who I’d done multi-night hikes and canoe trips and numerous smaller hikes, and work projects, whose father taught there, for it would explain my siblings apparent corruption; if my friend, who had anxiety issues more apparent after his divorce, is he knew of any abuse there; for it actually seems widespread. I messaged him. I hadn’t seen him in a year and a half, being bogged down myself, and his strict father, may have not allowed my phone to connect to his, so I messaged him via facebook. Half a week later, he went missing, it was in the papers, his sister and mother reached me wondering if he’s shown up at my house. They said he got upset and ran out into the January night, and apparently jumped from a high pedestrian bridge; though that would be impulsive, and not suicide; Though they searched the Delaware the next few days, his body was found not far, three months later. Was there something afraid he would talk to me? Yet what is the harm there? I’m reasonable, not zealous, wouldn’t hurt anyone, forgiving, enlightened: is it talking would change the situation and convert people away from the metaphysic that makes em this way. In other words, people kept from me and honesty, because then they would go good, and it is not people, but their control, that wants them not good, so it is a control issue. Yet the system designed not to point out the obvious crooks. Was his anxiety making him a liability to others, handlers? He could have stayed and worked with me; he would maybe have talked to me, we would have worked this out without police or law, but communication, compassion, diplomacy, reason. Likewise, my family is caught up in this historical nature. Lets remember if constitutions concentrate power and so make officials vulnerable to control by criminals, if government does not police itself per constitutional structure; this would have come out; in reason, no one is at fault, there is something to work out. His death is quite disturbing. Does it send a message to others? Yet who would not want being honest with me, even laying down the real politic. I’m not going to push against might. Is it fear by the universe? Something Greece harkens to? And then, while getting a bead on all this; the boston marathon happens; marathon a greek term; and me in a legal one.

You might say what makes Athens and America similar, and different than other centuries, is our toleration of humour at us, or at politicians and power. Other centuries, were much more solemn. Some countries still are. In Athens and America, it is generally accepted that getting into politics is a way of getting rich; and statistics bear that out; it is known officially; and yet the criminals who exploit this system; and theoretically could manage and handle officials, their family, and finances; this does not come up to light, though a logical, and known extension. We know politicians get richer, through unethical behaviors, through criminal manipulation of officials; and yet we rarely condemn those criminals, but the officials are the fall-guy.

The concurrence of the marathon tragedy, my friend’s death, weighed together on my mind, combining together, seemed to have the same feelings, the same source, of irrational metaphysic; and that coupled with my ex-girlfriend tramping off to a best friend’s house, there since, and having trouble talking about it, prone to sneaking around, because she has a double life, I think, that this experience with my friend, were she to happily relate it to me, could help her talk about that, which she terribly wants to do. The swift conversion of anyone to corruption, rapidly creates this culture of secrecy. The slightest pressure, makes things Hard to talk about. Right things aren’t done; they get convoluted. This is a middle class value on love, unattainable.

Polybius sets the scene for the upcoming second Punic show down, or rematch for larger stakes than Sicily, by showing how diplomatic Rome is, to better prepare for war: Subdue Gaul, Help across the Adriatic the merchants oppressed by pirates and enabled brigand privateers; for which Polybius references Rome’s naval prowess, for what was intentionally a training naval expedition, sending 200 ships, upon a waterway, whose greatest powers, had few more than twenty ships. How they made a peace treaty with the Carthaginians, regarding rivers, beyond which no armed men from the other side, allowed.

Polybius talks about events in Greece, right before the second punic war, a nature of Greek war, between the Achean League and a Spartan King, demonstrating relations between Macedonia and Greece; which Polybius thinks is important enough to include in his classical contextualization of History with the inner rings of world history. Thus you see a fissure of Greek Spirit, as well, as if the rumblings of one world refracted off the horizon beyond the Adriatic.

Yet it is easy to liken The Second Punic War to George Bush’s Iraq war; in that everyone in Carthage, and most of the reasoning world, was for leaving the Roman Republic and Iraq, as alone as it was; But Hannibal, was Texan, rounding up support and pride to invade the evil flaunting roman republic, whose diplomacy consists in keeping us, from truly controlling Sicily, or Iraq, even though we have the far superior navy. No one could stand up to George W Bush, and no one could stand up to Hannibal. They both claimed the ventures cause pride. They both had fathers who were presidents of their country, and they both singlehandedly brought this venture to war to the fore, when more pivotal challenges lay elsewhere, ignored. The difference, though, between Saddam Hussein and The Roman Republic, was that the Roman Republic saw this coming. As soon as Hannibal’s inherent hostility violated a technicality of the peace treaty, Rome told the Carthaginian Senate, to hand over Hannibal, and a little money; and we are at peace. Hannibal, like GWB, was too powerful to just hand over. Never the less, this is as fine a sense of the art of roman diplomacy seen, consistent with saving the Adriatic, pacifying Gall, and seeking peace with Carthage, tho there is some contradiction there. Saving the Adriatic, and pacifying gaul, makes more sense preparing for war with carthage, than anything in its own right. And still, this peace offering, of peace for Hannibal, and a little gold and silver, does on the outset seem peaceful, with something tough backing it up, you don’t want to mess with.

And yet the cult of personality, is what was behind this war; whereas the fight of personalities between Saddam, and W, really both men lacked genius and considered third or fourth class officials, perhaps, as stories goes; whereas the cultural difference between Carthage and Rome, were values at odds, and in a most problematic way. Hannibal hated Rome, perhaps because it defeated his father; like W.

Back then, through city state tradition of Hellene I believe, there was some international policy, and enough small states, so that a popular leader on the outs with his native land, would logically be hired and feted by another competing land; as Spartan Kings advised Persian Imperialists; without seeming beyond the pale of political character at all; rather as within the pale of logically uniting political interests, and showing a whole world capable of getting along, even as war breaks out within it.

Thus, when Hannibal’s war had brought Rome to the brink of carthage’s wars, after 17 years of scaring Italy and Gall, Hannibal conveniently retired as the guest of some island tyrant, who too, was going through a questioning of allegiances to Greek, or Rome or Carthage. And there is a famous story here, that Hannibal entrusts the king, saying when he was twelve, he put his hand on the shoulder of the victim about to be sacrificed, though I am not sure about the shoulder, and swore his allegiance to fight Rome until his death. This impressed the king; but what is psychologically greek about this story, is the light it shines on the consciousness that back then, sacrifice of human victims, was natural logic, back then. Thus Chrisitainity’s concentration of sacrifice in one real man, coupled with more submission to History, to what History, or Greek Creators want, is exactly what the transition of classical time to today, was about; power placed in History, Sacrifice covert, under the cover of individuality, the amiguos superiority of material comfort, and also, less physical health.

Carthaginian images are similar to Roman Republic Images, except in light brown. Carthage leading men had gravitas. Othello, a bit what they are all like. Their names all start with ‘H”. Hansrubal, Hannibal, Hamilcar: They are heridotory, like the republic. They treat war somberly, like the Romans, and hang black flags on their walls to honor their fallen soldiers; rather than politicizing the war dead, as Pericles and ? did in Athens; in light of Carthage, the loss of soldiers, immoral, and Athenian patriotism through eulogy of war dead, questionably warlike and effective, and making Rome, a compensation for Greek impetuity, and galls, for their uptightness. One old wise Cathaginian Senator makes a famous plea to avoid war, that image of he old man against war against images of Rome’s ambiguous peace treaty, to give it time to prepare for war, like Stalin, buying Time, with Hitler. Hannibal may be seen in Roman History, as an impetuos, if strong twit, wasting precious resource upon unnecessary violence, and Rome’s suppression of such invasion, moral, even as Hannibal’s spirit converted Italian towns with ease. One could characterize it as the ambiguous morality of Rome, versus the ambiguous gravitas of Carthage. The diplomatic determination of Rome, versus, the impetuos and charismatic order of Carthaginian appeal. In today’s world you might practice for turning brown for tomorrow’s with gravitas. The Roman army, and Carthaginian Navy, the Roman Diplomatic Order, and Carthaginian Wisdom.


