A Citizen's Social Pledge of Allegiance -

My prior post grabbed an idea and wandered around with thoughts about it.  The idea was a restructuring of the relative importance and priority of an individual's social/economic/political relationships and "Pledge of Allegiance" on the basis of what is closest to home.  It is all about local mutual support alliances as a first order of priority.

This morning being Sunday is a good time to think about a Pledge that works and how it would benefit us as free citizens in pursuit of happiness both individually and collectively.  Any number of people more than one is a social matter.  This link appearing this morning rounds out one aspect of my thinking from the prior post:

The New Progressive Agenda: A Return to Citizenship by Toni Morrison

 "The difference between understanding oneself as a citizen and understanding oneself as a taxpayer is not merely wide; it is antagonistic. A citizen thinks primarily about his or her community and is preoccupied with the safety of the neighborhood, the health of the elderly and disabled, the well-being of the young. A taxpayer thinks mostly about himself or herself, about who or what is taxing -- that is to say "taking" -- his hard-earned money to give to some undeserving body or some other distant, wasteful thing..................

The Progressive Agenda seeks to return us to citizenship, the happily adult responsibility of being citizens to each other. It's concerned with how to ensure a livable wage for all of us; how to improve schools in all our neighborhoods; how to protect working-class jobs and pensions from predators who rely on exploitation and selfish behavior; how to welcome the immigrant, the "huddled masses" we all (except for Native Americans and slaves) once were."

The Army Soldier's Creed sets and order of importance:

I am an American Soldier.
I am a warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values...........

This link about bonds formed by combatants:

“What the military learned pretty early on . . . is that people die for the person beside them, not for their country or for any ideology,” McQuinn said.

This link illustrates the same motivation for super heroes.

The social bonds are often directly related to shared experience with the strength of the bond determined by the length of time shared and the magnitude of the shared emotion.  People that by chance simply happened to be the few survivors of a plane crash bond together to the extent that they may reunite annually.  Married couples attain the same degree of bonding by sharing many years together.  Mutual dependence and sharing and the degree of dedication related to them establishes social bonds.  So does shared fear, as long as it is perpetuated, often beyond reason when there is a focused narrow interest agenda that benefits from it.

The nature and relationship of motivation through fear or altruism is an interesting thing to ponder and apply to the the social order.  Fear shared among a social entity creates bonding as well as altruism among those in the social entity to be.

Interesting side note here.   Read the link to get the full context.

"The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist,^[5][6] and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898)....  and formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942.<sup>[1]"

The Pledge has been challenged for various reasons.  Challenge is thought provoking but to be constructive the social entity of the object of a shared pledge either included or excluded or placed in a relative priority is the free choice of an individual.  One may choose to put God above nation or honestly, any other social entity relationship.  

In Japan, the corporate employer gets a pledge from its workers and a company song of dedication.

Robert Reich proposes this pledge of allegiance by companies since they are people:</sup>

"The Corporate Pledge of Allegiance to the United States

• We pledge to create more jobs in the United States than we create outside the United States, either directly or in our foreign subsidiaries and subcontractors.
• If we have to lay off American workers, we will give them severance payments equal to their
• The [fill in blank] company pledges allegiance to the United States of America. To that end:
• weekly wage times the number of weeks they've work for us.
• We further pledge that no more than 20 percent of our total labor costs will be outsourced abroad.
• We pledge to keep a lid on executive pay so no executive is paid more than 50 times the median pay of American workers. We define "pay" to include salary, bonuses, health benefits, pension benefits, deferred salary, stock options, and every other form of compensation.
• We pledge to pay at least 30 percent of money earned in the United States in taxes to the United States. We won't shift our money to offshore tax havens and won't use accounting gimmicks to fake how much we earn.
• We pledge not to use our money to influence elections.

Companies that make the pledge are free to use it in their ads over the Christmas shopping season."


 <sup>I like it!

The best expression of individual affiliation with a social entity is the one they make for themselves.  While we are all in service to the joint social union we have created (USA) like soldiers in the army we fulfill that service to ourselves by first and foremost dedication above all to the most immediate, most personally important social entity of our choice.  It is our freedom of choice as long as it does not impinge on the rights of others in our country.

In conclusion, it would be a good thing to set the allegiance record of our lives straight by each citizen deciding where their most immediate allegiance is and ordering their citizenship accordingly.

What would be the result of that?  God of course for most in first place.  However we serve our country most by choosing other than country in second place.  Sequential order of linear priority orders the entire list of priorities from most to least.  How can it be stated that we serve our country best by a unique relationship statement of  each individual citizen's priorities that at the end of the list says "This is how I serve my country (fellow citizens united) the best".  

Maybe what we need to establish our personal "Mission Statement" in a context of our accomplishing it in the social order we collectively support. 

Mission "Pursuit of Happiness"

Statement of personal social entity allegiance priorities in service of the general welfare aimed at "Mission Accomplished".

Every citizen (and corporation and all other social entities) should have a Citizen's (Social Entity) web page and the "About" being their own personal "Pledge of Allegiance" (and historical record of change throughout their life time).  Maybe that is a good way to get our eyes collectively on the ball. 

Just all random free range thoughts on a Sunday morning. 

"I Pledge Allegiance to Myself" by Gary Lindorff.

Gary is David Lindorff's brother.  I am familiar with and respect the thoughts of David Lindorff often read at CounterPunch.com and was surprised to discover that his brother Gary thinks along the same lines.  That is not surprising after reading here about their father; Dave Lindorff Sr.
who evidently left a strong ideological legacy to his sons.  Dave Lindorff Sr's personal Pledge of Allegiance changed over his life time to become that legacy his sons inherited as their own to change and continue to express over their lifetimes.

Gary Lindorff's writings here.

It is often initially strange to find serendipitous relationships between and among previously known independent entities that become new found connections as I free range wander on the internet.  Perhaps not so surprising after all since the general rule of relationships is that everything is connected.  The more I roam, conceptually or geographically the more I find the connection  of everything.</sup>

The joy of discovery!

Gary wrote "Tribute to Snowden".  A fitting poem to illustrate the power of Allegiance to Myself.

