Contact Form * Contact Form Container */ .contact-form-widget { width: 500px; max-width: 100%; marg


Email *

Message *

He is a grifter a gaslighting zonbie who copulates with podiums

These are words written by a supposed educated journalist in a 'respected' journal.

Trump appeared to copulate with his podium in the debates with Hillary Clinton

watching Trump lurching behind Hillary during the debate felt a bit like a zombie movie
. Earlier in the campaign he’d urged his supporters to shoot her. ‘Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment,’ he rumbled at one of his 
tie led chants of ‘Lock her up!’ In the spring, 

Trump retweeted a supporter who asked: ‘If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?

Yes, Trump  is a 'grifter'  (someone who swindles you through deception or fraud) but surely this charge can be laid at the Clinton's door ie Clinton Foundation.
..Trump is also a .Gaslighter (a form of manipulation through persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying in an attempt to destabilize and delegitimize a target) Ah dear how one word can be a catch all for one's bias.
With Trump's election  America is about to become a battered woman, badgered, lied to, threatened, gaslighted, betrayed and robbed by a grifter with attention-deficit disorder. (How charming how kind)

Trump is patriarchy unbuttoned, paunchy, in a baggy suit, with his hair oozing and his lips flapping and his face squinching into clownish expressions of mockery and rage and self-congratulation.
More charm trowelled on the discerning writer. 

The narratives against Hillary cast her as a witch with  unlimited powers, or as a wicked woman, because she had had power and aspired to have power again. One got the impression that any power a woman had was too much, and that a lot of men found women very scary. But what of Merkel and Thatcher et al
'white men elected them.

Here is another lefty balanced writer:
One of the many lessons of the recent presidential election campaign and its repugnant outcome,’ Mark Lilla wrote in the New York Times

and so it goes on and on and you come to you hope is a balanced view that these supposedly educated journalists are infused with a kind of religious zeal and if their commandments are contravened bigotry homophobia Islamophobia diversity  racism they must speak up to defend their Liberal faith and it is under that injunction you can say, goodbye balance and hello bias.

The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledgehammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
That emotion was directed at Clinton, and was ready to swerve towards anyone who supported her, accompanied by accusations of treason and other kinds of invective

The haters protesting against hate



Let us turn to Orwell for elucidation

The horrible thing about the Hate demonstrations was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in.  (Millions marched on Washington)

Any pretence was unnecessary. (Although if they are so sure of their cause why are the window breakers all wearing masks?)

One can only imagine the rush of blood coursing through their veins as they enjoy a hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledgehammer, appeared to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp. Let's head to Davos and blow torch the bastards there, and after that...well who knows

as Madonna avowed I think of blowing up the White House,

The half educated US teaching profession

One is hardly surprised when learning that the US Teaching Profession through their Unions donate
99% approx' of their contributions (amounting to millions of dollars to the surprise surprise t

So one thinks of the learning curve of these estimable people,
They go to College/University and never hear an illiberal view.
The  go to Teacher training and never hear an 'illiberal' view

And if that is the case then surely they are half educated as they have not been
subjected to opposing views

This is also true of people in the Arts

The longing to meet somebody and then the frustration in their absence

“However much you have been wanting and hoping and dreaming of meeting the person of your dreams, it is only when you meet them that you will start missing them. It seems that the presence of an object is required to make its absence felt (or to make the absence of something felt). A kind of longing may have preceded their arrival, but you have to meet in order to feel the full force of your frustration in their absence.” 
― Adam PhillipsMissing Out: In Praise of the Unlived Life

The wish to be understood, our most vengeful desire

“If you want to be with somebody who gets you, you prefer collusion to desire, safety to excitement (sometimes good things to prefer but not always the things most wanted). The wish to be understood may be our most vengeful demand, may be the way we hang on, as adults, to the grudge against our mothers; the way we never let our mothers of the hook for their not meeting our every need. Wanting to be understood, as adults, can be, among many other things our most violent form of nostalgia.” 
― Adam PhillipsMissing Out: In Praise of the Unlived Life

