Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 5

Trying To Hold Back The Inevitable Change

I finally got around to watching the Sasha Baron Cohen speech where he argues for censorship of social media. Well, part of it anyway. Part of me couldn’t help agreeing with him when he was describing how hateful ideas are allowed to spread in an un-policed atmosphere. But the better part of me kept asking, “Instead of trying to battle the hateful narratives, why aren’t you helping to build a better narrative?” Because a better world is not brought about by tearing down all that is bad, it is brought about by ambitious, beautiful, truthful creation.

Cohen defends the work he has done, saying that by going under cover he uses characters to expose the inner darkness in the human psyche. He pretends to be a Kazakhstani in order to lead people in a anti-Semitic song. He pretends to be a homosexual at an MMA fight in order to expose whatever homophobia exists within the crowd. I don’t consider myself very knowledgeable about Mr. Cohen, but I don’t find what he does to be elevating.

For one thing, the line between what is real and what is staged in Cohen's work is very blurred. How many people in a given crowd are plants that are there to incite the crowd in whatever direction Cohen wants them to go? The impression I get from watching his work is that he does not wish to expose the unpleasant underbelly of American politics so much as get a laugh at the expense of the uneducated. I'd like to point out that social media has had no part to play in their lack of education. 

For me, Sasha Baron Cohen is pretty representative of the media he feels should instruct society. At no point while listening to Cohen talking about the dangers of social media (read free speech for non-sanctioned voices) did I ever once hear him question the official media. Nowhere does he blame it for building Donald Trump into a celebrity for the last thirty years. Nor did he mention the media’s incessant coverage of Candidate Trump at the expense of Bernie Sanders. The choice he sees is between the status quo and inevitable fascism. Only CNN and MSNBC, only Trevor Noah, John Oliver, and Sasha himself, are worthy of steering humanity to the best of all possible futures. Like most everyone else in corporate media, there is little self-reflection. I guess when someone is paid to apply your makeup, there is little need for a mirror.

But the official, the sanctioned, the approved, the corporate media, has done more to promote fascism and mix fact with fiction than could ever be achieved by even the most ardent of hate groups on social media. Most of the hate speech you find on social media is from those who have been raised on corporate media, a media that feeds ignorance, kills empathy, and sanctions violence. The heroes our media has given us solve problems with guns. It sanctifies all violent actions by wrapping them in the American flag, and never fails to support whatever war our government is pushing. The media creates a landscape where intelligent and respectful conversation is not to be found and where violence is inevitably the solution to every conflict. If this is not a breeding ground for fascism, what is? It teaches us that every talent, from cooking to dancing to surviving on an island, is a competition where only the strong and ruthless claw their way to the top. Your goal is not to cooperate and coexist, it is to survive and conquer. Fascism, much? Seeking to silence hate speech on social media is like cutting at the head of the hydra while the corporate media heart remains untouched.

Corporate media is not a solution to any of our problems, it is the problem for which we must find solutions. Solutions will only be found outside the corporate media, can only be found by those unwilling to confine themselves to the approved talking points the media tolerates.

There are many intelligent and fearless voices that will not be found in corporate media. The messages of Caitlin Johnstone, Jimmy Dore, Danny Haiphong, Glen Ford, Aaron Maté, Greg Palast and Glenn Greenwald (just a few of my favorites) are shared by caring citizens on social media to spread facts and viewpoints that never see the light of day on a mainstream media intent on fomenting hatred for liberals or conservatives, depending on which media you consume.

Of course, there is risk involved in change. There is the potential for things actually getting worse once the established narrative is overthrown. But we have to understand that the established narrative is speeding towards crisis on multiple fronts and it has no answers to any of the problems. It cheerleads our reckless steps away from discussions and agreements with other nations regarding nuclear weapons, it ignores or downplays the environmental destruction our economic system is at the root of, turns a blind eye to homelessness and incarceration. It excuses whatever takes power away from average citizens and gives it to powerful interests, saying it is done in the name of freedom. Corporate media is, in short, a fantasy world. Its cinema is juvenile and violent, its music crude and sexual. Its reporting is non-factual, angry, and intolerant of dissent. The only voices allowed to speak are those in the media and class bubble who are utterly disconnected from the lives of the common citizen.

Change can only come from outside that bubble, and those within the bubble, clueless as they otherwise might be, are at least aware of that. And so they are busy attempting to silence voices that give the lie to who they are and what they are doing.

Social media gives a voice to the voiceless, provides community to those who can find no source of community in a media that is decadent and pushes consumerism as the solution to humanity’s problems. Undoubtedly there are unsavory interests on the internet seeking to garner support for their opinions. As bad as they may in fact be, they are not the biggest threat at the moment. If tomorrow actual fascists were to take control of our media, I cannot think of a single news reporter or talk show host who would not show up the next day and read the script put in front of them. We already have a media that glorifies war and violence, is mostly silent as the police become increasingly militarized and unaccountable, and wishes to silence any voice that disagrees with the official narrative. Corporate media is not the cure for fascism, it is fascism in a fairly advanced state.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 4

Baby Steps In The Path Of Martin Luther King

When I realized I was banned from Facebook for a month, I contemplated doing a daily reflection on corporate ownership of the media and the silencing of the voices of average people. The title “Letters From Facebook Jail” just sounded good to me. It wasn’t long before it occurred to me I was borrowing from a title used by Martin Luther King Jr., Letter From A Birmingham Jail.

