"The true friend of property..is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth..The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces..There can be no effective control of corporations while..their political activity remains. ..We must have complete and effective publicity of corporate affairs..It is necessary that laws should be passed to prohibit the use of corporate funds directly or indirectly for political purposes..Corporate expenditures for political purposes, and especially such expenditures by public-service corporations, have supplied one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs."
Complete Speech
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
The Fountainhead
'Twas slow to get it's claws in me, but then I read around 650 pgs in the span of ~5 days. I'd say I became reluctantly captivated.
I'm reluctant to discuss the parts of this book that I deeply related to as I'm not yet sure how to articulate my feelings on them in my post-thought-provoking-book haze.. as such I offer this much less interesting moral/literary critique:
She's painfully obvious, just like all her characters, and - in quite a similar manner - uses it to her advantage.
One common tool in her reportoire: she goes to far lengths to spin crafty dilemmas that leave one with no feasable choice but hers. She gracefully constructs a moral maze that, in actuality has no forks and leads only to where she wishes to lead you. I find it ironic that she would work in such a manner when she claims to value personal choice so highly. It seems paradoxical. It's almost damaging to the arguments at some points. She is sure of herself [her 'self'] almost to a flaw.
At times she harshly damages her own cause by beating a dead horse. She begins to appear maniacal as she repeatedly and overtly preaches through her character's dialogue.
She has an uncanny ability to ascribe respect to a person, act, or thing, without directly stating reasoning. Only that it "calls to one's soul" or "exists without boundary reason or purpose other than its own dignified existence." This is gross and horrendous relativism, on its face. While affirming such value in remaining true to one's soul, never does she make a solid stance on what a moral soul values. Perhaps in that, one can conclude her assertion is no true soul can be categorized as good or bad. Is that what defines a soul? Pure unbiased, unjudged existence. The recurring theme, isn't it?
It is my honest belief that she gives humans too little credit, though her unique brand of pessimism is defended respectably. Half of me finds her fighting on the side of justice and half of me cringes at her gross misrepresentation of common people. She tries to paint a grotesque picture of mankind with far too broad a stroke. The nature of man is by no means as black&white as she makes it out to be, only in this fantastical world she's created.
While part of me views her immediately as a rival on many principles, I'm grateful for a vivid new perspective, a wonderfully detailed collection of relatable characters, and am most of all for her demand for people's integrity above all else.
It's strange, the way some things seem to sneak into one's life at the most opportune moments, as if called out for..
I think I needed to know this story.
I'm reluctant to discuss the parts of this book that I deeply related to as I'm not yet sure how to articulate my feelings on them in my post-thought-provoking-book haze.. as such I offer this much less interesting moral/literary critique:
She's painfully obvious, just like all her characters, and - in quite a similar manner - uses it to her advantage.
One common tool in her reportoire: she goes to far lengths to spin crafty dilemmas that leave one with no feasable choice but hers. She gracefully constructs a moral maze that, in actuality has no forks and leads only to where she wishes to lead you. I find it ironic that she would work in such a manner when she claims to value personal choice so highly. It seems paradoxical. It's almost damaging to the arguments at some points. She is sure of herself [her 'self'] almost to a flaw.
At times she harshly damages her own cause by beating a dead horse. She begins to appear maniacal as she repeatedly and overtly preaches through her character's dialogue.
She has an uncanny ability to ascribe respect to a person, act, or thing, without directly stating reasoning. Only that it "calls to one's soul" or "exists without boundary reason or purpose other than its own dignified existence." This is gross and horrendous relativism, on its face. While affirming such value in remaining true to one's soul, never does she make a solid stance on what a moral soul values. Perhaps in that, one can conclude her assertion is no true soul can be categorized as good or bad. Is that what defines a soul? Pure unbiased, unjudged existence. The recurring theme, isn't it?
It is my honest belief that she gives humans too little credit, though her unique brand of pessimism is defended respectably. Half of me finds her fighting on the side of justice and half of me cringes at her gross misrepresentation of common people. She tries to paint a grotesque picture of mankind with far too broad a stroke. The nature of man is by no means as black&white as she makes it out to be, only in this fantastical world she's created.
