Court-report-and-Highwood-Generating-station from May 2013

I published this as a Blogspot post in 2013, after being called to jury duty.   I discuss my past with the two District Judges, Parker and Best, neither of whom was a judge then (Parker was County Atty).  For some reason, this post was deleted.  Do judges have the ability to do that?   I posted the link on FB, but not the text, which I will do, now..   PHS, Mayday 2019


http://paul-stephens.blogspot.com/2013/05/court-report-and-highwood-generating.html

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Court Report and the Highwood Generating Station (sic)


Court Reform

I had the opportunity to serve on a jury (or at least go through the selection process) for the past two days, and I learned a lot from it.

John Parker was prosecuting the case of an alleged "pipe bomber" from Stafford County, Virginia, Judge Sandefur presiding.  It immediately became apparent that I should go to work for the defense, rather than serving on the jury.  No one believed that I didn't somehow know or have some connection with Mr. Stewart, the defendant (since I make a point of identifying myself as a Jacobite - at least for British purposes, as well as anarchist and "enemy of the state.").  And perhaps I do.  I certainly perceived him to be a worthy bearer of that name, but of course I had no opportunity to discuss his case or his personal history with him.

Now that I am off the jury, I might have an opportunity to do that.  But I'm almost certain there are rules against it, which seem to me to be improper, although often necessary.  I could probably get a waiver or something.  I was called to the jury at random, and found to be biased or predisposed to do less (or perhaps more) than justice required.  I should be free to help the defense, now, or at least evaluate its strategy and prospects.

Although I have no known historical connections with Virginia, outside of the usual patriotic, "Founding Fathers" identification with Washington, Jefferson, and Madison (and Jefferson, of course, is most important to Montana, which was part of the Louisiana Purchase), the name "Stewart" or Stuart rings many bells.  I suspect that Mr. Parker bumped me because he knew I was a friend of Stuart Lewin, a well-known local lawyer and political/enviro activist.  But I only know him socially and through environmental causes.  I've never retained his services or otherwise identified with his law practice.  Another I know (or thought I knew) is Channing Hartelius, who was Stuart's law partner early-on (they both went to George Washington University Law School).  Channing was a year ahead of me at GFHS, and we had many mutual friends.  And I've played poker with him in bars, not privately.  I've always criticized every lawyer I know when I think they are doing something stupid.  I'm a student of the law and legal philosophy, and I seem to be just about the only one here in Great Falls.  We should start a Jurisprudence Discussion Club, or something.

We were asked if we had any connections with law enforcement or the legal community.  Perhaps I should have mentioned Stuart and Channing as "law-enforcement" people I was acquainted with.  As a cab driver, I knew dozens of cops as well as some JP's, but none appeared on the list of witnesses in this case.  (They were Highway Patrol or Cascade County deputies, mostly).  Although I worked for a former Sheriff for six years managing apartments (1990-1996), I am no longer on good terms with him, since I think he owes me money (or more accurately, his partners do, along with him).  Bob Jones was also a partner in that Lexington Group, but he was out when they hired me, they said.

Mr Parker recognized me as someone who had run against him for the Legislature (2004), and we had one personal conversation (at the Labor Day picnic) after which  I withdrew from the race.  I didn't discuss my reasons for withdrawing from that campaign - I was still on the ballot, and received 10% of the vote with no Republican in the race.  Reasons included being fired from my job as cab driver (there's one monopoly, politically connected cab company, here), and failure to be endorsed by the Montana Conservation Voters, who endorsed Mr. Parker, instead.  They could have endorsed us both - I ran as a Green and had worked with the MCV for many years.

At the time, Mr. Parker supported the Highwood Generating Station, and it was Aart Dolman and Ben Graybill who interviewed me for the endorsement.  This also resulted in my resigning from Citizens for Clean energy, although I continued to oppose the HGS in every detail and every step of the way - except the one detail which CCE pursued, which was to outlaw small, independent Green Coops with the assistance of Northwestern Energy - the local monopoly grid.

This disastrous move was carried out by Cheryl Reichert, but with no opposition from anyone but me.  Even MEIC, an environmental advocacy group, got on board due to Cheryl's influence and the money she was able to raise for them, thus discrediting real environmentalists like me who were forbidden even to use the mailing lists we had put together.