It seems arrogant, doesn’t it, to tie my tiny little cause and thoughts to one of the greatest men of the 20^th Century? I thought about changing it for fear of looking ridiculous. In the end I stuck with it because I believe there is never a bad way to recall Martin Luther King’s name, message, and struggle to the world. It is done too seldom. Think how much more often you’ve heard Freddie Mercury’s name in the last year compared to Martin Luther King (no offense to fans of Mr. Mercury).

It is the tendency of people who appreciate people like Martin Luther King to refrain from mentioning him out of modesty or a reverence for the man himself. And while there is nothing wrong with modesty or reverence for our idols, it is a weakness that can be and is played upon by people who have no modesty of their own nor reverence for the likes of Dr. King. The life and example of Martin Luther King was a profound moment in history, and we should not be afraid to echo his thoughts and aspirations in order to keep his vision alive.

I fully realize that my small efforts are as a toddler’s timid first steps compared to a man who walked many arduous journeys. And yet the effort must be made. Were we able to ask Dr. King whether he would prefer to be emulated or revered, I have no doubt what his answer would be. He has left us ample clues as to what he believed ordinary people could do to make the world a better place. He would say “Not everybody can be famous but everybody can be great, because greatness is determined by service.” He would have said to those who sought to further his message “If you can't fly then run, if you can't run then walk, if you can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward.”

We do not have to believe ourselves great or worthy to follow the examples of Martin Luther King and all those who have stuck their necks out for the betterment of humanity. We have only to believe that the cause itself is great and worthy, and the cause will require every one of us to do our part. Great men by themselves will never bring about great change. Great men are borne aloft by the many who become aware of the greatness innate not only in themselves but in all humanity. Great men can only achieve great things when they are sustained by a movement, and a movement is only sustained by the efforts, vision, and sacrifice of a myriad unknown people who have caught a glimpse of a better future, or can no longer tolerate the injustice of the present.

I am increasingly coming to understand that the greatest of men cannot reshape the world when the clay is not yet ready to be molded. Had Martin Luther King been born a hundred years earlier, his message would have been drowned out by the cracking of the whip of the man who called himself his master. The times may not make the man, but the times make the man’s mission possible. And the smallest actions of the least of us help make the times what they are.

No, the world must be made ready if we wish to have leaders worthy of our support. Each of us must do what we can to clear the path for leaders wise enough, brave enough, and honest enough to lead us to the future we require.

Look about you. There are so many right now showing tremendous courage in standing up for truth and justice, for the rights of the oppressed and the poor. We have but to do our part in preparation and the required leaders will emerge from within a community demanding change. They will emerge from movements that foster the finest qualities and the most beautiful of visions. It is our mission to find what little greatness we have within us and bring it into the open for others to see. Seek out those doing generous deeds and they will inspire you, but you will inspire them as well. We are truly in this together. It is time we not merely entertain the idea but live it.

Seek courage and honest motivation in yourself, because though you may not be a leader like Martin Luther King, the challenge we have before us is the same one King saw before him. We still have what King called the “three major evils —the evil of racism, the evil of poverty, and the evil of war. We have slept for nearly 50 years since the death of Martin Luther King, and in that time the situation has grown even more critical. For 50 years we have awaited another leader to fix our problems. But he or she will never come until we have created a situation that is hospitable for such a one. The crisis point has arrived and we must each of us do what we can. And doing that, we must find ways to do more, in ways small or large.

And so I make my little protest while sitting in Facebook jail, refusing to be silenced. I’m fully aware that I am merely splashing about in the shallow end of the pool. But the whitecap of a wave that reaches skyward, that shines brightly above the water, is pushed upward by an unseen force from below. Let’s make some waves.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 3

On Tuesday morning I was alerted by Facebook that I had posted something that violated community standards and as a result I would be banned from posting on Facebook for thirty days. The offending post was of Christmas tree decorations from Nazi Germany where the face of Adolph Hitler and a Swastika took the place of the more standard Christmas themes. I certainly wasn't making a statement in support of Nazi ideology or hate. Quite the opposite, I was pointing out how religion can be and often is coopted by politics.

They offered me the opportunity to appeal my ban, which I of course immediately did, because I had certainly not done anything hurtful or offensive.

I arrived home from work to discover that I was again able to post and like on Facebook, so I assumed that my appeal had caused someone at Facebook to realize I had done nothing hateful or harmful. Then, an hour later, I was told my appeal was denied and my Facebook ban was still in effect.

