How We Can Win Control of Our Government:

I sent the following email to a fundraising organization this morning, seeking their cooperation in this effort.

I do not believe that Congress represents the people. We elect representatives, so that they will represent our opinions.  But the influence of big powerful lobbyists co-opts our power, and they are the ones who are represented instead. 

In the current representative system of government, our opinions are voiced not about single issues but about someone we can only hope will represent our views on those issues. Your single vote disappears into a box or a computer system, which is then counted in secret somewhere.  No one knows who voted for whom, the polling results are simply delivered to us under circumstances in which we must have faith that there was no corruption, significant errors, or breakdowns the whole system.  We only get one shot at this every two years or every four, and whatever issues get on the table are determined by legislative committees whose processes are largely hidden from the public eye.  Our representatives and senators are under no contract with those whom they purport to represent to actually represent them, and the general mood in Congress is to favor self-enrichment through corporate favors and promises, all directed toward the diminished wealth and liberties of the common citizen and the enhancement of privilege and wealth among the corporate elite.

The public has no means at its disposal to remedy this. But I believe that there is a means by which public opinion can have weight, a system in which the people could potentially themselves vote for and against laws, creating a shadow legislature which upstages Congress and puts it to shame, in which the true character of the American public establishes and outlines its mission and values. 

We need direct representation of public opinion, an ongoing, live system that instantaneously reflects it..  

We need a website that asks people to register. This would target virtually every single citizen in the country over 18.  The website would be used as a database for the initial rudimentary developmental foundation for direct democracy.  It could not be converted into a legal function of the legislature, however, without massive representation and involvement of the American public and the leverage they could exert.  So we have to move in that direction one step at a time. 

The website would be much like a survey, in which it would ask opinions about every issue that concerns us as voters, but this would not be just a poll.  This would be a permanent register of opinions through membership accounts, which each member can access at any time, and change his mind or contribute additionally to new issues as they come up.  The collective data on opinions for and against specific positions on issues would be readily available in a graphic display to anyone who went to the website.

A People’s Lobby would be the initial aim, a kind of “Occupy Congress,” if you will, with a completely horizontal power structure.  We would combine our collective voice and economic strength to become the largest voting block in America to overpower other influences on Congress.  This is a live vote system in which the vote would remain perpetually public.  There would be no static single event or referendum, like a vote for a Congressman. Rather it would have a fluid ongoing life and existence much like a thermometer sitting outside your window, that tells you every day, hour by hour, whenever you inquire, what the temperature is.

How does the public feel about single payer not for profit universal health insurance?  How does the public feel about Israel, about threats in the Middle East?  How does it feel about rendition and Guantanamo?  How does it feel about fracking, about pipelines? We would each be able to monitor our own votes so that any attempt at hacking or changing the vote would immediately be detected. Any massive shifts in how the vote stands could not take place without immediate detection and tracked to the source.

An account would be set up so that donations could be accepted, recorded and made refundable at any time a member wishes to withdraw, like a savings account.  All donors would become members by registering and making a donation.  All donations would be deposited into a trust account and no portion of it could be spent.  

I believe it would in effect act as an LLC, and may be registered as such, in which members each get a share for their donation, but no more than a single share, regardless of how much they donate, because no one can have more than one voice — their own voice. That account would then become the economic power of this organization and it would be spent according to popular agreement on how it should be spent, with all members voting. Those who disagreed could simply withdraw their money.

Administrative expenses would have to be agreed upon, once there was sufficient capital available to pay for it. The money could be held in an interest-bearing account, and the interest itself used to pay for administrative expenses.  


What’s Your Gender, Dude?

Gender roles have become a huge issue in America. I would say that it goes to the very heart of the divide between right and left, conservatives and liberals. On the right, there is a war against the LGBT movement. Conservatives like strong males, and they seem to like a man who dominates a woman.  On the left, there is a war going on against those who would crush their liberties.   Many women are tired of being dominated.  They want their freedom, and that means that roles are being redefined.  Some on the left believe that the traditional strong male identity contributes to female abuse and violence.  A much more gentle man who doesn’t distinguish gender roles sharply seems to be on the rise.   It has gone so far as to elicit a comment in the press in the Middle East that the new American dream is to be gay.

How do these differing sides see themselves in such relationships? How do the two sides differ?  Can they coexist? What makes a man a man? What appeals to you in a woman? Are you open to having sex with either male or female? Help us understand the real character of this issue.


This is a survey to understand what you prefer in a mate, how how you wish to treat her or him, and how you wish to be treated This also applies to same-sex couples.



This is our culture. What is it going to be? Who is going to dominate? Or should either? We need to begin to understand this problem much more clearly, and when we do see it clearly, then we can constructively deal with it.

The End of Congress: Planned Obsolescence

I am being offered an opportunity right now by a company called Amplifyd to receive donations through its marketing efforts for any cause that I would like to advance. Not only would they raise funds through this effort for United Progressives, they would have a large bank of callers contacting Congressmen and lobbying for our cause.

