The Face of Servitude ?

ser•vi•tude
NOUN
1. slavery or bondage of any kind: political or intellectual [or spiritual] servitude.
2. ...
Synonyms: bondage, bonds, chains, confinement, enslavement, obedience, peonage, serfdom, serfhood, subjection, subjugation, thrall, thralldom, vassalage, yoke,
(Source: Dictionary.com)

In this latter-day, when the “promises” of power and gain have again captivated the imagination of most of the world and ALL of the powers that be(lieve chiefly in themselves and secret agendas), we sometimes run across the transparent face of servitude. Could this be one?

Watch John Gross, Lead Engineer - NIST Report
(National Institute of Standards and Technology)
beginning at minute 32:35.

9/11: Blueprint for Truth (Time 1:59:07)
San Francisco Bay Area architect, Richard Gage, AIA,
provides the myth-shattering scientific forensic evidence
of the explosive controlled demolition of all 3 WTC
high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001.at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vb7o-OOe20

Do we ever ponder why it is that men and women of intelligence and education can so publicly abandon conscience and integrity? can present themselves so pitifully déjà vu the tobacco boys¹ of not so long ago?

Thus, to all those (being most of us, to some degree or other):

▪  who daily sacrifice integrity for a wage, a perk, a promise, a position, a privilege;
▪  who are addicted to a thing, substance, person, philosophy, idea;
▪  who have become locked—with oaths, covenants, or contracts—into a hierarchy of blind obedience to “superiors” or handlers (which includes the military & the “stars” of every stripe);
▪  who daily fear: “What will become of me” if I blow the whistle? if I tell the truth? if I break covenant with evil? if I stand up for justice and judgment?
▪  who believe there is no way out;
▪  who believe there is no forgiveness;

consider this:

[W]hen the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive [even if he die]. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die [a spiritual death]. … Therefore I will judge you, … every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, …? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye (Old Testament | Ezekiel 18:27-28, 30-32; see also Ezekiel 33).

Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool  (Old Testament | Isaiah 1:16-18).

-------------------------------/
1. The Tobacco Boys at http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2010/01/vc-beware-spokesman.html
Additional Considerations:
» To Loyalists Everywhere at http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2009/07/to-loyalists-everywhere.html
» A Proliferation of Masters at http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2010/01/proliferation-of-masters.html
» “The Great Chain of Being” [Subservient] at http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2011/12/great-chain-of-being-subservient.html

A Plea to the Bully Pulpit

Would the powers that be please schedule an open, global convention to discuss the despicability of bullying? Of course, we are beginning to name (and condemn) it for what it is, though we have a long way to go, particularly when it happens in families, or when the bully is especially powerful, wealthy, or famous.

SO, if you are part of a family, or if you are especially powerful, wealthy, or famous—or want, or plan to be—you might be well-advised to watch a re-run of Touched by an Angel, Season 7, CD-1, Episode 2, entitled “Legacy.” There you can observe in brutal detail the way of the bully—a powerful, wealthy father.

Considering the past and present ubiquity of bullying (from the micro- to the macrocosm), we suggest an international screening of “Legacy” (with requisite permissions) for all elected and non-elected government officials, all employees of governments, all CEOs and other HyPEs* of big business, all lawyers and lobbyists, all so-called conservatives and liberals, all fathers and mothers, all gang members, and all other persons and faux-persons (as in Goldman Sachs, et al.) who may or may not fit into one of the above categories.

After the global screening, here is the plea:

▪ If you are the bully: Admit it! STOP IT! (That means even, and especially, you, Uncle Sam! And you, too, IMF.)
▪ If you are the bullied, STOP IT! Get help. NAME IT for what it is—ten thousand times ten thousand, if necessary. Don’t give loyalty to anything that violates integrity. Stand for truth and justice.

-----------------------/
* (being Highly Paid Employees)

Accessory?

From Wikipedia¹:

An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:

● The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind"), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (Latin for "guilty act").

● If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.

In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an "accessory before the fact". A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an "accessory after the fact". A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an "accessory before and after the fact", but this usage is less common [bold emphasis added].

SO, if one is hired by a company (or country) and told to keep its unlawful, unconstitutional, fraudulent, or deceptive activities quiet (or perhaps even to carry them out), AND WE DO, what does that make us?