The legacy of father passed to son named Edward? 

I would hope.

Perhaps are journey through life is marked by mile posts where allegiances changed and a new course was followed.  The quality of the journey defined by the clarity of their purpose and.....what?
 

 

TPP Policy Cuts Both Ways? Japanese citizens organize to sue because: TPP

TPP would establish rules allowing a corporation to sue a government for profits or future profits lost due to government regulations.  The suit would be presented to a non-governmental arbitration board.

In the USA citizens cannot (generally) sue the government.  This link for background.  If they did (and in some permissible cases actually do) it would of course be a mater for our judicial system.
  
"Over 1000 Japanese Citizens Band Together To Sue Their Government Over Participation In TPP"

Fast Track means there is no additions to the proposed treaty.  If an addition could be added to the treaty then all nations party to the treaty must allow citizens that form an international corporation based in another country (Cayman Islands) to sue their own government for their financial and non-monetary losses (pain and suffering) caused by TPP.

What does it take to set up an International Corporation?  Not much, I think.  Ever heard of a Dummy Corporation?

Hey, Mr. International Corporation and Governments, just playing by your rules.  

Any settlement of a citizen corporation suit would of course be passed on to the tax payers in general.  So was the banking failure.  Looks like legal precedent unless anything too big to fail is too big to win a judgment against.  Perhaps the Citizen Corporation should sue the specific international corporation jointly and government?  Like suing the crook and the horse they rode in on.  Government admitting to wrong doing and the international corporation paying the penalty fine.

How many American citizens would participate in a suit against our government under the cover of being a foreign corporation?  Clearly a funny thing!  In court the US government as plaintiff meaning (on behalf of) the citizens of the USA bring legal action against the accused.  In international arbitration the USA is the accused.  Something that is not allowed within our system.

International Class Action:  Citizens of the USA suing the USA for financial damages in an international arbitration court established under the TPP treaty where there is no appeal of the final decision.  

If we could directly sue our own government for wrong doing (favoring the few at the expense of the many) we could all get as rich as the 1%!  It would only work if the 1% were required to form their own conglomerate corporation that would be required to pay the fine. 

The general rule of "citizen belonging relationship" is that all citizens belong to a national sovereign government nation.  No person is without a country.  It is an absolute relationship.  Perhaps that relationship should be restructured.  No person is without a corporation.  That relationship leaps the bounds of geographical domains.  That, of course, can only happen when corporations become the dominant power structure over nations.  

Doesn't TPP do that? 

In an intriguing way the change in relationship of a citizen to their nation would reverse the default nature of the democratic vote.  It would become what a citizen is voting directly against rather (being ripped off) than who they are voting for that becomes an agent facilitating the rip off by international corporations that have no moral imperative other than profit.  If business and profit is all this world is about and it is business vs business then perhaps citizens should form their own corporations rather than nations.  

A citizens corporation would (of course) be non profit. 

Would that be called a Union?

Workers of the World Unite?

Workers of the World Inc. ????? 

TPP puts US citizens in an adversarial relationship to their own government.  Perhaps we must remind ourselves to our right to representation by a lawyer in a court of civil or criminal justice against our own government when it abrogates its responsibility to its citizens by actions related to a greater responsibility to international treaties that demand payment from citizens (via our government) that are financially damaging and contrary to our national sovereignty and right to establish our own laws of the land.

Scapegoat Economics - Us vs Them- Richard Wolff

The subject line of this entry is the topic of this talk by Richard Wolff.

I have been thinking about the politics of division for the past week.  While my entries focus on what money is, what money does is economics.  The politics of division that get the press relate to sex and race, national origin, religion.  I think that economic "Us vs Them" is as great a division factor as any of these because it relates across the board to the greatest number of people.  Everyone relates to what money is.

Without money there is no food or shelter to be obtained.  However, most have enough money for the needs of food and shelter.  What most don't have is enough money to satisfy wants, not needs.  Satisfaction of wants are a relative thing stimulated by marketing to create them.  Needs and wants are the subject of a simple sentence where the subject is the personal pronoun "I" the verb is "Need/Want" and the object of the sentence is some "Thing".  Money is the universal "Thing" that like potential energy can be transformed into anything and everything.

NeedWant is an interesting verb to parse.  Yes, a verb.  Not a noun.   Think of it in its Infinitive form as explained here.  Verbs are more readily recognizable simply by putting the word "to" in front of them.  The concept of NeedWant is a continuum.  Think of it in the scientific domain of Space/Time as defined here.  Hard to know where one thing becomes another on the continuum line because they are transformations of the same thing.  Each is the other and can be defined in terms of the other.  A scientific representation of Yin and Yang as described here.

Economics as described here is: 

"Economics is the social science that seeks to describe the factors which determine the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services."

Money as described here is:

"Money is any item or verifiable record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a particular country or socio-economic context."

People can believe anything they want on the continuum of thought regarding the social issues of sex, race, national origin and religion.  One thing that everyone can agree on without any doubt is the belief that money gets stuff.  It permeates our lives as a value more than anything else.

What money does socially as an Economic thing is a great uniter and divider.  Like Space/Time, it does both things and each can be explained in terms of the other.  Money is a creature of the social conceptual domain.  What Money "Is" is a simple thing to explain.  What money "Does" to unite and divide people is complex.

My recent line of thinking asks the question:  What groups of society does money and economics unite and divide?  That line of thinking was kicked off with a joke I can't remember but I recall the premise of the intended meaning of the joke.  This is an explanation which of course will not make anyone laugh but it will convey the idea of the joke without the amusement.  Maybe that is the way Economists look at the world.

The joke compares the way three different nationalities look at the relationship between God, country, and family and individual in the order of importance.  Parsing the joke it is evident that if told to three people, each a stereotypical representation one of the nationalities.   Each person would laugh and get it.  However, the object of the amusement would be the other two nationalities and their ordering of priorities.  The 2nd order of the joke would be each nationality laughing at the order in which members of the own nationality order priorities that are different than theirs. 

Get it?

Ha! Ha!

It is subtle.