I’ve been weighing this offer for several days, and trying to decide what a worthy cause might be. The company is set to launch on June 10, so I’m out of time.

I’ve long held the view that lobbying Congress is not worth the effort. I’ve also been very focused on developing the foundation for a campaign to develop direct democracy. Direct democracy is the only real solution left for Americans to gain control of their government. The political parties have been completely bought out, and you can’t throw a good apple into a barrel of bad ones and expect it to survive. It’s over with. The legislature and the president will do as they please, according to the dictates of all the major corporate interests involved. They will not vote against their own interests. Fresh raw meat will not be torn from the mouth of a hungry wolf.

A campaign that attempts to persuade people that their little donation is going to help change government is disingenuous. We know what the truth is.

As to direct democracy, I am currently investigating software research and technology that would enable the establishment of an online database of standing opinions every citizen has on any issue of relevance to the constitutional rights we hold dear. It would be similar to a survey, but not a survey in the sense that it would be a permanent index of any opinion you wish to share publicly on fracking, on free trade, on LGBT issues, on Iran and Ukraine, and anything else Americans ought to have a voice in. Each person would have an account, and be able to go into it and add opinions and change them at will. A summary of all opinions would also be available on a graphic readout so that popular opinion for and against various positions would be accessible to everyone.

It should act in many respects like the stock market, in which you would be able to gauge the value of an opinion just as you would the value of a stock, and a ticker would be up all the time. Fluctuations in public opinion should become immediately evident, based upon events as they unfold.

It would also become an organization. The positions taken by the public in this database would become the immediate advocacy for it. This would be the beginning stage of direct democracy. The size of this database, and the extent to which it truly measured public opinion, and the willingness of people to participate, would be fundamental to its success.

In the end it would have power. It would empower people when they know what most people agree to. It would enable a shadow government, a people willing to establish their own laws and economic processes by means of social media tied directly to it. People will always act when they know others will support them and they don’t feel alone in what they say and do. And it would be like Occupy, with power distributed horizontally at all times, and advocacy based upon the voice of everyone.

The long term consequence of such an effort could be the revolutionary co-opting of government powers, through the disenfranchisement of the legislature and presidential directives. Direct democracy ideally needs no legislature, beyond law clerks capable of expediting the will of the people.

The fundamental truth, however, is that the people of the United States must organize, if they want to control their destiny, and are to have any hope of wresting control of their economic and political strength from those who now are in possession of it. We have to act now, and begin to build the foundation, while we still can. Corporate interests will eventually put up barriers to it, and the vestiges of net neutrality will soon disappear.

BDSM and You

I did government manufactured LSD tablets back in the 60s, and I’ve done acid and mushrooms.  I lived on the Oregon coast for awhile where you could find growing wild medium brown pinky-sized mushrooms with purple fins, cone-shaped and colored a medium brown on top, growing out of cowpies in low-lying moist grassy fields.  I’ve also practiced raja yoga, a form of concentration, that has led to out-of-body experiences.  What these experiences have taught me is that the body and the identity we wear along with it are extricable from one another, and are entirely constructs made up in our imagination, and that what we believe we are is nothing more than play-acting.  We have adopted a set that goes into the very core of our DNA that has a consciousness and has chosen.

Almost anyone will admit with Shakespeare that all the world’s a stage, but we are so immersed in it, in its psychological harmonic, most of the time that we claim the role we take as a fragile and delicate thing that needs protection and an armed defense. We are afraid that we will somehow lose what we are if we let go.

If you are into BDSM, you might take that into consideration in understanding how I judge you.  I accept you for what you want to be, and its either good for me or bad for me, depending upon how it affects the act I happen to be. The role that I take, and the culture that reinforces it, are important to the play I’m in, however, just as yours are to you.

You say you’re a queer. That defines not a biological character so much as a behavioral thing, a willingness to have intimate relations with the same sex. What it does to your psychological character, and how you wear yourself, because you have made that choice to act on the impulses you experience, is to become your character.  How high do you wear your chin around other men?  This is who you are.

Being a queer gives you an opportunity to break certain chains that exist in the mainstream that tie you to a heterosexual identity and its role. It’s liberating. Who wants to be a man when you can be a woman too?  That sets you above the roles, suggests androgeny.

As Plato pointed out in Symposium, “People used to be spherical creatures, you know, with two bodies attached back to back who cartwheeled around. There were three sexes: the male-male people who descended from the sun, the female-female people who descended from the earth, and the male-female people who came from the moon. This last pairing represented the androgynous couple. These sphere people tried to take over the gods and failed. Zeus then decided to cut them in half and had Apollo stitch them back together leaving the navel as a reminder to not defy the gods again.”

