The Way It Can Be

Sunday, November 19, 2006

ARA - A Country Called Refuge ... The Way It Can Be by Louis Evan Palmer

A
Haven
For
All

There is a country, a new country that doesn't exist yet, where anyone is accepted even if, in some cases, they may not be actively welcomed. It's name is "ARA" which is Latin for "Refuge" - over time, it has become the new beacon of hope for millions.

ARA is a mid-sized country with an ocean coast and no obvious riches. It will not extradite anyone although it does have normal laws and will imprison certain types of law-breakers. It will prosecute within ARA for serious crimes committed outside its borders. Almost exclusively this is where there is a loss of life although, in exceptional cases, it will prosecute where there has been a major impairment of life: such as, pollution & crimes against the environment or theft & embezzlement where the crime has affected thousands or more. Those found guilty will be imprisoned, or otherwise penalized, in ARA accordingly to its laws.

There are a type of law in ARA called the "forever laws". These are laws that require no interpretation and are to be applied as is for as long as ARA exists. In fact, they are the basis of ARA and without them ARA dies, in the same way, each of us would die if our heart was removed. So, for example, ARA does not have the death penalty - it's outlawed forever. ARA does not allow for extradition - it's outlawed forever.

ARA's armed forces are purely for defence and are directed towards non-lethal means of stopping foreign aggressors. Weapons that disable soldiers, that disable electronic & cyber systems, that blind satellites, that impede vehicles. It develops & uses methods of propaganda that can reach the population of the aggressor to alert its citizens of the situation in ARA. ARA does not allow for the development or deployment or use of weapons of mass destruction - it's outlawed forever.

ARA has complete control of its money, credit-making facilities and all financial instruments. It controls and regulates the flow of goods & services into and out of ARA especially those associated with banks and financial services. It is fair but firm with all foreign institutions but does not permit its country or institutions to be used to hide illicit or undisclosed earnings or launder money. Where warranted, ARA will pay out compensation to foreigners.

ARA has no secrecy laws - everything is to be disclosed. Its privacy laws are specific and focused - privacy is not to be used as a screen for secrecy. Some governmental misinformation is allowed but it is tightly controlled and legally santioned. ARA forbids the existence of secret organizations - there is freedom of assembly & association but it has to be open and fully disclosed - its members, its purpose, its finances, its actions, etc. There are no thought crimes in ARA.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Character-spotting ..... Take 1 by Louis Evan Palmer

I know
What
I like

There are always stories that make one think of character - that elusive quality which we value and seek but typically understand only in an oblique way especially given that we don't really think about it much or deeply. Maybe we should.

For example - there's a current story about a young celebrity singer who's recently divorced from a less well-known former dancer / would-be singer. They have two children. The former dancer also has two children from a previous marriage. He and she are their twenties. Apparently, he has threatened to make public a private sex tape they made in the first few weeks of their marriage unless paid a huge sum of money and granted full custody of their two children.

If this doesn't make you think of character then nothing will. That one can have two failed marriages and four children and still be in your twenties, does not speak well about oneself. People have to assume there is cause and the cause when boiled down to its essentials will have something to do with character.

Examining this concept, we find that one of the key aspects of character is steadfastness - to most people, character does alter when things get unpleasant or difficult.

This forces us to acknowledge that pure stubborness is not necessarily reflective of good character. An unwillingness to change one's mind is also not an attribute. Thinking about the reasons why we would consider this true leads us to the assertion that the motivation and intention of a person is pivotal when considering a person's character.

Using the previous example can make it easier to see various aspects of character.

One - taking something that's private and using it for personal gain. We instinctively feel this is wrong because we value our privacy and we trust those with whom we are sharing. To most of us, a person of good character does not violate our privacy and does not cause us to no longer trust a given person. Expressed in an very old-fashioned way: they honour us and their relationship to us.

Two - using threats and demands for money in the context of the custody of children is crass. We value children and feel they should be protected and assisted consistent with their proper development. To most of us, a person of good character does not use children as pawns in other personal disputes and never as the reward from a threat. Expressed in a an old-fashioned way: we honour our children and their relationship to us.

Three - being responsible and dependable is a mandatory requirement. Without getting into any specifics - to not be an active participant in the support of one's family either financially and/or personally is not acceptable. The exact arrangement of duties and responsibilities is up to the individual family and is not tied into percentages of this or that. However, having one party free-loading off the other party is repugnant to most people. Expressed in an old-fashioned way: we honour ourself, our relationship to our family and our duties and obligations.

Four - wanting the best for oneself, one's family and others. A person of good character is not out to hurt anyone. They want to help as much as possible and appropriate but their main focus is to fully meet the obligations they have and then go from there. They are not selfish or greedy. An avaricous capitalist is not a candidate, nor is a vengeful commissar. A person of good character does not kill or steal or cheat or slander. Expressed in that way that harkens back: we hounour our world, other people and our relationship to it.

To sum up on this first take: a person of good character honours themself, their family, their friends, and their world by trying to do their best, help, meet their obligations, progress and strive for understanding and compassion.