As subtle as Us vs Them.  Me vs You.

As subtle as Patton's speech to the Third Army:

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.^[22]"

The Economic Capitalism riff on this in the rip-off killing mode is self evident. 

Richard Wolff is a Socialist.  Maybe call him a Heterodox Economist but Socialist is a term that is getting greater respect recently, so is Bernie Sanders.  A term and respect that creates fear in the heart of a Capitalist in the Us vs Them war.

Capitalism is increasingly aggregating wealth to the top 1%.  This accumulation of wealth to the 1% is in large part due to the accumulation of monetary debt to the 99%.

There is a difference between Wealth and Debt.

"Wealth is the abundance of valuable resources or valuable material possessions. This includes the core meaning as held in the originating old English word weal, which is from an Indo-European word stem.^[1] An individual, community, region or country that possesses an abundance of such possessions or resources to the benefit of the common good is known as wealthy."

A debt generally refers to money owed by one party, the borrower or debtor, to a second party, the lender or creditor. Debt is generally subject to contractual terms regarding the amount and timing of repayments of principal and interest.^[1]

Debt is related to money.  Money obtained by contractual debt spends just as well as cash held as debt free by the owner.  (but is a representation of debt held by someone else because all money is created by debt and is therefore 100% debt based).

A better definition of wealth is the extent to which personal ownership of things is free from a debt relationship.  Some people have a greater amount of debt than the value of the things they own.  They are not wealthy.  At social economic levels beyond the personal level of wealth/debt individuals have greater common interest in the general level of wealth or opportunity for wealth (increased wealth or reduction in debt as the case may be).  The order of individual economic priorities as they relate to social economic segments depends on what maximizes benefit (or potential benefit) to the individual.

The most immediate economic benefit to an individual is to be in the lifeboat.  Once in it then a rising economic tide is the next benefit of being on board that specific economic boat which is just a metaphor for Economic Tribalism:

Tribalism is the state of being organized in, or advocating for, a tribe or tribes. In terms of conformity, tribalism may also refer in popular cultural terms to a way of thinking or behaving in which people are more loyal to their tribe than to their friends, their country, or any other social group.^[1]


Everything that preceded this paragraph was an elaborate stage setting that if used as a presentation by a teacher to a class would find the class asleep at this point.  However, it gets to what Richard Wolff is saying, the current economic situation and the antidote to national capitalism distribution of wealth to the 1%.

What is that solution?

Creation of wealth at the local level.  That is the tribe of choice for the 99%.  Creation of wealth at the 1% National level means a race to the bottom for everyone else.  How many in the 1% owe their wealth to a less than national level source?  Is there some writing on the wall here?

On the economic order of priority level, the local level, nearest to each of us, is most important for wealth accumulation at the local level.

My town is my tribe if that is where my income I transform into wealth is derived.  My town vs your town.  My state vs your state.

Produce Local.

Buy Local.

All politics is local?

All economics is local.

All (fill in the blank) is local.

All social justice is local.  Interesting idea.  The term "All Social Justice is Local" gets no hits on a google search.  I therefore claim bragging rights to be the first to say it as far as Google is concerned.  If it is true for politics then why not for social justice which is really what politics is all about?

So, I come to the conclusion of the formation of this idea:

In the same manner that our balance of payments is of vital concern to the wealth of our nation, the balance of payments at the corporate level is vital to the existence of a business and the balance of payments at the community level is vital to the wealth of our communities.  It all depends on taking in more than is given out?

Me and my balance of payments (to take in more money than I give out) and translate that difference into wealth (net worth) is the prime rule in personal economics.  My tribe taking in more money than it gives out and tribal wealth is the next most important level of economics relating directly to me.  That tribal level may be national, state, county, city, district, family.  Whichever gives the most economic security.

Big Question:  For most people that level of economic security is closest to primary or secondary local geographical level?

Buy local.  A good idea.

Sell at and beyond the local level and buy at the local level more than above that level.

A good idea for personal and local geographic wealth accumulation?

If that is true it leads to the concept of community geographic wealth.

My town as an economic corporate capitalist enterprise in which I am an economic stake holder?

My town vs your town?

Do we trade or exploit?

Is capitalism a trade or an exploitation?

It seems to me that in the Wall Street vs Main Street the situation is that Main Street holds all the resources that are being exploited by Wall Street.  Wall Street owns national level politics.

The Us vs Them economic relationship is therefore National Political/Economic Level vs Local Political/Economic Level.  That is the battlefield of Economics where the playing field must be leveled.  Local economic entities are the source of wealth and have greater aggregate economic power than national economic entities.  Why is it that the economic wealth is aggregating at the national economic entity 1% level?

Simple:  National level corporate economics is extractive of the local level using the same model of world level corporate entities that are extractive of nations.

In conclusion to all the above:  Here is the test question......................since us vs them, me vs you is the primary decisive and divisive social relationship of the day.  The training ground for first person shooters training for youth and the model for economic warfare...I mean competition. 

What entity and its interests is it that you are going to fight for and what is it that you are fighting for?

God and salvation?

Old Glory and Freedom?

Your tribe ( employing entity, race, school, state, city, ideological group, family) and mutual support/benefit commitment?

Yourself and your own best interests?

Maybe one way of determining the order of importance and priority is determining the degree of benefit/survival related to entity affiliation.

Money is a substantial and universal measure of benefit for both those that have it and those that do not.  The economic entity relationship that is most important is the one that gives the greatest monetary benefit/return.  Working up successively higher levels of entity relationship applies the same logic but in relationship to the individual higher level entities become multiple as well as directly less important to the individual but each higher level entity has its own most important Parent relationship.

The most important economic entities to an individual are those closest to home and where we live.  Geographically or conceptually. 

The economic importance of our own city and its contribution to the general economic welfare of all those that live in it is a potentially exploitable economic resource that does not receive the economic attention of its own population.  If a city had the business model of our nation then government and business in the city would work together as a corporate enterprise to maximize a balance of trade to increase city net worth with each citizen being a stock holder.

Us vs Them would become My City vs Your City in a zero sum game.

