Category: Question

In the First Place: Why Public Debate Is Usually Pointless

6/6/2014

What are the pillars of our society?

Those who make decisions on our behalf, those who enforce those decisions and those who report them to us:

Government
Churches
The military
The media

They are all institutions whose existences are based on beliefs they do not accept
any dissension from.

Government – we are legitimate and all of our actions are legitimate
Churches – our dogma is correct and you will be punished in the next life if you disobey
The military – our wars are justified and you are not patriotic if you say otherwise
The media – what we say is true, we hide nothing important and if you disagree, you are a nut.

The institutions control public discussion by labeling thoughts that would harm their existence. The following questions will never be answered by any of these pillars:

Government – What is national security and what types of information are really hidden to the public for this reason?
Churches – Can you prove that the leader of your religion really existed?
The military – How many soldiers would you recruit if you told them the truth about why we were sending them to war?
The media – How often are you pressured into dropping stories and who pressures you?

To get these questions answered, we need another actor to join the debate. Many fear the institutions and their enormous power and do not ask why our society functions as it does.

But we need the questions answered.

Almost every debate, whether about something like guns (especially in light of recent reported shootings in the national news) or butter (like the perpetual debate of how much money to devote to the military) starts off with at least one of the false beliefs stated above. In short, the debate gets it wrong IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Be a part of a public that reasonably questions what we hear. Disregard those who state beliefs but do not back them up or who refuse to answer your questions. This is how we collectively will get these questions answered. Then we can discuss the details.

4 Comments

What We Need and Why We Do Not Get It

7/4/2013

4 Comments

Many people laugh when I suggest that people connected to the government lied to the public about the events of 9/11.

But when I say politicians lie, or members of the Supreme Court lie, or that public officials lie about other matters, the same people nod their heads and agree enthusiastically.

Why is that?

It has to do with needs. If one determines that they need something, they tend to hold on to it more tightly than something they could do without. This attitude is simple human nature.

According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (see picture), a person’s first set of needs are the most basic: we all need to breathe, drink water, eat food, etc. If we are dependent (or believe we are dependent) upon someone else to provide these necessities, we would not likely question that person or antagonize them. We could be saying goodbye to our lives!

Once a person achieves this first set of needs, this theory tells us, they are able to handle the next set, which is about the security of: one’s person, employment, health, etc. If one does not feel secure about themselves and about their position in society, they will not be able to move up the “ladder” of the hierarchy and make friends or feel self-confidence.

“Rocking the boat” and questioning those who provide security, such as agents of our government, jeopardizes one’s ability to become a confident and social person. It may not be the same as being deprived of water, but one who openly doubts those charged with providing security risks social suicide!

No wonder a majority of people still trust our government with the responsibility of protecting us from attack, despite overwhelming evidence that the events of 9/11 were a hoax! It is far safer to “settle” for accusing politicians of lying and cheating because there is no fear of retaliation or alienation for espousing these views.

Yes, we all understand the advantage of safety: one does not have to lift a finger.

Imagine the possibility of afterlife. This idea goes beyond one’s security on the temporary home of Planet Earth. It goes to eternal life.

Imagine a deity who records your every thought and action. Imagine your destination after life going favorably in one direction and horribly in another direction. Imagine this deity having control over which way you go.

Many of those who are willing to speak out against the actions of those charged with running our government are unwilling to speak up about certain religions that threaten eternal insecurity to those that question the deity.

There is something missing in the Maslow’s theory. Somewhere after we get our water and our food, we need to grasp the right to ask questions and to obtain answers. The idea of either trusting our leaders blindly to protect us or to face alienation is not sufficient for any of us to function in a world of deception and lies.

That’s my theory. We need choices that reflect our needs, not our fears.

4 Comments

Diary of a Disturbed Mind Using an Eight Ball

3/23/2013

2 Comments

As a child, there was a phrase I had to say every day…

ONE NATION UNDER GOD

My kindergarten class says there is a God, but my parents don’t. Why should I recite this pledge?

BECAUSE I SAID SO

The principal says I must say it. Maybe he is wrong.

YOU’RE A LOSER* IF YOU BELIEVE THAT

I tried to trust God, but my friend died in a car accident.

GOD MUST HAVE HAD A PLAN

Then I do not care for God.

FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD…

Then why does he let innocent people die?

HAVE FAITH

Faith in what? A God I cannot see? A Bible I read and do not believe?

ONE NATION UNDER GOD

My nation sends troops to fight wars that make no sense.

OUR GOVERNMENT WOULD NEVER DO THAT

Where are the weapons of mass destruction?

I CANNOT REVEAL MY SOURCES

What?

SUPPORT THE TROOPS

I support the troops coming home and for all of them to stop supporting wars based on lies.

THE TERRORISTS DID IT

What terrorists are you talking about?

