August 2011

The Bastille was stormed because women had no bread to feed their families. The royalty was desacralized, dethroned and sentenced to death.  Five decades later Karl Marx wrote his manifesto on the plight of the working class. Ironically Marx did not work, but lived off the money of wealthy patrons.  Even when his child was dying as a result of being underfed, he did not go out and search for work, but searched instead for more entitlements.  How did his manifesto promulgate to a major economic movement?

Socialism and internationalism: the “theory” can be summarized in the well known oft repeated affirmation by Stalin that “the death of one man is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.”  Socialism, above all else, is  a condemnation of capitalism. It’s the attempt to level the playing field for all mankind, that no one be rich or poor, that all men are equal- and not just within a community or a county,  now the goal has become to socialize the planet.  The economic theory is a massive failure at all levels, yet it perpetuates.

Why does it fail?

Socialism in its attempt to redistribute wealth essentially means that as soon as a person or an entity builds a safety net, it needs to be taken away to provide for those who have yet to create their own. In the process of taking from one to give to the other, no one ever attains the security of a safe and happy existence.  It dooms everyone to fail, not just the few. When no one is allowed a safety net,  no one will have one:  under these circumstances it becomes impossible for an economy to improve.  Competition to survive will increase because no one is surviving. Mankind will live in a state of increased and perpetual chaos; mankind will fail, humanity will fail.

Of  capitalist corporations, however, I will say this: They have purchased many a presidency in many a country.  Off the backs of the workers, they have made many a man at the top  filthy rich and with unlimited power the likes rarely seen in the years of monarchy. And when the monarchies over-reached, they were overthrown by various means of riot and war to be replaced with democracy.  It will be the same for the corporations. Not if, but when. In the eras of  kings and queens, the intermarriages between families were carefully planned to extend their reach of wealth and power; this model which proved to be so successful in building empires did the same for executives, corporations and corporate power.

At this point, how can people revolt, overthrow and dethrone that overreach of power? If we boycott their products, their profits crash and because our savings were pushed into their egg basket, we’ll crash and burn,- the executives will just cash out and move on. Must we sacrifice our-self to secure a future not harnessed under their control?

Breaking up the monopolies is one answer, but unfortunately the politicians are not willing to do this because they’re empowered by these corporation.  These corporations, including the stock markets, hold so much power they control the future of the planet; unfortunately – at least here in the United States they have shown little regard for the person and are wholly consumed with the manifestation of profit.

Corporations and their top tiers, including the stock market which serves them,  have grown so huge and so powerful they don’t see the loss of one job as a tragedy, they don’t see the loss of millions of jobs as a tragedy, all they see is statistics. The planet is going to exist in perpetuated chaos until the corporations recognize that there are people behind the numbers.  One day as the world is crashing around those on whose backs the corporations created their wealth, executives will look to the horizon and see that their Bastille is going to be stormed. They will be dethroned.  -Not because capitalism doesn’t work, it does- but because the people are starving, and they’re starving at the expense of corporate greed.  the kings and queens faced the axe because of their greed and overreach; likewise, corporations and the politicians who supported them, to prevent tragedy of a statistical proportion, need to seek a peace treaty while they have the chance.


London is under the siege of riots. It isn’t the first time.  The tax riots that defeated Thatcher were led by communists, socialists and anarchists but there seems to be  no organized party or leader of these riots.  If there is a leader, they haven’t come forward yet. To organize, they use  Facebook,  the same method used in the Arab -spring protests. They’re not burning government property, but instead they’ve chosen to loot or destroy private property and businesses. This isn’t a group seeking change or trying to defeat the current crop of politicians, but a deliberate act of class warfare, against business, against property.  In Europe protests usually result in riots and destruction of property but  rarely in the United States do protests lead to violence.  Perhaps in America we have a sense of hope that the European youth lack, or disregard. We protest our politicians, not our neighbors or their property.


According to Sheldrake, author of numerous scientific books and articles, memory does not reside in any geographic region of the cerebrum, but instead in a kind of field surrounding and permeating the brain. Meanwhile, the brain itself acts as a “decoder” for the flux of information produced by the interaction of each person with their environment.

In his paper “Mind, Memory, and Archetype Morphic Resonance and the Collective Unconscious” published in the journal Psychological Perspectives, Sheldrake likens the brain to a TV set—drawing an analogy to explain how the mind and brain interact.

“If I damaged your TV set so that you were unable to receive certain channels, or if I made the TV set aphasic by destroying the part of it concerned with the production of sound so that you could still get the pictures but could not get the sound, this would not prove that the sound or the pictures were stored inside the TV set. However, neurologists have discovered that the brain is not a static entity, but a dynamic synaptic mass in constant flux— all of the chemical and cellular substances interact and change position in a constant way. Unlike a computer disc which has a regular, unchanging format that will predictably pull up the same information recorded even years before, it is difficult to maintain that a memory could be housed and retrieved in the constantly changing cerebrum…..”

I usually open my lectures with the premise that the brain is very similar to other electronic devises such as a television, radio and a computer. And then we discuss how the brain is different from those devices. Sheldrake’s theory is interesting and brings up a premise I had not before considered, and should have.  The computer does everything the same every time like clockwork, but the human brain retrieves differently at different times, places, situations and context.

I hadn’t thought of this as one of the key differences between computers and people but it is indeed one of the variables that makes people “human” and why researchers and engineers in their attempt to make a robot, or a computer chip more human, will find that the variable of emotion and context is not something that can be programmed, at least not authentically. Responding to a surrounding, for a human, is always in the context of individuation- which is vast and not all that predictable as much as behavioral scientists would like it to be.

But conditioned as we are to believe that thinking is contained within our heads, the idea that memory could be influenced or exist outside our brains  or links to a greater collective appears at first to be somewhat confusing; but in the same manner that a photo or a series of words travel from one cell phone to another along an EM wave, and could be lost, or dropped or diverted or spied on,  so too do our thoughts travel and then it doesn’t seem unreasonable at all that our thinking might be  somewhere out there traveling too.