Several lawyers besides Stuart got involved and made some political capital out of it, too.  I might mention Elizabeth Best, who ran for the Supreme Court and is a personal friend from the Unitarian Fellowship as well as Facebook and other venues. (She nailed me with the information that it was her grandfather, Dr. McPhail, an obstetrician, who brought me and thousands of others into the world.  That's better than a legacy of a million dollars for her).

I remarked at the time that by opposing Green co-ops and siding with NW Energy, the group had discredited themselves for any moral case against the HGS, a judgment strenuously opposed by several other "professional class" people or professors in the group.  These guys are a "union" covering up for each other like no other.  Indeed, it was only because of strong Union and co-op minded support that the plant was ever dreamed of, but the "answer" wasn't to attack unions and co-ops, but to explain global warming and other environmental consequences (as well as the vast rip-off of Montana resources and consumers - and taxpayers - which made the HGS a total non-starter).  Now, that is all clear, but only a few of us seemed to understand it 10 years ago, when the City (under John Lawton and Randy Gray as Mayor) first got involved in the HGS.

But I found Mr. Parker to be much improved, and I was not going to hold that past history against him.  I do take issue with his understanding of the law and legal processes, though, and it was only prudent of him to make sure I couldn't bring up any of this extraneous information in my role as juror.  (Not that I would have had any opportunity to do so).

I must say, the whole case seems staged and somehow "political".  Mr. Parker's main power base and campaign supporters (his present position is appointed) were, in fact, the police and prison-guard's (also Teacher's) unions.  He was praised lavishly by the law enforcement community for his many prosecutions of victimless crime, as well as mere possession of anything "sexually arousing" involving children.  He was able to convince the Legislature that anyone having a picture of a nude child and using it for sexual arousal (masturbation) deserved a 20 years mandatory prison sentence.  No child need have been abused or tortured, frontal nudity was not required, nor any sort of sex act.  Children photographed in the bathtub have been prosecuted under such laws, as well as paintings and other works depicting naked children, which millions do.

Although the mandatory sentencing has been largely removed in Montana, there are still a large number of victimless crimes which Mr. Parker is glad to prosecute - apparently to pay off the right-wing "law and order" people who want to pack the prisons even further - even though we now lock up 5 times more people than any other country (Britain has increased its prison population, too, in recent years, and always ranked 2nd to the US.), and spend as much on prisons(both locally and nationally)  as we do on public colleges and universities.  The Economist often remarked that we have cut welfare and substituted prisons for a universal social safety net and health care system.

I fear that Mr. Stewart will not get justice.  And he has also indicated through his attorney, Mr. Scott, that he won't testify in his own defense.  Mr. Scott (apparently no relation to Bill Scott, a prominent local lawyer and Republican - former Mayor), made a big point of asking the jurors what they might think of a defendant who wouldn't testify in his own defense?  Several who expressed reservations were dismissed.

All in all, thanks to Judge Sandefur, there were a lot of good points made about the law and its application, to educate the jurors in what their rights and duties might be.  The one thing they don't tolerate in Montana is finding fault with the law, itself - so-called "jury nullification."   At a time when every legislature passes hundreds of laws (like Mr. Parker's "child pornography" campaign) due to lobbying, misrepresentation, or outright bribery and coercion, it should be the  job of jurors to make sure that no one is unjustly prosecuted or punished for such "victimless crimes".

In the present case,  the charge was Attempted Murder, part of the traditional criminal law, so there would be no issue of the law being wrong or invalid, but there could be plenty of issues involving whether this was an appropriate charge, whether the accused is sane and responsible, what his motives were, etc.  I even suggested "criminal endangerment" as a better charge, but of course we were not allowed to have even the most superficial information presented to us beyond what would be presented in court (another fault - why  shouldn't we have access to other information and sources?).

I  was most concerned about  the widespread practice of "over-charging" so that a plea-bargain (which is rarely binding, anyway) might avoid a trial, while still putting a felony conviction and some jail time (got to support that Prison Industry!) on the defendant who, in many or even most cases, might be quite innocent of the crime or anything resembling the original charges.

This is, in fact, a major issue in judicial reform.  The courts and prisons are swamped, with a complete unwillingness by legislatures (in spite of the best efforts by ALEC, which was actually started by the prison industry and suppliers, and the rest of the "criminal justice system.") to spend more money and resources on such a counterproductive fool's errand.  As the Chinese proverb has it, "Pass one new law, create 10,000 new criminals."  In fact, I have accused Mr. Parker of doing exactly that, in the Montana Green Bulletin.

It's hard for some people to fathom, but many young men like Mr. Stewart consider it an honor to be arrested and serve prison time in Montana.  He is looking for adventure, and some real connection with the criminal dynasties which largely control our country, its government, economy, etc.  And we're a military town, with most of the jurors having military and/or paramilitary connections.  So, this is the place to be.

He'll probably get a fair trial, a lenient sentence, if convicted, and might well rise through the ranks of the revolutionary underground to become a general or gangster boss.  That's basically how it's done.  Apparently, his problems in VA involved a fiancee and wrecked relationship, which can drive anyone to desperate measures.  How he ended up here remains something of a mystery.

In any case, good luck to him.  Any further involvement on my part might be hazardous to my health.

Posted by Paul Stephens at 3:35 PM
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook

Labels: Citizens for Clean Energy, Courts, ECP, Highwood Generating Station, John Parker, judicial process, Montana Conservation Voters
No comments:

Montana "Health Insurance" costs continue to skyrocket under the ACA

Reflections on health care economics...
Benefis, Blue Cross, and the rise of Monopoly Health Care

This is part of an article on the Montana Medicaid "HELP" program which I wrote when it was being sorted out last Fall.  It was opposed because it was "part of Obamacare."  Actually, it wasn't.  It was a small part of a real public health care system which was proposed instead of the corporate "insurance model" which has proven to be disastrous in nearly all respects.  The following deals with the wider issues of socialized vs. for-profit, corporate health care..  -- PHS 8-1-16

If medical products and services were properly priced, without the monopoly protections they now receive, most people would be able to afford them, and "insurance" would be nothing more than a small charge and required examinations and follow-ups to make sure that people were getting the health care they were paying for.

The present disaster is, in part, a legacy of the battle between Church and State.  It needs to stop right now.  If the State is going to use public money for things like education and health care, which are fundamental to our individual and social well-being, then it must provide fairly and equitably to those who may support differing "education" or health care philosophies and practices. 

I've long maintained that a couple of good economists could, in a matter of days, design an excellent health care system on any scale which would be far less expensive and more comprehensive than anything proposed, today.  Medicine is now run as a "business" rather than a public necessity, like police, fire, the military, or whatever - the core "institutional infrastructure" of a humane and sustainable society.   And so, it is entirely the business (and even financial interests) of the "stakeholders" which is under consideration. 

These "stakeholders" turn out to be, not the doctors, nurses, and patients utilizing the health care, but some 3rd party bureaucrats and for-profit "insurance" companies as well as huge and powerful Drug Cartels who have no concern with the medical aspects of their "business" at all.  They are simply corporations with a lot of monopoly power which is fungible.  The more they rip off the customers, the government which funds health care, and anyone else, the more their stock rises, and the more valuable they are as a corporation. 

If a small company invents a new miracle drug (as recently happened with a cure for the previously incurable Hepatitis C), it is quickly taken over by a hedge fund or some other non-medical entity which then charges "the market price" for a treatment which costs them $200 to make, for something like $70,000.  And this even happens with old drugs which are still under patent, as we learned with an AIDS drug which used to sell for $17, and after being "acquired" by a Hedge Fund (whose manager is now in jail for various financial frauds) now sells for $thousands, and there is no shortage of lawyers and public policy "experts" who will defend this abuse of "property rights" and the totally fictional idea of  "intellectual property," which belongs to those "fictional persons," corporations, which now own and control practically every part of the government and "the public sector" in general. 

When Darwin and Wallace argued over who "discovered" or first enunciated the Theory of Evolution, it wasn't over "property rights."  It was over intellectual pride, and such "rivalries" rarely resemble the popular dramas based on them.  Often, the protagonists are good friends, and freely recognize the other's contributions.  The very fact that there's a word, "evolution," indicates that the process was very well-understood since Aristotle, at least..

=====================

HELP is our new state (Montana) Medicaid Expansion program, and it differs significantly from what was envisioned in the ACA which most other states have adopted. 

It was Ed Buttrey from Great Falls who actually put the package together and got enough Republicans to support it as a "conservative approach" to Medicaid expansion, meaning it is corporate-run (by the now for-profit "Blue Cross/Blue Shield"), and still maintains the structure of the "insurance model" of micromanaging the cost and appropriateness of every particular drug or medical service being billed.   And it includes premiums and co-pays, which are anathema to the whole idea of Medicaid, even if they are quite reasonable, which they are. 

Had the HELP program been offered independently of the ACA , it would have been hailed as a major "reform" toward something like the Canadian Single Payer system, which has the highest approval rate in the world, or did until the Neo-cons "introduced" private insurance and other rackets into the Canadian system, plus letting a third or more of their government-trained doctors and nurses move to the US where they could earn 2-5 times more.

Medicare and Medicaid are "socialized medicine", which is public provision of medical products and services.  Medicare and Medicaid are considered "Single-payer" systems, meaning that that the state or other government agency pays the providers, out of general tax revenues or out of some special tax and funding allocated to that purpose. 

Although this is often contrasted with "Single-provider" systems (Britain's NHS) which most developed countries maintain, this is the old view of "socialism" which is centralized and directed by some sort of planning board, rather than being "market-directed."  Medicare and Medicaid are very "market-driven", or would be if any sort of competition were allowed between the various providers.  Wherever there is a healthy multi-provider "marketplace" for medical products or services, prices stay reasonable, but there is a strong financial (and political) incentive to create monopolies and reduce services, while always raising costs which are separated from real costs across the board. 

Instead, under our present system, the government reimbursements through Medicare and Medicaid are largely determined by the providers, and the amount of graft and false-billing is huge - not to mention the "false billing" done by every provider for the products and services they provide.  The best luxury hotel suites in the world cost less than the typical hospital stay, which can hit a million $ in a few weeks for what used to be considered routine illnesses which simply required long hospital stays. 

There is no relationship between prices and costs, and most of the profits are plowed back into corporate deals which further restrict competition and increase costs.  Even staff and services are often cut in these "deals" (like the Benefis merger of two century-old community hospitals) - not to improve service, but to cut costs in accordance with the Enron-style Arthur Andersen plan they were sold as Boards, with the support of the School District (probably their largest customer, paying well), the Chamber of Commerce, and the military/retiree communities who need the services the most, but have access to all the VA facilities and Base clinics.  

There was a huge organization of all sorts of people to oppose this dastardly scheme.  More than 200 doctors testified against it.  Everyone I knew in the peace and justice movements opposed it.  The only people who favored it seemed to be the Deaconess Hospital Board, chaired by Dr. Gelernter, a psychiatrist known for his use of electro-convulsive "therapy" in the 1970's and before. 

Somehow, Arthur Andersen had gotten in the door, and had a "plan" which promised to reduce health care costs while improving "profitability."   It was a major point of contention, since both hospitals were profitable (how could they fail to be?), low-cost, provided a lot of charity care, etc.  But the Columbus, run by the Sisters of Providence, gave much better service - especially to the Native American community.

I'm not even sure that the name "Columbus", which had become unpopular and a symbol of slavery and oppression, didn't have something to do with it.  Plus, the newly-merged Benefis was actually run, under some sort of contract, by Providence Health Services, the umbrella organization, and still Catholic, so the "threat" of abortions was averted, or moved to a neighboring building.  (Another major complaint against the Deaconess was that it provided therapeutic abortions, while the Columbus didn't, so there was an alliance between the Right to Life evangelicals and the traditional Catholics).

It turned out they were all fooled.  After a decent interval had passed, Benefis announced it was pulling out of Providence.  OK, so give us the Columbus back.  No way!  It's a done deal.  We've already taken out the ER and OR.  It's an annex with professional offices, now, and a treatment center.  Sorry!   It went to court or mediation, and Benefis ended up paying the Diocese $10 million (for a facility which the whole Catholic community relied on) to shut up about it.  And of course Pope Benedict was happy to sign - it actually goes that high - probably some Vatican functionary, not anyone listening to the local Priests or faithful.