This morning, Thanksgiving Day, I scrolled through Facebook to see what people were saying, and without thinking about it, liked a comment. I was surprised to see that instead of a notice reminding me that I was banned, the like registered. Which encouraged me to try to post on my Facebook wall to see if it would be permitted. It was.

A short while later the ban was again in effect, but at least I had the opportunity to wish my Facebook friends a Happy Thanksgiving.

It is not my desire to bore you with the details about how Facebook institutes bans. And God knows I am not whining about the way I am being treated when there are others being placed in real prisons, facing real solitary confinement for sharing truthful information. I just want to point out to you the sort of one-sided relationship between powerful media sites and the average citizen. Imagine if George Orwell and Franz Kafka had a baby.

When I was told I had violated community standards, I was at least told what the offensive post was. Many people are not even told that and have had to guess what they did wrong. And while I was told I had an opportunity to appeal the ban, I was not given the chance to defend myself in any way. And when I received a reply back from my appeal, I was simply told that my offense against community standards had been upheld. No mention of who reviewed it, what the community standards are, or why the initial decision to ban me from one of modern civilization's greatest communication platforms.

Let me quickly point out the misuse of the term "community standards". It sounds almost democratic, doesn't it? As if the community of users got together, or at least sent their most trusted Facebook page administrators to a meeting where the rights and protection of the Facebook community was discussed and voted upon. Facebook does in fact have a set of community standards available: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/ But while they make the argument that the group is chosen from "civil society organizations, activist groups, and thought leaders, in such areas as digital and civil rights, anti-discrimination, free speech, and human rights..." no specific organizations or people are mentioned.

If Facebook is to be an aid to a democratic society, and I believe it is necessary that it should be, it must behave in an open fashion. It can be argued that as a corporation, Facebook can act in any way it chooses, but my interest is not in the rights of corporations but in the rights of human beings and the well-being of society. It is therefore dangerous to a society that deems itself democratic to allow one of its primary conduits of conversation to be run in a secretive and self-serving fashion. The rights of corporations should hold little import in comparison with the rights of citizens of the United States and indeed the whole world. If the laws say differently, the laws need to be changed. 

I can imagine a much more democratic way of dealing with people who appeal a ban for violating non-specific standards. Appealing to a jury of one's piers is an idea that our founding fathers found essential. Assuredly it would involve a little more effort than appeal requests being handled by algorithms, but I'm certain it could be arranged without undue burden on the corporation that is Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg would have to peel a bunch of hundreds of his stack of cash, but I'm willing to bet it would still stand higher than the Eiffel Tower. He has, after all, had an amazing return on investment to date, and it is not unreasonable to ask him to invest a little more to ensure his product is a beneficial tool for society. I think it would do him good to view Facebook as a boon to humanity rather than a tool with which to extract wealth. There has to be a soul down inside him somewhere.

The alternative, of course, is what we have now and what will only become worse in the future: a dystopian surveillance tool that decides in secret what can and cannot be posted. A world where humans communicate through a platform that decides who will see that communication and what barriers they will have to overcome to access it. A platform for conversation, perhaps the most influential one we have, that leaves a user constantly self-censoring for fear that they might be transgressing unspecified laws and banned from communication with loved ones, coworkers, fans, potential customers, people with similar interests, etc. It is really hard to imagine a world more dystopian than one where you have no idea what words, images, or combinations of words and images can leave you isolated from your community. There is no more frustrating a feeling than working with all your passion and beliefs into crafting a statement or article, knowing that your post might be being strangled without any way of knowing if it is or not.

The typical response to the concerns I have expressed will surely be brought up. "You’re free not to use it if you don’t like it." "If you don’t like it, build your own communication platform." "Facebook is a private corporation that can run their business anyway they see fit." Etc. The problem with these sorts of responses that are always trotted out in defense of the big and the powerful is that such arguments never do anything to change things for the better and in fact permit things to get continually worse. People are constantly losing their power and their voice, while corporations are becoming less and less interested in serving the public good. How much longer do we want to continue to have the conversation take place within the framework giant corporations have constructed? If Facebook is permitted to continue running its platform as a money-making venture with no concern for their influence on our society, I fear there will be no end to it in the foreseeable future.

P.S. Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 2

Just imagine what the response would have been a hundred years ago if it was announced that the United States Post Office was being given to one of the wealthiest people in the country to do with whatever he liked. The howl of the populace would have echoed through the decades so that it would still be ringing in our ears today. Our correspondence, one with another, is too important a thing to be left in the hands of a single person or corporation. Why, imagine someone a hundred years ago telling you you were banned from sending a letter to anyone for a month because you had sent a letter that did not meet with community (read corporate) standards. Absurd, isn't it? A hundred years ago, they did not have the reverence we do today for the sacred duty of making profit. A hundred years ago, America's wars for freedom were still too fresh in our citizens' minds to allow so much control over the flow of information to be held in so few hands.