Stress and Memory

Our perception of stress, and therefore our response to it, is an ever-changing thing that depends a great deal on the circumstances and settings in which we find ourselves. It depends on previous experience and knowledge, as well as on the actual event that has occurred. And it depends on memory, too.
The most acute manifestation of how memory modulates stress is post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. For striking evidence of how memory encodes past experience into triggers, which then catalyze present experience, Sternberg points to research by psychologist Rachel Yehuda, who found both Holocaust survivors and their first-degree relatives — that is, children and siblings — exhibited a similar hormonal stress response.
This, Sternberg points out, could be a combination of nature and nurture — the survivors, as young parents for whom the trauma was still fresh, may well have subconsciously taught their children a common style of stress-responsiveness; but it’s also possible that these automatic hormonal stress responses permanently changed the parents’ biology and were transmitted via DNA to their children. Once again, memory encodes stress into our very bodies. Sternberg considers the broader implications:
Stress need not be on the order of war, rape, or the Holocaust to trigger at least some elements of PTSD. Common stresses that we all experience can trigger the emotional memory of a stressful circumstance — and all its accompanying physiological responses. Prolonged stress — such as divorce, a hostile workplace, the end of a relationship, or the death of a loved one — can all trigger elements of PTSD.
Among the major stressors — which include life-events expected to be on the list, such as divorce and the death of a loved one — is also one somewhat unexpected situation, at least to those who haven’t undergone it: moving. Sternberg considers the commonalities between something as devastating as death and something as mundane as moving:
One is certainly loss — the loss of someone or something familiar. Another is novelty — finding oneself in a new and unfamiliar place because of the loss. Together these amount to change: moving away from something one knows and toward something one doesn’t.
An unfamiliar environment is a universal stressor to nearly all species, no matter how developed or undeveloped.
In the remainder of the thoroughly illuminating The Balance Within, Sternberg goes on to explore the role of interpersonal relationships in both contributing to stress and shielding us from it, how the immune system changes our moods, and what we can do to harness these neurobiological insights in alleviating our experience of the stressors with which every human life is strewn.


Obama's legacy, a war with Russia?

1960s -

Recall how the US responded when Russian missiles were
placed in Cuba.

Today 2017

' We will just mass troops on that guy Putin's border.. so let's just see what he is made of...'

'Last time I saw him I told him 'to knock it off'.'

(I beg your pardon, who the fuck do you think you are, Clint Eastwood?)Image result for Obama as gunslinger

STRESS the word that does not need translation

STRESSis perhaps the word pronounced most similarly in the greatest number of major languages.)

No need to parse it, no clause analysis required.  Everybody gets it from Albania to Australia

And most impartantly for us the the body gets it before the mind

Pre modern medicine was very advanced

Pre-modern medicine,

 in fact, has recognized this link between disease and emotion for millennia. Ancient Greek, Roman, and Indian Ayurvedic physicians all enlisted the theory of the four humors — blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm — in their healing practices, believing that imbalances in these four visible secretions of the body caused disease and were themselves often caused by the emotions. These beliefs are fossilized in our present language — melancholy comes from the Latin words for “black” (melan) and “bitter bile” (choler), and we think of a melancholic person as gloomy or embittered; a phlegmatic person is languid and impassive, for phlegm makes one lethargic.

Nabokov’s hospital misadventures

But this was far from the end of Nabokov’s hospital misadventures and only the beginning of his understandable mistrust of the healthcare system. In a 2003 email archived by the University of California Santa Barbara, Dmitry Nabokov (the son of the famous father Vladimar) recounts his father’s escalating medical misfortunes, strung together by a common thread of the tragicomic:
In the forties, while my mother and I were visiting a relative in New York and my father was busy with students in Wellesley and butterflies in Cambridge, he collapsed with acute food poisoning after a meal at a Cambridge restaurant called the Wursthaus. He was hospitalized, and then shown a routine chest Xray that revealed a dark mass in one lung. He was told it was cancer. He stopped smoking cold turkey, started eating molasses candy as a surrogate, and gained some 30 pounds. It turned out later that the Xray had not been his at all.

He is the Subject, he is the Absolute—she is the Other,”

Simone de Beauvoir's provocative declaration, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute—she is the Other,”
 We create risk when we endanger something we value, 

Feminist Perspectives on the Self

First published Mon Jun 28, 1999; substantive revision Mon Jul 6, 2015
The topic of the self has long been salient in feminist philosophy, for it is pivotal to questions about personal identity, the body, sociality, and agency that feminism must address. Simone de Beauvoir's provocative declaration, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute—she is the Other,” signals the central importance of the self for feminism.

To be the Other is to be the non-subject, the non-person, the non-agent—in short, the mere body. In law, in customary practice, and in cultural stereotypes, women's selfhood has been systematically subordinated, diminished, and belittled, when it has not been outright denied.

Throughout history, women have been identified either as pale reflections of men or as their opposite, characterized through perceived differences from men and subordinated as a result of them; in both cases, women have been denigrated on the basis of these views.

Since women have been cast as lesser forms of the masculine individual, the paradigm of the self that has gained ascendancy in U.S. popular culture and in Western philosophy is derived from the experience of the predominantly white and heterosexual, mostly economically advantaged men who have wielded social, economic, and political power and who have dominated the arts, literature, the media, and scholarship.

As a result, feminists have not merely perceived the self as a metaphysical issue but have also drawn attention to its ethical, epistemological, social, and political imbrication..

Modern philosophy in the West championed the individual. Extending into contemporary moral and political thought is this idea that the self is a free, rational chooser and actor—an autonomous agent. .
Modern Western philosophy's regnant conceptions of the self minimize the personal and ethical import of unchosen circumstances and interpersonal relationships. They eclipse family, friendship, passionate love, and community, and they reinforce a modern binary that divides the social sphere into autonomous agents and their dependents.

While women are no longer classified as defective selves, the caregiving responsibilities that once defined their status as dependents on male heads of households continue to place a special burden on women for labor that is devalued in society.

 Prevailing conceptions of the self ignore the multiple, sometimes fractious sources of social identity constituted at the intersections of one's gender, sexual orientation, race, class, age, ethnicity, and so forth.

Structural domination and subordination are thought not to penetrate the “inner citadel” of selfhood. Likewise, these conceptions deny the complexity of the dynamic, intrapsychic world of unconscious fantasies, fears, and desires, and they overlook the ways in which such materials intrude upon conscious life. T

he modern philosophical construct of the rational subject projects a self that is not prey to ambivalence, anxiety, obsession, prejudice, hatred, or violence. A disembodied mind, the body is peripheral

. Age, looks, sexuality, biological composition, and physical competencies are considered extraneous to the self. Yet, as valuable as rational analysis and free choice undoubtedly are, feminists argue that these capacities do not operate apart from affective, biosocial, socio-economic and other heterogeneous forces that orchestrate the multilayered phenomenon that we call the self. For many feminists, to acknowledge the self's dependency is not to devalue the self but rather to revalue dependency, as well as to call into question the supposed free agency of a self that implicitly corresponds to a masculine ideal.

I am bored...what shall we do now?

When was the last time you were bored — truly bored — and didn’t instantly spring to fill your psychic emptiness by checking Facebook or Twitter or Instagram? The last time you stood in line at the store or the boarding gate or the theater and didn’t reach for your smartphone seeking deliverance from the dreary prospect of forced idleness? A century and a half ago, Kierkegaard argued that this impulse to escape the present by keeping ourselves busy is our greatest source of unhappiness. A century later, Susan Sontag wrote in her diary about the creative purpose of boredom. And yet ours is a culture that equates boredom with the opposite of creativity and goes to great lengths to offer us escape routes.
Children have a way of asking deceptively simple yet existentially profound questions. Among them, argues the celebrated British psychoanalytical writer Adam Phillips, is “What shall we do now?” In an essay “On Being Bored,” found in his altogether spectacular 1993 collection On Kissing, Tickling, and Being Bored: Psychoanalytic Essays on the Unexamined Life (public library), Phillips writes:
Every adult remembers, among many other things, the great ennui of childhood, and every child’s life is punctuated by spells of boredom: that state of suspended anticipation in which things are started and nothing begins, the mood of diffuse restlessness which contains that most absurd and paradoxical wish, the wish for a desire.

The child is bored, 'I am bored'
'Well, what would you like to do?
' I would like to ....I would like to...'
and you wait and watch as s/he tries to conjecture up a desire.

Image result for boredom

What an astonishing thing a book is.

Carl Sagan, he who had made his life's wor kto look deep into the Cosmos
reflected on books
'What an astonishing thing a book is. It’s a flat object made from a tree with flexible parts on which are imprinted lots of funny dark squiggles. But one glance at it and you’re inside the mind of another person, maybe somebody dead for thousands of years. Across the millennia, an author is speaking clearly and silently inside your head, directly to you. Writing is perhaps the greatest of human inventions, binding together people who never knew each other, citizens of distant epochs. Books break the shackles of time. A book is proof that humans are capable of working magic.'