Character spotting, take 1, louis evan palmer, the way it can be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Monday, November 13, 2006

Unsurvivable Weapons - Nuclear by Louis Evan Palmer

Not
Just
Unthinkable

Herman Kahn wrote a book a while ago which he called "Thinking about the Unthinkable" and one of the basic premises it examined is that a war using nuclear weapons could be fought & won. We know, but have seemingly forgotten, that this is not true.

Part of the reason we know it's untrue is because while waiting for a Martian dust storm to clear, the scientists tending to a 1971 Mariner 9 space probe decided to do some extra-curricular investigations. Their resultant calculations highlighted that the dust blocked enough sunlight to significantly lower the temperature on the martian surface. Similar conclusions were reached by German scientists a decade later regarding raging global forest fires that would be caused by nuclear blasts. This led to a concerted effort to study the phenomenon of atmospheric particulates and their effects, especially on sunlight reaching the surface and the life dependent on it. Gwynn Dyer talks about this in the latest edition of his book "War".

In this context, the bottom line was that a nuclear exchange of more than 100 missiles in the 1 megaton range that was targeted on major cities (a likely scenario) would be enough to plunge the world into a nuclear winter with a massive post-explosion loss of life - plant, animal, human.

This is not the hundreds of millions who would die from the bombs themselves which has always been the main focus - this is the billions who survived. It could be the extinction of humans. It would certainly be a mass extinction of plant & animal life. It would also destroy the ozone layer which would render the surface uninhabitable. It would poison the entire world which would not allow it to sustain life. This is a horrible possibility which must be dealt with in the swiftest, most unequivocal manner.

This means that nuclear weapons are unsurvivable which means that they are unusable. The only solution to protecting ourselves against unusable, unsurvivable weapons is for their banning, destruction and subsequent & unrelenting prevention measures up to, if necessary, a prohibition on nuclear (fission) power .

To be clear, unsurvivable means that even if a country launched a completely successful first strike and there was no retaliation whatsoever, everyone on the planet would still die.

If a defensive posture is offered, let it stand as unchallenged that there is no shield imaginable that could stop all the missiles. For this reason, retaliation has always been part of the "defense". The only thing that a anti-missile defense opens the way to is a first strike or, the recurring dream of war planners, a tactical strike.

A tactical strike is such a ludicrous proposition that it defies reason to have it as an option. Does anyone in their right mind think that dropping a few tactical nuclear bombs on the fringes of Russia will not result in a counter-strike? Russia has made it abundantly clear that any nuclear strike against any part of its territory will result in a massive response - not a tit for tat - a full retaliatory counter-strike. What part of that don't we understand? Or, is this possibly a bluff in some catastrophic poker game where the ante is all life on the planet.

This then means that tactical strikes would be reserved for smaller, less powerful non-nuclear countries - which, of course, leads to a tremendous push in these assorted countries for these very weapons; this, in turn, pushes the whole world closer to the brink with each country that joins the "club".

Think about it - we're looking at a situation where India nuclear-fighting Pakistan could destroy the entire planet. Not Russia, China or America - India versus Pakistan. Israel, if it has the 200-400 nukes, it is reputed to have, could also destroy the whole globe if it launched all its missiles at major cities. The game is out-of-control.

The other option which seems to be rearing its venomous head is that of micro-nukes which can be disguised for public consumption as regular high-yield bombs. How many micro-nukes equal the damage of a major nuke? How long would it take to get to that point given the mind-numbing amount of ordinance being hurled at small countries like Afghanistan and Iraq? Does it matter if you're poisoned quickly or over a longer period?

The only reasonable path is an outright ban - immediate, complete, enforceable, and rigorous. Press your government for this, press the U.N. While the soonest possible disarmament is ideal, safety may dictate a slower, paced reduction but it must start now and continue unabated until nuclear weapons are a footnote in the history books.

If it feels like Time is short then it is!

Unsurvivable Weapons - Nuclear, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Future World by Louis Evan Palmer

What'll
It
Be?

Every once in a while, each of us will get a flash of the future, where we perceive something on another level and we are as sure as we can be that this thing we see will occur or exist in the future.

It may be an image we see in a movie or that we imagine while reading a book or staring into space but when we do see it, we immediately feel that it will exist just as we see it sometime in the future.

If we could collect all these special instances from various credible & incredible persons, it would make for a very interesting document I'm sure.

There have been any number of psychological & sociological experiments that have tried to explore our views on what's to come. Most are fairly ordinary and trying to look some months or 1, perhaps 2, years ahead. Others, however, are quite the opposite and depending on how much faith we put into them may, in fact, shake our conception of this world and time & space.

One investigation was conducted by Chet B. Snow & Helen Wambach who performed experiments over many years (first Helen alone and then with Chet). They regressed persons through hypnosis: first, to past lives and then, if circumstances were favourable, they also guided some into the future - which was more difficult for people to accept. The regressed persons saw a world where the population in 2100-2300 AD was only 2 billion. They saw four different human societies co-existing: one where about 1/3 of the total population were living in space and on other planets; where another 1/3 of the population were inside domes or underground; a little less than 1/5 of people were vegetarians living in harmony with nature in small settlements; and the remaining 1/5 of humanity had set themselves up in small rustic towns where they ranched and ate meat and locally-grown food. This was described in the book "Mass Dreams of the Future".