The moral imperative in this relationship would be that like a family, nobody in the city screws another member of the city.

In the domain of Capitalism there is an important term called "Utility".  A search of the term 'Capitalism Utility' presents many different views of the term.  At the individual worker level, their Utility is what they get paid for.  The same is true up the line of parent business/economic entities at higher levels.

If a city were to maximize the exploitation of its resources for economic gain using a business model then each of its citizens would have a degree of utility to the business (or not as the cost/benefit of an individual is evaluated).  The city as a business would maximize external governmental income as well as collective city private enterprise income.  Measurement of success would be a balance of trade balance sheet and profit and loss statement.

All economics is local, at least the most important self serving economics as far as the individual is concerned.

Buy as much local as possible to benefit the economics of the city.

The flip side of that is that money does not drain out of the city.

Sell as much external as possible.

The flip side of that is that income to the corporate city exceeds expenditure.

It is just business.

Socialism gets a bad rap.  Maybe it is a least effective economic model at the federal level, even the state level.  However at the local city level, if the city uses and "our tribe, our family" moral/economic model then perhaps "Socialism", taking care of our own on a moral/business model basis at the city/family level is the competitive path of the general common welfare?

What would that lead to?  "Gated" states, cities, neighborhoods?  Each gated entity seeking to admit the lowest cost employees to maximize its economic profit and keep out economic burdens that do not contribute?  Or would it lead to benevolence and sharing of abundance. 

What kind of business model is benevolence and sharing of abundance?

A moral/business model at the city/community level?

If corporations are people, my friend, then make cities a corporation rather than a political entity.  The idea that a city is purely a political entity is fallacious anyhow.  It really is a pseudo business and has an alliance with the business community more than the citizens it serves.  Just like the national level government.

A Union Of Special Interests Cannot Stand

I often find that the title of a blog entry that I intend to write something about takes me to something else by the time my free range mind finishes the writing.  That is the case of the prior blog entry and I am pleased with where it went.  My blog entries are not a focused expansion of the subject line but exploratory in nature.  A learning process within each blog entry that takes me to a new place, a new view, increased comprehension.  They get me somewhere.  Learning is a building process.

The concluding part of the prior entry talked about a Union of Special Interests.  One thought related it to the Civil War.  The analogy is worth some further thought.  That is the reason for this entry as well as to elevate the prior concluding thought to the level of a subject line in the chronology of the blog.  A relatively major thought.

Recent anniversaries of the Civil War and Lincoln bring up the purpose and reasons for the war.  Was it about slavery or states rights?  Was the slavery issue a means for the industrial north using it as a moral issue to gain domination over the agricultural south? It was about the preservation of the Union but there were many special interests at play.  The playing field was unbalanced.  True then as now, some die in war and others make a killing.

The Civil War was fought on geographical boundaries.  Today's major boundaries among Special Interests are more conceptual in nature and more complicated in scope, method and means of conducting warfare.  That is true but the model seems to be the same with the exception that the division between the Special Interest combatants is not as clear as blue and grey.

Elizabeth Warren throws down the gauntlet. is how Yves Smith describes it.

I once stood on the battle field of Gettysburg at the point called the high water mark of the Confederacy.  The point at which the tide of the war changed.  Place at which the advancement of Confederate forces stopped advancing and began retreat.  It was a costly battle there.  I was also at the place where Lincoln said something about it.

It would be ironic if not truly Hollywood if Elizabeth Warren were to make her statement that she is running at the same place that Lincoln delivered his address.  Delivered with the same brevity and same resolve to bind up the nations wounds.

We have been wounded and divided by Special Interests that do not serve to preserve our Union.

Run, Elizabeth, run.  Start at Gettysburg, at least conceptually if not geographically.

As much as I am pleased at times with my own thoughts and ideas they remain the equivalent of a monkey climbing a tree to the moon.  Initial progress is rapid.  I can however recognize and support the thoughts, ideas and abilities of those that can take us beyond the top of the tree.

"Trust Us" is not Encryption. Encryption is not Trust Worthy Either

The following link from the Washington Post is informative on the heels of the prior post that linked to all the Whistleblower sites and specified their communication protection levels.
  
Why confidential tips to the government may not be confidential after all

Sites that solicit Whistleblowers, and they are surprising numerous looking at the prior post link say that communications are confidential (no encryption) or encrypted but bottom line is that in reality it is a "Trust Us" statement.  Maybe be EFTO (encrypted for transmission only) but what does that mean?  Actually very little.  EFTO but decrypted at the receiving end to be in the clear.  Then where does it go?  Is the receiver a Honey Pot?  Third party agent to whom?  The Whom being whomever wants to know who the Whistleblower is and what they are whistling about?

Exactly who has the decryption key for encrypted transmission.  Intelligence gathering is simplified when there is a key to the door rather than trying to break it down.  That is a truth.  Cheaper too as well as being secret.

Breaking secrets is the business of the NSA.  Security is its Mission.  Security is Protection.  What is being protected?  Freedom.  Conflate Freedom and Liberty and "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice".

If the USA goes to war on the (hyped) probability that there is a 1% possibility (pick your own level of comfort probability) that if we do not the consequences would be a mushroom cloud over and American city.  (The consequences of going to war are now self evident as well as the reasoning)

Then......

The 1% or low probability that a Whistleblower will damage the security of the USA will receive equal justification for extreme action.  

It is the 1% or ?% probability rule.  If there is only 1% probability that a suspect is reaching for a gun then there is sufficient justification for a police officer to shoot first.  The justification that they felt their life was in danger.  It is just a matter of choosing a threshold measure.  Or manufacturing one to justify the action either prior to the event or after.

It is a matter of standards and honor.  Judgment and morals.  Right and wrong.  Truth.  Truth however is what we believe, not always an absolute because truth is relative when founded on conceptual belief.  Is that not true?

We hold ourselves to our standards.  Holding to a higher standard is a moral choice.  I chose to hold myself to a higher standard of truth and judgment during my career as a navy officer.  A belief that I would sacrifice myself to a higher level objective greater good.  In hindsight that higher level greater good did not have sufficient probability of being a true greater good to be worth what I would willing choose to do or give. 

Those that would give the final measure (or any less than final measure of sacrifice) for truth and justice would do so with a high probability and certitude that what they would give would be justified.  I think that those that would call upon or be jeopardized by such selfless action have a substantially lower threshold for their decisions.  Despicable when they manufacture justification for their decisions or hide behind false reasoning or absolute reasoning such as there is no alternative.  Zero percent possibility of doing or not doing an action.

"Trust Us"

No, I do not trust them to act with the honor, dedication to the principals of our nation to the extent that the citizens of this nation would, in the majority (that is a % basis of action too) act for the common good and principals on which we believe the nation was founded.  

I would take the default position on "No Trust" in the matter of Whistleblowing.  

I would do what Edward Snowden has done.

In WWII Russian officers ordered their rear guard troops to fire upon their own retreating troops.  Those officers were serving a greater good.  What motivated and justified their decisions and orders?

Perhaps the same reasoning that the Constitution was not meant to be a suicide pact.  That absolutes must be tempered with probabilities, realities, secrecy and deception, suppression if necessary for those that cannot handle the truth?  

Probabilities dictate action?  Low thresholds of probability justify action when unreasonable fear applies.  Recently a cougar was killed in town,  the second since January.  Only 20 people have been killed by cougars in North America between 1890 and 2011.  Maybe true, I only read that.  Frequency over time is another matter.  A couple of range free kids where taken into custody by police recently for doing what I did almost every day during summer vacation when I was the same age.  Cops shoot a person reaching for their ID in a wallet.  Shoot them in the back because.......of fear....hate...they deserve it if they run.  Running demonstrates a probability of guilt (.005%) that they are killers evading apprehension?

How low can probabilistic decision making go until is becomes the nominal tool for decision making made independent of reality by fear or any of our worst traits rather than premised on our best nature?

Who is betraying whom in this country and why is a serious question that we as citizens must ask and take action as necessary based on what we trust and believe to be true.  

There are too many things that are simply and fundamentally wrong in this world.  Monetary systems are just one that I focus on.  The current system is contrary to the common good.  TPP being done in secret and is contrary to the common good of this sovereign nation.   My own Congressman who I once believed to be a champion of truth is at the lead in its implementation.  It may benefit Oregon, perhaps that is his justification.  The rest of the country?  Well, special interest always seem to trump common good and we have become a Union of Special Interest.

"A Union of Special Interest".

Pertinent at this anniversary of the end of the civil war as well as Lincoln's assassination.

 "A house divided amongst itself cannot stand"

If he were president today I believe he would say:

"A Union of Special Interest cannot stand".  

Is that what I hear Elizabeth Warren saying?

"A Union of Special Interest"  Wow!  That is some paradox.

Fundamentally, a paradox cannot stand on its own two feet.  

It just falls flat because it is contradictory!

If we see the contradiction.................

I claim Google bragging rights to be the first to express the phrase in quotes:

"A Union of Special Interest Cannot Stand"

And have a Google search on that phrase return:

"No results found for "a union of special interests cannot stand".

I should send that phrase to Elizabeth!

The phrase is a very subtle play on words and implied paradox as well as double meaning that is recognized by parsing the phrase.  The parsing key to the meaning depends on the nature of the entity having "Special Interest".

Special Interest in the political/social definition of the term as defined here 

and also defined more broadly at this Wikipedia link.

Or the interpretation of "Special Interest" when the application is the the Pursuit of Happiness that is the special interest of each citizen proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence.

Using the former definition a "Union of Special Interests" cannot stand when those Special Interests Entities do not balance on a level social playing field through a  three part government responsible to the people for the administration of our form of governance that protects our Union.

Under the latter definition when the special interest entity is the individual citizen each in pursuit of their own "pursuit of happiness" and the big entity called "common good" associated with that pursuit then the phrase should be:

"A Union (USA) of special interests (citizen pursuit of happiness) stands forever".  That phrase is a foundation declaration of our independence.

Is that all too subtle to understand?

Looks like writing on the wall to me that is neither rocket science nor shadows on the wall.

Fusion Centers and PublicIntelligence.net

The prior post took off on a representation of information in space.  Just my way of looking at and comprehending something.  Beyond the unique way I sometimes look at things is the objective analysis of the thing itself and the things related to it.  That can lead to a big bag of other things when everything is related.  The important relations are most important.  Duh!  But what are the important critical relationships among any set of entities?

Related to the prior post about Fusion Centers is the entity that published the link:  PublicIntelligence.net  What is this entity?

The site page is sparse when it comes to links about the site sponsor.  The first page has only "About", "Contact" and "Support Us".  That is sparse depth about the nature of the entity splashed over a picture of riot police.  Something feels strange about it, like setting off alarm bells strange.

From the site "About"

"Public Intelligence is an international, collaborative research project aimed at aggregating the collective work of independent researchers around the globe who wish to defend the public’s right to access information."

Yes, that is what "Public Intelligence" is generically about if anyone wants to look at the problem domain that way.

But then the "About" goes on to present the Credo of the site:

"We operate upon a single maxim: equal access to information is a human right. We believe that limits to the average citizen’s ability to access information have created information asymmetries which threaten to destabilize democratic rule around the world."

"This site is an attempt to compile and defend public information using software and methods which are open source and available to the public at large. It is our hope that by making such information available and demonstrating the power of a public resolved to inform itself, we may engender a more informed and proactive populace."

Hooray for their dedication to "engender a more informed and proactive populace"!  Sounds like power to the people to me.

Who is this entity called "We"  Who are "They"  What is their agenda?

From the "About":

"We provide documents, detailed analyses, and a host of other open-source intelligence products from the private and public sector."

To whom is all this collected intelligence product provided?

Their credo belief is aimed at the limits to the "average citizen" ability to access information causing asymmetries that threaten democratic rule around the world. 

But then the "About" goes on to say:

"Governments, corporations, law enforcement organizations, as well as private citizens, use PI to research primary source material relating to a large number of topics that affect the safety and security of their daily operations."

The double speak starts to emerge after the flag waving for the private citizen and pubic at large.

Double speak?  I mean the hidden agenda.  Usually hidden in a lot of words in a run on sentence.

Agenda?

Is this site a honey pot?

The main site has these links related to the site itself: "About", "Contact", "Donate"

at the "Contact Link"

Contact

"Please feel free to contact us. We want to build an information sharing environment. If you have any suggestions, documents, or pertinent information regarding matters covered on this site, we want to hear about it. If you know of any errors or omissions in the material we provide, please let us know.  You may use the appropriate email address listed below or you can contact us via our secure contact form."

"To send us an encrypted message via PGP, please use the following public key.
You may also use our encrypted contact form."

Detailed IP address info here at this link

Leakdirectory.org

Lists all places to leak to!

Who wants to know what is leaking?

Fusion Centers and Shadows on the Wall

Naked Capitalism is my goto site.  If I was on a desert island and could only access a single site and through that site all of its links, I would choose Naked Capitalism.  Yves Smith is my hero.  The Links and now Watercooler by Lambert Strether present a variety of always interesting Links categorized to major topics.  One of those Links topics is Big Brother is Watching You.

This link appeared today under the category Big Brother is Watching You:

National Strategy for the National Network of Fusion Centers 2014-2017 

I have a broad interest in information systems, engineering those systems.  Information systems often grow of their own accord, following an organic growth pattern simply dictated by the environmental influence of logic its fundamental core.  Sometimes I wonder if an information system is being created by our intelligent minds or if we are simply discovering what is pre-existing writing on the wall.  The "Shadows on the Wall" that I have previously written about from many different angles that thread themselves throughout this blog like the other major threads that seemed to have emerged over the years.  

Fusion Centers are a locus of points around a central point.  I wrote about the concept of a locus of points once in relation to "Point of Entry" to a problem domain.  The locus of points equidistant from a central point in two dimensional space is a circle.  A locus of points equidistant from a central point in three dimensional space defines a sphere.

Each unique Fusion Center on the surface of a sphere is a single point of (n) points on the surface of the sphere consisting of all Fusion Centers on the surface of the sphere.  My own way of looking at the points on the surface of a sphere, call that sphere information/knowledge is to view it as an informational point of entry to the sphere with the name Problem Domain, whatever that specific domain name happens to be.  It is a problem to be solved.  I think of the Problem Domain as the "Big Marshmallow"  Life is a Problem Domain.  Freedom is a Problem Domain.  Money is a Problem Domain.  Making a good cup of coffee is a Problem Domain.  Matters of the spirit are in a Problem Domain all of their own.  I don't go there often but problems in any domain point to other domains, relate to other domains.  "n" number of domains can be very large, theoretically.

The official government Fusion Center concept has a Federal Core Point around which a line goes out to national, state and local levels not limited to government entities not evident at first look until the term "partners" is analyzed.  As each connecting line to a "partner" reaches out from the central core government agency, call it the NSA, it goes through levels of partners that have their own locus of points around themselves.  

Extend that line out from the NSA at the core and where does it go at the extreme outer edge?  It potentially goes to every individual citizen.  Hmmmm.......this Sphere is getting to look more like a web.

The official Fusion Center concept aims to put every citizen at the locus of citizen points that make the sphere of the Problem Domain point of entry.  The concept does this by soliciting and inviting each citizen to be its sensory eyes and ears detector and providing an official means of communication for reporting.  Alternately it wants to have eyes and ears on all citizens whether or not they wish to officially contribute in accordance with the Intelligence System.  

Each American citizen at the surface of the sphere has its own locus of points around itself to consciously push intelligence to the core or from which intelligence will be pulled totally independent of citizen choice.  Concepts of "Open Source" and "Secrecy" means and methods as well as their application to direction flow apply.

Working toward the center of the sphere, entities become organizations as well as individuals in organizations with various permutations of criminal and non-criminal matrix of individual/organization on the way to the core as well as at the core.

It is a very complicated Sphere.  That is why I have chosen a 3 dimensional view of the problem domain and conceptually even a 4th and 5th dimension to explain it.  

4th dimension?  Call it the "Shadows on the Wall" dimension as in "Plato's Analogy"

I started out with a link that appeared in Links in today's Naked Capitalism but did not address it directly.  That is because it is, itself, a shadow on the wall that must be put in that context before anything can be said about it.  And when that thing is to be said it only works toward getting to the core of the problem domain.

This entry therefore sets the stage (or should I call it the cave wall?) for the next entry where a light starts to shine some vague representational shadows of the truth.



 

 

BRASS is Big --- Really Big

BRASS is the Mother Of All Objects!

Not just Object Orientation

It is Object Being!

http://www.zdnet.com/article/new-darpa-project-aims-to-do-away-with-it-updates/

Cameras Everywhere - A Placeholder Pointer

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-0411-cameras-everywhere-20150412-story.html#page=1

Death of Cash - Placeholder pointer

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/04/10/2126212/buiter-on-the-death-of-cash/?

Wack a MoleMoney And FIRE

A long read this morning but this is Sunday and the proper day for contemplation of deeper things.

Risky Moves In The Game Of Life Insurance -- New York Times

Added 16 April subsequent to this original posting:  Might Jackson National Life Insurance be a player in this Wack a Mole game?  The preface to the link at Naked Capitalism seems to question why Andrew J. Bowden took this job.  

NC preface to the link in the NC Links section:  "Thinking further about Bowden landing at Jackson Life, it really is curious, in that Jackson has virtually no nexus to U.S. securities law. It’s a subsidiary of Prudential PLC of the UK (which is unrelated to Prudential of the U.S.). The guy has spent his whole career as a securities lawyer at Legg Mason and at the SEC, and it’s almost as if he no longer wants anything to do with securities law, or that he couldn’t get a job as a securities lawyer."

"It’s also somewhat of an odd choice for Jackson, since insurance law is so specialized (and state-by-state, with virtually no federal nexus), and Bowden has no apparent background in it."

My question:  Why would Bowden take this job?  Maybe relates to Risky Moves in the Game of Life Insurance?

Because of this  ????:  Andrew J. Bowden who is presently serving as director of the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations.

