Obama’s Afghanistan Decision

You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it. You must learn to see the world anew. – Albert Einstein

What is Obama saying when he commits another 34,000 troops to Afghanistan while talking about an exit strategy in the same breath?

“We haven’t killed enough of our children.”
“We haven’t traumatized enough of our young men.”
“We haven’t stolen enough from the citizens.”
“We need to placate the morally sensitive.”
“We need for people to forget about Iraq.”

The contradiction between committing more troops and announcing an exit strategy is rather startling. How is it that an escalation of violent force is going to cause the violent response to decrease? Has that ever happened in the history of mankind where one or both sides did not end up dead?

I have no idea exactly what would happen if the troops were withdrawn, but I can tell you this: adding bodies will only add to the ever-increasing cost of this war. I’m not talking about the money that’s been stolen (past, present, and future) but the even greater cost of children who must grow up in a household with an adult who has been paid for murder and who almost certainly has not received any sort of counseling as to why they landed in the military in the first place or even to what they’ve participated in as part of the bloody machine.

Violence cannot be used to solve problems that arose from violence. It has never worked, it does not work, and it will never work.

Written by James Pyrich in: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Nobel “Peace” Prize

What in this world is more darkly absurd than the Nobel Peace Prize?

The Nobel Peace Prize is only awarded to those who have achieved or represent the exact opposite of peace. Politicians and their cronies wouldn’t have their jobs without the initiation of violence against citizens.

Obama is no exception to the rule, but even if we accept that the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize is meant to recognize great accomplishments for peace, then one has to wonder how is it that Guantanamo Bay is still open, US troops are still largely deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that whole little torture thing has not been remotely addressed and Obama somehow deserves to be recognized as one of the greatest humanitarians this year?

I think that Stef sums it up best:

Written by James Pyrich in: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , ,

“Creation” and Troubles in America

There was a recent post to Derren Brown’s blog reporting that the new film about Darwin, “Creation,” was being shunned by American distributors. (It has since been picked up by Newmarket… and I think I would like to see this film. :))

On the blog and especially on the facebook post sharing this post, there were a TON of comments to the effect of, “Stupid Americans.”

I was debating with myself whether I should post a response on the blog, on facebook, or even if I should post anything at all. I decided that I would at least start a post on my own blog… mostly in part because what I have to say has very little to do with the movie in question, but also because I would rather have a discussion here than bungee in elsewhere and stir up a shitstorm.

The epithet, “Stupid Americans,” has always bothered me. I used to think (and the temptation is still there to do so) that it bothered me because of the “Americans” bit. After all, I am an American (though through absolutely no choice of my own), and for a very long time I would identify myself with that, for better or for worse.

However, I think that it was the “stupid” part of the phrase that bothered me more, because “Americans” is just a label but “stupid” is the part that’s meant to be insulting.

This might seem blindingly obvious, but please bear with me. 🙂

Why would the expression, “Stupid Americans,” bother me so much? It’s not like I chose to be born in the United States, and certainly when I was a child it was impossible for me to choose to leave. Even as an adult, it is exceedingly difficult, and it’s not like it is easy to assimilate into another culture, no matter how much of its comedy you watch on television. So, I really am stuck here, and even if I did relocate, it’s not like I would escape others who are keen on labeling entire groups of people however they like. (After all, there are those who hate ex-pats.)

No, it’s the “stupid” part that bothers me so much.

Why is that?

Well, in this particular case, “stupid” is referring to the abundance of religious belief and fervor in the United States.

However, “stupid” simply does not apply.

People do not become Christians because they are stupid.

People become stupid because they are Christians.

In order to believe in Christianity, you have to have your capacity for processing reality severely crippled. You have to be able to believe in an entirely anti-reality concept such as “god,” but still be able to function in the world.

Even then, it’s not fair to call it stupidity. Civilized people do not sneer at a paraplegic and call him “lazy” for being unable to get out of his wheelchair.