In what could be described as a remote viewing experiment, Joseph McMoneagle also wrote about the future in his book "The Ultimate Time Machine". One of the vivid images he saw was that of an Utopian society in the year 3000 A.D. He lists many tribulations in between now and then and, even utopia was not a permanent state of affairs, yet it is something for to look forward to.

My prognostications are more mundane, more of extrapolations, and only going out 100+ years. They are driven in large part by logic, intuition, and a fond hope & desire.

Who Makes What?
The global organization of productive capacity. There will have to be a profound discussion and agreement as to who is to produce what and how much. We can't have huge over-capacity in many key industries with everyone expecting to export their excess. In certain fields, each country will want to have some capability.

How are You Paying?
Money, money-like instruments and other financial tools will become subject to more rigorous scrutiny and regulation. "Finance Capitalism" and its rampant speculation and profit-driven instability will be reined in, hopefully forever. This will mean the demise of national currencies and their built-in drives towards war and economic depressions. Minimum & maximum incomes will be legislated and a system of credits will setup and they will be backed by the economic unit issuing it.

Contact with non-Human Sentients
This is inevitable and may have already happened. The entrance of non-human sentients on the world stage will trigger massive social & cultural changes. It may even involve Earth in confrontations and alliances within the greater galaxy.

Theory of Everything
Humans will uncover powerful secrets & dimensions which will confer (on some) a mind-boggling array of capabilities. Free non-polluting energy, non-linear travel, a world where humans are god-like in their ability to create. Very dangerous time & place.

Hidden Societies
This refers to physically hiding, not secret societies. The technology for hiding will outpace the technology for discovery. As it becomes technologically easier to effectively hide & survive, groups of people will start to do this on a broad scale. Because it will done in secret, it will be difficult to really know how widespread it becomes. In fact, how widespread it may be.

Allocation of Resources
As societies become more enmeshed, resources will be fairly, efficiently & officially allocated on the basis of need as well as the basis of contribution. It will no longer be acceptable to allow entire regions, populations, or classes of people, to starve or die from preventable conditions or diseases. This means that the control of many resources will be vested in independent transnational bodies. (no, this does not refer to profit-making corporations!!)

The Primacy of Mind
Society will move from a belief in the primacy of matter towards a belief in the primacy of mind. Quantum mechanics has started that process but because it is so revolutionary, it is taking a long time to penetrate through and through. Once it does it will have a tremendous impact on everything. It will go way beyond a belief in God being everywhere - in other words, this is not Medieval Times Redux.

Economic Units
A grid of standard economic units will be super-imposed over the world and used for administrative purposes. Having countries that are too large or too small or over-endowed or under-endowed will be considered as a threatening imbalance. More prosperity & education will level out differences and allow for populations to come under control, with zero or negative growth curves, and this, in turn, will allow for populations to migrate more easily and thus even out the load on the environment due to people pressures.

Future World, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

The Magic of Polarization by Louis Evan Palmer

It's
So
Easy

Polarization is part of a duality puzzle we continuously find ourselves immersed in but, for the most part, it remains focused on our conscious roles in magnifying any separations we discover. It's about intensifying divisions, celebrating threats and exhorting to action - be it preventive or corrective; in many cases, it fosters aggression, pure and simple.

The conscious role in polarization, among other things, is the public discourse and accompanying actions, yet, as with all else, most of the activity is beneath the surface. The conscious component acts as a catalyst at some points, a leader at other points, also as a follower, a resister, perhaps an opponent. It seems though that our motivation and intention, whether examined or not, is what drives the process the most - it colours it, animates it, shapes it.

If our intentions are for what we might categorize as the greater "good" then polarization will amount to a radicalization in that direction - action for good, opposition to negativity and malice and harm. We might with some trepidation call this a "good" polarization.

More often though, our intentions are for a much more circumscribed "good", a good that is very specific, usually fragile and under threat, and it is then that this stunning metamorphosis can take place, whereby, like a collapsing star, our good intention, or the suite of our good intentions that form a particular cluster, collapses in on itself and becoming so dense, becoming impervious, it explodes outwards in a paroxysm of unthinking action - a reflex at this point. Our particular "good" is safely ensconced in this vortex of gravity & density & energy and, almost by definition, everything outside has become the threat, the "other", the enemy.

This is the true magic of polarization, its ability to create a very special universe of "love" for a given "good" surrounded by a threatening gulf of menace which must be dispersed somehow, or transmuted, or, more typically, destroyed.

Naturally, polarization is a way of looking at things, its alchemy is a way of organizing the world which carries with it dangers - foremost, it is the beginning of a process of creating an enemy. If we can look far enough down the road, over the hill that is the future, we can see that this first step towards differentiating can, if due care is not religiously adhered to, lead us towards a fully-fledged enemy.

And, as we know, enemies are made to be destroyed.

The Magic of Polarization, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Friday, November 03, 2006

Best We Forget by Louis Evan Palmer

Cheering

For

The

Home

Team

There is always a waxing and waning in the effusion of patriotic fervour associated with Remembrance Day. It has an uptick when there is an anniversary or when there are Canadian troops committed somewhere. It tends to drop out of consciousness when times are good.

While some sit back now and make poetic statements about freedom and sacrifice, there is not much talk about the futility of many wars or the bloodthirstiness of their prosecution. There is also not much in the way of mass media coverage of how specific wars got started or who benefited financially or what nations advanced their causes or sphere of power.

