an incomplete indictment of the American establishment

The Security, Liberties and Wellbeing of the people are jeopardized by their own government which has been infiltrated and corrupted by corporate aggression. This is an Indictment of this Empire (a System of Corporate-Puppet Governance which commits inhumane acts in “our name”) by the People of the 50 States:

Overthrown democracies and oppressed peoples.

Deaths from invasions.

Deaths from labor oppression.

War Atrocities: especially Torture.

Economic devastation of other countries, such as through sanctions/embargos which ultimately exacerbate the suffering of citizens already enduring violent conflict.

Domestic economic devastation, such as through free trade agreements and allowing the abandonment of the manufacturing sector, whole communities and the general labor force (run-away factories and outsourcing).

Human rights violations:

Criminalizing Dissent: Unjust detention and/or deprivation.

Privacy rights violations.

Free speech violations.

Ruined Reputations, Mischaracterizations and Outright Lies (including Black-listing).

Other constitutional abuses:

Emergency powers through false flag events.

Supreme Court severely out of sync with stare decisis.

Elections fraud.

Corporatre campaign financing ruining integrity of federal elections.

Corporate profits and "Personhood" manipulated to the benefit of the corp over all other "externalizations" to the effect that the citizen, the employee and the consumer are all non-entities and even expendable.

Corrupt or dishonest practices:

cronyism, nepotism...

quid pro quo

moralistic rhetoric

Public School Administrations and Boards: Funding not reaching intended Public School children

deregulation of financial and industrial sectors.

Conflict of interest violations including non-recusal.

Voices to Reference:

Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark

Retired Supreme Court Justice Stevens

The crisis of American middle class ideology (continued)

I'd like to paraphrase Stanley Payne on the topic of the conditions for the development of fascism.

Firstly, yes, unemployment appears to be a condition but more importantly the economic pressures must be accompanied by:

• a perception that it "stem[s] in large measure from foreign defeat or exploitation."
• a sense of "international [...] status humiliation";
• a "[state system having just entered] a framework of liberal democracy";
• "political fragmentation";
• "large sectors [...] either not represented or [having] lost confidence in existing parties." [bold italics my emphasis]

- from A History of Fascism, Stanley G. Payne

If indeed these factors complete the criteria for the potential for fascism to develop it could be said that America today harbors this dangerous capacity. Already one can see, hear so much hatred and anger (on the internet) towards our government and the financial sector. We shall consider that the World Bank, the IMF, the Federal Reserve as well as all the world's capitalist trade centers and Global Corporations comprise the condition of foreign exploitation. Who can argue that America's Wall Street has not brought upon Americans a severe drop in status in the eyes of the world? And what of the current federal government administration? Wasn't its platform promised as an attempt to achieve a more liberal democracy― however shallow? And how many voters now perhaps are considering abandoning both parties? Who indeed represents the 99% that the recent Occupy Wallstreet protestors speak for? Is it those who commit 20% of our annual budget to military defense. If anyone of us spent that much on weapons in the home there would be little food on the table and precious little else to do but fight with each other.

With the added fuel of fear contrived into an internal terrorism threat and the further fanatical patriotism of such groups as Citizens United and the Tea Party―we are ripe for scrutinizing our neighbors, trammeling our co-workers, calling out every little bit of suspected neglect or abuse; and attempting to weed out in every unjust way the non-conformers. We are less patient, less forgiving and much more arrogant and likely to express cruelty than we have ever been. Why is there so much ridicule and reputation damaging intrigue? Is it because underneath we are basically aggressive animals and it's just a dog eat dog world―the hunter mentality crouching behind the gift and the promise?

No, I am not so proud of my nation today. I am as yet not completely proud to be an American ―not if being American means exploiting the environment and the poorer nations for our own comfort, not if it means oppressing our own poor, propertyless or less acquisitive citizens. If being American means allowing corporations to become so powerful that they are the defacto government, then I am not proud to be an American. If being American means I will denounce my neighbor if he will not volunteer to patrol the streets as a vigilanti, when truly he aspires to a productive income, then I am not proud to be an American. If being an American means fostering a predatory ethic, then I am not proud to be an American.

But if being American means to oppose all the above and be willing to sacrifice comfort, frivolous or excessive possessions to achieve these just conditions for living on this continent, much less on this planet, then I am truly a proud American and even more so a proper and decent human being. I can only hope to be joined in this, this aspiration for profoundly fair global citizenship.

fascism already here?...

coincidental(?) phrases, concepts and events that should make you very uncomfortable:

freedom corps / freikorp

homeland / heimat

Patriot Act / Enabling Act

Read, Naomi Wolf's, The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot or watch the film based on the book. Note her ten steps of the closing down of an open society. Here are the first two:

1. "invoke a threat" (fear mongering and the "war on terror" war economy) enabling "Patriot Act (severe reduction of constitutional civil rights);

2. "secret prisons where torture takes place"

So you wonder who fabricated this threat: watch this

And on a related topic, a perhaps a film worth watching: The wave. Note the instructor's experimental classroom project eschewing of concern for "cheating" and the transformation of it into a proactive sharing of answers in order for group cohesion to be strengthened.

monocultural collapse

Bee colony health and corporate America are intimately related.

Monoculture and pesticide dependent agriculture is likely the cause of bee colony collapses around the world. It has already been demonstrated that bee populations have been negatively impacted by mass systemic pesticide use in agribusiness. Large acreages of single crops have often enough been cited as contrary to natural processes, contrary to the necessary condition of diversity of species which supports a healthy ecosystem. But this is wholy new level of danger given the role of the bee in the vital process of plant pollination.

In Europe for example you will find decisive actions have already been taken preventing the use of systemic pesticides. Comparisons of the bees' physical behavioral responses while on the organic v. the systemicly treated plants have been put on film. Disorientation and even abrupt neurological failure occurred for bees foraging on the treated plants.

The premise then: EPA regulation does not use the precautionary principle.

...and: The financial regulatory system in the US is also just as lacking in precautionary principles.

The entire framework of human practices it would seem is corrupted by this lack of forethought regarding sustainability. The principle of profit determined by the corporate sturcture of American business is likley the primary culprit here.

How did this happen? Well, for one thing the appointment process allows government to input conflict of interest into the infrastructure of regulation. At least as far back as the Reagan administration we know that regulation was frowned upon, that it appeared to government itself it only hindered American dominance in world business and trade. So in order to ensure this competitive edge corporate figures have been allowed in and out of government departments and regulatory agencies. And we know that this occurred during the G.W Bush administration as well as in the current Obama administration. (Monsanto)

The two realms of power in free trade economies have in effect merged into one force. Any postulations of checks or balance are a sham and misdirect attempts to find a solution. The government has merely become a front for corrupt and inhumane practices. Even the Supreme Court has resumed this bent of discontinuing scrutiny of corporate behavior. For example, there is no precautionary principle protecting the integrity of the Federal Election system from high concentrations of corporate funding now. See the recent decision: Citizens United v. the Federal Elections Commission.

The point here is that while we in America presume to follow democratic principles this very openness to activities has fostered a one-sidedness in leadership, one of monolithic corporate control of everything including governance―to the ultimate collapse of earth's life friendly ecosystem.

We need not list the many inhumane events such as political detainment, torture or genocide to call attention to the great horrors we are capable of? But these are the extreme result of this same obsession to homogenize ideas and peoples which has been the focus of many interest groups, especially the Christian right―and not just in America, but also in China where to be a member of a minority religion could mean imprisonment (China maintains a rather sinister combination of communist totalitarianism with profit-making principles of corrupted capitalism). Sadly we see it now in our educational reformers too. From NCLB to Race to the Top common core standardization, the idea of getting everybody on the same page of preparing for innovation and global competition for jobs has been tainted by the same corrupt profiteering that has begun the toppling of global economic stability.

So how is it that very few question this conflict of interest in America, our single-minded forging ahead with standardized testing and the privatization of education?  How is it that our ethical environmental principles have dissolved and been resigned to accepting the patenting of genes and the genocide of the bees? It's because most of us are too busy entertaining ourselves to see the quid pro quo and the outright corrupted nature of our governing and corporate powers, nor even the harm being done each and everyone of us on a daily basis through the poisoned food web. So now what? Are we just waiting for Fukashima to kill us all off?  We can't just choose to launder our problem with biodegradables and sort the recyclables, nor single crop or common core our way to fix this. The whole structure needs to preserve diversity otherwise you just get more of the same dirtied water, and stagnant minds.

This monoculturalism then must cease, for homogenization of anything is to give all a death sentence.

The Difference between an excellent education and an average one

The differences between children.

I won't address the cultural differences here but I will address the issue of the attentive v. the not-so-attentive student, and the dynamic diversity of readiness to learn. Firstly, I state it this way because children who "act up" in class are often simply ready for more stimuli, and therefore I think disruptions can be dealt with indirectly by giving these children more responsibility. Care should be taken of course to observe first and especially to note the conditions, then on another day or so seek to guide this child's energy towards a helpful task, towards more responsibility in class, and thus attach a positive association to their impulses rather then a spirit defeating negative response. Very quickly one will discover which disruptive children have a different sort of pro-activity need and which truly have disorders and/or counseling or other professional needs. This may seem an indirect way to this revelation, but I think it is better than the applying the survey line of questioning that only serves to underscore the negative perspective.

The differences between home environment and classroom.