How many accessories and principals are out there in our beloved countries? Out there and afraid? Afraid to lose jobs? reputations? homes? loved ones? freedoms? perhaps their very lives?

Any déjà vu here?

Why have we begun to look so much like our former AND current enemies?

How about we have an international re-screening of Judgment at Nuremberg? How about doing it on September 28, the International Right to Know Day²? Or better yet, do it on September 29 and call it the International Responsibility to Know Day, since so many of us seem to prefer to NOT know those things that challenge our preconceptions of self and country?

Will we too, in some future year, when things have run their course down this slippery slope of suspicion, surveillance, and surreptitious “judgment,” hear some judge say to us:

The charge is that of conscious participation in a government-sanctioned system of cruelty and injustice in violation of every moral and legal principle known to all civilized nations. The tribunal has carefully studied the record and found therein abundant evidence to support beyond a reasonable doubt the charges against these defendants.³

------------------/
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term)
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Right_to_Know_Day
3. From the screenplay, Judgment at Nuremberg.

Snow Job?

Does it not seem in these latter days that blizzards of deceit and myopia are getting thicker and thicker as co-offenders attempt, with desperation, to obscure, distort, or mis-remember events?

Take the blizzard surrounding Edward Snowden:¹

 Officials and reps on the right and left, crying out for the “rule of law” to be honored in extraditing and prosecuting a man for exposing secret, massive breaches of law by others. How about we take the words of John Boehner (et al.)² and add the names of all the guilty (including sanctioning politicians) in this “giant violation of law.”

Take the blizzard surrounding Benghazi:

 How soon we seem to forget the facts of “9-11” and numerous other embassy deaths in past years as we point fingers of outrage.

Take the blizzard surrounding the IRS scandal:

 How duplicitous to stand atop a heap of one’s own still secret “targets” (past and present) and point with indignation at another’s targets.

Does not the Ministry of Truth from Orwell’s 1984 seems alive and well as we frame and reframe events to conform to our 180° view of a 360° world?

------------------------/
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden
2. http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/2013/06/14/edward-snowden-u-s-traitor.html

“The Great Chain of Being” [Subservient]

~
If ever there were a clear case of ubiquitous déjà vu, it is The Great Chain of Being Subservient. Not in the sense of being subject to authority for the maintenance of social order balanced with individual liberty, but in the subjugation of one’s life, gifts, talents, and yearnings for the sake of money—whether for one’s own gain (or survival) or for the gain of an employer or master.

History has seen men, women, and children cycle through soul-crushing subjugations to every type of master—with reforms and revolutions mostly just empowering some new over-lord.

We pretend The Great Chain (vis-à-vis humans) was broken with democratic and industrial revolutions yet we seem to have merely extended the reach of a harsh, unmerciful over-lord—debt. An over-lord, extant from ages past, loved by the market-place, oft fed by inadequate wages, and now bloated with manufactured desires.

Why do we, too often, sacrifice gifts, talents, dreams, soul, and integrity to over-lords like debt, pay-checks, perks, bonuses, loyalties, prestige, possessions, security, etc.? Perhaps the chief cause is Fear, as in “What will become of me if I leave my soul-depleting employment?” How long before oppressions and stress manifest in mental illness?¹ Can one prosper in doing what nourishes the soul?

Haven’t we endured long enough the dogmas of competitive capitalism? Don’t we have enough evidence that cooperative capitalism is the more sure means to widespread prosperity and to the pursuit of happiness for the majority? Why is our excess (if we have any) locked in investment reserves (managed by financiers) instead of “kick starting”² projects WE deem worthy?

Thankfully, more and more activists are challenging the discredited ideologies of omniscient markets and global glorifications. Until we reject the false extremes of “free-market competition,” self-interest, and profit-primacy, The Great Chain of Being Subservient will persist in its various manifestations from the most elite HyPEs (Highy Paid Employees) to the working poor to the involuntary unemployed.

----------------/
1. http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2011/12/20/the-high-cost-of-workplace-mental-health/
2. http://www.kickstarter.com/

See also http://dejavu-times.blogspot.com/2009/12/lucky-you-lucky-them.html

Thoughts sparked in part from studying The Great Courses “Foundations of Western Civilization II: A History of the Modern Western World,” with Professor Robert Bucholz; from David C. Korten books; and from Yes! magazine.