It was said that many of those who marched off to World War I were enthusiastic and anticipated being home and victorious in a few weeks. It was an adventure and a chance to make triumphant noises over a prostrate enemy while crowing about British or French or German greatness.

We do want to remember and having a day dedicated to it certainly helps but it also moulds it into a public event which means into a propaganda event. Now it attempts to highly praise our troops in Afghanistan, to glorify in a subdued way. Forgeting about whether there was any legal justification for being there or how NATO got itself hoodwinked into assuming the bloody mantle of leadership from the United States, having troops dying strongly invites the expression of the most primal type of chest-thumping, flag-waving, thought-numbing jingoism.

Having a day like this makes us admire the soldiers of the past whether we should or not. Defending yourself well is admirable. Being able to fight well is advisable. But extolling the dead and their victorious living comrades put us into a mindset where war is an answer. Defending means someone has invaded your territory - that foreign troops are actually on your soil - and currently that is only true about us.

We have a Remembrance Day advertisement that shows a crusty bloated old soldier in some Canadian Legion facsimile of a uniform standing beside a teen-aged boy who is dressed in what appears to be a cadet's uniform. By showing us this linkage, it gives us every indication that the fateful process of germinating the next crop of cannon fodder is underway, one generation setting off the other.

Ringing bells and shooting off guns and blowing sombre horns shouldn't be such a big part of our remembrance. Preventing wars and understanding their causes should get more of our attention. Honouring non-military non-conflict-based peace-makers and peace-keepers should get more of our attention. We don't need any more of the ancient Roman desert-making peace - the peace of death and desolation.

But we constantly peer through a portal on war, the tragic failure of peace, where it's typically portrayed as vile and wrenching (for us) yet exciting and intense. It's part of an atavistic subculture that seems to dominate world politics even as it's denied. The warriors are listened to, the peace-makers are set aside for other less dangerous times.

Our extravagant memorializing has the opposite effect - it may not glorify war per se but it glorifies sacrifice which can be worse because it's more encompassing; worse not in itself but in its potential for misuse as a powerful tool of manipulation. The end result is to stifle dissent and ostracize critics. We make for ourselves a drum-beating tyranny-lite and hope it goes away after the war, hoping as well that the current war will end even though almost all its causes are still present.

Sometimes remembering the way we do on Remembrance Day is a way of denying the senselessness of it, its preventability, where the fault for these things really lies. It begs some questions though: Can you be good at something you don't practice? Can you practice something that you don't, at some level, admire? Can you admire something without wanting to try it?

Best We Forget, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, October 21, 2006

Dueling with Duality by Louis Evan Palmer

State
Absence
Relationship
Context
Awareness

Duality is a natural state for people. We learn that basic "fact" early on and never quite seem to shake it. Typically, we never have reason to. It is a state where we feel, without obvious effort on our part, that almost every thing we sense has something which stands opposite to it or in opposition to it or apart from it in some relationship.

Duality seems to have aspects of a "state", aspects of a "relationship" and also to merely reflect the presence or absence of something where we often feel that the absence is a force or substance of equal stature to the one we sense by its presence.

For example, cold is the absence of heat. Heat is the presence of energy, cold is its absence. Yet, we feel cold as a force on its own even when factually it's nothing, it's the absence of heat.

Another clear example, darkness is the absence of light. Again, we usually feel darkness as a force on its own but it's an absence we detect and to which we react.

It's a perfect incarnation of the binary concept where 1s and 0s are the substance and 1s are the presence and 0s are the absence. However, this concept presents an interesting twist whereby position and relation give meaning to the absence beyond just being nothing.

Another idea to think about - if we looking at either a presence (say, heat) or an absence (say, cold), we may never notice it if it didn't vary. It is the contrast which allows us to observe many, perhaps all, phenomena. If, in fact, we cannot perceive things which do not vary then who knows what myriad of "things" we co-exist with but not not perceive because they do not vary. ..... like the source of everything.

We must also remember that context is part of the equation: we apprehend something like heat in a universe of space and time and mass and energy; we detect the presence or absence of one thing while situated in a realm on other things in which the presence or absence manifests itself.

To touch on the variance theme, we can go one further, if something exists which we cannot perceive in any way (to date), then we are not aware of its presence or absence. If that element were significant then our whole definition of reality would become suspect.

Thus far, we have a presence or an absence; we have a state which varies; and, we have a relationship wherein an absence or a presence gains additional meaning; we have context; and we have that which we cannot apprehend.

Some of the common things that we consider to be related in a dualistic relationship: love versus hate - hate seems to be more than the absence of love, where an absence of love seems to imply a frigidity, a lack of emotion, a lack of interest or empathy for someone; hate draws to mind, an active force directed at someone but with malice and ill-will. Is coldness and no feeling the opposite of both Love and Hate? It is if we want to maintain duality as a balance of presence versus absence. However, that's probably not how most people think of it.

Other potential dualities are more of the type where one thing stands apart from some other thing in some kind of a relationship. "Here" versus "There" or "Now" versus "Then". These are more of the measuring kinds of dualities - the one thing is located at a different point on some measuring standard versus another thing - in one case, it's a measure of space as in "here" versus "there"; in another case, it's a measure of time as in "now" versus "then".