From the link at InsuranceNewsNet.com:  

"Meyer will be succeeded by Andrew (Drew) Bowden who will be leaving the SEC as director of the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations to assume the role of senior vice president, general counsel at Jackson. In his role at the SEC, Bowden reported directly to Chair Mary Jo White and oversaw a team of over 900 managers, professionals and staff who operate globally out of 12 office locations conducting examinations of investment advisors, investment companies, broker dealers, exchanges, self-regulatory organizations, clearing agencies, transfer agents, municipal advisors, and other registered entities. Prior to his work at the SEC, Bowden served as executive director, chief operating officer and general counsel at Legg Mason Capital Management. He holds a Bachelor of Arts from Loyola University (Baltimore) and a Juris Doctor from the University of Pennsylvania."

"Jackson has $212.2 billion in total IFRS assets and $198.7 billion of IFRS policy liabilities set aside to pay future policyowner benefits (as of December 31, 2014)." 

Whack a Mole is excellent video meme.  It is a game.  A mole pops up, the player wacks it down with a hammer.  It pops up elsewhere, whack it again.  Same mole gets faster and faster, to fast to whack because it ducks and pops up elsewhere.  Next stage is when other moles learn that they are relatively safer to pop up in numbers knowing they cannot all be wacked by a single wacker.  The number of moles popping up increases.  The number of wackers do not.

Game over for the wackers.  Moles win.

An excellent business model!

The critical entity relationship between the two principal players (Wacker and Mole) is implemented by the action Wack.  Initiation of action is associated with Identification of Pop-Up.  Wacker has knowledge to recognize Pop-Up and send message to WackTool that has knowledge to send its message to Mole. 

Mole has knowledge of methods to AvoidWhack.  One method is DuckQuick.  Another more method that obviates the need to DuckQuick is  "NotSeen".  There are various ways for the Mole to implement its MoleNotSeen Method.

MoleNotSeen method is the default method A.  MoleSeenDuck is plan B.

Enough of games.  The insurance industry is playing this game.  So are the Banksters.  So is Real Estate.  FIRE???   Finance.  Insurance.  Real Estate.  They are all moles.  Banksters popped up first.  It successfully evaded Wacker.  Real Estate popped up out of the same system of holes.  Some safety in numbers.  The Wacker was weakened.  It could still send a message to WackTool but WackTool methods were hamstrung.  Insurance popped up.  The Wacker was beat.

Wacker was beat when it became the object of role reversal.  FIREMole became Wacker.  WackTool as a method of FIREMole became BusinessModel.  The ObjectEntity of BusinessModel implementation became the Wackee.  Wackees are all of us.  Standing up and not seeing the WackTool coming.  Not knowing the knowledge to duck in anticipation.  Easy targets.  Low hanging fruit goes first.

FIREMole continues to use the same method it knows and employed when it was the target of Wacker.  The Method called NotSeen.

NotSeen trumped WackTool by virtue of Invisibility.  FIREMole used invisible to turn the tables on Wacker.   Now in the role of Wacker FIREMole continues to use InvisibleMethod WackTool to deliver its message to us all.

We never see the message of WackTool coming until it hits us. FIREMole is very clever.

Game over?

Only when FIREMole wacks GoldenGoose that lays the eggs.

FIREMole is not a mole.

It is a fungus.

Surprise?

That is the art of FireMole's deception and invisibility.

The Parasites here. 

The parasites are not institutions but the people that direct them?  

Kelsey Collins and the Peace Gong

Five years ago Kelsey was going to buy a Peace Bell for her home in Sisters.   A small one made from a gas cylinder.  It gives a lovely bell sound.  I suggested she get a large cylinder made into a Peace Gong.  Peace was a big thing with a capital "P" to Kelsey.  Often to express the importance of anything we talked about we would say "And that is spelled with a capital (letter here)."  or small letter as the case may be.  Big "P" Peace needs a big "G" Gong.

The big gong I had seen was made by Buffalo, also known as the artist Chris Folsom but I often had to search my mind if I ever wanted to use that name.  He was Buffalo.  Named by Native American Indians.

It was a big gong!  Kels bought it.   The structure on which it would be mounted was a gift to her.  I designed that with Buffalo and he fabricated it.  I incorporated in the design two things dear to Kelsey.  A heart and a hawk.  A tribute to love and the son that she loved.

Buffalo fabricated the gong and stand but his artistry is the incorporation of spirit in the process.  His, mine and Kelsey's and a tribute to the spirit of her son Chase that had taken on form as Chasehawk.

I learned of Kelsey's transition two days after her passing.  I arrived at Chasehawk to find daffodils placed beneath the gong.  Time was spent simply slow walking the grounds that I feel she made sacred by her presence.  A long thoughtful walk that began and ended at the Peace Gong.  A walk that touched the spirit of Kelsey that surrounded me and brought it into my heart.  I found that I needed to understand my feelings but mine lead to hers and somehow and hers to mine.

What I believe are my truths.  What would Kelsey say about that?  I think it would launch a fascinating discussion.  On different subjects, at different times and places I am sure we have all had the joy of that discussion with Kelsey.  Not the same question or statement, of course, but one that launched an exploration.  An exploration with Kelsey as a guide, as an agent to find what path we may choose to follow.  How often that has happened is the beauty of her spirit.  How often it has elicited the beauty of my own spirit for me to embrace.

How often have I been a guide to Kelsey?  A role reversal?  

Change belief and truth changes.  I thought about that as I walked.  My belief that something was a simple tribute may have been a different belief to Kelsey and its constant presence a pointer to a path.  The thought troubled me greatly.  

We do not know the path she walked, the one she intended, her Exit Strategy and why she chose it.  I don't know what role I may or may not have played.  I do believe that if I commune with the spirit of Kels in my heart she made a choice that was hers alone.  One guided by all the loving things she did and were done out of love for her.  Not a path of choice driven by anything else that was not love for her or herself.

