Religion is just one of the many behaviors which enable people to adapt to the pressures and dangers of this planet as a species which has survived so far by that very strategy.
It took me about a dozen years to get the anger out of my system. I was sold a Bill of Goods which did NOT work! I was ready to burn it all down.
To mend this world we need to be--not arsons--but firemen.
How can we persuade others the religious mindset is only a temporary strategy with a high cost in time and effort to maintain a sense of security?
Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still.
Kindness, empathy, listening.
Let's face the fact our world has caught a really bad case of obsession with ideology.
So many arguments and shut-down, name calling and each side know they are right.
Kindness, empathy, listening is perhaps a better highway.
Becoming some kind of example means we have to convert ourselves first.
Alcoholics don't reform until they hit bottom.
Addicts are trying to ease the internal pain but the means they use is destroying them.
Until the religious person smashes into some kind of wall, some point of no return--they have no incentive to humble themselves.
Arguing doesn't work.
If a person who is religious is in a family and community of happiness--why would they change?
It is corny to say this but I believe it is true:
BECOME THE CHANGE you want to see in this world.
TerryWalstrom
JoinedPosts by TerryWalstrom
-
40
Overcoming our Evolutionary purpose in order to save mankind (A most interesting discussion)
by TerryWalstrom inrecently bret weinstein and richard dawkins sat down for a debate.in the following video, weinstein talks about what can be done to address an error in dawkins'selfish gene theory in terms of the new atheism's error and regarding religion as a mind virus.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm8fksjljtm&t=1096s_____and a good follow up:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr5yn2g4h54&t=904s.
.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
-
"Murder Your Darlings" (Advice to writers given by William Faulkner)
by TerryWalstrom inmurder your darlings(advice to writers attributed to william faulkner).
come in and have a seat in that chair.
i’m georgiana.
-
TerryWalstrom
MURDER YOUR DARLINGS
(Advice to writers attributed to William Faulkner)Come in and have a seat in that chair.
I’m Georgiana. I know you by your reputation as an honest reporter.
A professional writer. I’ll give you my story.
All I ask is two things.
First, please excuse my appearance. My dark glasses hide bruises.
Second, quote me exactly--no insinuating tone. I am a lady despite rumors.
Now, to begin…For all the women murdered by my husband, I was-- am the one he saved for last.
Saving the best for last is quite rational you’ll agree?
It bespeaks the obvious: I, Georgiana, am the best of all the victims.
You find that amusing? Well, I don’t.
I’m a very practical person--but I have my pride.
Yes, I’m prideful enough to exult in such notoriety as the one he saved for last.
If you knew Henry as a cold-blooded monster who held women in no particular esteem whatsoever--you’d discover my point of pride on this.
I would have been murdered except...
I turned Henry in and he has been arrested and held for murder.
Correction, murders.
So many. No one would imagine just how many!I only agreed to sit down with one journalist.
You are that man because I wanted the very best. You understand?
I exclude the sensation seekers, the liars and exaggerators.
I’d prefer you say something like this in your interview copy:
“Georgiana’s current reputation...is the work of small minds.”Suspicious and low-minded reporters--present company excepted, of course--have treated me as H. H. Holmes’ accomplice.
This is preposterous and artful invention--I was completely fooled until the police arrived and apprised me of the extraordinary events surrounding Henry’s murderous trail of deceit and serial murder.
He got away with all those dead partners, murdered wives, the swindles and embezzlements because news travels slowly and no photos of Henry have been published. He used so many phony names, alibis and quick-witted stories--such is his hideous genius.
I only had one thing to go on in my appraisal of him as a man. He was shy, courteous, charming and found me fascinating.This may be the 1890’s, but modern telegraph and newspapers do a poor job in sounding an alarm throughout these United States, small towns, backwater villages.
There is no heads up for rich widows who are lonely and susceptible to a fast-talking son-of-a-bitch who finds them fascinating.You see--I...
I managed to convince myself we somehow bonded.
He appealed to some protective, empathic disposition within me--can you imagine?
I see you’re thinking what a fool she is.I tell you this extremely embarrassing personal gossip because certain reporters--not like yourself, have written and published in their newspapers of “Georgiana’s tendencies as ...adventurous…” which, these days, implies a woman of loose morals.
My judgment is loose on its hinges, I’ll grant you.
My morals are intact. Look how many hapless men Henry gulled and murdered--not all simpering lady folk--grown men! He is tricky and undetectable!
You can quote me on this.
I would be more than lucky to avoid my fate unless I acted immediately to secure an escape from his plans for my destruction.
But I delayed turning him in once I began to suspect he was an abnormally prodigious liar.
Yet--something was interfering with my natural survival instinct.
Most curious!
An intelligent, well-educated person--a journalist such as yourself has probably never been completely fooled by a charismatic criminal.
I see the smile.
You think you’re older, wiser and superior to Georgiana--the little fool.
I laugh at you, then.
That’s the sort of confidence all victims possess.
Predators toy with their intended victims. The smarter the prey--the better the game.
He delights in personal danger--it turns up his flame of inspiration.
If he set his cap for you--it was only a matter of time.
Henry took you in and distracted you before you knew what hit you.
Worse still--what about intuition? Gut feeling?
The tickle on the back of your neck screams a silent warning no one can hear?
What would you do? One moment you trust the person in the room with you--and straightaway, that little cold tingle--and it’s too late.While you are pondering...I’ll say one more thing. If you found yourself alone in a room with Henry and he suspected you of suspecting him-- you’d never leave that room alone and alive.
So, Fear? Um-hm. Of course. He ate your fear for his breakfast.But you’d never in a million years guess the next part.
ADMIRATION!
Sick, twisted admiration--I’ll concede.
What did I admire? His scathingly brilliant mind! A criminal mastermind!
You’ll want to write this down. Go ahead...it must all be printed exactly as I say it.He tried to convince me to dress up in clothes like his; Derby, mustache, becoming an imposter to divert the police while he made good his escape!
What sort of woman would do that for a serial murderer IF SHE KNEW?I can see you’re baffled.
You’ve stopped writing down what I’m saying.
You’re thinking, Georgiana is talking out of both sides of her mouth.
Georgiana claims to not be an accomplice and yet she admired the monster who’d planned to kill her.
Why?
Your face is very pale, Sir.
I once read about a writer’s club called The Inklings.
Do you belong? Do you have inklings?
I apologize for my dark glasses.
There is an abnormal largeness to my eyes. More than one physician has said it may well be a tumor behind them which has the effect of disconcerting people on the first encounter.
I wanted to curry favor with you, not put you off.Henry, by contrast, has weird and unsettling eyes which never gazed directly at you. No no. You catch him out of the corner of your eye staring like some hideous and hungry demon.
I am Georgiana and I speak wide-eyed and innocently.
I can see by your face you caught my obvious joke.
____
Whom do you think is telling this story?
I’m such a spoilsport.
Let me remove my glasses for you.
_______
To the Public:
He was the best writer I could find and now he is a former one.
I’m completing his little essay out of respect for talent.
The expression of surprise on his face was delightful!
My squinty eyes drank in his terror and my thirst was quenched.
Georgiana will have been hanged by now--in my clothes.
A volunteer--to honor my genius and her devotion to me.I’ve celebrated my freedom with this blade and a river of red ink.
Georgiana, my darling, wherever your soul may be--this sacrifice I offer in your name--my one and only love.
I too fancy myself a writer.
The best advice a writer has ever given rings true.Have you heard it?
“Murder your darlings.”
_____
A short story by T.E. Walstrom -
72
Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?
by TerryWalstrom inbanks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.
in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?
banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/
I like how the politicians talk out of both sides of their mouth knowing the public isn't keeping tabs on
anything said.
"Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess."
_____
MeanMrMustard is right:
The above article points out: "The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods."
_____
This quote is particularly galling:
"All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit." -
72
Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?
by TerryWalstrom inbanks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.
in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?
banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
There is no conspiracy but there is political malfeasance in relaxing the Laws which keep lending institutions under strict scrutiny.
Under President Obama, the bad legislation which led to the 2008 meltdown was addressed with stricter policies of tight regulation. Under President Trump, those stricter policies have been relaxed again and loosening of regulations. Go figure!
Remember which political figure said, "Deficits don't matter?"
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/28/16378854/mark-walker-deficit
BUT WAIT!
Saying such things publicly sort of rules out a conspiracy and bolsters the idea of lunacy.
*In 2009 Dodd-Frank Bank regulation laws were passed in reaction to the crash the previous year with oversight rules which call for strict monitoring.