It seems the tribal system, north of the equator, conspired for a few to achieve hereafter life in the mind. And the Greeks submission to historical examination, resulted in more than a few; who then have a control, and say, in History. As we look for a translation of betrayal, into mind, one sees a cold bluey saucer like sphere, evoking Jupiter and the cold distance, justifying betrayal; whose absecence surely links well to others. And we try to grow ourselves by rearranging out scales; a cold glimpse, then warm feeling.

The clues and feelings to Greece, can include, pagan “homosexuality” excessive codification or complexity of the simple, crime, as opposed to successful war, a corrupt party of the people, perversions of democracy and assembly, perhaps excessive education or community regulation? Separation of power from people, Idolization of what is wrong, claims of greatness towards what really isn’t.

In terms of power, the less known by History, the out of scenes, and thus more able to power, though the nature of government of heaven so unknown, we may imagine have greater benefits if such is possible in the absence requisite for this scenario. Thus the galls lost in their marching along the Adriatic to northwestern Greece and their famed Achean League; yet second rate powers have to be respected in what balance, justifies what respectability and grace; for the greeks were not graceful, but sophisticated, trained, or coerced, depraved, or enabled wrong.

Polybius writes, “The Carthaginians bitterly resented their defeat in the war for Sicily…and they were further provoked by the affair in Sardinia, and the indemnity they were required to pay.”….”After they had subdued the greater part of Spain, they were ready to seize any opportunity for retaliation against Rome.” Upon the choice of Hannibal as General, of Spain, Hannibal, tackled the leading tribe of Spain, and all the other tribes, bowed down before him and gave tribute; which Hannibal then wisely passed on to his soldiers, as they passed that winter in New Carthage.

However, as that generousity had his soldiers love him, the farther tribes, and submissive tribes, as tribes do, rallied round against Hannibal and Carthage, the following Spring. Larger cities, weren’t as easy to subdue and had to be sieged. Yet, as a few gave him chase, he pivoted on a river with elephants, the barbarian tribes failed the water, and he chased over a hundred thousand of them north, forever scared to come south and harass him, again. Sagentum, was the crucible town, Rome dominated, whose taking, Hannibal knew, would provoke Rome; so he planned cautiously for this.

Rome, purposefully encouraging war of not, ignored the continuos envoys from Sagentum, and their reports of growing Carthaginian power, yet when Hannibal returned to New Carthage, the new capital of Spain and further Spain, he found a Roman delegation there, asking him to keep his hands off Sagentum. Hannibal rose to the implicit threat of these envoys, claiming to represent the true Sagentum people, who had lost a few of their leading men, thanks to corrupt Roman arbitration of a conflict. “The Carthaginians, he warned them, would not overlook this treacherous act of seizure, for it was an ancestral tradition of their to take up the cause of victims of injustice” Rome portrayed itself officially this way, in clearing the Adriatic of privateers, standing for government as allowing free trade. “At the same time, he sent home to Carthage asking for instructions on how to act in view of the fact that the Sanguntines, were relying on their alliance with Rome to commit wrongs against some of the peoples who were subject to Carthage”

Polybius makes several points, here. 1) Realizing Hannibal was not speaking honestly, they sailed to carthage to entreat the senate to avoid war. 2) The Romans expected the war to be fought off Sangentum, not in Italy 3) If Hannibal had just said, the Carthaginians just want Sangentum, and a remittance of their debt incurred when at a disadvantage, the Romans would have had something honest to stick their teeth into and deal with; by not even being real, the statesman Polybius, says the Hannibal condemned his lot to war. For frankness and honesty may avoid war, as lying and lack of good faith, and false pretext, ensure war.

If we weren’t made from clay, it would be different.

December 11, 2012

Eve walks by Adam, Adam goes, “Hey, that’s my rib”. Eve responds with a nose nuzzle.

This scene probably had to happen before the fall, and in the garden of Eden. Adam was down a rib, long before a snake showed Eve a tree of knowledge. Before the fall, while they were still naked, allegations of a missing rib, had to be more severe and ticklish. Or maybe, part of the innocence of The Garden, was not telling Adam, Eve was made from his rib. And yet I imagine if the rib was taken from him, then he must be aware of it. The idealty of Eden includes Adam knowing Eve came from his rib. In that sense we strive for domestic tranquillity today.

A world where Eve is made from a rib of Adam’s. Where the Lord is known for having banged out the universe in under a week, where the very material of the humans, who writers come from, though writing is definitely not limited to Earth, and unites us with other forms that write as well, so then we wonder the relation between writers, and the subjects made from Clay about. In any event, in no way can we construe being made from Clay, is a good thing. Quite the oposite; our preponderance to ignorance and folly, indicative of a severely clay-like situation, and not the brain and complex mind-matter one would expect of senses and consciousness. Being made from clay, is an enabling of our service to the Universe. Dwellings are made from Clay; as thus others from outside earth, may dwell in us. An earth subservient to the Universe is very hinted at in Genesis, and yet something not allowed to be said; the big secret, without which we’d stare at our audience; a hard audience our covert sacrifice is harder than.

Thus the fall began with being made from Clay, the fall began in our glorification of a Lord whose simplicity is probably meant to deceive.

Eating the fruit, gaining the knowledge of Good and Evil, understanding clothing, got them kicked out of the garden of eden; but Eden was a fallen environment to being with. America may be a fallen culture: it is fallen, regardless of whether we recognize it as such so. Eve ate the apple, put on clothes, the lord saw the clothes, the shame of her own innocence, and thats a violation of the lease; but this garden, claimed of paradise, had the flaws of clay, glorification, and missing ribs to begin with so as a paradise, it must have been an opiated one; the way TV and such may be construed as paradise.

But let’s consider another way. Say before the knowledge of good and evil, Adam had no idea a rib was gone. Or if he was aware of it, it didnt matter, he had no idea of the values and ramifications signified missing therein. Then, after eating the fruit, gaining knowledge of good and evil, Adam got pissed off about missing a rib, even more pissed off that it is now his girlfriend so, and they both put on clothes, because beyond Eden, Nod, wasnt as nice as the garden,  and stormed off, never wanting to see the landlord known as Lord again, who took his rib, and imposed it upon the clay shape before him. Thus Adam, before eating the forbidden fruit, is incapable of estimating his missing rib; or he is in such faith, that its a non issue. Yet Adam learns of the missing rib, becomes furious at the Lord, and storms out, like some trailer park dispute., strange trailer park dispute.

In this version, it is an awareness of Sin, in our macro-media age, that is the catalyst- Not Sin itself. Sin is alaways there – Yet as inherent to our situation, it comes from above, not  from Earth.

Or Adam was aware of the missing rib; saw it as a severe impedieent, which makes the charactorization of Eden as Paradise, almost promotional  in the interests of the writers of the book as alians, whoo took Adam’s rib, to make Eve so, and when Adam ate the fruit,  he found out, as I said, and it was never the same. But here’s the problem, if we had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evi, then we would have firmly gotten by now that being made from Clay is evil, yet at the same time, being made from Clay makes it hard to realize good and evil. Thus how could Adam, made from Clay, comprehend Good and Evil, especiallly when even today, there is none of the necessary condigned negativity associated with being made from Clay, which the situation calls out for. This is the contradiction, People made from clay dont fully get Good and Evil.  All the fall can be about is a pissed off Adam about the rib. Don’t you get, we’re claimed to know good and evil, but dont get were made from clay? That being made from clay, not bioneuroulogical chemicals, is a negative? So Eden was a fallen made from clay state, and there was no need to blame Eve, except in this version of sexism, pure and simple, right there before us, now.

Can we honestly say we have any governance by a knowledge of good and evil? Can we say we ate that fruit? Then why is it claimed we ate it? TO double fool us? Is it possible to ever eat such a fruit, and so gain what we need and have not? What do we have to do to attain common sense, wisdom,  the brain and mind we are promised? No, made from clay means difficult conduit to wisdom.  Moreover we seem governed by some wisdom of the universe and not wisdom of earth.

This is a bit of a new subject. But lets try to make definitive points. What Jesus calls the kingdom of God, Jews call being made from clay. While “The kingdom of god” is a terminological capstone of Jesus’s teaching, Mark 4:12, being made from Clay, isn’t, but Old Testament.