I believe it could very well be that children labeled as attention deficited can be better helped if they are viewed contrarily as prepared for a faster pace. In other words, less challenged internally but rather the classroom environment is challenged―that is, in that it does not match the pace the child has become accustomed to. Of course this will not be true of all children diagnosed ADHD, but I do believe we can avoid losing creative thinkers to this categorical limbo if we account for the above concern that perhaps some children just need a higher level engagement. Perhaps this is already addressed in some schools or programs, I don't know. Regardless, this presents a greater challenge for educators obviously, and so therefore, very energetic, gifted teachers will more likely excel at this. But to extend that a little further, I think teachers should be required to take drawing and/or design classes. Here me out: only in this way will they in the least become visually competent. I should emphasize: I don't mean teachers should aspire to be artists, not even that they must be able to draft a likeness. What should be required though is that their vocabulary be broader, such that they can train the develping child's eye to be able to describe what they see with more acuracy and therefore be on the way to greater critical thinking, the pinnacle of literacy. The pace of civilization today and the need for more innovative thinkers, demands that we address visual literacy.

Perceived adult to child differences.

In general I think teachers should take parenting classes. An odd thought perhaps, but maybe not so. They are truly the most challenged of guardians are they not? What would we think of a mother or father with 25 kids at home? We'd either think them irresponsible for having so many or we'd merely wish them a good deal of fortitude. Teachers can use volunteers, it is true. And parents I think should recognize this and do all they can to participate in what ever way they can, from cross walk duty to helping out on the playground or in the classroom. But, what must be recognized is that we are training our children to repspond to multiple authorities that often have different rules. The child thus learns that adults differ too as to how to manage their difficutlies and other people. How are we surprised then when children are not consistent in their behavior? Perhaps we expect too much consistency. And further, this leads to my last "difference" point...

Different teachers lead to a world of diverse ideas.

Frankly, this is what may hold us back forever until our doom if we do not address this. Thanks to nearly a century of weeding out the controversy and "political incorrectness," both liberal and consrvtive efforts have manged to sterilize our history and narrow the curricular scope and thus deter the posibility of learning from our big mistakes. In simple terms, if we take out what can be debated in the schools, what's left but sentiment and rote learning? So, what do I propose to do about it. Well, first of all, I think we need to give more authority back to the teachers to the degree that they are not required to test for national standards and school performance for Federal funding. This NCLB precedent is bogus. Secondly, teachers should be given the mandate to form congresses such that they decide amongst themselves what literature to utilize, and become responsible to each other to report successes and failures. Let them make this their challenge to be flexible and thus more responsive and engaged with the continualy morphing dynamic of "differing" children. They must also be allowed variance from the congresses selections. I believe we will achieve a greater variety of thinkers, the more variety we allow in the classrooms, it's as simple as that.

Other differences (of opinion) and Barriers? There is another great barrier, however, that must be addressed if any of the above can be achieved. The interest groups, corporate or otherwise, that have become dependent upon the status quo will fight like the dickens to prevent any considerable change. Lobbies, for example, must be answered and challenged in kind in the legislatures and in the media. Both administrators and union leaders will be aggressively against these relaxed constraints, I'm sure. So too, will the publishers of inferior texts that have been given extended contracts and even perhaps complacent teachers will raise their offended voices. What better way to put debate and ingenuity back into academia than such a row?!

a review of Barry Lopez's Crossing Open Ground

I was on the bus and it occurred to me there was a passage about landscape, storytelling and lying that struck me and though I forget the exact quote and won't go back to find it, I am provoked to think about how it is so easy to trust nature and the landscape, that truth and language are not so much an issue or required; that there is no real question posed about being. We do not fear an unfaithfulness in nature's utterances. And further finding myself on the bus reading this, it occurred to me too how safe such an allegiance (to the driver)is. I do not have to worry about the reckless acts of others[...] But once the contemporary human begins to orate directly upon us, faith and our footing fail us. We are dragged along upon someone else's tilting, winding path, only hoping not to find ourselves upon a precipice gazing down in a singular lack of togetherness with the ground. We find ourselves in a kind of cordial free-fall without any hope of landing softly; there are only cacti and vultures waiting for the ultimate failure of lingual competence between antagonists. The landscape on the other hand is a truly sound protagonist; there is no doubting it, for it has no intention but acts as it will, as it must, and we can be comforted all along as we are nearly swept off the earth at the same time by natural disaster or the failure of aging organs...

I have faith that one day I will be taken back into this grand scheme. Therein my true faith resides. Not in human nature, that is, not at least as we have misunderstood it to be. We choose as we progress, and therefore even reason fails us in this way: being choice at all it goes against nature!

Mr. Lopez has privileged us with a close view of his direct and very personal contact with a landscape I feel I could love were I fortunate enough to be an outdoors person. Such is story telling: a privileged impossibility.