On March 14, 2018, the US Senate passed a bill by a 67 to 31 vote, easing financial regulations and reducing oversight for banks. The law passed the House of Representatives on May 22, 2018 in a 258–159 vote. The legislation was then signed into law by US President Donald Trump on May 24, 2018. -
40
Overcoming our Evolutionary purpose in order to save mankind (A most interesting discussion)
by TerryWalstrom inrecently bret weinstein and richard dawkins sat down for a debate.in the following video, weinstein talks about what can be done to address an error in dawkins'selfish gene theory in terms of the new atheism's error and regarding religion as a mind virus.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm8fksjljtm&t=1096s_____and a good follow up:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr5yn2g4h54&t=904s.
.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
(Evolution is change over time under pressure by proliferating one's own gametes. This impulse takes no higher notice of good, better, best for others.)
Dawkins won't concede that religious beliefs are part of the adaptation process of the evolutionary imperative.
Bret Weinstein views this as unfortunate because there are definite social benefits which accrue when people act ethically toward one another. (Even when based on imaginary traditions.)
Where is the hang-up?
Dawkins feels he must totally reject superstitious, non-factual premise on which religion is based and view ALL religious impulses as a virus of the mind amounting to insanity.
Weinstein sees Evolution as the "instinct" to overcome all competition in the pursuit of spreading one's genes. Humans have more potential than merely that and unless they get a handle on other ways of adapting the drive to view others as tribe / non-tribe, civilization will tear itself apart in pissing matches, political wars, and turf struggles. -
40
Overcoming our Evolutionary purpose in order to save mankind (A most interesting discussion)
by TerryWalstrom inrecently bret weinstein and richard dawkins sat down for a debate.in the following video, weinstein talks about what can be done to address an error in dawkins'selfish gene theory in terms of the new atheism's error and regarding religion as a mind virus.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm8fksjljtm&t=1096s_____and a good follow up:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr5yn2g4h54&t=904s.
.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
Recently Bret Weinstein and Richard Dawkins sat down for a debate.
In the following video, Weinstein talks about what can be done to address an error in Dawkins'
Selfish Gene theory in terms of the New Atheism's error and regarding religion as a mind virus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm8FksjlJtM&t=1096s
_____
And a good follow up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR5yN2G4h54&t=904s -
7
A Cat's Last Emily (Emily's Last Cat)
by TerryWalstrom ina cat's last emily (emily's last cat) __________.
lifting her elbow up off of her cat.
emily whispered, .
-
-
TerryWalstrom
Diogenesister: You must be published. Links?
I've written three books (two on Amazon) and one about to publish.
Thanks for your interest. -
7
A Cat's Last Emily (Emily's Last Cat)
by TerryWalstrom ina cat's last emily (emily's last cat) __________.
lifting her elbow up off of her cat.
emily whispered, .
-
-
TerryWalstrom
Thank you.
I woke this morning missing my old friend, Quincy. We were JW's together since the age of 13. He died two years ago and the sound of my phone not ringing is the saddest sound of all.
HOME IS WHERE YOUR HEART ISIf willows had wings and wasps could sing
If flurries of snowfall were blue
The roar of the Nile and its proud crocodiles
Would carry me back home to youIf pennies were time, I’d buy for a dime
An echo of you for a day
And then I could tell the old wishing well
To carry me back home to youThe wind comes along just to whisper your song
Then turns out its pockets for me
That broken old moon has spoken and soon
Will carry me back home to youIf death had no sting every church bell would ring
If tears made a sound in the night
The angels could listen and thunder would glisten
And carry me back home to youTime spins to an end and I’ll find you, old friend
A beautiful lie must be true
IF it rains pennies fall and we'll pay one and all
When they carry me back home to you(In Memory of my friend Quincy Roberts)
___________**_________ -
7
A Cat's Last Emily (Emily's Last Cat)
by TerryWalstrom ina cat's last emily (emily's last cat) __________.
lifting her elbow up off of her cat.
emily whispered, .
-
-
TerryWalstrom
Thanks for the encouraging words.
It was early this morning when a short phrase worked its way into my head.
It interested me for some strange reason. It had a kind of lilt to it and was suggestive of an idea. "Lifting her elbow up off of her cat" was all I had.
I had no idea where it would take me. So, what I did was select a piece of very evocative music to play through my earphones that would impel me to write in a stream of consciousness. The music was Emmanuel by Michael Colombier and played by Chris Botti.