In a November 1903 letter, found in the altogether enchanting compendium Letters to Friends, Family and Editors (public library), 20-year-old Kafka writes to his childhood friend, the art historian Oskar Pollak:

Some books seem like a key to unfamiliar rooms in one’s own castle.

The fertility of solitude

Image result for solitude

We create risk when we endanger something we value, what might that something be?  

Perhaps of being alone with the self?  Many would argue there is no such a thing
as the self, no little man/woman (homunculus} that is the essential you.

So what is one afraid of in the state of solitude?

hat is why I go into solitude so as not to drink out of everybody’s cistern. When I am among the many I live as the many do, and I do not think as I really think; after a time it always seems as though they want to banish me from myself and rob me of my soul and I grow angry with everybody and fear everybody.

Simone de Beauvoir's and implication for the transgender

Simone de Beauvoir's provocative declaration, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute—she is the Other,” Does such a statement have implications for the transgender?

Think of this dilemma for the transgender person; s/he comes upon two opposing marches
one, a feminist march for the rights of women
and on the opposing side  of the street a march by men demonstrating their rights 
against their oppression by feminism,

Which march does s,he join,

Answer s,he notes a balloon passsing by s.he grabs hold of the string and and is hoisted above both demo's lofted in the air she cries out 'PASS'Rebecca Solnit on Hope in Dark Times, Resisting the Defeatism of Easy Despair, and What Victory Really Means for Movements of Social Change

Excuse the levity

Deconstructing the inner citadel called the 'self'

What is the X of the self? Is it a thing, a substance, or is it a free flowing riverlet subject to the wind, rains, thunder and lightning of daily life?

However for many, even a majority today's prevailing conceptions of the self ignores the multiple, sometimes fractious sources of social identity constituted at the intersections of one's gender, sexual orientation, race, class, age, ethnicity, and so forth. 

Daily occurences such as structural domination and subordination are thought not to penetrate the “inner citadel” of selfhood. 

However those who deny these intrusions to the self deny the complexity of the dynamic, intrapsychic world of unconscious fantasies, fears, and desires, and they overlook the ways in which such materials intrude upon conscious life. 

The modern philosophical construct of the rational subject projects a self that is not prey to ambivalence, anxiety, obsession, prejudice, hatred, or violence. Age, looks, sexuality, biological composition, and physical competencies are considered extraneous to the self.

Time to return to the drawing board and storm the ranparts of that inner citadel of the self.

Think of the freedom of your self - not being consigned to a condition - but of making, constructing your self on a daily basis.

Hollywood and the hierarchy of needs

Reality demonstrates that people act on their basest needs. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs says that basic needs are things like food, shelter, safety, and security. 

If one progresses up the scale, needs like love, belonging, esteem, and respect become important.

Which brings us to HOLLYWOOD (note how I have put that in scary caps - because it is a frightening place with frightening attitudes and I know because I have worked there
as a writer - so been there done that and got the t shirt)

Hollywood is a competitive place to live and work. People who live and work there know that it might be the most competitive place to live in the entire world. The drive to succeed, to find an edge that propels you to the next level can be very compelling

Cut back to the chase, it would be fair to say that the bejewelled and tuxedoed audience for Meryl Streep's speech at the Golden Globes (the solipistic group hug)
had already had their basic needs met in their oh so bourgeois profession.

So what drives these soi disant 'artists' like a herd of buffalo to the liberal grasslands?

Erich Fromm said, “If I am what I have, and I lose what I have, who am I?” 
Think of that audience losing what they have, how do they protect themselves against that worst than death fate.

For many Liberalism, in it’s cult-like compulsion toward legalistically defined behavior can be viewed as a quasi religion, as opposing views are made illegal in law by supine politicians,

Although indubitably in the lush 'moral'grasslands of society by 'moral' necessity, although a specious ploy, they must appear to align themselves with those who have been denied 
grazing rights.

The result of all this is that the artist dwells in the realm of emotion. While all of us experience emotion, the rest of us have the luxury of moving on. Not the artist. He has to dissect it, magnify it, and live it for months on end. 

Then, like some cruel joke, the artist is often rewarded for his attention to detail in describing for all of us the precise most painful components of pain, loss, grief, insecurity  and other emotional parts. 