"You" versus "Me" can be looked on in this way but it's really more than that though - it's one type of being versus another instance of that type of being.

"Motion" versus "Stillness" is an absence versus presence duality. "Conscious" versus "Unconscious" may be this type unless we use the more common meaning of "Unconscious" as a type of consciousness of which we are unaware - then it's two types of consciousness.

Some would argue that "Evil" is the absence of "Good" and in a similar manner that "Hate" is the absence of "Love" but it doesn't seem that way.

Reaching into the physical world again, we have a "Particle" versus a "Wave". Here is where an interesting thing happened. It was regarded for hundreds of years that phenomenon that exhibited these characteristics had to be one or the other and it was up to us to figure out which one a given thing was. At the turn of the 20th century, it began to be realized that a photon, for example, was actually both a particle and a wave. How it was both became the focus of another profound debate which is still going on today.

The Wave - Particle debate can be considered similar in some ways to the relationships a given person may have with other members of one's family - say for a male: son, brother, uncle, nephew, father, grandfather... we don't consider it an either-or proposition and yet it's the same person who has these very different relationships - is it also a duality of sorts? Maybe a photon has a "wave" relationship with certain physical aspects of reality and a "particle" relationship with other physical aspects. If so, a photon, or any other particle of this type, may have other non-wave non-particle relationships that affect its interaction with the physical world.

Is duality a lesser reality, a circumscribed version of the real thing, which allows us to navigate this universe but never actually apprehend it directly? Is it possible to adjust, or un-adjust, the observer so as to see the reality from which the duality emerges? Since it appears that the final arbiter emanates from consciousness, it would lead us to conclude that we can apprehend the reality in which duality is embedded.

What changes would ensue from this type of breakthrough? Or, perhaps "breakthrough" is not the right word as it implies something new when, in fact, it's something prior - maybe something like "unbirth" is a more accurate way of phrasing it.

It's reminiscent of sages who say we live in two realities - the dualistic one and the one from which it emanates. The feeling is that it can only be a "good" to see beyond duality.

Dueling with Duality, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Co-Creation by Louis Evan Palmer

Creation

Its Source

Its Purpose

Its Substance

There is a single substance out of which everything in this universe is created. And if so, then everything is this substance be it awareness or consciousness or material or not.

In another universe, might it be another substance? No. It might be another manifestation of the substance, there may be different rules but the ultimate substance must be the same.

Yet there is something which precedes even the single primordial substance and that is the formless, limitless ocean of potential and awareness out of which the universes emerge.

In the entirety of creation, it is easy to imagine a vast range of sentient beings with an equally vast range of creative power. Creatures who are so powerful as to be able to create worlds and indeed whole universes.

Is it possible that the myths that point to powerful angelic beings are reflections of a reality where powerful beings possess the power of creating realms of existence in which beings such as humans can live?

This could lead us to think that the universe we know might be the creation of an extremely powerful being and our entrance into it is by choice and our remaining in it is also by choice abetted by delusion and unpaid debts.

Let us call this awesome creature an angel and name her Gloria. She may resemble other figures of mythology like ISIS or even, to some, Lucifer, but the idea is the same - a being who can create worlds, who could create an entire universe.

Our Universe is then a creative object composed of a single primordial force & substance but created by an apparently unique entity, by Gloria. Now the humans in Gloria's universe are amazed and humbled by Gloria's handiwork and outpour their praise of her - they worship her, they call her God. And it is God if God means the single source and fabric and soul of everything but it's not God if it means "who made it?" although the maker of the maker is part of whatever that creation then makes. If that secondary creator actually exists, of course.

This sets up a dynamic that if we attribute the wrong source to the universe we live in, we will never get to the correct destination. We will always stop short because we'll have mistaken the apparent boundaries of this universe for real boundaries. We will then stay in the wonderful world of the co-creators while longing for the ultimate source.

If something like this were true, then everything about this universe including afterlifes and choices to do with reincarnation are part of the chosen existence.

"Free Will" is the energy that drives the manifested realities. "Free Will" is the allowance that Love demands so as not to impose but it, in turn, enables the contention and relation that drives us further into the chosen created reality and away from the unchosen uncreated reality.

Are these the kinds of things that our various myths are trying to convey to us?

The "fall" is our emergence into this life in this universe. "Satan" is the being who created this universe to entice and entrap us and to convince us that he is "God". Or when the Buddha admonishes us for clinging to illusion.

We add to this universe with our own co-creation which goes some more way towards making "it" seem more real again. Gloria has mesmerized us and holds us in thrall as we live life after life in her universe and feed all that spiritual and mental energy into maintaining and expanding her magnificent creation.

Co-Creation, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, October 15, 2006

Universe of Love & Hate by Louis Evan Palmer

An
Inexhaustible
Supply

Due to its scope and somewhat extemporaneous composition, this will be a rambling dissertation.

In our Universe, there appear to be at least two cornucopias both emotions. The first being the font of Love, the second, of Hate - where these emotions can pour forth in a seemingly endless flow. It is possible that Hate doesn't actually exist and is merely a twisted or mirror-image of Love. These observations being mostly empirical but also to a degree logical.

Perhaps, the initial questions should center on emotions in general and where they originate. Are they only the sparks and surges of a body and its nervous & endocrine systems? If they are, in fact, the effects or emergent qualities of a physical system then they are, by definition, transient and malleable which does seem to be the case.... yet.

An interesting question suggested by the above: are there any emotions or feelings that exist and persist throughout our life, or for years? Do emotions require outside stimulation; in other words, are they always a reaction?

One thesis being offered is that all emotions are offshoots of a single primal emotion; for the sake of argument, let's us call that primal emotion "Love". Where an emotion will be taken to be a thought & a feeling wrapped around a memory and an expectation - which seems a lot like saying it's unknown.

Like a photon, an emotion may be a force without mass. Whereas, Light is a number of photons, Emotion could be viewed as a number of elemental emotion particles which may organize themselves like Elements in the atomic table into a hierarchy of relationships and their associated energies and effects.

Because they seem to be twins of each other and the most powerful of the emotions, it may be instructive to look more closely at the emotions we call Love and Hate.

Love is a force that moves towards the object of its affection with good intentions and gifts of every sort; it imputes goodness and seeks to provide and protect for its beloved. For the most part, it is active and hot. It has desires to be with the object of its affections and to share and care and enjoy and empower. Sharing, may in some situations, entail consensual taking as in sexual love.

Generally in our experience, Love has an object, it is not undifferentiated. It is a powerful emotion or state and can override even the urge to self-preservation.

Hate is also powerful, some would argue more powerful. Hate can motivate someone to kill another, more easily than Love. Hate also thrives best with an object on which to focus - undifferentiated Hate lacks power. In our experience, Hate is typically focused on other humans.

When Hate takes on a non-human focus, such as particular types of animals, it is usually derivative - that is, that animal has killed someone the human values or cares for (a family member, a pet, an animal in a herd); or, the animal has come to represent qualities that humans dislike or fear - say, a wolf representing a snarling, blood-thirsty incarnation of evil. It's not a case of, say, hating large sea-going turtles for themselves and no other reason.

Hate would focus and direct bad intentions or perform actions and make plans that will harm or hurt the hate-object. In this way, Hate would be seen as different from repulsion in that repulsion constitutes a flight response based on Fear - which may generate Hate but is a precursor as it were.

There can be a "hot Hate" or a "cold Hate". A "hot Hate" will generate destructive actions against the hate-object but also still has a conscience and can still feel revulsion at some of its actions. A "cold Hate", on the only hand, has submerged its malevalence and now carries out its hateful actions without feeling. Of the two, the "cold Hate" is more dangerous because it can now "go industrial" in its Hate.

Hate can go back and forth between "cold" and "hot" but once its goes "cold" the "hot" flashes become merely interludes in a "cold" landscape. "Hot Hate" is the first phase which if maintained for long enough will generate a cadre of "cold Hate" haters - they will then take the Hate to an industrial level, that is, long-term actualized mass hate. At an individual level, it's murder.

Hate thrives on differences, their identification, their magnification, their preservation. Hate will comment or elaborate on differences to do with dress, custom, foods, beliefs, mannerisms, symbols; more powerfully, differences to do with religions, economic status, interaction with others, symbols; most powerfully, when the hate-object becomes identified with an ideological enemy - then almost anything becomes possible as the battle is now with the equivalent of a spiritual or cultural virus or plague.

Groups that use, or depend on, differences, particularly extreme or superfluous differences, and the powerful reactions they can generate as a means of generating solidarity and exerting control are playing with an explosive mix. Yes, a mature society will have evolved a means of tolerance that can accomodate these differences but this almost always entails compromise on both sides - when that is missing, or not present to a sufficient degree, then the brew that feeds Hate starts heating up.

By the time we arrive at the propaganda stage, we are in danger of having past the dialogue point and are now entering the pre-conflict stage. The early stages of propaganda is the time for urgent action to identify and accomodate and correct, to the extent possible, the catalysts of ill-will towards the hate-object. Propaganda being replete with unfair characterizations, attributions and threats and violent proposals. (You may have noticed that we are inundated with propaganda)

Domination can be considered a form of Hate where intentions and motivations are the deciding factors. A father's or mother's discipline when temperate and for the obvious betterment of the child should thus escape from being labelled as a form of domination.

Interestingly, Free Will, especially when viewed in opposition to domination, can be viewed as an expression of Love.

Does "hate" have any place in our civil society? For example, is it possible to just "hate hate"? Or, stated in another way, can Hate be controlled and used for "good"? In effect, using "Hate" as a tool for the purposes of "Love". The Means versus the End again.

The answer seems to be clearly "NO". They have different goals and motivations. One is fed by division, the other by communion. etc. etc.

Hate most commonly is directed towards actions - we hate what other people "do" rather than what they "are" - the "hot-hate" against what people "do" will get increasingly hotter until it reaches the end state of "cold-hate" against what people "are" - now, the hate-object is no longer human, no longer worthy of existence, it is a mistake of creation, or a faulty experiment in human dynamics that is to be terminated, or a plague to be wiped out.

This brings up the interesting question of "rights" - what gives anyone the right to hate anyone else (or love)? And, more importantly, to do anything about it? Having or being in a Family is the obvious example but beyond that? A mystical family? A common origin and destination? A shared journey and purpose? All of these reasons point to "Love" rather than "Hate" making it seem that the Hate is the frustration of Love, its thwarting, and the loneliness and fear it (or rather "we") generates.