Perhaps in part you are rejecting the stereotypical male who believes it his duty to dominate females and act like a heel. Feminism has made it very unpopular. But you are still attracted by it.  Knowing that you have broken those chains to the classic male ego opens the door to the possibility of breaking others, such as that violence can be pleasurable, and suffering too. And now you have gone full circle.  You rejected the stereotype, but now it’s ok. You have found people who take pleasure in being abused.  You yourself have found pleasure in being abused. You also like being the abuser. So now what was unacceptable and the driving force behind feminism is now acceptable because someone is willing. You both live by the same philosophy. Or is it all just an excuse to get naked like children and forget that there are any rules that bind the imagination to explore pain and pleasure?  Let’s never grow up.   And is there any less of a culture in your lack of one?  Doesn’t the rejection of conventional boundaries become itself a lifestyle, a way of life, and a challenge to other ways of life?
I guess what that says to me is what people say in every culture.  People grow accustomed to their circumstances.  Muslim women like wearing hijabs.  It’s abuse only if you believe that they don’t like it and are being forced into doing this, or brainwashed into doing it, by their husbands.  You step on a nail and you jump. How painful is it, really?  Every perspective you can imagine is out there expressing itself as a culture.  It’s difficult under the circumstances to take seriously any sort of movement to change male and female relationships because the conditions in which any exist have been encrusted by time and accommodation and are built into the system. What will people tolerate?  How much pain is pleasurable?  They have to become pretty bad for people to want to change.

What relationship, if any, is there between what the diaper group does, the people who dress others up in diapers and discipline them before masturbating them, and what rapists or pedophiles do?  What’s very remarkable is that in BDSM we have women, presumably lesbian, masturbating babies, or the fantasy of the babies they have put in bondage.  Is there a direct correlation? Do they both proceed from the same cause in the social psyche?  Does one facilitate the other?  Is the mindset of sexualizing a baby in one no different from the other, however they differ in matters of consent? One has permission, the other doesn’t, but aren’t they the same fantasy ultimately? They both want chicken; one bakes it, the other fries it.

The inability to set rules and boundaries is the fundamental complaint about men in society.  They negotiate nothing, do not recognize individual space or sovereignty in the woman, and fail to understand that she is a real human being with needs and demands of her own.  The only purpose she serves is to fulfill the desires of the man.  That’s called objectification.
Women, I suspect, tend to have a stronger sensitivity to order and rules than men. More men are in prison for violating crimes than women. A woman will be very careful about how she parks the car; the man will just throw the sonafabitch in there.   Is it not possible that people in the general populace of society have the same urges that you do, to find pleasure in abuse, in causing pain to someone else? And perhaps they do things to provoke someone else to cause them pain, because they find pleasure in that too. So society is the more unregulated, chaotic expression of the structured consensual thing you get into. In BDSM, there are fewer victims, maybe, in your organized group scenes, but on the other hand, why wouldn’t that appeal to the rapist, or just a weirdo munchkin who just can’t get enough?  But we are all living out the forces of social pain and pleasure that bear upon all of us collectively.

I don’t have a problem with that.  You like to get beat, you like to be a beater, go for it.  But I’m a news analyst as well as a writer. I’m a Press TV contributor.  I’m used to looking at things from a larger perspective, and I don’t think the BDSM culture is in any way isolated from the impact of American culture, or its lack of it. Given the popularity of Fifty Shades of Grey, beating others seems to have become an American pastime.  The Ft. Lauderdale scene on Memorial Day is one very good example. Black on black violence.  People who agreed on Facebook to go down to the beach and fight. These niggas, they call themselves. Isn’t it so much masochistic self-punishment that is apparent as the cause of any desire to inflict so much pain and hate upon one’s own race?

We have a country riddled with thousands of PTSD-infected men who have spent 13 years making a career out of killing. They make horrible fathers, horrible husbands, horrible citizens. They have a highly decreased capacity to put up with either themselves or others.  They are far less likely to want to make a deal with someone for mutual abuse. They will just do it.

The Santa Barbara incident suggests to me that our materialistic lifestyle is producing children who are given everything as a substitute for love, and the lack of love becomes a huge driving force for hatred directed at the source from which they believe love entitlement is du a e.  We have a world full of women who abandon men, who despise them, because the economic system has destroyed them.  They abandon their children, and because of it, she abandons their children too to what very often turn out to be child molesting live-in males so that she can go out and get a damned job, A materialistic society is way beyond either’s reach, and for men, their worth in providing and being a man in the most traditional sense has been taken from them. For women, they know in their heart what they are doing to their children. They have been all been raped. There are no princesses after all.  Just slaves.

There is a direct thread between the way you act, what you like and don’t like, and similar likes and dislikes in the larger society.  I won’t dare to try to psychoanalyze why someone gets pleasure out of being beaten, but I’m sure that it goes very well beyond the immediate sexual gratification, if that’s what you call it. There’s a proven link between violence to others and a deep sense of inadequacy and self-hate.

Baby masturbation symbolism

Baby masturbation symbolism:

On the issue of rape:



Reference to Plato in wikipedia: