On CBS Sunday Morning there was a story about Pritchard, Alabama. The city can no longer retirement benefits to its retirees. The city does not have the money. It is in violation of state direction to pay the money. It does not have the money. Its plea for bankruptcy has been denied. The city must pay. The city says that it cannot.
Later on the same program there was a story about the IBM computer called Watson. A comment was made that it only does what a computer does best. It uses logic. Another comment was that it will never be able to duplicate what we can do with the human heart. That was a segue to what came next: Human emotional attachment to what essentially a computer, even if it is dressed up as a baby seal.
We are manipulated into attachment to other things that do not have a human heart. Recently there is a commercial with the punch line "I love my bank". The delivery is saying it over and over again. A human says it to her dog. This is the ultimate in your face joke of the marketing industry. If you can get someone to love a bank, you deserve an oscar in the advertising business!
Later in the same program was an ad for a credit card. The focus was on having a baby, the guy fainted when he learned they were going to have triplets. The Chase credit card saved the day!
What if we asked Watson what kind of Monetary System we should have. It would certainly tell us the we must create money, not the banks. Jefferson said that long ago.
Manipulators are manipulators regardless of the medium of manipulation. Logic is hard to manipulate, emotion is easy. Watson is the ultimate, at least up to now, thing that cannot be manipulated by anything but logic. Logic at a low level can conflict but it can be resolved at higher more fundamental levels. In the end I guess the logic that wins is the logic of its contextual system. All that is necessary to resolve a logic conflict is to take it to its ultimate frame of reference contextual level.
Is that contextual level bounded by not going beyond the separation of church and state? Not if one is conflated with the other. It ends, as far as Americans are concerned at the Authoritarian Level. That is where we draw the line between the opration of exterior authoritarian control versus organic democratic freedom of choice.
Then Ben Stein made his appearance. I always have to supress the immediate urge to barf when I see him. He talked about money. Demand, inflation, stagflation. The world situation. Banks holding money. He said "The feelings are ominous". He cerainly got the right!! Feelings are emotions. We are in a crises.
What is the fundamental nature of the crises. Is it feelings or logic. It is a combination of both. The current money system is not logical, not reasonable. The current controllers of money must fight the those that want to control it with the manipulation of emotion and when that fails the direct use of force.
The current controllers of money power send in the goons loaded with emotion to intimidate and outshout those that seek control. At first they are identifiable goons of the system. The top level agents of the Federal Reserve Bank inserted into government positions. Then when things heat up they send in the plain clothes goons. The ones that go hand to hand with the people desiring freedom. The Power Holders then fight a delaying game, make promises that are empty and nothing more than more of the same old stuff. In the end, the only question is will they go peacefully or be forced.
Have we seen that same scenario play out recently?
No comments:
Post a Comment