To be continued.

Universe of Love & Hate, The Way It Can Be, Louis Evan Palmer, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Monday, October 09, 2006

Death by Bilateralism by Louis Evan Palmer

The Delicate
Art of
Outsmarting
Yourself

Countries like Canada, so-called middle powers, have a tendency to get deeply immersed in the various tints and hues of diplomacy and tea leaf reading.

Because of Canada's peculiar geography, it has only one direct neighbour, America, and one, Russia, at a slight distance but with the Arctic expanse as a buffer. This tilts what would be the normal stance of the smaller, less powerful, neighbour keeping the other at arm's length. As a result, it has created a dangerous dynamic of cyclical relations with their potential for getting seriously out-of-synch. Cyclical by its nature is riskier than steady state.

It's safe to say that bilateralism is the preferred mode for a powerful state. It then has the upper hand in every dealing and derives the maximal benefit for itself. Conversely, the less powerful nation should avoid bilateral agreements like the plague as they entice with the sweet allure of a special relationship and a permanence when in reality neither loyalty not longevity is possible in international relationships.

Canada has tried to be particularly clever in weaving both bilateral and multilateral agreements and has somehow failed to notice that the bilateral agreement will have precedence. The powerful country, in this instance, the USA, will always push for bilateral relationships for the simple, obvious reason that it can better dominate and dictate in that relationship than in a multilateral one.

Another disadvantage for the less powerful partner in a bilateral relationship is that it can impede and retard relationships with other countries. Other countries may come to regard the junior partner as irrelevant and negotiate with the stronger partner regarding both countries. Or, it may feel that the stronger country has a veto over the less powerful country. Or, it may view the less powerful country as a proxy for the more powerful country and therefore as threat and a potential enemy.

A significant insight that Gwyne Dyer presents in the latest edition of his classic "War" is that the strongest nations are at war the most and suffer the highest losses. It's a bit of a debunking of the peace through strength argument although it may just as well be highlighting the workings of the national psyche of a powerful nation in that it is more willing to resort to a military solution because it thinks it will win it; or, more popularly phrased as "Might makes Right".

What does all this lead to for countries like Canada?

That multilateralism is the way and has really always been the way both from a logical perspective and a practical, empirical one.

In addition, Canada should be actively looking at making its trade flows more evenly spread out between rest of North America, South America, Asia, Europe and Africa. There must be targets like 20% of exports to the rest of North America, 15% to South America, 10% to Africa, 30% to Asia, 25% to Europe. Hard targets with hard dates. This is the type of planning and action that can save a country if extreme hardship hits one part of the world.

The same logic applies to defence, to trade, to immigration.

Tying ourselves so deeply and inextricably to the United States, or any country, through FTAa and NAFTAs and NORAD/NORTHCOM is a recipe for disaster.

Death by Bilateralism, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 30, 2006

The Way of the Spider - Web of Support by Louis Evan Palmer

Break the
Grip of
Corruption

By Helping
Whistle-Blowers

This is the first of "The Way of the Spider" articles dealing with how the corruption is maintained and how it's vicious grip can be broken.

Many years ago, before the Internet, before the brazen nonsensical ravings of the leaders of the world's only superpower, before blatant pseudo-wartime censorship, it was easier to believe that corruption, real corruption, endemic and soul-destroying corruption, was a thing that lived in foreign countries, poor, ignorant backward countries but not here in the First World, at least not in any serious way.

Of course, that was one of the biggest lies in a festering swamp of lies. Corruption has come to roost in the free world. It's now in your face and "what are you going to do about it?" and omnipresent - you don't even have to look for it.

The many faces of corruption are simply the many faces of vice and sin and abuse. It is merely grown large and indiscreet yet not so indiscreet as to not want to suppress knowledge of its existence, to poke out the eyes of those who would scrutinize it.

It is partly being able to answer certain questions in a certain way. Being able to say that you could kill a given number of people if you could get away with it and make a lot of money; that you could abuse a position of power for sexual favours. The questions and answers go on and on and it is important to state that we are not talking about ordinary temptation - we are talking about non consensual, about force and threat, and about tricks and falsity.

Again, its favourite breeding ground is secrecy and it is towards its exposure that we can turn for some victories in what we should regard as our endless struggle for a fair & fine society.

The call is to set up a Foundation which citizens can fund to provide money and benefits to bona fide whistle-blowers. This would allow them to break the salary & pension shackles which bind so many. It must be generous, especially for the early years, so as to allow the brave people stepping forward not to have to suffer for telling the truth, for trying to better society and preventing subversion of the law and justice. It would have to cover medical insurance and similar costs. Relocation, personal safety and other witness-protection-type costs must also be addressed. When required, legal costs must be covered.

It would all be worthwhile.

Would it have been worth paying for 3 or 4 or 20 whistle-blowers to blow away the subtrefuge and bloodshed of Afghanistan and Iraq? Even now, to stop the hideous aggression and murder and mayhem.

It is worth it times infinity.

We must build a new safe world out of this shambles and it is from the spider that we see the way - each strand from one source, connected over and over to every other strand, affecting the whole web, supple and strong, swaying in the breeze.