National Finals

~
A short, multiple-choice exam for Nations, their presidents, prime ministers, kings, rulers, magistrates, electees, appointees, dictators, usurpers, etc., AND their lawyers, advisers, employees, go-fers, and sycophants. Examinees have 7 options:

A= YES
B= NO
C= Maybe
D= I don’t remember
E= I take the American Fifth
F= I’d rather go-to-hell than tell (Caveat emptor: this may constitute a technical redundancy.)
X= My employer made me^[1]

PLEASE ANSWER HONESTLY—even if it goes against your nature!

Have you EVER:

1. lied? __________
2. taken a bribe? __________
3. deliberately destroyed important documents? __________
4. favored a financial donor’s agenda? __________
5. misused government revenues? __________
6. abused others from a position of power/prestige? __________
7. turned a blind eye to the crimes of “friends” or colleagues? __________
8. interfered in a judicial case? __________
9. twisted/manipulated facts, statistics, text, pictures, videos, etc. __________
10. succumbed to insider trading? __________
11. ignored/denied a conflict of interest? __________
12. mis-/discounted/manipulated election results? __________
13. broken any law for personal, family, or collegial benefit? __________
14. deliberately dropped a bomb on civilians? __________
15. deliberately dropped an A or H bomb? __________
16. injured or killed innocent people and called it collateral damage? __________
17. instigated/fomented rebellion against elected officials in other nations? __________
18. believed you were appointed by God to micro-manage the people? __________
19. played the harlot (in déjà vu of Ezekiel 16:28^[2])? __________
20. told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? __________

-------------------------/
[1] In this case, please read

http://dejavu-times.blogspot.com/2009/07/to-loyalists-everywhere.html
http://dejavu-times.blogspot.com/2010/01/proliferation-of-masters.html
http://dejavu-times.blogspot.com/2010/01/vc-beware-spokesman.html

[2] Old Testament Ezekiel 16:28: Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians [et al.], because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied.

Fill in the Blanks!

In his book entitled, Voltaire’s Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West, John Ralston Saul profiles certain technocrats from the latter-half of the 20th Century whose devotion to systems and theories have led our "promising" civil society down the path to perpetual war, economic tyranny, and pernicious dogma. Now, in the first decades of the 21st Century, we seem inundated with hard-core, déjà vu clones of systems men and women—power brokers—who have finagled themselves into advisory roles at every level, and several, into the highest judicial office in the land, even SCOTUS. When the scales of justice, once again come into balance (through revolution or massive civil rejection of the dogmas and corruptions), the names of these system sycophants will fill the blanks, list upon list. Perhaps you can fill in a few from mere observation and analysis. (The indented quotes below are from Voltaire's Bastards:)

[_____] is the most perfect example of a technocrat holding great power while crippled by a personality cleanly divided between mechanical brilliance at one extreme and childlike idealism at the other, with absolutely no thread of common sense to link the two together (p.96).
… From his appointment in [____] he carefully avoided the technocrat’s inferiority in public affairs by staying out of sight [as much as possible] while quite naturally combining enormous political power without public responsibility. … [____] was obsessive about secrecy. He controlled information flows even within the government, thus excluding certain ministers. He was, by nature, a manipulator of men and structures (p.97).
… [_____] seemed to believe that by means of a determined legal, technical, and manipulative intervention, reality would be put back in its amateurish place (p.98).
… In the context of the technocratic mind, truth, like history and events, is what suits the interests of the system or the game plan of the man in charge. Truth is an intellectual abstraction, and a man like [____] felt himself in control of the definitions (p.108).
… Almost without exception they [____] are bullies. … Their abstract view of the machinery of human society prevents them from understanding the natural flow of events and from remembering when they themselves have erred and why (p.115).
… Instead they [____] seem actually to believe that their definitions of the world will become both real and permanent simply because they are the result of applied logic. When these formulae refuse to stick, the technocratic mind, rather than deal with failure simply wipes the slate clean and writes a new definition. They are, in that sense, slaves of dogma. At the same time they tend to avoid the maintenance of linear memory. An accurate picture of recent events would prevent the constant reorganizations which they use as a means of erasing the past and justifying current actions (p.116).

Many of these “blanks” are just modern courtesans who “fit the shoe” of Mikhail Lermontov’s poem from 1837 (Death of a Poet):

You, greedy crew that round the scepter crawl,
Butchers of freedom, genius, and renown!
Hid by the bulwark of the law, and all—
[Justice], truth and honour in your steps cast down!¹

When systems and theories trump human rights, perhaps it’s time for an anti-T² Party that rejects the fallacies and corruptions of both the right and the left.

-----------------/
1 As quoted at p. 100-101 of Saul’s, Voltaire’s Bastards. See an additional translation at http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/lermontov/death_of_poet.html
2. As in TYRANNY where multinationals manipulate governments, governments betray citizens, and where too many citizens will not look behind the PR and propaganda that is inexorably centralizing in the name of freedom and democracy, an even more egregious power concentration than what they have been indoctrinated to fear from the left.

See also: http://dejavu-times.blogspot.com/2009/09/are-we-there-yet-at-t-point.html

A Proliferation of Masters

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. (New Testament Matthew 6:24; Luke 16:13, “No servant …”)

These words were spoken nigh 2,000 years ago, and perhaps never before in history, till our day, have more people been attempting to do this very thing—to serve two (or more) masters. I do not speak in main of the ageless dilemmas that have burdened servants and employees,* such as:

▪ Do I say or do things on behalf of my employer that violate my personal integrity and moral values?
▪ Do I have to work on my Holy Day to keep (or get) my job, or to avoid being an inconvenience to my fellow employees or bosses?
▪ Do my employer’s business practices to which I contribute through my time and energies violate my sense of fairness and justice?
▪ Do I turn a blind eye to right and wrong because I need/want that pay-cheque?
▪ Do I tolerate personal injustices and abuses for the sake of employment?
▪ Have I taken employment that offends my spirit and purpose in life for the compensation and amenities because I fear, “What will become of me?” if I don’t or for the mere fact that the pay and benefits were better than an alternative that would have nourished by soul?
▪ Etc., etc.

Employees have always been at risk for such conflicts of interest. But, in today’s world, at least four other masters have become so pervasive, there is scarce a living soul that is not juggling at least two—not to mention comparable pressures on companies and even nations!

Consider—
Master Two as mammon through debt.

What does debt impel us to do? Have any of the Ten Commandments or other moral imperatives given way to the stresses of debt? What can debt cause us to put at risk or lose? Home, family, friends, integrity, compassion, security, peace of mind, trust in God? What would our answers be to the bulleted questions above were we to substitute “debt” for “employer”?

As well, how many companies have succumbed to debt? How many nations have compromised their sovereignty on account of it? Bartered away the wellbeing of their citizens?

Consider—
Master Three as mammon through the desire for power or fame.

What do government officials or private business leaders do, refrain from doing, consent to, deny, and so forth, for the sake of gifts, donations, assurances, alliances, perks, privileges, re-election, reappointment, etc.? What do the powerful and famous do to retain power and fame? Has the achievement of them ever been a personal temptation? Have we become so inured to the status quo of mammon in our politics, business, entertainment, sports, and even religion, that we discount the servitude and consequent devastations to our democratic, creative, spiritual, and moral values?

Consider—
Master Four as the mammon of investment pursuits.

In this day of increasingly unregulated finance capital, how many persons or fund managers buy shares, stocks, bonds, financial instruments, etc. without the slightest regard for anything but maximized returns? This Master is perhaps the most subversive of all, because as owner of the investment, we appear to be the master, when in reality, the “pursuit of profit” becomes the Master. We take the “three monkey” stance of refusing to see, hear, or speak evil of how our money is employed to build upon itself. We profess to be good Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Confucians, or other moralists, yet do we “innocently” invest our surplus or leveraged capital in plans and programs that violate our beliefs?

How much public good have we sacrificed for private gain? How many public and private costs have our investment strategies shunted to public accounts to increase the bottom line? How informed are we about the ways and means of our investment portfolios? Do we prefer not to know?

Consider—
Master Five as the mammon of ideology.

How many of us are so fixated on some idea, person, or thing that perceived “good” ends claim to justify foul means? So convinced or zealous we won’t consider further facts or contradicting witnesses? How many of our politicians bow to the party line knowing they are harming their constituents and their country? Must others obey law, use common sense, be reasonable and conciliatory, while we can be excused through rightness or rank? Do our wills and insights supersede all other wills and insights? Do we discard moral strictures to promote or protect our ideology?

Consider—
Who and what are the masters in your life?

--------------
*(including, maybe especially, latter-day CEOs, CFOs, CAOs, etc.)

va: Beware the Spokesman!

“Talk about déjà vu!!!!!” my friend Sondra headlined in her email reporting her belated research on the state of healthcare debates.* She continued: “It was the tobacco boys all over again. Painful! Painful! Our best ’n brightest industry spokesmen—lined up like errant school chums—all prepped by their corporate-ness to the identical party-line. The new chant?—Recission. Recission. Recission. (Unanimous!) And you know what? I actually felt sorry for them—these free-market devotees touting policy and ‘apple-pie’ American business—for I never saw a sadder display of conformism and lackey-loo in all my life (except, of course, for those tobacco boys**). And it set me to thinking. Right there in that hearing-room was the raison d’étre (’scuse the French) of stratospheric compensation pacts. They buy soul.

“And the sweet hush-hush is that for many of our chiefs and semi-chiefs, it’s only half the story. They spend their days eating, drinking, flying, and perking at company expense. So, I ask you: Like who would give up that kind of privilege—that kind of “security” to speak one’s mind; to question the status quo; to question the ethics?

“So what do you think? Can anyone EVER agree to be a spokesman for pay without risking a fracture of soul? And considering the trade-off, how cheap it seems to go—whatever the perks! Sad, sad, SAD!”

---------------
* July 27, 2009 hearing at Indiana University Southeast, United States House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations New Albany, IN Field Hearing led by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the said Subcommittee. Spokesmen: Don Hamm President and CEO of Assurant Health, Indianapolis, Indiana; Richard A. Collins, CEO of Golden Rule Insurance Company, a UnitedHealth Group business, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Brian A. Sassi, President and C.E.O., Consumer Business, WellPoint, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana.
http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1718:terminations-of-health-policies-by-insurance-companies-state-perspectives-and-legislative-solutions&catid=133:subcommittee-on-oversight-and-investigations&Itemid=73&layout=default&date=2009-07-01

**Tobacco boys: http://www.jeffreywigand.com/7ceos.php

To Loyalists* Everywhere

(*Addressed specifically to every soul upset by Déjà Vu criticisms & more generally to Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, Socialists, Communists, rebels, terrorists, groupies, nationalists, globalists, sectarians, and loyal dependents of every stripe—including those dependent on an employer’s pay cheque^[1] or those intimidated by dependency into the façade of loyalty; etc., etc.)

Every desired value has its extremes, and LOYALTY has been pulled and pushed to the extreme since the dawn of power; pushed and pulled to that place where seeing we will not see, hearing we will not hear, and being challenged we will not read, research, investigate, or admit of any negatives.

This willful ignorance^[2] is the sad legacy of unquestioning loyalty to any person, cause, group, idea, or ideology. We mount our political, religious, or ideological high-horses and wield the sword of our various passionate loyalties striving to cut asunder all criticism and opposition. Thus, too many of us speak democratic principles with our lips but in our hearts and councils seek monopolies of thought, perspective, and action. We call our version “patriotic” or “the ONLY truth,” and resist with anger, the historical parallels—the corruptions, conspiracies, and crimes (the 3Cs) that forever tempt (and too often accompany) power and influence. For extreme loyalists, the 3Cs that might apply to their own loyalty are fiercely denied or justified for extenuating cause.

But questioning and requests for transparency and accountability are not acts of disloyalty. They are duties—obligations of intelligent life to demand balance, integrity, justice, equity, thought, and consideration. Intelligence demands accountability. Intelligence rejects the hypocrisy of saying one thing and doing another. That is how I see it, and that is why I “déjà vu” in the hope that my insights (perhaps mistaken at times) may help move us from intransigence to seeing, hearing, and investigating the full story of our loyalties; and to recognize both the richness and the tragic waste in the complex, precious, and déjà vu world of such loyalties.

[1] “It is difficult for them to see whose paycheck depends on them not seeing.” Upton Sinclair
[2] A version of the three-monkey stance: See no evil, hear no evil, & ask no question concerning the object of loyalty.