Fast-forward to today and the power Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook have over the flow of information. Not only has it for the most part usurped the Post Office's role in carrying messages from one area to another, it has assumed other valuable roles as well. For example, 45% of people say that they are getting their news from Facebook. That's a lot of power. That's a lot of responsibility, too. But being a corporation, Facebook has no responsibility beyond their investors. That's not you, the user. Of course, Facebook does need to show a degree of responsible behavior in order to keep their customers happy. But that's not you, the user, either. Unlike the United States Post Office, you are neither the owner nor the customer. You are the product.

Yeah, you should have figured it out when you found yourself getting something for nothing. That's not how capitalism works. Hell, that's not even how the Post Office works. If you haven't been buying a stamp for every Facebook message you share, you should have realized you were doing something for Mark Zuckerberg in return for the opportunity to see cute puppy pictures. You were giving him access to your data, which he in turn sold for a profit. How much? Well, the last I looked, Mark Zuckerberg was worth $60 billion. Depending on fluctuations, he may only be worth $50 billion at the moment, but look for him to rebound as the power of Facebook users declines and the  information Facebook provides users continues to be restricted. Mark Zuckerberg is not going to make more money by insuring you are better informed about the issues you should be worrying about. He'll get richer by selling more advertising so your mind is occupied in contemplation of buying things you don't need with money you don't have.

There are people who are financially and politically motivated to make sure you stay stupid, fearful, and impotent. I don't know how to break this to you people, I don't know how to break through the inertia so that it becomes a conscious thought which is capable of directing your actions. The wall of propaganda is immense, the science of marketing and manipulation well-studied and well-financed. And the pictures of animals doing funny things is undeniably attractive. I can only continue what I've been doing, what so many people are doing: point out the lies, the distractions, and the censorship required to have you continue to be unaware of your situation, afraid of change, and feeling unworthy to be in charge of the society to which you belong.

Perhaps there is one more thing I can do. Perhaps it is the most important thing. I want to remind you that you are a human being who has a certain inalienable right to dignity. You are better than what they tell you you are.

You have a right to freedom of speech. When they try to take it away from you, they will say they are doing it to protect you. They are not there to protect you, they are there to profit from you. This is pretty obvious: if they were there to protect you, they would have volunteered to join the armed services and sent their children overseas to serve in the wars they pushed.They didn't and they haven't. If profit were their motive, they would be obscenely rich. They are.

You have the right to know what's going on in the world. They may tell you you're not equipped to deal with clever Russian memes that seek to undermine your confidence in the system. Well, I've got news for you, if you're not equipped to handle the ham-fisted manipulation of Russian propaganda, you've surely fallen victim to the U.S. propaganda machine, the slickest propaganda machine the world has ever seen. If you're worried about Russians and not about homegrown propaganda, it's only because you've been propagandized. If they were worried about getting you the truth you need, Zuckerberg and others would be spending their money in order to insure that Facebook is a top-notch information-supplying company. They would not rely on NGOs (e.g. Atlantic Council) funded by foreign agencies, weapons manufacturers, and oil companies to decide what truths you should be exposed to. Again, the obscene wealth possessed by Mark Zuckerberg shows where his interests lie.

You have the right to be in control of your country. People who have an incurable obsession with obtaining money long after they've had every monetary need/desire/fantasy satiated are going to tell you differently. Don't listen. You're at least as good a person as those who have enough money to buy islands, politicians and spaceships while children starve to death. Stand up for yourself. Be like your ancestors a hundred years ago, who never would have tolerated the means of communication being controlled by a few absurdly rich people. Be like your ancestors over two hundred years ago, who decided that America would not be controlled by a few who had inherited their wealth and position. Be an adult, in control not only of your life but the society of which you are a part. Because people, not money, need to be in control of humanity's future.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 1

On Sunday night my Facebook feed was awash in articles about Sasha Baron Cohen calling for social media censorship. I replied on more than one of them that I thought it was not a good idea and that I was more concerned with the lies and misleading narratives that corporate media was using to shape our narrative. On Monday night, I posted the video below with the comment: "The difference between corporate media and social media could not be clearer than this video and the comments made by ordinary YouTube users. It's no wonder why they're so anxious to get social media under control" Assange Arrested And Charged With Conspiracy from The Daily Show

This morning, Tuesday, I received a message that I was banned from Facebook for 30 days. There might not be a connection to those posts, but there is unmistakable irony.

The post which Facebook found objectionable was a picture of Nazi-era Christmas tree ornaments, one with the head of Adolph Hitler, another with a swastika on it. I posted it as a response to someone who shared a picture of a couple dressed for Christmas, the woman with a "Don't Tread On Me" shirt, the man with a Christmasy looking sweater with an undeniable Rebel Flag design to it. The message I sought to convey was how easily Christmas can be co-opted by politics of the worst kind. For the record, I am in no way sympathetic to Nazis, one reason being is their penchant for silencing opposing viewpoints.

I make no bones about it, I use Facebook to connect with people who have political beliefs similar to my own. But even more than that, I use it to engage people in political conversations whatever their positions. I have Facebook friends across the political spectrum and I've always striven to be as open-minded and respectful as possible. I'd like to think if you were to ask any of my Facebook friends of whatever political bent, they would agree.