While part of me views her immediately as a rival on many principles, I'm grateful for a vivid new perspective, a wonderfully detailed collection of relatable characters, and am most of all for her demand for people's integrity above all else.
It's strange, the way some things seem to sneak into one's life at the most opportune moments, as if called out for..
I think I needed to know this story.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Imposed Democracy
"..it was called Operation Iraqi Liberation or Iraq Freedom. In our opinion, we are back to point zero now. At this point...workers are not allowed to organize. Unions have been banned...Civil society organizations are also being harassed by some facilities put in place by the government. And the democracy that has been imposed on Iraq by this occupation has brought forward a prime minister who runs prisons." - Yanar Mohammed, President, Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
The previous entry has inspired me
"Madness, my love"
by Joshua Cabrera
Awash a hex of spring entwined
with suffering and pestilence contrived
Eat drink fuck partake in revelry
A mass of unintended consequence
covered in a glaze of gallantry
Curses wrought and harsher words ne'er spoken
Eat drink sleep your soul e'er broken
Nerrol, the twins whose tongues bite hard
draw blood and wonder if your selflessness has damned you
Errol: this lake runs red, goodness destroyed d'Alucard
A being of no sex conceived but not nurtured
is a rock, a buzzard's post, existing but not learned
This is the memorandum we give to goodness
With this we raise our prayers
to our new God
We name him We, for we are he.
And he is very wrathful, indeed.
by Joshua Cabrera
Awash a hex of spring entwined
with suffering and pestilence contrived
Eat drink fuck partake in revelry
A mass of unintended consequence
covered in a glaze of gallantry
Curses wrought and harsher words ne'er spoken
Eat drink sleep your soul e'er broken
Nerrol, the twins whose tongues bite hard
draw blood and wonder if your selflessness has damned you
Errol: this lake runs red, goodness destroyed d'Alucard
A being of no sex conceived but not nurtured
is a rock, a buzzard's post, existing but not learned
This is the memorandum we give to goodness
With this we raise our prayers
to our new God
We name him We, for we are he.
And he is very wrathful, indeed.
"Drowning Swimmer's Dream"
Unknown source:
Who art thou?, asked the guardian of the night.
From crystal purity I come, was my reply,
And great my thirst, Persephone.
Yet heeding thy decree, I take to flight,
And turn, and turn again, forever right.
I spurn the pallid cypress tree,
Seek no refreshment at its sylvan spring,
But hasten on towards the rustling river-
Of Namozine, wherein I drink to sweet satiety.
And there, dipping my palms between
The knots and loopings of its mazy stream,
I see again, as in a drowning swimmer's dream,
All the strange sights I ever saw,
And even stranger sights no man has ever seen.
Who art thou?, asked the guardian of the night.
From crystal purity I come, was my reply,
And great my thirst, Persephone.
Yet heeding thy decree, I take to flight,
And turn, and turn again, forever right.
I spurn the pallid cypress tree,
Seek no refreshment at its sylvan spring,
But hasten on towards the rustling river-
Of Namozine, wherein I drink to sweet satiety.
And there, dipping my palms between
The knots and loopings of its mazy stream,
I see again, as in a drowning swimmer's dream,
All the strange sights I ever saw,
And even stranger sights no man has ever seen.
What do I want?
I want:
to change the world for the better.
to see things yet unseen.
to know that which is currently unknown.
to teach others what I know. Everything I know.
to inspire cooperation.
to give the world meaning so we don't squander our precious lives.
to see the beauty in the ugliest of things.
to harm as little as possible.
to probe as much as necessary.
to abandon my fears.
to inspire creation.
to promote diversity of thought.
to feel all there is to be felt,
all the pain,
the sorrow,
the anxiety,
the anticipation,
the orgasmic pleasure,
the sickness,
the joy,
the awe,
the hunger,
the strife
because it is only through exploring our reactions to these that we truly learn about ourselves.
I want to find out what it is inside of me that holds me back, that keeps me from doing these things with infinite passion. What is it inside of me that keeps me from being the person I long so much to be? Do I lack the will or the power? Am I under the hand of a higher authority? Am I my highest authority? Can I change the world around me? Can I change me? Can I do it before time runs out?
Please help me understand.
Help me.
Help.
.
.
.
I want to understand me.
to change the world for the better.
to see things yet unseen.
to know that which is currently unknown.
to teach others what I know. Everything I know.
to inspire cooperation.
to give the world meaning so we don't squander our precious lives.
to see the beauty in the ugliest of things.
to harm as little as possible.
to probe as much as necessary.
to abandon my fears.
to inspire creation.
to promote diversity of thought.
to feel all there is to be felt,
all the pain,
the sorrow,
the anxiety,
the anticipation,
the orgasmic pleasure,
the sickness,
the joy,
the awe,
the hunger,
the strife
because it is only through exploring our reactions to these that we truly learn about ourselves.
I want to find out what it is inside of me that holds me back, that keeps me from doing these things with infinite passion. What is it inside of me that keeps me from being the person I long so much to be? Do I lack the will or the power? Am I under the hand of a higher authority? Am I my highest authority? Can I change the world around me? Can I change me? Can I do it before time runs out?
Please help me understand.
Help me.
Help.
.
.
.
I want to understand me.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
What is real?
To say something is real implies 3 things: 1)There is a thing. 2)This thing interacts with other real things. 3)There exists a conscious observer to observe/interact with said thing.
i.e. Reality is a composition of 3 physical phenomena: matter or energy, the ability for matter/energy to be exchanged, and an observer to perceive reality.
Consider a ball floating in space. A ball alone isn't a real ball at all. We can't see a ball if there's no light. Therefor there must be a light source whose light can reflect off the ball so we (the observer) can see it. Thing(mass)+matter/energy interaction+observer = real. A lack of one of those three means not real.
If a tree falls in the woods and no one's around to hear it, I assert there is no tree!
It follows suit the next question is 'where does the thing(mass) come from?' Let me jump aloooottta steps and say many signs point to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
The next question might be: what does it mean to observe? Does the moon observe the sun as we do? I think not. Think. The key word. To think is to observe nothingness. To perceive and thereby cause thought is observation. Therefor observation = energy interaction with consciousness.
What then is consciousness? Well, we consider a person conscious if there still exists a recognizable pattern (seen with the use of fMRI and EEG technology) of electro-magnetic energy interaction in the region of space known as their brain.
How did this pattern that we recognize as consciousness form? From completely random electro-magnetic interactions in the initial life-forms that coalesced on a young planet Earth. The reason this pattern survived and grew to what we know it as today is rather obvious: natural selection. The life-form with the most effective electro-magnetic pattern that helps them survive gets passed on, mutates, and evolves into what we see today.
In a sense, a life-form can be thought of as a support system that sustains, protects and attempts to pass on this pattern we know as consciousness, which evolved from naught but chaos.
i.e. Reality is a composition of 3 physical phenomena: matter or energy, the ability for matter/energy to be exchanged, and an observer to perceive reality.
Consider a ball floating in space. A ball alone isn't a real ball at all. We can't see a ball if there's no light. Therefor there must be a light source whose light can reflect off the ball so we (the observer) can see it. Thing(mass)+matter/energy interaction+observer = real. A lack of one of those three means not real.
If a tree falls in the woods and no one's around to hear it, I assert there is no tree!
It follows suit the next question is 'where does the thing(mass) come from?' Let me jump aloooottta steps and say many signs point to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
The next question might be: what does it mean to observe? Does the moon observe the sun as we do? I think not. Think. The key word. To think is to observe nothingness. To perceive and thereby cause thought is observation. Therefor observation = energy interaction with consciousness.
What then is consciousness? Well, we consider a person conscious if there still exists a recognizable pattern (seen with the use of fMRI and EEG technology) of electro-magnetic energy interaction in the region of space known as their brain.
How did this pattern that we recognize as consciousness form? From completely random electro-magnetic interactions in the initial life-forms that coalesced on a young planet Earth. The reason this pattern survived and grew to what we know it as today is rather obvious: natural selection. The life-form with the most effective electro-magnetic pattern that helps them survive gets passed on, mutates, and evolves into what we see today.
In a sense, a life-form can be thought of as a support system that sustains, protects and attempts to pass on this pattern we know as consciousness, which evolved from naught but chaos.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