People who are religious are mentally crippled and deserve the sympathy to the extent that they deserve.

This does not, of course, excuse them for inflicting their handicap on children, especially with the access to information we have available today. Even if a religious parent did not wish to alter their belief, they are definitely aware of other religions, and especially of non-belief. It is indefensible to tell a child that God is absolutely real when there are so many resources available to parents to present differing viewpoints, at the very least.

Still, “stupid” does not apply. It is not through a lack of intelligence that religious people believe what they do. It is through having their brains damaged by being inflicted with unrealities as if they were absolutely true.

Religion is not a reasoned position; this is why presenting evidence and a strong logical case against religion fails to convince so many people.

One last thing, and then I’ll be finished.

The vast majority of people who are throwing around the epithet, “Stupid Americans,” are almost guaranteed to be holding beliefs just as irrational and just as dangerous and damaging as religion.

This is because almost everybody in the entire world today believes that violence is the best tool to use to solve social problems. This is not generally the case in their personal lives, but in society at large, they champion and cheer violence being used to further their goals.

This belief is the fundamental curse of humanity; it is the cause of war and devastation and economic crises and all manner of violence in the world that is entirely avoidable.

The reason people believe this is because, as children, they are made to believe that even though violence is bad for an individual, it somehow becomes good when used by a group. This is a complete contradiction, because members of the group are individuals themselves, and it is this unreality inflicted on children that damages their ability to process reality…

Hence, even if “Stupid Americans” wasn’t an invalid and cruel thing to say, it would merely be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.


No American Patriots Have Died In Any War, Ever

There has never been such a thing as a war in which American Patriots have died.

There has also never been such a thing as a war in which the Enemies of America were defeated.

Why is this?

Because America does not exist.

“America” as an entity, or as a thing–as something that exists objectively in the real world–does not exist. There is not a thing you can point to and say, “This is America.”

But what about the people? Surely they are America?

Sorry, the people who are called and believe themselves to be Americans are not objectively different than those who are called Englishmen, Afghanis, Japanese, or Australians. If you were to examine the DNA, you would find no gene or allele for “American”.

But what about the land? Surely that is America?

No. If you took a rock from America and examined it in a laboratory, you would find no characteristic called “Americanness” by which you could say that this rock was objectively different than a rock that came from anywhere else in the world, or the universe.

But what about the buildings and the cities? Surely all of those are America?

Again, no. Building architectures and city plans do differentiate cities from each other worldwide, but there’s not an objective difference that makes a building “American” or a city “American.”

The only reason any of the above are called “American” is because people believe it is. You don’t have “America” in any of the above–you have people doing things in cities and buildings on the land.

There is absolutely no objective difference between a person doing something in his home in New York than another person doing something in his home in Yakutsk.

America is a fiction just like God or Zeus.

The fact that nearly everybody believes it is real does not make it so.

The only people that have ever died in any war throughout human history are people who have been broken so very early on that they no longer remember what it was like to have a will, pride, honor, respect, or integrity of their very own.

They subjugated themselves to a “higher whim” that they dared not question. However, no such “higher whim” has ever existed nor ever will exist.

Beliefs in these fictions–god and country–have caused deaths in the hundreds of millions in recent centuries, if not billions throughout the course of human history.

The fact that none of these things have existed, currently exist, or ever will exist through the course of human history just leaves one question:

Do you wish for me to be shot if I do not believe the same things you do?


The Biggest–and Oldest–Government Program

While I was standing in line at the grocery store the other day, I saw the latest Newsweek magazine, which had several headlines.

On the top, there were, right next to each other:


The main headline, underneath a blue hand clasping a red hand in a handshake, was:


The first two headlines are kind of funny in terms of juxtaposition. The first thought that comes to my mind is that they’re saying the president is no longer a thug, look how civilized he is!