I CANNOT REVEAL MY SOURCES

Who can I trust?

FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD...

I give up. Is there something you can tell me not connected to God or country?

"RAYMOND SHAW IS THE KINDEST, BRAVEST, WARMEST, MOST WONDERFUL HUMAN BEING I'VE EVER KNOWN IN MY LIFE."**
---

*or a communist, a traitor, a conspiracy theorist, etc.

**from The Manchurian Candidate, a movie based on the novel by Richard Condon

2 Comments

When the Revolution Came

2/1/2013

0 Comments

When the revolution came, no one recognized it.

"The media's lying to us? Yeah, right. You people should go to jail."

Those who could see found their vision had no light, their voice had no audience.

They had nowhere to go. The few true revolutionaries looked within for freedom, for genuine solutions to problems and for the truth.

It was a movement with no sound or fury, a concoction of like-minded people who decided the box had nothing to offer them. They would meet every so often to provide comfort to one another.

The rest of society simply ignored them. They knew what was best for themselves and for others. Very soon they outlawed questions by refusing to answer them.

This is how a lie became the truth. The revolutionaries are nothing more than a memory somewhere deep in the archives of the Town that Time Forgot.

No one will ever ask about the time capsule of the revolutionaries and their ideas. It's not that they don't care. They just don't know how.

Now they don't even recognize themselves. Who says you need a gun to dictate to the masses? Some just dictate themselves.

0 Comments

Blame the Church?

7/8/2012

4 Comments

There was a time in my life I especially remember that in which I should have said something.

I was in high school and in my English class, one of my classmates (I will call him Tex) made comments about his Christian beliefs on an almost daily basis. We were in a public school and most of the students had the patience to listen to what came off as religious dogmatism.

Others in the class hounded him, told him to shut up and jeered whenever he would start to say something. I sat there in an emotional straightjacket until one day, after class, I started crying.

I felt bad for the fact he was being picked on but did not know quite what to say in class. It took me years, but now I have constructed an imaginary dialogue which I could have started to get the class to understand Tex’s background:

Me:        Tex, where are you from?

Tex:       Texas

Me:        Are you Baptist or Methodist? (Sorry for the stereotype, but it is close to the truth)

Tex:       Baptist

Me:        Did you attend church every Sunday?

Tex:       Yes

Me:        Did everyone else in your neighborhood go?

Tex:       Yes

Me:        Did anyone ever challenge the doctrines of the church?

Tex:       I never heard of anyone doing that.

With my background of having spent several summers in Texas visiting my grandparents, I had an understanding of how most people raised in the South (and especially those who still live there) think about religious and political matters.

I could have told my classmates that people in the South devoutly believe as they do just as much as non-religious people believe. Attacking a person’s beliefs will get us nowhere. It is better to simply ask a few questions and create a dialogue. No one should be made to feel left out.

4 Comments

No, I Don't Know Where Barbara Olson Is. May I Continue?

4/5/2012

0 Comments

“You don’t believe the official theory? Then tell me what happened to Barbara Olson!” I call this the “Barbara Olson Question,” issued usually by defenders of the theory of 9/11 that says, among other things, that the renowned political commentator was on a flight that was taken over by hijackers and smashed into the Pentagon.

To the one typically asking the question, there are only two choices: Olson perished in a plane crash at the Pentagon that day or Olson perished in a plane crash at the Pentagon that day. In other words, no other answer will be acceptable.
The fact that Olson has apparently not been seen or heard from is proof positive that the plane crash (and the rest of the official story) is true.

Her alleged flight, American Airlines 77, was not scheduled to fly and did not fly that day according to the original Bureau of Transportation Statistics. For these reasons alone, we can rule out the official story.

Not that official theory defenders care. To understand this question, then, is to understand the other possible answers.

Possibility #1: Barbara Olson died in another manner on or after September 11, 2011. She may have taken another plane and gone somewhere else that day. She may have been killed by plotters or died of other causes.

Possibility #2: Barbara Olson lives today under a new identity. She may have been part of the plot and went somewhere else to live a new life with a new identity. Or she decided on her own to leave. Some have suggested she has returned to society with a new identity.

The details are simply not available for confirmation. But the problem with the Barbara Olson Question is with its users. Failure to tell them where Barbara Olson is at this moment is the same to them as failure to provide an adequate theory on that day’s events.

This issue illustrates the need to ask the right questions. The better question here is “What are the possibilities as to what happened to Barbara Olson.” Only then do we free ourselves from the trap the Barbara Olson Question poses.

0 Comments

In the First Place: Why Public Debate Is Usually Pointless

What We Need and Why We Do Not Get It

Diary of a Disturbed Mind Using an Eight Ball

When the Revolution Came

Blame the Church?

No, I Don't Know Where Barbara Olson Is. May I Continue?

Author

Categories

Archives