Brain Dead conformity

 “People are sheep. TV is the shepherd.”
― Jess C. Scott, Literary Heroin (Gluttony): A Twilight Parody  

 “Why do you have to be the same as the others? ...Most of them are stupid.”
― Ken Follett, Winter of the World

  “The city was filled to overflowing with persons who had neither brains nor individuality, who bore no resemblance to men that live by bread, and had only their outward shape to distinguish them from sheep.”
― Lucian of Samosata

 “I don’t like the term “Average Joe.” I prefer “Dolly,” because not only is the Everyman a sheep, but he’s also a clone. They all think alike and act alike.”
― Jarod Kintz, 99 Cents For Some Nonsense


Pavlov and his experiments with dogs.
Pavlov Ivan Petrovich Pavlov was an eminent Russian physiologist and psychologist who devised the concept of the conditioned reflex. In his initial experiments, Pavlov rang a bell and then gave the dog food; after a few repetitions the dog started to salivate in response to the bell. Pavlov called the bell the conditioned stimulus because its effects depend on its association with food. 

Just like the dogs we all have Pavlovian responses to repetitive stimuli. French teenage girls are exposed repetitively to TV and film images of attractive people smoking and a very high percentage of them smoke. Russians have experienced a profound rise in their living standards under the leadership of Putin and experience a positive Pavlovian response to his name. Conversely Western media associate Putin with a rejection of our American leadership and in our media he is vilified. Just like the dog's salivating response on hearing the bell ring, many in the West have an instant negative response on hearing his name. Republicans have the same spontaneous bell ringing reaction to hearing Obama's name. 

Mindless Conformity
It logically follows that our Pavlovian responses can blindly lead us into collective herd-like and mindless conformity. A rush into a war in Iraq with flags waving. Oops!! a mistake based on lies that leaves a nation destroyed  including 5,000 American soldiers and as many as a million Iraqis dead.  Thomas Friedman, (described by Matt Taibbi of the Rolling Stones as light weight but popular columnist of the NYT) was a strong advocate for this war. 
This was a repeat that followed the disaster in Vietnam that killed an estimated 3.6 million in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, and 6,500 American soldiers and ended up with an ignominious American defeat.

 The Lonely Crowd - Written in 1950 by David Riesman describes three main cultural types:  tradition-directed, inner-directed, and other-directed. If we can step aside from the herd and listen to mainly inner directed personalities it can give some hope to the human race. The Internet has opened a window to these voices all of whom reject mindless conformity. Their voices are now being heard and shared by millions through the Internet. The aren't so lonely anymore. My list is long but here are a few names: Chris Hedges, Matt Taibbi, Jon Stewart, Naomi Kline, Jesse Ventura, Michael Moore, Pepe Escobar, Elizabeth Warren, Edward Snowdon, Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange (Wiki Leaks) Cenk Uygur (Young Turks), Erik Margolis, Peter Lavelle (RT).

Where does mindless conformity take us? There are many allegoric stories written about this human weakness such as

• Herman Melville's 'Moby Dick' where the crew blindly follows Captain Ahab's  obsession to kill the Great White Whale. Only the first mate rejects this maniacal obsession and survives to tell the tale.
• The fable 'The Pied Piper' tells the story of children listening to the leaders flute and blindly following him to their death. Dates back to an actual event in Hamelin in 1284 where 130 children were killed.
• Examples of modern day Pied Pipers for military interventions, including the disastrous wars in Iraq and Libya, include Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, Fred Barnes of Fox News, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times and influential Republican right wing policy advocates such as Victoria Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan with the backing of PNAC (Project for the New American Century).  She is currently busy in Kiev with a 5 billion dollar budget to realize her hegemonic goal to replace Putin with a US handpicked leader just as they  replaced Ukraine's elected leader with Poroshenko, a US handpicked stooge. 