But now I have been banned from Facebook for posting a picture that I came across while researching a book I am working on. I saved it because it was so striking to me, the notion of Christmas being transformed into a holiday to reinforce Nazi ideology. The idea that a nation of decent human beings could be corrupted in this manner should serve as a warning that it could happen to us, that we are not so unique that we could not fall prey to a government that tells us what to think and how to behave. A government that feels it is their right and duty to go through our correspondence, censor what they find objectionable, and punish those who share unapproved messages.

This is an inconvenience to me, but its repercussions run far deeper than that. For one thing, I am in the process of writing the third novel in a series, which started with the lead-up to World War I and is now in the lead-up to World War II. It deals with Nazis! There is no way around that. I have invested the better part of my free hours for the last three years researching how Nazi Germany came to be, not only because it is the subject of my book but because it hits so close to home in the current political climate.

The main point I want to touch upon now--and I will be dealing with many in the next month as I blog daily while serving my Facebook jail sentence--is that I now have the fear that something I post will result in another 30 day stint in the hole. The image that I had in mind for my upcoming novel would have been a contrast between a peace symbol and a swastika, but now I have to seriously rethink that since the presence of a Swastika might trigger a ban.

But the worst part of it is that I do not know the rules of the game, and nobody is required to tell me. Or you. Or anyone. The rules are arbitrary, controlled no doubt by algorithms that cheaply but inefficiently determine what is permissible discourse on Facebook, which is for me and many others the principle platform for building communities in the 21st Century. To have the thought that anything we might post could lead to our banishment from communities in which we have invested so much time and energy must surely cause most people to adhere to posting only the most banal of posts.

Social media has the potential to bring people together, I have seen it first-hand. I have been a part of communities where people from across the nation and even across the oceans have gathered together in the same geographic location just to have a meet-up. The power of social media and the internet to bring people together and bring about positive change should not be ignored because of the possible negatives. Sadly, as with all other aspects of society, those who are looking for obscene profit and those who desire undue power are shaping the internet to be what they want it to be. I am doing what I can to take this technology and do good with it, as are many others, Sadly, I fear that is a big reason those with wealth and power are willing to take away our voice.

More to come in the next 30 days.


If you liked what I write enough to support me, you can buy me a coffee. If you liked it but don't have a credit card handy, please share. Also, follow me on Twitter or Facebook, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

The Neoliberal Blame Quiz

Here's a short quiz I designed to test how much of a neoliberal you are. Simply match the numbered problems on the left with the lettered underlying causes on the right. The answers are provided on the bottom:

1. Gilets Juanes Protests In France                    A. Economic Inequality
2. Columbian Protests                                        B. Government Corruption
3. Trump Presidency                                          C. NAFTA
4. Black Lives Matter Movement                      D. Police Killing Unarmed Black People
5, Equadorian Protests                                       E. Austerity Measures
6. Bolivian Protests                                            F. Military Coup
7. Chilean Protests                                             G. Russia
8. Lack Of Faith In The Media                          H. Media Owned By Oligarchs
9. Lack Of Support For U.S. Interventionism    I. Military Industrial Complex's Endless Wars
10. Brexit                                                            J. Lack Of Sovereignty
11. Opiate Crisis                                                 K. Over-Prescription Of Opiates, Anomie


Answers: 1-G, 2-G, 3-G, 4-G, 5-G, 6-G, 7-G, 8-G, 9-G, 10-G, 11-G

If you got one or more of these answers right, you are a neoliberal.
If you got more than five of these answers right, the Democratic Party would be interested in sponsoring you for a congressional seat.
If you got every one of these right, Debbie Wasserman Schultz considers you a threat to her position within the DNC.
If you got seventeen out of eleven right, congratulations, you are Hillary Clinton or a member of the Atlantic Council.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Fake Steak Sucks

Sometimes I think of how nice it must feel to believe that one of the two major parties is actually on your side, fighting for issues that matter to you. To believe it arrogance to think that the future might ever depend upon anything you will ever think, believe, say, or do. To believe that the future we all need will be ushered in by individuals born to lead and to rule, people we need only give our approval to. To sit on the sideline and shout our encouragement to those who battle it out in the arena for our benefit. 

But I have experienced that delusion, and I know that it has never made me happy. Because while I can lie to my conscious self, I know that I can never lie to my true self, my real self, my soul. While I tell my thinking mind that everything is okay and a certain breed of supermen and superwomen are shaping humanity's destiny as God or destiny instructs them, some part of me knows it is merely a story I tell myself in order to avoid speaking up, acting up, rising up. Holding on to such illusions has only ever caused me pain.

I am reminded of the traitor from The Matrix, the one who regrets having been awakened to the truth and is willing to betray all his friends and comrades in order to retreat to the security and small pleasures to be found in the illusion of the matrix. But I know, as one who used to eat fake food in the matrix, that it is better to experience all the horrors reality can inflict upon us for a brief taste of something real.

Awakened, I taste the fruits that I have raised in my meager little garden, recognizing them for the little miracles they are. I cherish each genuine connection that I have with other humans, recognizing them as part of the miracle of existence. I drink in the poems and prose, the lyrics and the music, the paintings and the movies made by those in touch with something beyond the matrix—and in turn I am in touch with the miraculous. And I realize that what I call miracles are merely those moments where I am face to face with reality, the matrix no longer standing between me and the awesome universe. Once one has experienced miracles—which is to say, once one has opened oneself up to miracles, to reality—one need never again fear gazing into truth. And once one has done that, the matrix no longer has appeal, offers no joy, no temptation. Having stepped outside the illusions, life is nothing but miracles.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Politics Is A Business, And You Keep Voting For Jack And Jill

A lot of Democrats feel hatred for those of us to their left who have voted for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein rather than the Democratic candidate. My question to them would be, could you ever imagine being given two options, neither of which you can live with yourself for choosing?

First I would like to tell you that it was not a decision we made lightly. Almost everyone who voted for a third party in the last 20 years started out voting for one of the two major parties. It was only after voting election after election and seeing things continue to head in the wrong direction even when those we voted for came to power, that we decided that what we were doing was not working. It was an aha moment we are currently waiting for others to have.

Some believe that when option A is not working, it is time to Try option B. Others believe that when option A is not working, you have to try option A harder. Those who voted for third parties believed it was time to try an Option C. Or D, or E…Let’s not limit ourselves to what is not working.

Because as much as some will tell you that the world is binary, it is often fatal to think within the box. When you start believing that the only choices you have lie within a small framework, not only do you forget to think outside the box, the box will continue to contract until you once again dare to think outside the box. We who have chosen options outside the box are merely the canaries in the coal mine, those more sensitive than most to corruption and the consequences of that corruption. We are those who sit inside a burning building who first smell the smoke and decide we must leave the party while the rest call us party poopers. We are those who, sitting next to you in the theater, recognize bad cinema when we see it, and realizing the plot for the retread it is, refuse to sit through a movie that insults our intelligence and our moral sensibilities. And while you may blame us for the theater closing down for lack of an audience, we in turn blame you for the continued existence of Adam Sandler. Because they are just going to keep giving us endless uninspired sequels until people stop showing up.

You have to understand that the game is no longer politics but business. Those who donate to the Democratic Party to such an extent that they in essence own it are not giving in order to create a healthier democracy, they are investing their money in order to turn a profit. And the way for them to make a profit is to give as little to the customer as possible. We are the customers, the consumers of the political product. It is their job to make us satisfied with what will cost them the least. And the easiest way for them to do this is to convince you that you have no place else to go, except the Republican Party, which is even more in their pocket than the Democrats.

This is where the marketing department takes over. They will tell you whatever they can think of to make sure you believe your only options are between Coke and Pepsi. Of course, they know you have other options. They know that both products are bad for you. Their job is to tell you that one has 10 calories less than the other, or that blind studies have proven that more people preferred the taste of a certain soda. They will never ever bring up topics like diabetes, tooth decay, or obesity.

The candidates are products. You are a consumer. Those who make the commercials are the marketing wing of corporations who are interested in maximizing profit. They want to give you the absolute least for their money. This is why the marketing arms come up with evil but effective slogans like “Blue no matter who.” Their job is to convince you that no matter how poor the quality of Pepsi is, you don’t opt for Coke. Actually, that is not true, since they own stock in both companies and will profit regardless of whether you buy Coke OR Pepsi. Their real goal is to make sure you keep thinking about cola and not other beverages. And at all costs, they must keep you from thinking that drinkable water delivered to your tap by public utilities is an idea from the land of unicorns and rainbows.

You are the consumer. They are the ones with a product to sell. So long as you are buying what they sell, they will never, ever, ever change. Why would they? You think they care about you? Now there is an idea from the world of unicorns and rainbows. No, what they care about is what they can take from you. They want your public lands, they want to privatize whatever is currently being provided to you without stockowners getting rich in the process. They want to reduce the amount they have to pay you to create their profits. They want your money to invest in their bombs to blow up people like you in other countries who won’t give them their resources.

To the degree that you resist, they will be forced to play your game. To the degree that you claim yourself to be powerful and not at their mercy, they will have to make concessions. They will have to provide you at least the minimum of what you demand, or else they will lose you as a customer. You will find there are ways of surviving without either Coke OR Pepsi, and they will go out of business.

