Sunday, August 24, 2008

From Paradise to Dystopia

The line separating “paradise” from “dystopia” is a very fine one -- easily crossed because it is a kingdom built upon illusions and delusions, rather than any real realities, and those living in it, lose that ability to distinguish the word from the actuality -- and prefer the word over the actuality. But then, they can’t tell the difference.

Only an outsider would notice that absurdity -- and so it is eventually decreed, that no outsider can ever be allowed in -- except in the case of long-lost relatives, who have to first undergo extensive brainwashing and indoctrination to see only what they are allowed to see, and to deny everything else their sensibilities tell them is true.

Bad laws and bad government is a bad lawyers paradise.

But you people keep on (re)electing them -- so you get the government you deserve -- where nothing works right -- but they promise that in 20 years, everything miraculously will.

One of the obvious deceptions used by the rail folks to blur any ability for the citizens to make valid distinctions (discriminations) anymore, is this straw man argument that the rail should be justified as the Superferry is -- overlooking the key distinction that the Superferry is a private enterprise risking those investors' money -- and not taxing the people limitlessly because they can.

"Risk" is not a guarantee that these investors succeed -- and most ventures fail, and government needs to help them as much as possible to succeed and not to fail -- as most people in Hawaii have been brainwashed into thinking -- that they must cause the failure and destruction of every non-government run enterprise.

Government doesn't provide most of the things in a prosperous society; private enterprise in this manner does. It has been tried the other way before -- but even the Russians and now the Chinese realize that government can't provide for everything as well as private initiative and innovation can. But Hawaii always seems to the last to find out about these things -- and even proclaim it as the Next Big Thing.

Hawaii is left to be the only socialist state in these United States still thinking that a proven failure everywhere else, can still work here if people just believe hard enough -- no matter what the realities and actualities. That's how socialist states work -- by confusing the words with the realities -- and then people prefer the words to the reality.

So I wish Mufi's public relations people would stop insulting the intelligence of the people of Hawaii day after day until they're so punch-drunk -- they start kicking the referees and blaming everyone else but themselves for everything going wrong in the world (Hawaii) -- even buying out the opposition because everybody comes to despair that it is the "only game in town," and if one doesn't hop aboard the gravy train, his neighbor is not going to think twice about grabbing his share -- rationalizing that's what everybody else is doing and so they have no choice but to be as corrupt as everybody else.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Blog Trilogy

Once you start a blog, it takes on a life of its own -- and if one is a writer, it then takes a deliberate and premeditated act of murder to kill it, and that is the reason this blog, started for the purpose of supporting my campaign for elected district representative, has just become a representative viewpoint that one would not ordinarily see in Hawaii, and in fact, would be suppressed, repressed and oppressed, in their misguided notion of “Democracy.”

This is the kind of “democracy” Plato warned about in his “Republic,” in which the case against democracy is that it devolves quite easily into demagoguery -- or the manipulation of the masses instead of its representation in a republic.

In such “democracies,” full expression and examination is suppressed, so of course, when voting, the people do not have a full range of alternatives but only the “right” to vote yes or no on one option. And if another is allowed to be presented, the proponents of the one, will claim that the presentation of any other, is unfair, unjust, or illegal -- and make all attempts to ban it.

That’s what they know of “democracy,” and rely on this confusion of the word for the act itself -- of letting the many speak (for themselves). Many mindless pawns in this way (many are paid), are convinced and proud to proclaim themselves “Democrats,” as though the words themselves, were enough to make them true “democrats.” They will even try to convince everybody else, that they own a copyright on such usage.

Nowhere is this more true than in Hawaii -- which has become the poster child for such abuses and distortions of the concept of “democracy” -- of which the party leaders will try to convince everyone, exists far worse everywhere else in the world.

However, everywhere else, we do not see the complete disintegration and disrespect for social order as is not imploding before our eyes -- and world view, now that such other paragons of governmental abuses as the Taliban and Saddam Hussein are gone. So now there is Hawaii, along with a few other “tropical” places like Zimbabwe and the Sudan, that people have even less intention of touring and experiencing in their lifetimes -- where dying culturally and societally, seems to be their way of life.

This perspective is even more valuable to cultivate and maintain than just to have a vote -- in a legislative body with no real, significant choices, and why I decided it was important to maintain this blog, and with my other two, Thinking Differently and Thinking Hawaii, are my Blog Trilogy.

Thursday, August 07, 2008

By What Right/Authority Do You Speak?

Some people are shocked to learn that I’m not the representative of Waikiki-Kapahulu yet feel free to represent a point of view not allowed others otherwise -- or just not exercised, so used are people to voting to give up their rights to speak for themselves, and only allowing another to speak for everyone. That is the meaning of union representation -- and how many otherwise independent, competent, educated professionals come to complain that they have no rights to speak for themselves any longer at their jobs -- because they have voted to surrender those rights, for more money -- at the price of more freedom to do their jobs and exercise their own judgment in their own best way, which is the very definition of “professionalism.”

I don’t think many people realize that subtle surrendering of those freedoms -- and why the mayor of Honolulu now insists, “You people don’t get to vote, because you voted for me to do your thinking and talking from now on,” and the opposition, is bought out, because that is the only way to succeed in that society.

Larger perspectives are therefore banished -- because it would make such insights plainly obvious. Once one has this larger perspective of human motivations and behaviors, its power to control is gone -- and the key to this freedom and right to speak with authority for oneself, is the right to be an individual, and not to limit oneself by a group identity, allowing only a properly designated official spokesperson to speak.

Increasingly in the last century, that was the trend for virtually every institution -- this insistence that there could only be one official (consensus) voice, which partly explains the explosion of the Internet in which many speak for themselves -- albeit as “anonymous aliases,” because it is still perceived to be “too dangerous” to express those understandings as who one is.

That, obviously, is the next frontier in the freedom of expression, and not simply more outrageous expressions reinforcing one’s anonymity. That is the next stage of development of virtualizing reality -- that people actually become real rather than remaining these fictitious and largely wishful perceptions of who they want to be.

The First Amendment freedom of expression, is meaningless unless one can express those views, free from the fear of retaliation and punishment -- especially for responsible and liberating speech. That is allowed for irresponsible speech and perspectives because they are largely ineffective, and the status quo will allow all that undermines the credibility of such freedoms because they do not threaten this status quo, but in nearly most cases, reinforce the legitimacy of this surrendering of one’s power to speak independently as oneself -- in exhibiting how incompetent it is to speak for itself.