What can we do to prevent being swept away by mindless conformity? Unfortunately the  controlling and wealthy interests need their armies of well cared for sheep. The Koch Brothers can  be included in this select group of 20 people whose wealth is estimated to amount to a total net worth of over a half-trillion dollars. 

Their collective investments run into the many millions to finance chosen politicians, conservative think tanks and media campaigns. Koch brothers for example promote the rejection of global climate change regulations related to oil and gas production and generously finance conservative politicians who support their causes. 

The history of the Koch family makes for some very interesting reading. The pile of money Fred Koch and his family made working for the Bolsheviks in the late 1920s and early 1930s, building refineries, training Communist engineers and laying down the foundation of Soviet oil industry provided the foundation of wealth for Koch industries. Fred Koch (1900 - 1967) from this experience in Stalinist Russia became an ardent anti-communist and a founding member of the John Birch Society. He was convinced that the evil 'socialism' was taking over America through unions, colored people, Jews, homosexuals, the Kennedys and even Dwight D. Eisenhower. He had four sons who were all rabid conservatives; Charles and David who manage the Koch empire, and Frederick, the oldest brother a philanthropist who died in 2014 and William, the youngest brother an American businessman, sailor, and collector. William's  boat was the winner of the America's Cup in 1992.
Read about an unsavory Nazi past of Koch relatives.

Since Sheep rarely think about these issues, their complacent conformity lends a helping hand to the influence of the .00001% as they trash Obamacare and environmental protection. In my view only an economic upheaval can alter the course of this complacency.
 

Rumsfeld, Bolton, Perle, Wolfowitz, Kagan, Zoellick,Schmitt - all valiant 'Chicken Hawks'

"At present the United States faces no global rival. America’s grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible."

PNACers seem to harken back to fuedalism. They are politically primitive.
 Jane Smiley

 "The PNAC program, in a nutshell: America’s military must rule out even the possibility of a serious global or regional challenger anywhere in the world.

 "Nineteen Arabs were named as hijackers of the 9/11 planes, but they've been a dream come true for the PNAC 'think-tank' whose 2000 Statement of Principles stated a "catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would advance their policies, i.e. justify wars and "regime changes".
 Quotes from The PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses"

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) originated in a Washington based think tank in 1997 founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. Its stated goal was to promote the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world"

In discussing the PNAC report Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000), Neil MacKay, investigations editor for the Scottish Sunday Herald, quoted Tam Dalyell: "'This is garbage from right-wing think tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks, men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.  These are the thought processes of fanatic sociopath Americans who want to control the world."

The PNAC group have left a spectacular trail of costly failed ventures in terms of lives lost and nation states destroyed, such as in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan but they don't give up and are now attempting a repeat in Syria, Iran and Ukraine while uttering warlike challenges to Russia. President Vladimir Putin stands in their way by blocking Nuland's regime change in Syria, defending the aspirations of Russian speaking Ukrainians living in regions bordering Russia and defusing US threats against Iran's peaceful nuclear ambitions. He has also consistently condemned before the fact PNAC's interventions. The US media consistently labels him as an enemy of Washington's peaceful intentions.

US foreign policy is hopelessly entangled in PNAC's goals for 'Regime Change' in Syria and this explains the bizarre US polic y of arming Jihad terrorists and in Kiev allying, on an end justifying the means basis,with corrupt and Nazi elements in the government thus inflaming the conflict and distrust between Kiev and Ukrainians living in areas bordering Russia. This destructive interference in the Ukraine is being led by the notorious Victoria Nuland of "fuck Europe" fame and her husband Dick Kagan (who had a leading role in the design of PNAC) and  supported by President Obama. Strangely the EU led by knee-jerking neocons like Anders Fogh Rasmussen, José Manuel Barroso, and strangely tolerated by Merkel and Hollande, are supportive of these costly US led disasters occurring in their back yard. Past European leaders like Willie Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, Jacques Chirac and Charles De Gaulle would have brought all of this destructive nonsense to an abrupt halt and sent PNAC and its NATO war machine packing back to America.