The choice is yours. There are a lot of people who have already shifted away from the Coke/Pepsi paradigm. Many more are sitting on the fence waiting for the tides to turn. Change has to come. It has already begun. You may be afraid of taking the plunge, may still be under the influence of the marketers who tell you there are no alternatives than the products they are selling. I can’t tell you what to do, it’s your choice. But just as you have a choice to make, so do we, and if Adam Sandler makes a Jack And Jill 2, don’t expect to see us in the cinema.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Jeffrey Epstein And The Silence Of The Media

Those who would bother to listen to my arguments in the midst of the Russiagate madness—they were few—would ask me incredulously “Do you think everybody in the media is lying?” I would reply that I had no way of knowing what was going on inside their heads or their motivations for falling in with the herd, but their behavior was not the sort that is exhibited by journalists behaving in a professional manner. People couldn’t understand how nearly every single news outlet could get a story wrong. I too was astounded by it, but just because I couldn’t explain how such widespread hysteria was possible didn’t mean it wasn’t happening. When the news tells me it’s snowing and I look outside to see it is a warm sunny day, I’m going to go with my own common sense. I’m surprised more people don’t remember how they were sold the lie of WMD’s or babies being tossed to the floor from incubators.

Flash forward to August of this year. A convicted pedophile with ties to incredibly important people in the United States and elsewhere is found dead in his jail cell. The most important criminal in a United States prison dies and the two cameras that were supposed to be keeping tabs on him were not working. His guards were napping. A man who could potentially bring down governments, royal families, and elites of many stripes is found dead, allegedly of suicide, and the first response from the media is concern this will cause people to circulate conspiracy theories. Never once do they declare that it is their job to get to the truth of the matter, only that they have to help stomp out false narratives. Their job, they proclaim, is to await word from authorities and report what they are told.

Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell with Donald and Melania Trump

I have no desire to try to explain their behavior, only to point out that this is not what news media is supposed to be. Their task—allegedly—is to provide the facts, dig for the facts, not to silence narratives contrary to the official narrative. Just who decides what the official narrative is, anyway? In a healthy society, a little ambiguity and uncertainty is healthy. Only in abusive relationships does someone demand you accept their version of the story without asking questions.

Flash forward to the present. The story is over. Despite the fact that most everyone would like to know more about how Epstein died and about who and what he was involved with, you are likely to hear his name only when a non-employee of the media conglomerates slips “Epstein didn’t kill himself” into a live segment, such as here and here.

This is a story people would tune in to watch. The people want the truth about this, this would make the media a ton of money. And if even one mainstream station chose to cover it, every other station and newspaper would be forced to cover it as well.

Epstein With Bill Gates

But nobody is. While the media freely floats conspiracy theories about Vladimir Putin having tapes of prostitutes peeing on Trump, while Tulsi Gabbard is being called a Russian asset without anyone bothering to back it up with evidence, there is a conspiracy of silence surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein story. There is no other option but to call it a conspiracy. How exactly it works or why it exists are not something I can fully explain, nor do I care overmuch to speculate on. The only thing that concerns me is that the media is acting contrary to their stated and observable interests: to supply truth, generate viewers, and create wealth. It is undeniable that the people want more information and the media is intent on not giving it to them.

Epstein With Prince Andrew

Is this the media you are supposed to trust when they tell you there are necessary reasons to send your children off to war? The media you are to trust to tell you that the drugs your kids will be put on for the rest of their lives are safe? That the people in charge of our economy are making the best possible decisions for all of us? The media you should trust to ensure your drinking water is safe?

Turn on your television, flip through the channels, and realize that every talking head you come across has made a choice to keep silent about Jeffrey Epstein. Know that all of them are okay with protecting those who have sex with children. Know that whatever banal bullshit they are talking about is more important in their minds than teenage girls being used as sex slaves for the rich and powerful. Understand when they attempt to impart their opinions on current events that they serve the powerful and corrupt, or at least know enough not to speak out against them. For once in your life, get it through your head that the job of understanding the world you live in must be done by you and cannot be left to such people.

You cannot trust those who grow wealthy by keeping silent.

Who grow wealthy by keeping you distracted.

Joy Beyhar, who insists that she cares about women’s issues, and is silent.

Rachel Maddow, who tells you everything is Russia’s fault, and is silent.

Sean Hannity, who will warn you about Mexican rapists, and is silent.

Trevor Noah who cracks a joke about the absurdity of anyone who would question the official narrative.

Brian Williams, who tells you how beautiful missiles are, and is silent.

Anderson Cooper, who tells you to trust the system, the same system that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to die in prison, and is silent.

Ellen DeGeneres, who kisses women on TV to prove she’s a liberal, and is silent.

Every single person on television who is permitted to address the viewing public is silent.

Ask yourself how they can all stay silent while pedophiles walk free. Not pedophiles merely, but those who turn teenage girls into sex workers. All it would take is for one of them to speak up and demand answers.

And if it all seems quite unbelievable to you, ask yourself why it is you stay silent? Once you realize that you have not spoken up, you will start to understand how such a conspiracy of silence could ever happen, how a society is more concerned with protecting child predators from justice than it is protecting children from the powerful and corrupt. If we can stay silent, if we can stay willfully ignorant or misinformed on this issue, what other lies are we swallowing, what other corruption and abuses of power are we allowing to exist? How many lies and silences are we allowing the media to feed us?