The rest happened organically right down to the last stanza when I got stuck. I wanted it to end the same way it began; melancholy but happy. But no--the music had its way and poor Emily never made it back up the stairs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClMTuUwl0tg
I've been told this was a bit on the dark and side side--so--I've been moved to write a brief epilogue:
EPILOGUE
(The landlord sits reading by her window at night
In her lap sits a book, a new cat block's the light
No longer lonely with this grateful Le Chat
The cat she names "Emily" ( Emily's last cat.) -
72
Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?
by TerryWalstrom inbanks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.
in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?
banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.
-
-
TerryWalstrom
All week long I've been reading about the history of banks in the U.S
The idea of doing business without using, touching, or carrying actual gold or silver came about this way:
At a certain point in history, trading and barter became very burdensome. Coining valuable metal into portable currency seemed a better alternative. Not ideal, but better than barter. Local lending institutions with trusted operators became necessary. Poor people did NOT trust a National Bank over a Local Bank for a long time. Why? Because they were run by strangers and the opportunity for locals to keep an eye on the bankers was not possible or to judge their character.Local banks were run by people they knew.
The eventual solution? FREE BANKING ERA.
Local Banks could do as they pleased as long as funds were backed by an equal amount of gold on hand and on demand. Free banking spread rapidly to other states, and from 1840 to 1863 all banking business was done by state-chartered institutions.The legitimacy of any bank was solely determined by the LAWS passed locally or nationally to monitor and control operations.
“Wildcat” banking appeared because local laws could be “relaxed” by local politicians, cronies, and double-dipping investors!NOTE: Banknotes were issued against little or no security, and credit was over-expanded. The borrower couldn’t pay back the loan and the local economy became depressed (the payback funds were necessary for the Bank to make new loans).
What remedy was possible?
Federal Laws were enacted to examine and regulate all banks and bring currencies in use into harmony.
THE NATIONAL BANK ACT radically changed how banks operated.
Local banks which refused to abide were taxed until they came in line and agreed.
To compete with National Banks, State Banks created a new invention: the Checking Account. Customers could pay their bills and buy goods WITHOUT DEMANDING GOLD from the local bank’s on hand reserves.
During the Civil War, the Federal need for funds to fight the war led to the selling of Government Bonds (I.O.U.’s + interest) citizens purchased on promise of repayment and profit.
As the Age of Industry began, banks began investing in commercial enterprises by lending money to entrepreneurs for startup, equipment, etc. The interest charged added to the bank reserves on hand.
The whole idea of using paper money, Bonds, IOU's, promissory notes made "cashless" transaction possible as more and more people began to TRUST that somewhere somebody had gold or silver on hand to back up the transactions.
Human beings are not trustworthy when they get the chance to steal or gain advantage.
So?
So, after banks failed, the Federal Government stepped in and guaranteed local banks up to a certain amount. This was to instill trust (even when trust was illusory)
The big financial meltdown in 2008 came because untrustworthy people did untrustworthy things such as selling houses to customers without enough collateral.
Why would Lenders do that?
2 reasons
1. An act of Congress made them do it
2. Banks could sell the "bad paper" to Wall Street
Who went to prison for any of this?
I don't know--you tell me? Nobody is what I'd say.
Why nobody? Because Congress made it possible and Congress jumped in and supported the Too Big To Fail stop gap financing. TRUST was purchased. CONFIDENCE was purchased. With what money and from where? From future taxpayers.
That's right. People who aren't yet born.
Money from nothing.
Who do we owe all those TRILLIONS to? Each other.
We pay taxes. The government spends tax money not yet collected by borrowing.
Banks, the Treasury, the Fed all participate in a mostly illusory leveraging of the future to pay for the present.
Those who get angry fall into two categories.
1. Those who see nothing wrong with this and say it will all be okay, so shut the hell up.
2. Those who become convinced a vast conspiracy is involved.
What do I think? I think no conspiracy is necessary when most of what happens is made
legal by politicians acting in public (getting voter approval) who are paid to grease the wheels of fiat money and future leveraging.
The so-called 1% is enabled by voters, if you come right down to it.
If regular civilians could spend like crazy and not pay their bills--(Big Brother will step in and pay) almost everybody would. But hey--a great many citizens live beyond their means using credit to purchase goods and services--all on a PROMISE to PAY.
In other words: we all do it--"money for nothing and the chicks are free."