But of course… even presidents cannot escape reality. If you’re the leader of a gang that shakes people down, you are a thug, it doesn’t matter how many gadgets you have or how many flowery speeches you make.

In any case, the main headline was even “better”. They’ve put this story on the front page as if it is a serious debating topic, or a serious thought-provoking article.

However, there truly aren’t any serious thoughts that get provoked in the course of this article, and there really isn’t anything to debate. Big government as a way of solving social problems has failed again and again and again throughout human history, and it has killed hundreds of millions of people even in this current century.

Blame is never put on the fact that the system has its roots in violence. It’s always that the wrong people were at the head of this system, which means that the populace chose bad leaders. Or, that the masses are too greedy, too stupid, too lazy, too whatever, to make the system work.

You never hear anyone in the media say, “The system is failing because, at its core, it threatens people with imprisonment and death if they do not comply.”

That is the biggest government program in existence.

Finally, they use the expression “new era” in the headline, as if now that Obama has been elected, something has fundamentally changed in the government.

The only things that are changing, however, are those which essentially are maintaining the status quo of expanding government power more and more and more. It’s not a real significant change for the mafia to demand 25% of your profits when, in the past, it demanded 20%.

No, this “new era” is nothing more than a dry continuation of the old–one that has been around for millennia.

The oldest government program: threatening people with imprisonment and death if they do not comply…

Or, in a word:



Change? Really?

Do you still believe that Obama is all about change?

President Obama ‘orders Pakistan drone attacks’
Obama joins the ranks of cold-blooded murderers

He’s not been President for a week yet and he’s already ordered the murder of almost two dozen people.

Written by James Pyrich in: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , , ,


I just saw a “sneak peek” commercial for one of the latest WWII movies to come out: Valkyrie.

Valkyrie is a dramatization of an internal plot to kill Hitler–that much has been made clear by the previews. The commentators punching it up say things like, “This is a story about the greatest evil the world has ever known.”

There are two things that are interesting about that comment. The first thing is that Hitler, while certainly evil, isn’t alone in terms of body count. Heads of state and the armies they control far outstrip the body count of the worst serial killers that act alone.

The second thing comes out of a discussion I had with a friend about WWII movies in general, especially Holocaust movies. It seems that these movies, while often gripping and emotional, don’t ever really progress beyond, “Hitler was bad, Nazis are bad, Concentration camps are bad.”

These movies don’t have to go deeper than that, but it is telling that the question, “Why Hitler?” never seems to be asked. Hitler rises to power in Germany–why? The Nazi party spreads like wildfire–why? Concentration camps are built and various minorities are rounded up and shipped off–why?

Deeper than why Hitler rose to power is why the German people were susceptible to a man like Hitler, why they looked to him as a leader. How did Hitler come to be who he was?

I think that some answers to these questions can be found in The Origins of War in Child Abuse by Lloyd Demause (audiobook) as well as in For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child-rearing and the Roots of Violence by Alice Miller.

There are deeper and more ancient evils at work that result in the horrors of war.



As a society, we like war. We like murder. We love the violence and destruction.

We don’t like to admit it–in fact, we run from admitting it, we fog, we evade, we cover-up, we do everything short of admitting that we really, really like to solve social problems by pointing guns at people.

We like to dress up children in uniforms, give them guns, and tell them it is good, right, just, and moral to kill. We like to complain to our leaders about how our chains chafe us, and we beg and grovel for the chains to be loosened just a tiny bit, oh please, just a tiny bit.

We like to attack those few daredevils who cause us to feel anxiety when they talk about living a voluntary life on the grand scale. We like to shame them, as we once were shamed.

We like the violence.

We like to attack our children, filling them with rumors and lies and deceptions about the nature of reality, saying to them that what they see is not truly what they see, but that invisible things are real, and good, and just, and moral.

We like the violence.

Why do we have war?

We like the violence.

Written by James Pyrich in: Politics | Tags: , , , ,

Powered by WordPress | Aeros Theme | WordPress Themes