Thus, the artist is conditioned in a Pavlovian way to act based on emotion. It would seem natural that he would then transpose that action on other elements of his life, including his marriage, his friendships, and his politics, in their political manque way.

Speaking of Politics - why of why do actors 
pepper their persona's with their views on politics when the majority of them are profoundly uneducated, 'My child is not very academic I think she should pursue the Arts.' (This of course, nust be balanced, this does not apply to all actors, in the current generation Eddie Redmayne went to Cambridge and Jack Lemmon to Harvard.

None the less, the Professoriat in the Arts and Humanitie  are 25 to 1 Liberal, those in Medicine, Engineering and Science are approx' evenly divided.  So I would submit that 
those pursuing an Arts/Humanities education are schooled in the embedded Liberal views of their teachers.  Having done three degrees myself over 7 years  I do not think I ever
heard an illiberal view.  I did once express an illiberal view myself and the Professors 
started agitating as if dancing on hot coals. 

So the question becomes then–why do artists feel compelled or qualified to delve into the Political when they have no training for it at all, and even their life experience lacks credentials necessary to relate to real Americans who don’t live in Hollywood? Should they not simply exclude themselves, much like a judge does when she knows she has conflicting experience that might impede her rational judgment in a case? Well, no, because we believe in freedom under the US Constitution–even under the knowledge that freedom could result in loss of liberties for having them., John J. Ray has a theory about fame and ego that is too good to paraphrase:

My basic proposal, then, is that most (but not all) Leftists/liberals are motivated by strong ego needs — needs for power, attention, praise and fame. And in the USA and other developed countries they satisfy this need by advocating large changes in the society around them — thus drawing attention to themselves and hopefully causing themselves to be seen as wise, innovative, caring etc

We will see below why one of the most consistent themes to emerge from the Leftist’s love of change is the claimed need for “equality”. And the belief in “equality” also tends to lead to support for such things as redistribution of wealth generally, heavily “progressive” income taxes, inheritance taxes, foreign aid, feminism, gay rights and socialized medicine. Again for reasons explored below, Leftists also tend to oppose religion and the churches and this in turn tends to mean that they favour abortion and oppose or obstruct religious schooling in various ways. So let us now briefly look at some of these characteristic Leftist/liberal themes to see how they relate to basic Leftist motives.
And he concludes:
But in all cases, bitter experience has shown that Leftists in power are very dangerous and destructive people. Where their power is effectively unchecked, they generally seem to resort sooner or later to mass murder (as in the case of the French revolutionaries, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Jim Jones and many Communist regimes and movements worldwide) and where they are partially thwarted by strong democratic traditions and institutions, they at least bring about large-scale impoverishment (as in post-independence India and pre-Thatcher Britain)

All people including artists want to believe that their work is meaningful and significant. For artists, this propels their belief that human nature is changeable with proper “education” which thereby gives credence to their work. Thus, to believe in their own meaningful output of work product, they must fancy themselves “educators” capable of changing people in important ways. Did they ever in their arrogance reflect that educating others might smack of the bridle.

Hollywood whose real artistic soul is made up of cash registers, night take heed post Trump.
Hollywood and it 'liberal artists'  is marketing today to a glowingly conservative consumer. Conservatives are crying out for family oriented, morally compelling, traditional values that once graced the silver screen and our television sets.

The heart of America is sentimental for a turn back to the roots of Hollywood. If the market is demanding enough, it just might result in the artists resorting to Maslow’s Hierarchy to make a living to meet their basic needs, and that might look a lot like the recent Trump election.

I would argue using the word Hollywood and its soi disant 'artists' as a template are not paid for tapping into the power of rationale, but rather, the power of emotion, closeted in mink they have no real reason to exercise or even acknowledge the rational argument of a situation.

When an artist takes a look at how to “fix” a social or economic problem, it shouldn’t surprise us that they are looking for heroes and villains. So for Ms Streep je suis
a vicitim as are all Hollywood.  All together now, even if you are in your limousine
je suis a victin. Hollywood a majority of its inhabitant are swathed in vulgar riches and perpetrators, and for bigger than life fantasies that aren’t based in reality.

For Meryl Streep to play the self pitying victim card in her speech was an insult to rationale.
As to the them all being Liberals, of course Ronald Reagan would usurp the above argument, as would Clint Eastwood but then they  had a 'make my day' quality.

Those prized holier than thou morals of the Liberal class are no more than opinions
just as the statements I have made in this post are no more than theories.