A hawk surmounts the Peace Gong.  Buffalo made a hawk but then made what he felt was a better one.  Kels wanted the first one and we put it up above the garage door.  Last week I took it down from above the door and mounted it below Chasehawk.  While standing on the ladder doing that a thought pushed itself into my mind.  In some way Chasehawk had been a constant call to join in flight together.  That struck me very sudden, very hard as a contributing belief of Kelsey's truth.  I suddenly wished I never had the thought that produced the Peace Gong.

Kels had surrounded herself with the truths of her beliefs.  Pictures, signs, names of Chase and Bruce.  All constant presence of their spirit as well as Calypso, Isis, Scooty and others. She had made tributes to them.  That reverence and love for their spirits had guided my intent to give a gift that would also be a tribute.  

She had made so many of her own path markers pointing the way and guiding to her decision. I feel I contributed only one more.  It it played any unintended role in her choice it was a gift that gave her comfort and joy on her Exit Strategy journey.

I rang the gong gently with my hand and listened to my heart.

Kelsey's spirit spoke to me. 

The Peace Gong did its job.

To: DSK
From: BFT

I am at peace with your decision.  At peace with you and myself.  That is my truth.

Love blessings, forever...

BFT

Thoughts of Kelsey Collins While in the Dental Chair

In the dental chair this morning I sent my mind elsewhere.  A coping mechanism out of habit.  It was only a teeth cleaning.

Kelsey was fastidious about the care of her teeth.  Frequent teeth cleaning, I think.  While cleaning her car this week for its new owner I came across many things.  Heart shaped rocks in various places.  Maybe 15 of them after all the cleaning was done.  Mints.  Fernando's business cards, her own cards.  So many other things that had just accumulated.  Within easy reach were the small plastic things with a length of dental floss between them like a sling shot.  She used them often.

Some things we do daily to maintain.  I should floss more.  Some very significant things are done less often to re-establish some even more significant thing once it has been established.  The less significant stuff?  It just fades away if not renewed.  Maybe it deserve to do that.  Maybe not and if so what does the fading tell.

Kelsey renewed herself daily, periodically.  Some planned annual events she attended every year.  When the time was right then one of her major renewals was "White sands, turquoise waters, blue sky".  A perfect mental picture of peace and a trinity of tranquility that she made happen by going to places like that.  She had not made that dream a reality for awhile.  I asked her about it and I think she said it would be Belize.

I have my own perfect dream of peace and happiness and I recently returned from an Australian implementation of that dream.  It is a time for me to kneel and kiss the earth in a manner that I have so often done before, will do again.  The focus was a sailboat trip in the Whitsunday islands including Whitehaven beach.  To me the most beautiful beach in the world.

There are subtle telling indications about ourselves, about others.  Perhaps Kelsey's dream of peace and joy shifted to a higher level, superseding the sun and sand that she had often sought as a vacation renewal of mind and spirit that was no longer needed.  I like to believe that.

Sunday was always Kelsey's day.  A day to be with Kelsey.  To meditate, to choose renewal.  It is not surprising that she chose Sunday to be the last day of her life.  Starting early, probably watching Sunday Morning.  Looking at the Sisters mountains.  Meditating on beautiful things, the place she intended to go.  The focus of her Exit Strategy to accomplish its purpose of leaving life with grace and dignity.

I sent this picture with love to Kelsey from Australia

The essence of it is joy and peace.

She replied to me: 

"Sounds like you're having a magnificent time, BFT! Looking at those white sandy beaches made my heart smile for you!"

LoveBlessings,
Kelsey

The essence of Kelsey.

 Within my heart.

Kelsey Collins - Exit Strategy

Today I learned that my dear friend Kelsey Collins transitioned on Sunday.  The news is devastating. I am in shock.  She was a friend that I loved dearly .  We had lunch on Friday in Sisters and walked in the woods with her dog Lilly.  As always we talked of happy things.  My trip. Her book. Her radio program.  She had recorded it previously for broadcast last Saturday.  She was happy but she was always happy and full in the spirit of life. She was also full of the spirit beyond life and exceptionally aware of the transition between the two.  I cannot believe the news.  We shared our thoughts with each other.  There was nothing at all that indicated her intention.  Perhaps that is something I think I should of detected.  On the other hand Kelsey might say that a smooth transition gives no indication of any change.

She drove her car up into the mountains near Sisters and shot herself.  Mortally an abrupt change.  It always is.   I believe however that what she taught and how she practiced her life was and continues to be the essence of what she has given us.  The transition from life is one that should be smooth and beautiful.  It is so if we believe it to be so and practice it by preparing ourselves for leaving life with grace and dignity as an Exit Strategy.  A strategy that when incorporated into our life assures a smooth transition of the spirit.  When the time comes we are therefore prepared for that transition.  Where we go to in that transition is anywhere we believe we go.

We all have a belief of where we go in the transition.  The beauty is that absence of a thing or state of being is by virtue of being nothing, or no-thing,  is also a conceptual state of being.  A paradox of our mind and conscious.

Kelsey is now beyond transition and in a state of being with her dearly loved ones that she always believed existed beyond transition.  Perhaps she thought more of the loved ones that she was transitioning towards more than the loved ones she would transition from.  She left behind for us everything that her immense spirit was.  I believe there were final thoughts of all of us on this side of transition at the last moment as well as thoughts of those on the other.  Both thoughts were blissfully happy.

I celebrate her life and hold her spirit in my heart.  That is also a place that she believed that we would forever live in spirit every time we said "I love you". 

Kelsey was a wonderful inspiring person.  She leaves her spirit with me but I will so deeply miss her presence in my life

Kelsey chose to do this.  She lived a life of grace and dignity and chose this "Exit Strategy".  That term is also the title of her book.  Her son and her husband also made this choice.  I’ll never know what went through her mind in those moments leading to her final choice in life to “transition” as she would call it to another state of being that she believed in.  I choose to believe that despite the circumstances she died as she lived.  With grace and dignity.

She leaves a big hole in my heart, my being, my life.  I will accept that with grace and dignity and gratitude for the time I have known this wonderful women that I loved.

Kelsey's spirit lives in many places now and in so many hearts.  One of those places is her Saturday radio show.  Listen to her spirit there and take it into your heart.