What is the future for PNAC, in a World dominated by unrivaled US financial and military dominance since WWII? The good news is that US share of the World's GDP that once stood at 50%. has since declined today to 26% which is comparable with EU figures. As the World's economy becomes  increasingly multi-polar with the GDP of other leading regions and nation states (e.g. India, China, Brazil, SE Asia) growing at several times the rate of the US we can expect  that the concept of PNAC (The Project for the New American Century) is on a collision course with reality.  Despite this the US unfortunately continues to use NATO as their roving battleship to batter down nations such as Russia that threaten PNAC's hegemonic ambitions. Brussels complies because they find NATO useful to strengthen relationships, including  military commitments, with countries in Eastern Europe that were once members of the Warsaw Pact.

PNAC and NATO are organizations designed for conflict and by their very nature and mandate require an enemy. If the humanitarian concerns of regions in conflict such as currently in Ukraine, Syria and Iran were of genuine concern, then European, Russian and the Washington would preside over joint meetings to arrange financial aid and support. Putin has put forward recommendation for such meetings but Obama and his vassals in Brussels refuse to talk with him because it conflicts with the avaristic hegemony of PNAC to gain control of the oil and industrial resources in the region and for Brussels to piggyback on this ambition.

The West is playing a dangerous game with Washington's right wing led by PNAC promoting further military build up in Eastern Europe and wanting to move NATO into the Ukraine up against Russia's doorstep. Its forcing European nations to take sides and encouraging revolution in a deeply divided Ukraine. Its producing a powder keg.  A powder keg kicked off World War I and it could happen again.

As far as I know America is the only nation who proclaims their leadership is good for the world. Try claiming that throughout the Nations of Latin America,  Iraq,  Iran, India, China, Brazil - the list is long. PNAC is an aggressive invention of the right wing in America that has failed miserably in the past  and is predictable to repeat the same in the future. Armed with NATO and in the hands of mediocre politicians of which there is an abundent supply of these days, it will continue to do great harm. 

Complacency! We Become Too Comfortable With What Is

 “All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume.”
― Noam Chomsky"

“Those who are easily shocked should be shocked more often.”
― Mae West


“Why do I do anything?' she says. 'I'm educated enough to talk myself out of any plan. To deconstruct any fantasy. Explain away any goal. I'm so smart I can negate any dream.”
― Chuck Palahniuk,

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/micheldemo125531.html#rbx0s0LoKf0Y6ZcE.99

Once conform, once do what others do, and a kind of lethargy steals over all other senses of the soul
- Michel de Montaigne

Once conform, once do what others do because they do it, and a kind of lethargy steals over all the finer senses of the soul.

Michel de Montaigne

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/micheldemo125531.html#rbx0s0LoKf0Y6ZcE.99

Once conform, once do what others do because they do it, and a kind of lethargy steals over all the finer senses of the soul.

Michel de Montaigne

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/micheldemo125531.html#rbx0s0LoKf0Y6ZcE.99

Once conform, once do what others do because they do it, and a kind of lethargy steals over all the finer senses of the soul.

Michel de Montaigne

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/micheldemo125531.html#rbx0s0LoKf0Y6ZcE.99

Once conform, once do what others do because they do it, and a kind of lethargy steals over all the finer senses of the soul.

Michel de Montaigne

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/micheldemo125531.html#rbx0s0LoKf0Y6ZcE.99

When you are in a steady job or securely retired you are likely to become too comfortable with what is. You might whine a bit about local problems in your community but you just adjust. It is an easy lethargy. The common comment of friends and neighbours is, "Why waste your time trying to rock the boat because you are powerless to do anything. Just get on with enjoying your life". It reflects a conservative philosophy of the financially secure avoiding unpleasant issues, respecting authority and self preservation by accepting what is.

• It explains why the so many are complacent less likely to vote in local elections. "Rob Ford (mayor of Toronto) is a liar and a incompetent drunk lacking any vision for the city, but he keeps the taxes low, is a political conservative like our Prime Minister and shares many of the conservative beliefs of my family and neighbours. Why change anything?"

• It explains why conservatives dislike demonstrations in the streets, no matter what the cause. "It's because they are noisy and disruptive, hold up rude signs, block traffic, are disrespectful of law and order and our flag, and set a bad example for kids. They always want to change something but I like everything the way it is" 

•  It confirms why conservatives support a grossly overpriced and  unworkable euro that benefits a productive Germany and the wealthy few throughout Europe but assigns many of the citizens of southern European nations to a life of unemployment and poverty. But the few wealthy can say "I can still afford my Mercedes so  we need to manage this unrest by accepting   some German generosity to ease the pain. And don't revalue the currency because it will diminish my wealth!" Live with what is! For ten years we have tinkered with it while Southern Europeans suffer from staggering levels of unemployment and a bleak future. We live with what is to no effect when it is obvious that Germany should break off from the euro and return to the Deutschmark (as George Soros suggests) thus letting the rest of Europe take control of their destiny by settling on their own banking system with one or more competitive currencies that would encourage entrepreneurship and put people back to work.

I live in Narbonne, a city too small to hide its human problems. I meet daily on the street with normal citizens, the passing tourists, the shopkeepers, the unemployed, the beggars, and the physically and mentally impaired.   In large cities in Europe and North America with populations of several million you can live in secure sections of the city and only learn about the city's underbelly from the local newspapers and the TV. Complacency sets in as problems are hidden and we learn to accept as normal the economic conditions whatever they might be. We  live with what is. For example, what the employed public complacently accept as normal in parts of Southern Europe is a 25 to 50% youth unemployment rate whereas in Denmark normal is closer to maybe 5%. It  is just what is, and wherever we live we see what is as normal. 

With this prevailing attitude politicians whether, on the left or right, respond by tweaking the system and changes, if any, are minor, usually ineffectual and painless. We learn to live with what is. 

This attitude in part explains why we put off addressing universally threatening issues such as global climate change, the steadily widening  wealth gap in a once predominately middle class society that was the foundation of democracy, the acceptance of tax avoidance schemes, and the thievery of bankers gambling with the nations wealth.

The wake-up call happens when a disaster occurs that threatens the very survival of the financially secure as well as the destitute. Then a conservative tinkering with what is hits a brick wall. A strong leader is then needed who realizes tweaking will accomplish little and undertakes fundamental changes. Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, Charles de Gaulle and Nelson Mandela are examples of brilliant and powerful leaders who understood this and realized that fundamental changes in direction and not simply tweaking 'what is'  had to happen.

Teddy Roosevelt

Theodore 'Teddy' Roosevelt as President broke up the large industrial and railroad monopolies , a defeat for JP Morgan and Wall Street. He was a man of many talents with no patience for living with what is; historian, naturist, Nobel Prize  winner, trust buster, adventurer, hunter and military leader (Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders). His face sits on Mt Rushmore along with Lincoln and Washington.

Franklin Roosevelt

 Franklin Delano Roosevelt assuming the Presidency at the height of the depression recognized that fundamental changes in the financial system had to be initiated. Nothing would be accomplished by tinkering with what is. He defied Wall Street and undertook a major change by passing the Banking Act of 1933 with it's Glass-Steagall component that separated commercial and investment banking, designed to wall off customer deposits from the risk-taking inherent in securities underwriting. This was followed by social legislation enacted between 1933 and 1938 known as the New Deal

He had no patience with the the foot dragging of Republicans determined to work within what is.

Charles de Gaulle

Charles de Gaulle recognized tweaking 'what is' following the 2nd World War would not resolve France's governing problems. He cleaned the slate with the 5th Republic thereby liberating the colonies and reforming an unworkable constitution. He also boldly announced that France would become a nuclear power with its own bomb. (interesting to note that Iran has currently made the same announcement but sacrificing the bomb)



Nelson Mandela was a young anti-apartheid revolutionary who (unprepared to live with what is) spent 27 years in jail for his beliefs. Pubic pressure gained his release and  joining negotiations with President F.W. de Klerk abolished apartheid, led the ANC to victory and became South Africa's first black president.

Nelson Mandela

 

To summarize, great leaders invariably recognize in times of crisis that they must take on the risk of battling for fundamental changes. Conservative opposition ( that always exists) by those protecting what is might be tolerated as a force but must not stand in the way of fundamental changes. 

The future,as in the present and past will build on what is, namely societies laws,cultural values and functioning institutions. It is vital however that leaders also recognize that many challenges will be facing the world in the future, both known and unknown, that cannot be handled by tweaking what is and new and fundamental solutions must be found. For example we know that the seas will rise and flood the coastal cities as the polar ice caps melt and massive amounts of methane will be released from the arctic seabeds. Building sea walls and dykes may help to slow the damage from what is but the solution may ultimately lie in reducing our dependency on carbon fuels and the wasteful energy consumption of a rapidly growing consumer society. 

At the time of Christ the world's population stood at about 250 million. In the next 20 years it will probably rise from the current 7.5 billion to about 10 billion, a 40 fold increase of  humans with 2 to 3 times the life span of their ancient ancestors. Our wasteful consumption is clearly negatively impacting on the climate and if current trends continue unabated it raises serious questions about human survival on many parts of this planet. Can the old governing systems with its short time cycle of four to five years to satiate immediate appetites successfully guide us through these challenges? I don't think so. We can tweak and build on what is but that won't be enough. We will need very different and more stable governing structures, new break through sciences and enlightened leadership with a vision of a distant future in order to address these more fundamental and critical long term survival issues. 

Globalization has created a grotesque integration of world banking systems, industrial enterprises and worst of all NATO that binds nations to interconnected commitments and limiting the freedom of individual nations to act. It is a system of sticking with what is and destroying those who don't. 

Can great leaders rise up from this or do we destroy them? Chavez and Castro failed, Dilma Rousseff Brazil's President is defiant and Vladimir Putin is attempting to lead Russia in a different direction, building alliances in the East and attempting to break the dollar monopoly, has stared no wars, does not spread his armies around the world , has intervened to stop America and Saudi Arabia from military interference in Syria and is understandingly opposed to the warlike NATO leaning against his borders.  For this the integrated forces of what is led by America declares Russia as an enemy that stands in the way of hegemonic power. 

Can great leaders to lead real change emerge in this globalized and highly integrated world or will the globalized forces to prevent it prevail? Will we remain accepting what is and avoid the critical decisions that will enable human life to survive on this planet? Wait and see.  

   

Pussy Riots and Western Hypocrisy

The Western response to the Pussy Riot conviction is a classic example of a superficially informed  public being easily manipulated to turn these punk women into heroines, to deny the government the right to set standards and laws, and to confirm Putin as a corrupt and much hated despot. The reality is that the US Government and particularly the Neo Cons are using this event to attack Putin and destabilize the government. Putin stands in the way of  US hegemony, NATO's missile shield and their ambitions in the Middle East. He also brought to a halt the rape of Russia during the Yeltsin period (that was ably assisted by Larry Sommers and others from the US). In short, Putin stands in the way of US intentions to dominate on the world stage.

The acts of this group in a public museum, a supermarket and then in a cathedral would be a criminal offense and punishable in any Western country. A conviction and some time served, long enough to discourage this kind of public behaviour seems reasonable. A year sounds like a sufficient deterrent and my guess is that when the dust settles, good behaviour, public pressure and the fact that one of them is a mom will see them released in that time frame.  Public standards are at stake here and the choice is whether any society has the obligation to draw a line somewhere or whether young punks can do as they please without punishment. The calls for leniency from leaders in the West is shear hypocrisy. Does anyone seriously believe that the invasion of a church, mosque or synagogue by punks uttering insults and obscenities and similar invasions of public space such as supermarkets and Moscow's Biological Museum to stage, video tape and photographing a group of about 20 participation in sexual intercourse would go unpunished in the United States and Western Europe?

They no doubt have a just cause in objecting to corruption in the Kremlin but they should surely accept that these public acts will result in arrest, punishment, public shock and outrage. An arrest ensures publicity and that is why they accept punishment.

Aside from their acts in the Cathedral here are some of the facts about these "nice girls" who are simply expressing their right to free speech.

1. Pussy Riot is not a "band" as Western media call it. It is an extremist group. They have held no concerts or recordings, they have never written a song. But yes, beginning in November 2011 they are planning to include some "music" in their defacing and attacks, so thus they are called a "band".

"Pussy Riot" is an outgrowth from the organization "Voina", which means War in Russian. They have open connections and financial assistance from the U.S. government-sponsored National Endowment for Democracy.

2. They openly admit that their acts are criminal. For example, aside from the "Holy shit, Holy shit" masked shouting in the church, Voina/Pussy Riot have also attacked "capitalist" McDonald's staff by throwing live cats at them, overturned police cars, once with a police officer inside, stolen a frozen chicken in a supermarket and inserted it in the vagina of one of the group's members, fire-bombed property with petrol bombs, staged and filmed full penetration sex acts in Moscow's Biological museum. Here is a video in French that includes a moderator's expression of disgust and presents clips from their acts. that shows their disgusting acts. One has to ask why during their tour in America interviewers like Colbert, Leno and others are treating them like sweet young girls. As for Google it presents an overwhelming avoidance of the facts. 

[link to plucer.livejournal.com] Such nice innocent girls.

And their big supporter who was recently arrested at one of their demonstrations is Gary Kasparov, the world renowned retired chess player who holds both American and Russian citizenship. In Russia his popular support is about 6%, about the same as the Pussy Riot.

In the real world, Kasparov is a clear de facto puppet of Western opposition to Putin. Back in 1991, he was awarded the “Keeper of the Flame” by the Century for Security Policy (an organization founded by Frank Gaffney Jr. of the Project for a New American Century), typically reserved for American neocon defense policy wonks, including Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Perle, Gingrich and Caspar Weinberger. Kasparov is allegedly still connected with the organization. Also read Washington’s “Fifth Column” in Russia. 

Kasparov was recently an invitee to the secret Bilderberg meeting on June 12th in Virginia. The Bilderberg  Group meet once a year, in North American or European location, and attendance is limited to about 120 to 140 business and financial leaders from the world's largest corporations and leading politicians from Europe and America.  They discuss shared international concerns and set a foundation for future collaborations on objectives. Clinton, Merkle and Obama have attended past meetings.

  I'm sure the Pussy Riot are thrilled to have all this international support. Do they really know that they have  well organized extreme right wing elements in the US behind much of this publicity with the clear intention to topple Putin  and replace him with a leader more like Yeltsin who will accept US leadership and business as usual? 

In the meantime being a Pussy Riot is spreading worldwide. Here is one young women's comments.
“Initially there was desire, a very strong desire to become part of Pussy Riot. That was some sort of dream of mine. I didn’t even know how real it could be, how I could join those awesome girls and be close to them, then it all somehow happened. … It was so cool. It is just happiness. For me, it is just one big chunk of happiness to be a Pussy Riot girl.” 

Maybe a meeting for this profound girl could be arranged with Dick Cheney, Woolfowitz, Richard Perle or Hillary to discuss their shared dreams for Russia.

Postscript from Counter Punch: The Secret History of Pussy Riot