The Way of the Spider - Web of Support, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Righting an Unfair Taxation System by Louis Evan Palmer

Creating & Using
Tax & Other Laws
and Regulations
to Avoid
Contributing to
Society

In the area of taxation as with many other areas of public policy and governance, we are firmly in the grip of a tyranny of half-truths: the true part is used to propagandize, silence opposition and cudgel dissent; the false part is used to accrue power & influence and to cheat and steal from the public and other purses.

The cheating & stealing can be of an active kind where existing resources, in particular, money and other highly liquid assets, are somehow appropriated; or, more subtlely, a kind of theft that is apparently passive - where assets that are due are not paid, are not paid in full, are not paid on time, or are transferred in full or in part to other parties, especially the public trust in its multiple guises.

An important half-truth in the taxation area, specifically corporate taxation, is that which claims that tax avoidance for specified publicly-sanctioned reasons is a "Good" and therefore, within certain discretionary limits, is to be encouraged.

Valid studies which can assert in unambiguous terms that such-and-such tax exemption worked and how well it worked are few and far between. The key factor, that tax exemptions are a different form of tax credits but without transparency or solid governance, is conveniently omitted.

Also, lost in the rampant rush to grab as much as possible from various tax exemptions, is the fact that very often no limits are set on how much can be claimed in a given year, or over a set number of years. Where individual tax forms are careful to circumscribe deductions for everything, the bounds on corporate tax exemptions are often generous to the point where major corporations pay no tax, or very little, for years.

The proffered reason, more an article of elitist faith than anything, is that society gets back all, or much, of that lost tax revenue and other benefits. Typically, there's no proof and no pudding for these and other similar assertions.

The recommendation is for all forms of tax avoidance and exemption legislation to be removed from the law books and other supporting regulations & advisories. This includes RRSP regulations which are realistically only available to a more financially privileged segment of the population and are therefore unfair.

Economic remedies must be instituted as programs which are auditable and subject to public review & debate. As well, minimum taxation levels must be set for all reporting entities, in particular corporations and their wealthy executive offspring.

All reporting entities should be paying a fair share of the monies required to keep the system & infrastructure running and improving and, where necessary, expanding. It is grossly unjust that some major corporations and their directors, that arguable are benefiting the most from our society, should squirm and wriggle their way out of paying their fair contribution back to that society.

Claims, usually more the privileged bleating of obscenely over-paid corporate executives, that zero taxes are somehow fair and right, should be treated with the same firmness and alacrity that the Tax authorities seem to reserve for those lower down on the food chain.

All benefit, All pay.

Righting an Unfair Taxation System, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Thursday, September 21, 2006

No Guns in Cities by Louis Evan Palmer

Empty

Canadian

Cities

of

Guns

Gun-Free Zones

Canadian cities, all cities, should be free of guns, all guns. Meaning all persons including police and army personnel - other effective means of control are available for them. The demarcation lines for these gun-free zones should generally match the city limits. The sign stating the name of the city, its population, will just add the words “This is a gun-free zone”. No guns means no guns – no short guns, long guns, concealed guns, non-concealed guns, single-shot guns, automatic guns, semi-automatic guns, etc. etc. – none!

The various reasons proffered for the necessity of bearing arms are not convincing. Self-defence is one of the mainstays. The main threat in this scenario is that someone else is threatening you – bear-spray or mace would be very effective in that circumstance and would not endanger others or yourself. In a surprising number of situations, the gun is wrested from the owner and used on them – even police. A loud screeching alarm is also effective. To the extent possible, avoiding dangerous places or situations is a huge factor. Having a dog with you. Having one or more friends with you. Having all your senses – that is, not being impaired.

Arguments made in favour of bearing guns that center on the deterrent effect this has on would-be dictators are also not convincing. Huge sweeps of existing weapons would be conducted. Weapons would have to be hidden away after the fact of a coup, not before. A lot of the weapons acquired by insurgencies are stolen from the occupation forces or smuggled in from abroad – unless they are stashed secretly in anticipation of a defeat or occupation. Not the same animal at all compared to everyday life in a large modern city.

Police don't need guns. They have many alternatives and more research and experimentation can expand the non-lethal arsenal quickly and effectively. There should not be an argument for having guns outside of army bases if they are inside city limits; better yet, move the army bases outside city limits. In any case, an army base should not be considered part of the city proper as access to it is restricted.

Guns clubs, shooting ranges and the like should likewise relocate outside city limits. Privately owned guns must be stored there. Collectors have to dismantle, and lock away, key working components of their guns to keep them within city limits and this should be limited to older, vintage-type weapons. It's safe to say that a peaceful modern society should not be allowing citizens to keep powerful new weapons as collectibles in their home or within city limits.

Let's make this a step towards a more peaceful society and mindset – no guns in cities, period!

No Guns in Cities, Louis Evan Paler, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Louis Evan Palmer
He lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have been published in numerous publications.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Thursday, November 16, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Monday, November 13, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, November 11, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Friday, November 03, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, October 21, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, October 15, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Monday, October 09, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 30, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 23, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Thursday, September 21, 2006

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

BUY BOOKS by Louis Evan Palmer

About Me

Blog Archive

LINKS

technorati

stat counter

BlogTopList