“Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless–like water. Now you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup, You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, You put it in a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash! Be water my friend.“
– Bruce Lee
“For centuries we have been spoon-fed by our teachers, by our authorities, by our books, our saints. We say, ‘Tell me all about it—what lies beyond the hills and the mountains and the earth?’ and we are satisfied with their descriptions, which means that we live on words and our life is shallow and empty. We are second hand people. We have lived on what we have been told, either guided by our inclinations, our tendencies, or compelled to accept by circumstances and environment. We are the result of all kinds of influences and there is nothing new in us, nothing that we have discovered for ourselves; nothing original, pristine, clear.
Jiddu Krishnamurthi in Freedom From The Known (1969)
Comment:
It’s heresy to say this, but K has never appealed to me all that much….
What he says is perfectly true, and as far as I can tell, in the tradition of advaita (non-dualism), but his criticism of bourgeois thinking and imagery only goes so far with me. I agree upto the point where he talks about “flow,”much as Bruce Lee does in my next post, but when he attacks all concepts and conceptualization (maybe I am misunderstanding him?) — he loses me. It’s not concepts that are the problem but identification with concepts — or am I wrong?
Concepts and memory may be the kingdom of death….. but don’t they make up half of a whole? We exist with one foot in death.
Gurdjieff is closer to me on all this…
Not being a closeted Paulster, Jonah Goldberg couldn’t quite “come out,” but at least he’s poking his head out from inside the whale (aka, the almighty leviathan of statism) in this column, via Steve Bartin, from the Lew Rockwell Blog.
“Jonah is great on Huckabee and not too bad on Ron. He even pooh-poohs the smears of some of his fellow neocons. Jonah, good for you, even if you are only recognizing, on the distant horizon, the first signs of the Ron Paul Tsunami that will transform American politics.”
Here’s a sample of Goldberg’s piece:
“I would not vote for Paul mostly because I think his foreign policy would be disastrous (Also, he’d lose in a rout not seen since Bambi versus Godzilla). But there’s something weird going on when Paul, the small-government constitutionalist, is considered the extremist in the Republican party, while Huckabee, the statist, is the lovable underdog. It’s even weirder because it’s probably true: Huckabee is much closer to the mainstream. And that’s what scares me about Huckabee and the mainstream alike.”
Comment:
Hey Jonah! Bambi versus Godzilla? How about David versus Goliath? We know how that turned out….
“The ancient Greeks (and perhaps Aristotle specifically though I have not had time to look up The Nicomachean Ethics) used to give logical examples of how in a world of irrationality, the lone rational man shall be at risk of being universally misjudged as the person who is irrational. That seems to be what Ron Paul is experiencing now in American politics. None of the other candidates, Democrat or Republican, can hold a candle to him in terms of thoughtfulness, integrity or self-knowledge, and hence their attack-dogs will certainly bark that he is the one who is mad, not they. It is the fate of the rational man in an irrational world. Can America’s ordinary voters return to their 18th Century candor and get to see that? If (and only if) they can, he will win….”
Dr. Subroto Roy at Indian and Pakistani Friends of Ron Paul.
THE ONLY PRO NATIONAL DEFENSE, ANTIWAR, FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE.
AGAINST PREEMPTIVE WAR
AGAINST TORTURE
AGAINST THE PATRIOT ACT
AGAINST AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
FOR STRONG DEFENSE
FOR SECURE BORDERS
FOR FISCAL SANITY
FOR STATES’ RIGHTS
FOR THE CONSTITUTION
Joseph Sobran on how tyranny came to America:
“According to the Declaration of Independence, the rights of the people come from God, and the powers of the government come from the people….”
“The Constitution was the instrument by which the American people granted, or delegated, certain specific powers to the federal government. Any power not delegated was withheld, or “reserved.” As we’ll see later, these principles are expressed particularly in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, two crucial but neglected provisions of the Constitution…”
“Let me say it yet again: The rights of the people come from God. The powers of government come from the people. …..”
“You can think of the Constitution as a sort of antitrust act for government, with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments at its core. It’s remarkable that the same liberals who think business monopolies are sinister think monopolies of political power are progressive. When they can’t pass their programs because of the constitutional safeguards, they complain about “gridlock” — a cliché that shows they miss the whole point of the enumeration and separation of powers. …”
And here’s Sobran on the only way tyranny might yet be overthrown in America:
“Can we restore the Constitution and recover our freedom? I have no doubt that we can. Like all great reforms, it will take an intelligent, determined effort by many people. I don’t want to sow false optimism….
But the time is ripe for a constitutional counterrevolution. Discontent with the ruling system, as the 1992 Perot vote showed, is deep and widespread among several classes of people: Christians, conservatives, gun owners, taxpayers, and simple believers in honest government all have their reasons. The rulers lack legitimacy and don’t believe in their own power strongly enough to defend it.
The beauty of it is that the people don’t have to invent a new system of government in order to get rid of this one. They only have to restore the one described in the Constitution — the system our government already professes to be upholding. Taken seriously, the Constitution would pose a serious threat to our form of government.
And for just that reason, the ruling parties will be finished as soon as the American people rediscover and awaken their dormant Constitution…”
Comment:
[NB: “God” in this context need not automatically raise any secularist/humanist hackles — more on this below]
If you want US Govt. Inc. to win, vote blindfolded – for any of the leading candidates, Dem or Repub. It won’t matter which.
If you want America to win, vote Ron Paul.
It’s that simple.
There’s no one else who’s defended the constitution in season and out, when it was unpopular, when he was unknown, no matter who was in power, or who asked for the money, or what they wanted it for.
No matter what the issue, Ron Paul’s question was always the same: Is it constitutional?
The American Constitution has not had a more loyal champion in government in the last thirty years.
We’ve tried capitalist cronyism and socialist cronyism.
Let’s try a crony of the constitution.
Update:
From Jonathan Rowe at Cato Unbound.
“The inescapable conclusion is that America does have a political theology; it is just not Christianity. (For more on America’s founding creed, see this article.) Nature’s God was theologically unitarian, universalist (did not eternally damn anyone) syncretist (most or all world religions worshipped Him), partially inspired the Christian Scriptures, and man’s reason was ultimate device for understanding Him. He was not quite the strict Deist God that some secular scholars have made Him out to be. But neither was He the Biblical God. Rather, somewhere in between….” (In other words, the founders subscribed to something not so far from the syncretist “wisdom” tradition, and like this blogger, saw no essential divergence between that and the enlightenment. That’s something both militant evangelicals and dogmatic atheists can’t seem to bend their minds around).
Update 2:
In her excellent book “The Rosicrucian Enlightenment,” Frances Yates stated the case for hermetic/occult influence on the Age of Reason too enthusiastically (as one of the greatest historians of the period, John Pocock, cautioned those of us who embraced Dame Frances uncritically)– but at least, she put it out there….
“I started out with $600, a second hand Volkswagen, and a wife. One was an asset and one was a liability. I will let you figure out which was which. I liquidated both, and still had the $600. I worked long hours, and spent weekends reading about markets. I simply love it. You have to love what you do, whether it be gardening, hairdressing, etc. When you love it, then the money follows. Even if it doesn’t, you will still be happy. Being happy and poor is better than being unhappy and poor. As for making money, I did very little marketing. The key is to make your clients money. If you have a good track record, people will find you and knock on your door. Just make your clients money….”
This is for whoever is nursing a misplaced anxiety about my possible affiliation and frantically conducting searches into it…
NO. I am not now, nor have I ever been, nor plan to be, a CIA agent, flunky, or stooge…(well, on that last — one can never tell. It’s possible I’ve posted articles which were concocted as disinformation, but if so, that would be pure error and I probably mentioned somewhere that I wasn’t sure about the authenticity of the information – I usually don’t touch topics where I can’t tell if what’s going on is staged…)
The closest I got to the CIA was at a dinner party two years ago, when I met the former head of the psychic research division at the CIA. (There was one…it was shut down, so they say…more on that at another time).
We had a lengthy conversation about the CIA, Aurobindo, and mind-body research. I still get circulars from the outfit he runs now which develops forecasting systems for business. He’s an engineer and fighter pilot, who builds planes in his spare time – but we share interests in Rudolph Steiner and philosophy.
So much for the Mata Hari thing. Besides that, I’ve worked in India (for a couple of months) for a Christian aid organization (World Vision) – helping with promotional material for potential donors to medical care for the poor. I mention it because I’ve read that some Christian mission and aid organizations have ties with the CIA. But, if there were any moles sniffing around, I didn’t know any of them.
As anyone who follows this blog would know, any espionage or terrorist organization who tried to recruit me would be shooting itself in the foot – as big- mouthed as I am.
I’d probably be blogging the whole thing…
Jim Rogers was on TV last night, talking about the dollar crisis. (Yes, it’s now a full-blow crisis).
Bernanke, he said, is a total fool. I’m sure words like”jackasses,” “dimwits,” “cretins,” “morons,” and “numskulls” were trembling on his tongue, but public decorum prevented them tumbling out.
Seems he once thought Paulson and Bernanke were both reasonably competent. Especially Hank Paulson, being a Goldman CEO an’ all (than which exalted post, dear reader, there is no more exalted post in the USA). Turns out, JR is no more sanguine about it, what with Bernanke trashing the dollar over here, whilst Paulson runs around the globe pretending he wants to prop it up.
And Bernanke, he says, doesn’t even know anything about economics. Asked about the impact of the dying dollar on American consumption, Big Ben does a Marie Antoinette:
“Let them buy Yank.”
“You big lovable lug,” says Rogers (or some such words) — “D’you suppose American manufacturers are just dying to keep the price of American goods sweet ‘n’ low for their dear, dear countrymen, when prices are up elsewhere?”
Well – I got news for Jim. I don’t know about Bernanke, but Hank Paulson is no flunk-out from Econ 101.
The word you are looking for, Mr. Rogers, is KNAVE.
Goldman Sachs alums, bless their sterling little hearts DON’T CARE what happens to the dollar. They care EVEN LESS about the American consumer or the American economy.
If anyone can find any evidence to the contrary, I will be happy to send them an apology. Until that time, I’ll just stick with giving the whole crew of big bankers the bird.
Yes that one – turkey suits them to a tee…
Comment:
Of course, rushing out and selling dollars for euros at what might be the bottom mayn’t be the best idea. If I remember right, Rogers was “bullish” on the dollar (short term, I imagine) earlier this fall, anticipating a spike. Well, the spike isn’t here and the dollar index broke it’s lower channel with no resistance to speak of, falling straight from 78-80 to 75 with a very feeble bounce since then.
There’s not guarantee it won’t go to 60…
So the question again is where do you go?
My plan is to buy real estate in Asia – probably, Malaysia, but it’s not one most people can follow. And I notice that Malaysian real estate is now being priced in euros…
I think the Chinese, Japanese and Saudi currencies look like good buys at the first spike up- or, even now….
I am too nervous to buy gold over $800 frankly (that’s around 79 on the etf), though I think geo-political concerns could well drive it to $1000.
From a correspondent (can’t vouch for its authenticity, but found the commentary interesting):
“We’re not going to be done with the subprime mortgage when the CDOs fall. Therefore we will have an insolvency problem with the banks that are mentioned above.
This is the kiss of death of a privately held Federal Reserve. For the Federal Reserve to function, its stakeholder banks (like JP Morgan Chase) must remain viable and liquid. When one of them, or any major bank in the U.S. (like Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Bank of New York, Washington Mutual, etc.) is impaired or ceases to exist, the architecture of the Fed’s capacity to respond to systemic challenges is unsustainable.
If the banks have no money, they can’t pump liquidity into the market. Taking half of a trillion dollars out of market in a single distressed write down becomes problematic. The US banking system does not have the liquidity to take the hit.
The actual solvency of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is relatively indecipherable due to the fact that their treasury management processes (and the risks of their own investment strategies) are not uniformly disclosed with sufficient transparency. The FDIC was set up for isolated problems with a few bad banks but is NOT prepared to “insure” the system in an industry-wide crisis. The actual liquidity reserve of the “insurance” that Americans view as their safety net is 1/100th the actual exposure of outstanding deposits. The actual coverage ratio for the Bank Insurance Fund (BIF) fell below 1.25% in 2002, the same year that less stable credit practices were adopted by America’s leading banks.
The funny part is that the Federal Government will be on holiday when all of this happens. There will be no one to put freeze actions and moratoria on actions. The only way you stop the cataclysm is to put together civil actions on deposit withdrawals.
As I discussed previously, the Chinese currency wild-card may become relevant far sooner than expected. An effort by China to convert its $1.4 trillion U.S. Treasury holdings into euros is not viable for many reasons – not the least of which is the European Central Bank’s inability to absorb such an event. As China continues its rush away from supporting U.S. Treasuries and as Middle Eastern investors are buying them up in more diversified holdings, a new “currency exchange” is unfolding. Realizing that they cannot liquidate their holdings, it appears that the Chinese are currently using their U.S. Treasury holdings as collateral for euro denominated purchases and long term infrastructure transactions. In other words, they may be “liquidating” their holdings as collateral and, in so doing, effectively migrating to non-dollar value without ever having to officially dump their current Treasury holdings.
Therefore, collateralize the credit in dollars – especially if you’re long in dollars. The lender/financier won’t call the note because you have it structured in such a way to both allow it to perform and hold illiquid collateral that no one wants. This essentially inflates euros. Although you can’t sell dollars, the whole purpose of collateral is that it is a second source of payment – collateral is there to down rate the risk of the loan. Secondary becomes irrelevant.
When February comes, the Chinese are going to do something as they will have to decide what the exposure is going to be with the treasury. As I see it they have to just dump the treasury. They only keep it because they can use it – they have 43% direct/indirect of US treasuries so they’ll dump them on the market.
The US Congressional pressures to decouple the RMB will work, but not in the way we want. Our plan includes helping them hold on to the treasuries, it does not involve them not holding the dollar anymore. The US wanted the tether to be part of the float. This will cause disenfranchisement of the US electorate (during primary season). February is also when public (media) will realize we won’t pull out of this.
Side note: Mayor Bloomberg could enter the race at this point, being the savior candidate (at least economically), but has $1B dollars in non-liquid money so he may not be able to enter.
OPEC price with the whole fluctuation of oil futures presages the event. They are going to run the price of oil as high as they can get it on the dollar, while buying US treasuries from China with the money. When the dollar does collapse, they’ll flip denominations. The wild card is long about March when the OPEC cuts spot oil off the dollar to the euro. One can look at the current oil price at close to $100/barrel and fail to see that, as this premium price is currently turning around and investing in a weakening dollar, the effective price (less the dollar investment hedge) is probably closer to $50/barrel than the spot price reflects.
Currency problems will change the game – they are financially structuring themselves to take the hit.
When we can’t afford to buy oil commodities on a spot market – it compounds the problem however the consumer that Saudi Arabia ships to is liquid (China). In the US it is a big problem. There is still a market for oil; it just changes. When you come out of Straits of Hormuz, turn left.”
Thomas Jefferson:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.” (emphasis ours)
James Madison, 1789-JUN-7 “The Civil Rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext infringed. No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases.”
” In the spring of 1778, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia, PA. They resolved three main religious controversies. They:
 |
Decided that there would be no religious test, oath or other requirement for any federal elected office |
|
Allowed Quakers and others to affirm (rather than swear) their oaths of office |
|
Refrained from recognizing the religion of Christianity, or one of its denominations, as an established, state church. |
With all the excessive interest shown in Mitt Romney’s religion, it might be worth noting that the founders were expressly prohibiting tests/oaths of faith for office, protecting freedom of religion, as well as endorsing freedom from (an established, or state) religion.
The main problem underlying church state doctrine is that constitutional law has never gone into what constitutes a religion (hence most of the seminal cases are filled with ambiguity and either favor the state or majority religion too heavily (Scalia’s opinions) or are simply confused (O’Connor). In my opinion, a number of cultural Marxist positions that are now promoted as universal and imposed as such do violate church- state separation if we read the word church broadly to include orgnaized beliefs that go to the “fundamentals” of life (nature of human life, gender roles and family, existence of the soul and afterlife, or not).
So, on a matter such as abortion, where there are several credible moral and theological positions possible, devolution to the states is the best guarantor that diversity of opinion will really be preserved.