Don’t ask how it is possible, simply admit that it is real. Once we as a society have done that, then we can begin to understand how it happened. Then we can begin to bring justice to those who for so long have felt themselves above it. But it will be us, not the people on the television, who will have to break the silence. 

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

A Message To The Democratic Party

Dear Democratic Leadership:

There are a few things I’d like to make clear to you because it is apparent that for the last 3 years you’ve been living in your own fantasy world. I know you will not listen. In the 35 years I’ve been voting, you’ve made it abundantly clear that you have not been listening. For a while you pretended to, but even that gesture has been abandoned. Where once you made promises in an attempt to win our votes, you now make threats.

While I know you will not listen, I feel morally obligated to share my thoughts nonetheless. And while I know you are unfamiliar with the idea of moral obligation, there are some who may read this who are. I want to show to them, to posterity, and to myself, that I have certain principles and am willing to put those principles in writing so that others may judge me according to how well I stand by them. Again, I don’t expect you to understand.

The Democratic Party has no set of principles by which it exists. Where once I considered myself a Democrat because I believed they were the anti-war party, they have moved to the right of Donald Trump when it comes to war, goading him to bomb other nations and screaming at any promise he makes to withdraw troops from places in the world where we kill people illegally.

You set yourselves up as the opposition to President Trump and all he represents. Yes, I know Trump is an immoral buffoon, a semi-literate clown who embarrasses our country in front of the world. Yes, the Republicans have sunk lower than I could ever have imagined by electing him to be president. But let me remind you that you lost to him. Your presidential candidate could not even rise to the level of “more appealing than Trump” in the eyes of the American people. And not only did your presidential candidate lose, the ripple effect across congressional and governor races was catastrophic. If I could set aside your moral failings, the facts still remain that even with your moral compromises, you are still incapable of the very victories you claim you must compromise values in order to attain. Even purists can lose.

And while you claim the position of the only legitimate opposition to Donald Trump, you never defend any of the positions I care about. You only attack Trump—and then quite rabidly, it must be admitted—in defense of your own interests. Trump can engage in attempts at regime change in other countries, and you are in lockstep with him. Trump can go after journalists and you eagerly cheer him on so long as they are not servants of the same masters you serve like Jim Acosta. Trump can gut environmental regulations and the only resistance you put up is a symbolic one.

No, the only time you truly resist Trump is when he is going after one of your own. To that end you have pushed the farcical Russiagate narrative in order to clear yourselves of any responsibility for your loss to Trump. On that nonsensical position you have hammered away at Trump for 3 years, an attack that has only strengthened him. And only when he went after Joe Biden’s son and the undeniable evidence of nepotism did you find it fit to begin impeachment proceedings.

The environment, peace, clean water for Flint Michigan, on none of these issues are you willing to fight. The proof lies in your inaction on these issues when you held the power to do something. It is only when Trump might harm your interests, or the interests of the unelected intelligence agencies that you dare not question, that you come to life. You fight tooth and claw over power in the same way the decadent and detached European royalty once did while ignoring the interests of the average citizens. And yet you not only ask for but demand our fealty. It is like being asked to take a side between Pablo Escobar and the Cali Cartel.

You sell yourself as an inclusionary party, welcoming people of all races, religions, gender, and sexual orientation, but you only celebrate women, gays, and people of color so long as they are corporatists and warmongers. Have them speak out against people of color being bombed or young women working overseas in sweatshops to make our clothing, and they are cast out from the homogenous herd. People like Caitlin Johnstone, Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett, Glenn Greenwald, Cynthia McKinney, and countless people of integrity are ignored and even actively attacked by the Democratic establishment because they take seriously principles the Democratic Party once stood for.

The 2016 election and its aftermath has wiped the last of my illusions from my eyes. I was naïve enough to think that if the Democrats lost to Donald McDonald that you would be forced to take a long hard look at what you had become. I had no way of knowing how far your disease had progressed, how beyond redemption the Democratic machinery had gone. The inability to beat the worst presidential candidate in U.S. history was shocking, but it was nothing compared to what followed: 3 years of insane gibbering about Russian bots and buff Bernie pictures. And from all the maniacal Red Scare tactics you have engaged in, the only results you have to show for it is the silencing of dissent from progressives and ordinary citizens by billionaire social media owners and unaccountable intelligence agencies.

It is apparent to me now more than ever before that your primary goal is not to push progressive issues but to marginalize and defeat the progressive movement. That is what you stand for, that is your raison d’etre. Whatever illusions I once had that we shared common goals has been irreparably shattered by your actions.

I have abandoned the last of my illusions regarding the Democratic Party. It is time for the Democratic Party to do the same. Do not, in your wildest flights of fancy, believe that those of us on the left with a degree of integrity and honesty and clarity are in your camp or can be wooed into it. We know now that you are not an ally. However insistent your words, your actions have shown incontrovertibly that you are in league with our enemies. From henceforth, we are at war.

Sincerely,

A Pro-peace, Pro-democracy, Progressive

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.