Point being, in terms of epochs, another did begin with the flood. Let’s say Adam and Eve left the garden to evolve in a morally difficult planet. First we have to ask, was earth like a science experiment in a universe that predicted humans on earth, as, they exist within preset conditions. Or was there a scramble to deal with an amazingly unhappy universe? Or both? But then we have  to say, as they left the garden, as animals, without clothes, moving on along evolution, adapting through knowledge of good and evil, there is no need to blame the fallibility upon Eve, even as there may be an anguish to the male expression of childbirth, even a bemoaning that we can’t just be a few living forever, like solitary planets perhaps; the fallibility is on the universe, its rare odds of life, and affliction upon Earth, not the means of spreading good and joy in a dark universe.

And of Course, the farmer killing the hunter, makes no sense, now there’s a sin that caused the flood and a second fall; in that, a lord and patriarch, would favor vegetables over meat, a hunter is more likely to be pent up and violent, and a farmer is stronger than a hunter; thus the flood, and noah, and rescuing the animals; that is a fall through Sin, Cain and Abel capsulize an immoral age; which must be redeemed, or is paid for, by the flood. It is around here that one might insert the women coming from the mans rib? But how would that work; so its put in genesis, but only becomes a reality in later days;

The Four Teas of my Life

October 16, 2012

People are lucky if they get four loves in their life, if they work on and are a part of four good farms in their life, if they can feel close to four family members, or………Anyway, in my day and life, I have had four great teas in my life, if you will allow me recount them nostalgically, sentimentally some, Certainly the first tea leaves me very sentimental.

I was only 31, maybe 32 at the latest, and been away from the childhood manor since age 23. This was the winter of 96/97, and the manor house mortgage had been shrewdly paid off by amassing 2000 a month renting out its house to several renters of interesting charactor, all older and mysterious to me back then. However to the detriment of the manor the full basement was flooded, wood floors never seriously clean, front lawns parked on reduced grass, fireplace disused, porch, garage space, out of controll, and I set about that winter to reclaim the home so, staying in the basement, once the flooding cleaned.

And bert who had one bedroom,, had another bedroom rented out to Norma, his girlfriend. Burt was AFL-CIO at Rockefeller Center for NBC stuff, and commutted via train to the big apple each day. And Norma with her stirking long and thick black hair, thin Physique, taught at a school for the autistic in nearby pennsyvania, wherre some days she complained they pulled her braids. This latter would make anyone take to the bottle, and Norma took to the vodka, drinking it up by the bottle, always straight, God I felt like such a wimp mixing my vodka, by her in her bedroom watching afternoon TV after work and before Bert got home. Eventually though, the bottle got the best of her and she was fired for smelling like vodka on the job too many times, and after that, never the same.

Anyway, one year she sprinkled some spearmint seeds, perenials , around the stone horshoe outside the back, a perimeter of some 30 ft, and each year, long after all the crazy renters had left, and the whole family returned to the house as some base, or compound perhaps, the sppearmint came up every yr, a fragrance reminiscient of the sunny, if not tooo serious and responsible Clinton years. I would even dry those spearmint leaves and roll them into cigarettes or additives for  rolling papers. It was an excellent tea, the best, dried out or not, right outside the kitchen bay window, and I’d pick a whole paper bag full and see how long through the winter it would last. Sometimes I’d share it ass Norma’s tea, sometimes as Vic’s Tea, depending on who the clientele was.. It had a masculine, distinct tasty taste. and it was the best, no tea was ever better.

The  of course, a future tea can always taste better than a paast tea. Thats what makes future teas true teas, they are better than your past ones, and sure enough, I found a future tea, and boy was she she beautiful, oh so much more pretty and interesting looking thann  that dank dark green spirmint leaf. It was The Red Clover Tea, or as I affectionately called it, Red Cloberty, ( as in red liberty.) Lord, you may ask, how can you find the red and purple clovers that flower into tea petal leaves? Where does one have to go, who does one have to find, what has to happen for such chance and bless to occur? First, it requires a girl,, industrious and proactive enough , versed in the garden grwoing song you know, enough to have property, and red clover tea flower seeds, that are then planted in a shape, inthis case a circle, also, like the spearmingt right outside an entracne off the kitchen. I had always thought the spearmint of Norma, or Vic, if I said so, was superior. No, this red clover tea, out of Georgia, no less, was where the stumbling intoxicated tea occurred. Not only landscaped well, but made a better tea than spearmint, if a little eearker and less masculine.



On “The Way of all Flesh” by Samuel Butler

July 23, 2012

My criteria for reading a book is its “page-turning” quality. The second criteria is if it is fundamentally educational, such as The Bible, or histories or ideas, written long ago; in which case you can only turn so many pages before dozing off to think. Thankfully, The Way of All Flesh” this is a page-turning kind of book, and between all the entertainment from page turning quality, and the ideas harmonizing behind the cogency, one gets a pleasant sociological combination of entertainment and idea

This book is a period piece. I suppose all works  of art are by definition, period pieces, but this especially so; compared to other books I’ve looked at, such as by Gide, or Kafka, or Obama, there is a more three dimensional depiction; a depiction of the average man, and not the tendency in literature more recently, to write about the unusual man, or the outsider, or one in extraordinary situations.

It is Satire. British novels have always been; because the reality Satire satirizes, is called the spade it is. The reality of the world, to the spiritual, isn’t really the realest reality of the world, yet because the novel is limited in its conceptions, to this circumscribing of the way things are; because of this fuzziness, and purposeful vagueness, by making light of it; by making light of a classmate who is tricked into marriage, and yet responsible for guiding sick people unto death as should; that is an instinctive reaction to the moral ambiguity of our world.

For the hero, Theobald, is a bit of a dullard, taken advantage of, treated badly; Butler treats the particular dysfunctionalities, and immoralities of his particular age, with the humour necesary to summon the strength to describe immorality and dysfunctionality; the sterness to call society as seen, without sugar-coating it. And yet, if one defines “literary” as criticizing society without ending up on its bad side; Butler is quintessionally literary I mean it is funny to hear Butler describe in polite and severe tones, the ineffectiveness  and wrong of his hero’s mind.

Yet let me think clearly now; there is clearly sugar-coating to the whole genre right? An artist is subscribed to by his culture, precisely for sugar-coating those childhood horrors worse than thought; Or are things only so bad, as in acceptable if not great, absolute? Is being teased by packs of girls, and forced into The Church of England, that is what it is, no sugar-coating there?

Because the novel is the first person, ostentasibly written by someone who was a classmate of Theo’s, there is the description in the third person of a protagonist, yet it is written by someone in the novel himself. Thus the first person subjective mode to the novel, is desired and pushed on by Butler; who also evokes Sterne is his focus on the humourous, as well as how the humourous comes from the flaws of charactors. There is a stark questioning of british life, without identifying the answer that question requires.

Now in examining the old books on the shelves of my library for page-turningness, I had to go very fast through the first 50 pages before the plot becomes riveting enough to have to read every word and turn the page. But this reality is consistent with Butler, because his “period” form, the way the dedication to his period is manifested, is rather than start with the central protagonist Theobald, he starts with the fellows grandfather. And it is written in the first person. Fictionally, the author was a child when Theobald’s grandfather was alive; and the author was an aquaintance of Theobold growing up, they knew each other’s sisters as well; as no small part of the book touches on awkward male-female, traditions.

So there are images from 1802 and the grandfather, who is an interesting man, and his son George, who is lucky enough to become rich and flawed, and then George’s two sons, one of whom the story seems centered on, and by page 50, you feel enough sympathy for and worry about enough, to keep reading. The linking of the story of one man, put through college by a greedy father, reluctanting qualifying for the clergy, and then a professorial post; who is so socially awkward, that he is snapped up in the conspiracy of one parson’s family to marry off a daughter to him, as he assists in services in the small town outside of cambridge.

What is interesting in this part; well there are several interesting aspects here. One is the sensation, that one can die, and his work still go on, through other people, a very profound idea that gave me pause; as such would be so unsatisfying to my efforts at challenges now; and yet the possibility of such condign is true and makes sense, yet no one says it, and yet it is a plausible way the world works underscoring the gloom and subdued quality of the world and earth.

Another is the sociological symmettry, of a father, born relatively poor, new to the lower orders of the upper class, and how are his sons to support themselves; back then it was the church, or perhaps law, or perhaps a professor ship; and so it is today, except the investment banker has replaced the church, as a prestigious and tolerable form towards the more mature decades.

Another are the depictions of how routinely rude children are and can be, how awful the dynamics of a family can be upon the young; Butler seems sympathetic to a horror of individuals within family life, especially young; recounting the strictness that was common, and the constant kill-joy exhortations of a parsimonious awkward father, to Theobald in his early twenties; the sheer immorality and societal dysfunction requiring conspiracy and need to marry or foist off daughters, through cunning, upon those heir to a little money. The women, at least initially, are portrayed as conniving and scheming to get a man, and marry; making every relation I’ve ever had, color with the feeling it was a plot, and I was picked off like a turkey by a hunter; and yet it is true; there is a certain aggression Theo lacks, which is quite common, though its oposite reinforced by contemporary media, for which the impression of marriage is made upon him and he is soon locked in a marriage with a women 3 years older, where both of them really do not love each other, one a victim of a culture of cunning, the other a victim of stubbornness and inexperience. The calculation required and carried out by a family with some nine daughters to marry off, is very much a vehicle to the plot, that shows Butler’s focus on a dismal reality, and by extension, some resolve and analysis therein. To the extent every marriage contains two people who don’t truly love each other, but felt the pressure to Marry, Butler’s work is relevant, bold and honest. It speaks of Art as demarking something unpleasant and true–it provides the artist’s perspective, as coming from outside society, as it questions and exposes society, which later generations translate into a less three-dimensional but more artistic and less “normal” protagonist subjectivity.

Thus, with a comic’s low profile or subtle air, immoralities and dysfunctionalities are exposed and dealt with, by this novel.

By encompassing previous generations to lead up to his tale, Butler emphasizes the perspective of time. When the fiancee is called 24 and his? 27, my charactor at both ages leaps to mind in a way, at those ages, where the distance between ages, moves slowly enough to never have been aware, of the considerable change I went through in those ages. There are a few different rythms to life and its decades; 24 was the finishing of an innocence, and 27, the rough hugging of growing sophistication through a devotion to sociality my innocence rejected.

I want to say, though our yuppies, investment bankers, and theirs, clergy, or lawyers, the pressure, by elders, for their youngers, to make money and support themselves, existed then, as now. As do the indignities of being young with a family’s strains; as Butler’s descriptions and my recollections of my childhood have some overlap, of rude childhood people one has to deal with, of sisters being rude and imperfect, and other women, not even there. There is a quality of his time, and now in N.J., where the job of a women is to stand up to you, not out of righteousness, but to develope one’s ability to stand up, in a patriarchal and oppressive world.

Love to Butler then, is not some joy of physical intimacy, but a literary device, required and urged on by a society that would not reproduce without it; the view of love is very jaded, not romantic, fraught with problems, and far from idealized, shown for the unpleasant nitty gritty reality it occupies.

But most importantly, I must point out what Butler’s times are going through, for without learning, it is hard to see what is missing, or what causes something, or what this is not like. Because what the reader must know, to not be ignorant, is Butler is writing of a time,over ten centuries removed from classical times, classical times being primarily defined by me, as times when everyone in europe and north africa, belonged to a tribe. One was not only a roman citizen, one was a member of one of the 30 tribes. Rome didn’t attack, subdue, and gain obedience from other countries outside their sphere of influence, but tribes that owned land outside their sphere of influence. And the tribes, whether controlling government and culture as fully as possible, in such as Gaul, Germanic areas, and Spain and North Africa, or whether practicing tribal practices, but citizens of Rome, a Rome, which included the tribes in its federal system of checks and balances by requiring them to meetin in local piazzas, to ratify treaties, or give their opinion of matters before the senate.

It is this crude tribal democracy, that has been shoved out the door, for an individualism designed for oppressive impositions, such tribe Not trumping family, and there being No community discussion, and the federal government Does Not want to know what the people, per tribe, feel about relevant matters, Likewise, the justice department does not spring from the people, quite the oposite, and the economy is regulated by capitalism, rather than consensus, or even general planning and strategy; so the way you get the sad, stoic, oppressed, (and oppressed by the reduction of religions a hundred fold) Britain, we see through Butler, is the replacement of tribal culture, with the individualism, yet conformity-creating, society Britain back then knew, and America now, knows. For what is worse about America, as that traditionally, one migrated as a tribe with tribal attachments; whereas now, the states attempt no imposing nullifcation of federal laws, nor nationalities and heritage be relied on for culture and thought, as they were routinely in antiquity. Yet do not forget, antiquity had human sacrifice; though the system of justice was looser-ended back then, stemming from the people and effectiveness, rather then government-imposed life-long judges, criminals were required to be sacrificed, as getting other people to, is obviously not easy.

So when Butler and The Novel, take you within the individualistic, and dramatize what resonates near your own experience, so many grandfathers later; they are painting the painful scenes, individualism is designed for; they are writing about a sacrificial toll in subtle ways; and yet they are essentially not making sense; evoking a dream of faint glory; rather than a sensible story. And it is a simple principle that shows the illogicality of the plot of fiction, that even defines how “fiction” is “Fiction Terrible”: if so many people are oppressed in childhood, surely they would unite and smote that form of childhood. If so many people are lawyers, surely they would realize life-long judges are trumped by short-term judges, and so change the system. So fiction is about an individual, ultimately all alone, though who would be surrounded by other’s like him, yet that is only an appearance; whereas the plots of a tribe, while equally calculated, do not so easily involve oppression; for more recognition of what this principle reveals predicated pagan times; whereas what fiction involves in its effect, is the modus operandi to understanding the color of more modern era.

Tribal obligations, trump marriage obligations. Girls may squeam, but a tribe, probably was composed of by siblings, and then perhaps offsprings, in ultimate division, rather than families. So the focus squarely hits on the head, what turns out to seem to be Butler’s important theme: that marriage is sick.

Yuppies and marriage, so with perspective, they are seen as going together, and furthermore, with perspective, I see the yuppies all around me in my twenties, entered through those narrow yuppie gates, to jobs in Manhattan, with a sort of polite, and subdued depravity; now looks like such initiation results in the feeling a big bite of their mind has been taken, or worse, that they can never get out of crime and depravity, rather they are cemented to it by marriage. And while this acceptance does not make sense to me; hoping for the more realistic rendition of salvation and enlightenment and agrarianism and common group thinking; it is associated with the prestige of the world, what we work with. Living a lie, is very much a theme we work with, and very much what Butler drones in through his fine rendition of Theobald and Christina’s first day together married, when she is 33, and how awkward that first day is. And as may be the case with great art, there is a need for it. Look at all the sitcoms with married couples, yes they illuminate not getting along, but they also never swiftly end in divorce. This depiction of the awkward disapointment or illusion and its real crust was a relief for me to see, as our modern society, while ocassionally touching on the subject in a passionate way, really does not routinely take on the phenoma of marriage, and all its processed trapping.

Butler shows an imposed world, imposed from every end, from the pressure to marry, to the pressure to make money, to the effects of calculations therein, to the weakness of human charactor, most essentially causing pressure, as the people never do click together, since western civilization, while alluding to another way, greatly enforces itself as The Truth, because western civilization is about imposing human images, like the novel itself, upon human beings; creates a “reality” by taking the undeveloped and oppressed nature of the human being, and giving it a set of images culled of civilization. A wift of fading and faint glory, essentially singular, the definition of a dream, where the alabaster of company never sticks together in a more eternal or ultimate society. Like a dream, fiction and life, never have bonds great and true enough to change things, back to classical understandings, of tribes, community, the universe, the fear.

So marriage itself, is built up to with lies, at least in Theobald and Christina’s case, that then those lies fall down, upon marriage. Is the women that natural deceiver unto marriage? Do we have ways we would choose? Do you think we chose to live this way? And is this acceptance brainwashing? Is brainwashing, something the mind and fiction does to itself, and then calculated to contain a pressure upon that that would otherwise think straight? And isn’t such pressure metaphysical? And done by a nonmaterial or less material or by something of different energy, or suffering itself into a system? And that thus this comprises and defines totalitarianism? The oppression of society by nonmaterial force?

Reading Dreams of My Father

April 22, 2012

Reading Dreams of My Father. Here it is, straight from the horses mouth. I hadn’t known of this book. I am almost the last to know. I only found out his middle name is Hussein at the coronation. I had always thought the Tea Party made that up to taunt him. After some sputtering I realized this is actually a priceless gift to the people we have hurt the most in the past decade, Arabs, now have a moral-spiritual claim upon the Character of our Presidency.

But, of course, I voted for Obama, because if anyone needed a role model, it were our willing and spirited minorities. Now, of course, I realized during his campaign, his poetry, didn’t hoot about racial issues, such as violence in bad neighborhoods, high percentage of minorities in prison, not even how more insensible our economy must appear to minorities compared to us; but I hoped against hope this was to avoid being villified via the pressures of the campaign, and he would respond towards the reason I voted for him, in style.

Then, just recently, I learned he spent ages 6-10 in Indonesia, so, not only did he not get the experience of a darker mama, but the elementary school system in These United States, is practically the capstone to understanding racial harmony in America. With bussing back in the seventies, ordered by the courts, to provide racial harmony, elementary school was bound to be where many a white kid experienced the whole gang and gaggle of blacks, for the first time, on a consistent, daily basis.

I to this day I have the fondest wishes for Byrum, and remember how Jerome always insisted on be called Maurice, which always made me think why; and Veronica Michtell, one of the smartest black girls who I believe is a lawyer now. To think Barrack missed out on this critical component of integration, going to school together, ….I mean, elementary school in America, just may be an elemental, natural, and moral criteria to being our president. It’s a little like the way I find myself objecting to governors who are not from the state they govern; gives em that carpet-bagger feel.

And then I learned, not only did he live in Indonesia, while I had to take a bus to elementary school everyday, but he wrote a book about it; and then here I am, cleaning out where I live, and I find this very book. And then this black kid Isreal is over and starts to read it, and when he leaves, I start to read it, and when I read a book I write about it in this blog.

Now first, let me get this out of the way, I’m jealous, someone with a white trash mother, who lived in Indonesia, aged 6-10, became president; while I toil away with witty remarks on the subject, in obscurity. However, I have learned, to be suspicious of jealousy, and its incitement, because jealousy is not real; nothing is that good or great, earth slides to the dismal scale fairly easy and quick, and no one earnest and true doing good which would cause jealousy, these people are too true to be jealous of. So jealousy is just a mexed up feel generally, and I very rarely feel jealousy.

Then Obama learns of his father’s death, while describing his apartment on the east side of Manhattan at 94th st; and this is funny; because I can definitely see the East-Sider in Barrack; being a west-sider; but then some manhattan nuance springs up; he says most of the people in his Harlem  were peurto rican; whereas I’m pretty sure in general they tend to be Dominican and gang based, rather than individual and peurto rican; and you would refer to this sort of Harlem as a Spanish Harlem, as he says his neighborhood was mainly peurto rican. Now I do not know for sure as I didn’t get out to 94th and first back then.

The short chapter 1 is 90% images from the border of East Harlem, then ends with receiving the news of his father’s death.

But I understand now, if he spent his elementary school years in Indonesia, with a muslim parent and alianated mother, he’s not the right candidate to rouse and lead minorities through their issues.

There are three tells in this first chapter; revealing some jagged angle; the first is the image of his roommate yelling down from the fire escape they took smoke breaks on, at the white women walking their dogs, to scoop their poop. That’s what rednecks call “cracker”, cracker-behavior; where normal politeness is lost via peculiar social pressure; for surely the first thing you learn in these neighborhoods is keep the voice deep and well moderated; so that’s a little weird vignette.

Then he trots out an old yarn about his father, dangling a younger african student, over a ledge, in hawaii, for dropping his pipe down the ledge. That’s a violent image showing the anger of his father. Is that camouflaged, or what is meant to be shown?

Then Barry says he prefered at that young age as a student of higher education, to be alone, than hang out with the stupid repetitve hanging out people. I can relate to that. I remember at 24 how much I liked and needed to comfort myself, with myself, applying the excericise of the mind, as the wisest activity; something I still hold true; yet especially young, there is a tendency to have been weilded through primary education so swiftly, the mind is not applied, exposing school as stultifying the classical behavior of enjoying your mind.

Likewise, in my mind, there is a positive promotion of himself, as measuring the news of his father’s death; which does seem authentic and thoughtful, rather than passioned and foolish, false and not real.

Then, the story about his father, by his grandfather, reminisced from Hawaii, drifts on into further scenes, images and vignettes about his father; and frankly we are exposed, to what seems unacceptable, the interplay between his white mother, never good at intercultural relations to begin with, and her dark black husband with a british accent, comfortable with a beer at a bar; because this issue must be very hard broach; particularily as you come across more and more circumstances where these relationships tended painfully. How really is the author going to address what is often the folly of relationships born of something other than relating.

His grandfather portrays his father in sem-flattering terms; and yet how often have we seen a niggardly sycophant attitude by whites towards blacks; where the issues aren’t dealt with, and the interaction not genuine? Is Obama going to deal with this? Is this real praise, or does the story of his father accepting a Phi Beta Kappa awared, which requires good grades, in jeans and T-shirt, unaware it was a tuxedo event? Is this the innocence of a near-genius? Someone very out of touch? Or a normal response at some level?

Barrack laments these anecdotes were trotted out rarely, as even a sugar-coated therapy for the abscence of Barrack Sr., and thus he really knew his father very little? Which brings up the point of hardship, can be the assumption, that there is something magical beyond the hardship; and yet the world is moderate or worse, beyond the hardship; there is a wonderful relief to any recovery; but there are finite chisels to everyone’s sculpture; and the search for son-father relation, symbolically spiritual, to explain where and how we are.

Obama’s father was born in Kenya, in tribal society, and if you even meet Africans, ask them about their tribes and how they live; for it is not nearly as bad as what we’ve read growing up. Barrack Sr. showed promise and was selected to study abroad, in Hawaii, where he graduated top of his class. Africans in America do have a specialized social side. I have lived and worked and helped train with Kenyan Marathoners on a farm, so I certainly have experienced their special social pride; but I have also experienced how white girls trip them up, and how foolish that infatuation for them, and cutting for the girl.

According to his mother’s story, Barrack Sr got a scholarship to a Harvard program, but it didn’t afford his family, and from Harvard, he went back to Africa for Kenya to return on its investment.

Up to the age of 5 or 6, this was the story he heard of his father; that his mother white, and father, black, made no impression on him. And there is a wry tone, that truth will be revealed, and what seems true, changes, and yet, there is truth, to everything.

He then starts to discuss interracial marriage; how its outrageous to make it illegal, how his mother’s parents were gracious regarding, how it is an issue; yet there is a tendency to be proud of it, and being proud of one’s identity is important; but I for one am tired of the dilution of blood as an outright positive; its a real issue, morally ambiguos, like many others, signaling a silence of society, rather than potent discourse, being all alone by design, regarding explanations.

Then there is this thread, of academic parents, whereby its inculcated, some are respectable, some are not. I’ve come across this also, and can only say, as someone who has experienced the lower class, this bifurcation ignores the fun and goodness and skills, some of the less respectable have, in that some of the less respectable, are more respectable than the respectible, and good society recognizes the less educated can be more enlightened, and the important thing is working, and there is something good about people working with their hands honestly, and the poor and the rich, or college-educated and drop-outs, are compelled to be polite and respectful to each other; and this what hospitable society constitutes; yet Hawaii seems a little far off this Mark; even though I am sure the natives understand this.

His mother’s parents, from Kansas, living in Hawaii, are very nice to Barrack, and Barrack obviously returns the favor speaking very warmly of them. He looks up to his grandfather, and sees his American Heritage refracting through him, his mother’s father, in that that is wonderful, as there is a tendency to forget, Barrack is half white; and for some reason we treat that as minority, rather than half-majority.

Barrack wonders whether his gramps kindness is from liberalism, and not therefore genuine; as he recognizes the significance of the interlude between his parents, before his mother’s parents. But 30 pages into the book it becomes starkly apparent; the lack of racial harmony and addressing minority issues of his campaign is no fluke. This book has the wrong racism. If you believe these vignettes of his grandparents consitute contemporary, relevant racial issues that have even existed in my lifetime, you really missed forced bussing and integrated elementary schools.

Let me repeat; he writes these images of the forties and fifties, where you can’t call blacks Mr., and if you have a black friend you are taunted by your peers en masse, and the blacks are not allowed in the store. This entirely was not of my mid-forties life time. If anything Whites are not sympathetic to the alianation Blacks may feel, from and too, the insensible economy, the insensible promotion in commercial sports, the admixture of race, the violence, the prisons, the alianation from being far from their traditional power in Africa; these are the issues of racial harmony.

I have never seen Whites mean to Blacks. I have though, been robbed by blacks, and never by blacks, I have walked through a black neighborhood and had bottles thrown at me for being white, and yelled at for being white, and seen dead dogs around, the way I never see in white neighborhoods; these are the serious issues of alianation, that are relevant, and have been experienced, anger towards our own and others. But I have never seen whites persecute blacks, in my lifetime; really. I even remember in the late sixties, a handyman came by a few times a summer, Mr. Vance, who I remember, even under the age of five, was to call him Mr. Vance. And as for segregation; if you make the issue out of the timeless seperation of neighborhood by color, you miss the true issue, which is one standard or tier of living for one color, and a usually inferior one for another; that latter is the definition of a racist society. So we do have a racist society; that runs away from the issues; that up to page 30, seems led by Obama, out of touch enough to not relate to the real issues of anger etc, apparently from living in Hawaii and indonesia. But surely there is a coming of age, no matter how late, that comes, undocumented by media, when one realizes there are problems, unique problems within the black community that must needs be addressed, where harmony is created by awareness, and discomfort, by ignorance.

Let me give you an example of ignorance: A racist society is defined by segregation, not different standards of living for different races.

Often the anger towards minorities regards the ocassion of violence towards women; something the media will not admit, as it would lead to a reconsideration of the metaphysic here. Same way, I can not be helped, through where power is placed, because the metaphysic of local elect, or me influencing society by becoming famouse, is offensive to no person, but to a metaphysic saddling society so; a society whose primary is deception, a lying about earth, by western civilization, by societies previous; for within lies, enabled the creation of the kingdom of god; done for a reason.

Again, I have had memorable experiences, with minorities; from jamaican weed dealers at Washington Square Park in Manhattan; I’d carry s sign indicating the abscence of the world, and they would tease me by thinking I was a cop. All right, anyway.

Hawaii does have a different rythm of harmony by virtue of the powers the natives yield and weilding power often better towards racial harmony by the minorities in a local majority; as Hannibal united a more diverse group against The Roman Republic, than the Romans to defend themselves against The North African warrior.

Yet he speaks of the United States oppression of Hawaii, and certainly, we should set Hawaii free; but he speaks of Hawaii as if Japan never owned it. We took it from Japan. If we set it free, Japan would probably rule it again, and still does have a sphere of influence there. His demonization here, and his earlier phrase, “sword that tasted wars first cut of blood or something”, is frankly a liberal tendency, that mispeaks to the international community, that seems to compell the liberal subject from himself, his experiences, to some written world, not directly relevant, of segregated imagery villified, and minority friends not allowed; when our age today has an amazingly high degree of peaceful racial interaction; where if anything whites lack sympathy to blacks, while blacks may live in dangerous neighborhoods, like Brooklyn.

He rhapsodizes liberally how self-segregation leads to whites receiving racism, in Hawaii; but then ends the chapter, before going to indonesia, with the start of the wry even measured commentary, one hopes for in a leader, that casts reflection upon the first chapter as homilies the media wants to hear, and not actual. “I was too young to realize I was supposed to have a live-in father, just as I was too young to know that I needed a race.” He ackowledges he was caught in a dreamworld, whose waking world reclaimed his parents, and left him there. So we approach Chapter 2 and Indonesia.

There were in indonesia because his mother fell in love with one, which had to be a terrible embarrassment, because children know the truth. I’ve seen mothers like this; I’ve tended their children. I relate to them, insofar I didn’t cause it; a hard thing for society to own up to together, as deserved, of tribal times; but something their mothers may lack without an aware grace. So right away, I feel tremendous sympathy for Barack, because I know these kids; makes me wonder how he became president. The images with his mother are painful. Will he deal with the tragedy of his mother? Honest imagery and a wry tone are not enough.

The irony of moving to Indonesia–for of late I’ve found irony marks or mocks our society more than any quality, is that it was genuinely, probably a good and worthwhile move for him. If I was him, I could see how Indonesia was more comfortable than the situation in Hawaii, insofar that are more minorities, or racially mixed people, or darker skinned, in Indonesia, so Barrack gets along with neighborhood kids, and I imagine is more comfortable; Indonesia sounds wonderful compared to the western limitations upon animals; The new husband to his mother, actually seems the genuine type that cares more about the kid, than the single mother. Indonesia, for all the hardship, is unpretentitious, warm and comfortable.

He ran with the neighborhood kids, which, you may know, include bullies, who throw rocks, that land on the head, if pursued for taking a soccer ball from a game.

When I was six, I met the neighborhood kids, having a rock fight, amid the hills of slate and shale bulldozed into hills often taller than a six year old.  Now, that would be totally unacceptable to me; I would stop unsupervised children playing like that. And to be sure, the rock fights died out in a year or two, and at some point, there was enough head injury and pain, no one threw rocks; throw crab apple fights, with the big crab apples especially, were painful and lingered.  It was like peanuts and Charlie Brown, there were no grown-ups, no adults keeping an eye on the kids, which seems so normal now.

Likewise many people do not seem to have an age of 6-10, so deceptive and true, this world around me; the notion people have experience, when experience leads to reason, and reason away from the oppression of school, into  the wisdom of community and thinking together—so with a grain of salt to many experiences.

Jesus didn’t really die for you AND other Easter Comments

April 16, 2012

 1) If Jesus was seen on Sunday, he really didn’t die on Friday. Easter is a celebration of how Jesus didn’t really die, was ressurected. So if he didn’t really die, then how could he have died for you? The catholics, methodists, episcopalians, baptists and lutherans are victims of a corrupted christianity. This corruption stems from the Letters of Paul, not the first three gospels.

A) The literary form of repeating a story four times, in a different light, is a literary technique based on the old testament habit of the same.

  1. 2) Jesus preached the terms, The Kingdom of God, and the Kingdom of Heaven. The Kingdom of God, as a term, is a euphemism, for the alteration of the human in the womb, into a being, referred to as The Kingdom of God. This alteration makes it very easy, for a human like Jesus, not to be punished at all, but merely have such exist on paper as much of the world exists on paper to color the world with a representation other than the kingdom of god.
  1. 3) In the pre-jesus pagan world, human sacrifice was alarmingly common. They would sacrifice criminals, or those stragglers in society no one gets too along with; because pagans were scared of the universe, and the universe would cause enough bad things, that sacrificing people, was thought to ward off bad things happening. So from this historical perspective of the transition from pagan, to judea-christian, we see the effect of the teaching to reinforce the christian age was not going to be known as an age where people were openly sacraficed, ie, killed specifically in sacrifice out of fear bad things happening otherwise.

4) I’m one of those people who believe the Gospel According to John, the fourth Gospel, was written by John The Baptist, who was a Christ too. Therefore there is a sarcastic quality to John, whereby his having to step aside, for Jesus to ascend, for all the work John did to not ascend alongside history, was like a death, for Jesus to succeed; because John sacrificed his fame, for Jesus’s, the gospel per John’s theology of sacrificing for you, tonally represents his own literary feeling regarding the whole scene. For the bible is primarily a literary work. It should be read no differently than any other book. Start on page one, interpret it for yourself, try to finish it, find it a page-turner, discuss it with other readers; It is writing, manifested towards spirit; an example of the literary path.

  1. We redeem our misbehavior, brought on by the world of sin, through godliness. We are not removed, but active participants, in moral society, as possible, and we ask god for mercy upon our performance.
  2. Does the Kingdom of Heaven return to dust? Dust is where we came from, maybe, but not where we will return to. Except the kingdom of god, entranced, will return to dust, but energy, does not seem to, hence the older mean.
  3. What is hard to do is render the kingdom of god. The soul, mind, required for this, may be more serious than me. Likewise, should that be possible, earth becomes somber, not willing to move, and seriousness marks those similiar qualities; as humans, and minds, have gross similiarities, making the particular differences, harder to see.
  4. What christians seem to me to be worrying about, is becoming an active participant in life, when so often, life is so much too much to be an active participant, brought down in sin, sin, heaven acknowledges, renders society a metaphysical design for sacrifice, than for good, so what does the christian wonder to do?
  5. To understand we are part of a great universe, is a hard thing, because this universe oppresses us. Divinity that can end the oppression, stems from the resoluteness of the kingdom of heaven. It is possible to go forward, in this context. There is no need to get down by defeat. Don’t take it so seriously. Holy Spirit is possible, and believed in, as a remedy unto salvation at all times.
  6. Praying for your persecutor to heal, is a basic. Religion can go farther than this. For that to happen, we must realize, in society today, religion may not enact its precepts; it’s merely advice; yet if that was a basic constitutional clause, then from there, we may go to even greater services of religion.
  7. There are misconceptions of christianity and by christianity. For instance Paul, really corrupted the gospel. His taking the gospel and story so seriously, in unliterary fashion, is one of the realest examples of the corruption of good, we can find, and historical. The notion of life after death, is not preached by Jesus, who preached of a material salvation on this earth, but a part of Paul’s corrupt translating of material salvation in the physical world, by society as a whole, into something about qualifying for heaven. This heaven thing is a greek concept of greek mythology; not gospel. While the idea is take teachings and run with them. Christianity has a bit of a bad habit, based on Paul, of going in the wrong direction.
  8. Forsooth being aware how we are children of God, And aware of our belovedness a good direction. Certainly, good christianity understands it is about, here, now, making our lives better; and not this mythology about an afterlife politically calculated by ancient greece to make people fear, or be comforted.
  9. Can you understand dying as leaving the world of sin. As thanking you?
  10. Lifting ourselves up, christians forget, requires communities, friends. Friends of spirit.
  11. When I worry, about people, who suffer more than me, surely they must find my suffering comparable? Particularily as we are in the same community. For Chrisitianity is good, when it says to the alone, I am greatly alone; when we remind the handicapped, that we are handicapped: Compassion, as a compass, to find our salvation out of the world of sin.
  12. I think Christianity is very troubled by war, doesn’t understand the historical evidence of war, wants world peace as a criteria for established religion. When truth is spoke, amid ageis of state, when a state, that wars, rules us, and not god; christianity believes in that opportunity to transform the state out of its warring and sinning condition. In earlier times, pagan practice was closer to the state; yet history records frequent wars amid the tribes of europe and africa and everywhere.
  13. Seeking to have God deliver us, seems no more than accepting we are critically a part of the kingdom of god. So what matters is the lack of anxiety, the seperation of modern society, from the kingdom of god, creates.
  14. It would seem the pagans, through less population, enjoyed and cared, a more lush earth; whereas we destroy nature and farm fields, and this is surely not God being nice, but God sacrificing earth itself; but we must believe it is for an end, it is a sacrifice that brings something to heaven; that there may be a pay-off from it; that future generations may live, for our sacrifice. I don’t know if that is true, but it seems what is logical to believe: Unless the power of Satan is seen as never being overcome.
  15. Do we seek to be cheered up with other people, or tackling spiritual problems, that may not be able to be tackled?
  • Verily I say unto you there are two true themes here.
  1. The world of sin is great enough upon all and each, that we are enabled to relate to the suffering and the troubled well enough.
  2. What christianity offers is a true peace of mind; that counters the flailing through society, by admitting the original sin, the altering of the human to human being, at least we are at peace, and neither fooled nor anxious.
  • Likewise, this explains the service::Paramount, guide.

Prayer is important in as it is not done alone but with another or others. Don’t pray alone; the pipeline to god must go through the conduit of another who listens, represents god, and will answer your prayers. Then, I like to think, prayer, within reason, works.

Athens Greece today celebrates more Easter more than xmas. Easter time sound systems, people on stilts, and young impetuos ten year olds with air bats, converge on street corners, for all ages to dance to, 2-80.

But we have to be honest here. In pagan times, religion was in controll, or at least a part of government, and there were routine sacrifices of human beings. At the same time, we have to conclude, in the heart of Africa, humans died midway through life, for we must remember, the kingdom of god is because dying halfway through life is too hard, for we must remember, we can die as the kingdom of god, or we can die as humans; the pagan universe wants it take unaware, and this was what actual and pagan and religious government tribes actually dealt with in local communities.

So the question is, can we be honest about the situation. Obviously, as the kingdom of god, those deaths of crime in the newspaper constitute modern day sacrifice, for the same pagan universe, but could we reveal all the lies, and still say there is a quota of death. Could we be that honest about it, and reveal the kingdom of god, still have society, that discusses human sacrifice. Likewise, is it so hard to figure the universe switches our condition from natural to limited. Likewise is it hard to figure, the kingdom of heaven lives alongside this society and the kingdom of god, elaborately creating society, unable to make it better, per metaphysical compact, and speaking to each and every each day, with a thousand voices perhaps, that we are loved, and this is the best we can do.

The Kingdom of Heaven may have several or many forms. And it is important to talk about and try to articulate these forms. I think now, the souls in heaven are very small, have their hours ansd days just like we do, live a sobering, serious and difficult existence, and are close to my consciousness, if not attached somehow to the brains of everyone, particularily to mine, to view society as it is viewed, so as better to replicate it. I wonder where and what stock the memories of the experiences of the forms are?

The mind then is about focusing on small things. Yet it is very hard to register and feel these small things, and yet everything from earth to its gravitational field feels a little absent. We do not live in a passionate world embracing weather and people. The mechanisms of illusion obscure true feelings as well. It’s a metaphysical, totalitarian oppression. God is absent from political discussion: that’s atheism and communism, together, in America. People need to Identify America, not that I don’t love her, as a communistic totalitarian entity whereby this dark dream be ruled by higher power.

And the oppression from Paul and Catholicism and C. We would celebrate that one exceptionally lived, not that one commonly died. Jesus would lose his glory were he actually killed on the Cross. Hence the irony of “good” in good friday. It is not truly good, it is the fake good of government. It is not truly good, and the “good” does not actually mean good, and intoned so.

Likewise, the reformation is consistent with a reform of the errant last gospel and paul. Catholicism was chased from northern germany.

But this discussion is much less than the discussion of the kingdom of heaven jesus intended.

The Kingdom of God is because the universe demands too much death. This is not much of a discussion.

The Lord of the Old Testament is a half-pagan God. The Lord of the New Testament, has to be Jesus. One is an earthly Lord, the other, by virtue of extending into the universe both promises the power to deliver to his people, and predates earth, the way Judeasm is the father of Christianity. This discussion does take us to where we are now.

The extent of Christianity’s ability to promote a dialogue, beyond a soothing service, and into the Halleluiah realm, should be questioned. There is a lot of christianity around, but is that where the origin of talking about the truth going to come from. Is it going to originate from any religion. Will its source be the media, or politics, or facebook or community, or all-might God, pure and simple. How does one gain the recognition in a world which creates the negative? Where creationism is about creating an ignorant society, where almost nothing is true. Right off the bat, and don’t conform to society’s rules of and for recognition. Recognition is a fake artifice for society. If it is not true, discrepanical, then how can it include me? That includes facebook. The foundation of ignorance does not go up far. What have we got to do about it? How can we recognize truth and weed out the false and reform the false with the truth?

This, what you read, is essentially a form of prayer, you have to answer and deliver; insofar as I may answer your prayers, and we may answer each other’s prayers. The power of prayer must be challenged, and recorded, estimated; powerpoint presentations on prayer- thats the new age christianity.

It is hard for a rich man and the kingdom of god. Occupy wall st forgets the kingdom of god makes it so that the good people may not have to use money, if money is merely seen as a prop for an ostensibly evil society. It is possible to imagine better societies where the people did not actually use money, even as their history, their lying history, records that they do. As the kingdom does not use money, so money really doesn’t exist. Yet it is possible to make the 1% use it, while the 99% doesn’t, in a metaphysical sacrifice of the sensibility and borders of the 1%.

It is so true that living in a world without prayer, and the recognition of god, as consistent with a work ethic and community, is no way to go through life; as deam wormer said to flounder in animal house. But even where that community exists, will it spread through the greater community to you and me? Or is the origin of the kernel going to be something else; like a crime that is solved and shows the picture of some morality plays? Or some fascist play of the people?

Again, the pagan assumption, christianity lacks, making christianity a trail head, as paganism be a path, is that the universe is in pain and requires sacrifice from earth; so the overtones of sacrifice may be legitamate literary fodder, essential to the unity of the book.

This powerful assesment does trump the darkness of the world, but there is an overall tendency for christianity to talk very staid and even sugar-coatingly in its address and description of this situation, and convey what is tragic, as something that is acceptable, and though it is accepted, it is still tragic.

Prayer is central to christianity as a potential origin for good. When this will be manifested, we don’t know, and we see the dryness that makes christianity naturally staid, ie, the difficulty in pacifying the universe.

Another thing we must discuss is why from the turning water into wine, to the last supper, which I think was 4 years, was that the whole duration of the story; why wasn’t the tale of Jesus longer; why did it stop, did he go to live amid the kingdom of god, did he want to stop being a part of the story of the world, was that all the pagan gods allowed, were other denouements and retreats from society considered?

The souls in heaven must be very strong and low to move the kingdom of god, which may be seen like a mass. Likwise two souls may come together in a way to generate power it seems.

We are limited in our bonds with each other, that is the nature of the totalitarianism; which stems from the nature of a lack of truth in society. The lack of truth, limits our bonds; otherwise we would be asserting righteousness. But something between us promoting something is not, limits truth, and so we have a lot of meaningless communication.


Maundy Thursday must be contextualized as the last supper for Jesus’s friends with Jesus, not as Jesus’s last supper on earth.

 Its an ironic comment on eat, drink and be merry

    •  ‎(if you go by this phrase, one half of being merry is good food)
    •  But being merry ain’t where its at. The bottom line is untangling our heads

       Like Its not about a bunch of people being cool, its about things being so hot you all are stunned
    •  because you really are stunned, its just the world that’s not. And yet the movement of the world, may be a reaction to not being able to take the heat.
    •  The heat that you are stunned

       Yet you are everyone, and the link to the spirit energy beings all around.
FINAL POINT: Some people celebrate Easter, because of the joy that Jesus was seen Sunday, lived. Others, that Jesus died for you. Except you wouldn’t celebrate Jesus dying for you.

The Lemon Drops in “The Lemon Drop Kid”

March 15, 2012

Damon Runyan is robustly, and urbanely, funny; combining politeness with crossing lines, to classic comedy: But not all of his short stories are strictly comic. There are some serious tragic tales, mainly with tragic death in them, and the Lemon Drop Kid is one of them; for which I would like to review the lemon drops, in The Lemon Drop Kid, by Damon Runyan.

The lemon drop kid, on the run from the coppers at the Saratoga Race Track, finds himself in love with a girl in a nearby town, whereby he gets a job as a soda clerk, marries her, only to have her and her baby die on birth, because The Lemon Drop Kid, did not have the money to get her proper medical attention, for which he stuck up the Commericial Hotel, but it was too late; only to learn after a 2 year stint in Auburn Alabama, that someone owed him a lot of money.

One lemon drop is he couldn’t afford a doctor. In this day and age, several times, has a poor friend checked into the emergency room to receive urgent treatment, and not dealt with the bill. It is far more likely for one now a days, to have unpaid medical bills, than unpaid horse-tract debts. Charities, such as catholic charities, offer paperwork for poor hurt people to fill out, which can pay their hospital bills, and even tide over the loss of income.

That certainly is a lemon drop, that his love dies, with two or three years of his love, because he can’t afford a doctor. But let us also say, the game of love is filled with swoon, by which I mean, baby-producing haste; I mean there is a baby at the end of most love, especially this foolish kind played by previously criminal, and still poor, elements. If we were honest, that our matrix, generated by heaven, involving our representation of the kingdom of god, as fully human, dealt with something we wouldn’t reproduce or is what it is said to be, love, marriage, and its subsequent children, would be honestly reckoned, and in such honesty, I doubt there would be a loss of medical funds; so it is our precise dishonesty that causes these pathetic situations; and if the lord allows our sinful dishonesty in such prime relations, how can he not allow our economic lapses? Aren’t they part and parcell to the saccrificial nature to society? A nature we ignore or chalk up to chance, rather than see the heavenly design of evil upon our society?

Likewise, the poor girl, “deals cards off her arm, at the Commericial Hotel”, a reference to cheating for the house; that is not ethical at all. No good karma comes to it. How is her death not karmically reliant upon her immoral behavior. Even if not, what about her consistent mistreatment of society cheating them with cars? What does that say about the Lemon Drop Kid, known for his habit of lemon drops, his being attracted to that waywardness; even as he, earnestly took up working at the general store, to leave behind and avoid selling tips at the racetrack as a way to live, and see the world; but then his beloved still rubs elbows with crime. He is out of harm’s way, living low, while she still courts it?


Subliminal Gun Control in Damon Runyon’s The Hottest Guy in the World

When you have an old friend, whose a bit of a bully, and is trouble from more than one directions, for vast errors, among the diverse planes of trying to make money distributing what can’t, and shouldn’t be sold,  you have to wonder, should he get a gun? Because, he’s the type, whose too sweet to have a gun.

And yet you wonder, maybe having a gun can make a difference, even as a threat. Because in Damon Runyan’s, The Hottest Guy in the world, who is back in Manhattan and allegedly on the run for multiple bank robberies in multiple states; well, he checks in with Damon, who writes in the first person, and they go to see this fugitive’s girlfriend, and I forget why Damon Runyan is required for this; probably out of fear of being interrupted by the cops.

Whereas for me, I would not have a gun, because I believe I a smart enough to be able to reasonably talk with anyone coming at me with a gun; as I can try to explain the kingdom of god to him, and how that makes him really a mind operated by the Kingdom of Heaven, which knows this body he operates, really isn’t the kingdom of heaven, but transformed into the kingdom of god, because of our super sad universe.

Whereas a hot friend of mine, may not be so expressive and knowledgeable; thus, incapable of being reasonable, maybe they need a gun?

And yet, especially if something happened, a gun wouldn’t really help. Even hurting someone else, would feel bad, ad ultimately not be good; so what is the point of a gun, how could a gun help?

Well, so, they are walking and there’s a crowd above the post office across from madison square garden, where a gorrilla from the circus has escaped and climbed up on the roof, with a baby stolen from a young mother, along the way.

There, they see the old girlfriend, and go talk to her, and she is very concerned about the baby being held by the gorilla and waved to the crowd. So, the hot guy, Jules, takes out his gun, and aims and shoots the gorrilla right in the forehead, where he falls backwards with the baby landing on top of him perfectly safe. Jules was able to do this, the story goes, because he had spent the whole winter hiding out in an old warehouse near Montreal, practicing his shooting on mice, as the warehouse was far away from being heard.

It turns out, the baby, is the baby of his old girlfriend, with a childhood aquaintance who is now a cop and right behind him, saying, “I been following you since you got in, was going to arrest you, but that’s my baby you saved, so lets just get out of here.”

I suppose that is an example of being helped out by having a gun.

And leads to the logical wondering if merely having a gun, something of that power around, is beneficial to the soul?