We should all remember that virtually every doctor, every patient, every family who had contributed to the Deaconess and Columbus endowments (now controlled by Benefis) opposed the "merger." And every clerk and janitor who worked for these hospitals could count on its care for themselves and their families should they fall ill. Not so anymore!  

Remember what the word "hospital" is supposed to mean?  It was like that.  And any sick or dying person could just check in, under a doctor's care.  You didn't need to prove you had "insurance" - which, if you did, was a sure ticket to getting vastly overcharged.  Only the wealthy wanted or needed insurance.  The rest got what they needed - health care. 

In effect, it was "socialized medicine" in the same sense that the Catholic Church is "socialist."  And one hospital was owned by the Church, while the other was founded by Brother Van (along with 12 others around the state, and more than 100 Methodist Churches.)   The main point is that their "mission" was to heal the sick and reduce suffering - "harm reduction" - which is also the first principle enunciated in the Hippocratic Oath - "Do no harm". 

"Obamacare" was attacked as being "Socialist" mainly because people are forced to participate in it, and the workers bear the full burden of a system which costs at least 4 times more than it should.  If this is "socialism", only the insane will want to participate in it, unless they're Democrats, and told that this is the price they must pay for supporting the first African-American President. 

What's wrong, then, with this "charity" model for health care?  The rich would like better quality, so they don't want to be in "the charity ward".  They want to go First Class.  But, no, everyone wants to go First Class.  The reality is that NO society, system, "insurance plan" or any other "provider" of health care services is going to pay for everyone going First Class.   And since the physicians and other health care managers and providers make the most money off of the present system, it's not likely to change - especially if you put them in charge of changing the system.  How many times have we learned that lesson in Montana (without, however, learning anything)?

Spiritual Powers

The Masons

I'm one of those people who grew up amidst Freemasonry (which is itself supposedly a misnomer, or mis-translation from an earlier French usage).  Both my grandfathers were Masons - Grandpa Nelson, with only a 6th grade education, was actually a Shriner - 32nd degree, which requires memorization and understanding a large body of comparative religion and history, which isn't really that bad.  

This was a way you  could get an advanced understanding of the world and your place in it without having gone to school.  You did have to be able to read and write, though - in other words, be literate.  I'm afraid that's an accomplishment that few young people have, today, except in the fashion of "computer-literate" or whatever.  140-character consciousness.  Even "scientific literacy" or "numeracy", as they say in Britain, is hard to come by except by the techies who are basically Borg from Day 1.  

You'd be amazed at how many upper-level professionals don't know the  slightest thing about social science, including economics.  And how many lawyers seem to know nothing about legal philosophy, let alone ethics and sociology.  Like  physicians, they now spend a lot of time learning about how to maximize their "practice" and incomes.  

But in the 19th Century, there wasn't really a "professional class". Outside the nobility, the best-educated and most productive people were either clergymen or skilled tradesmen and craftsmen - i.e., Masons.  The Medieval Guild system, and an economy based on humane and Christian teachings, and of course the schools that trained them .  The great European and British universities were founded in the 12-1300's.  And the Italian ones like Bologne were directly transplanted from the Hellenistic schools which go back to Athens or before with Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum, and the later Museum of Alexandria - the greatest center of learning in the world before it was destroyed in various waves of monotheistic fanaticism.  I've just been reading about Julian the Apostate, nephew of Constantine (the first Christian Emperor, who moved the Roman Empire to Byzantium), who actually re-established paganism (poly-theism) and all the cults and mysteries associated with it!   So there has always been this conflict between "established" churches and belief systems, and the rest of us who may want to think and believe something different.   

The Knights Templar, who were started during the Crusades in order to "Save Jerusalem", were supposedly the fore-runners of the Masons.  Jacques DeMolay, for whom the Masonic youth organization is named, was supposedly the last Templar.  Don't quote me on this - I read it many years ago.  Although we now think of Masons as "anti-Catholic," that was not always the case.  DeMolay was tortured by the Inquisition (or something like that - the one we know by that name, now, was part of the Counter-Reformation, I believe).   This was part of an event which must have been one of the most coordinated mass murders in history, taking place all over Europe by secret orders carried by itinerant monks (somewhere in the 1300's, I think).  All the Templars were killed, and their vast estates  confiscated by the Church.  It's fascinating stuff, and can still be seen in films (and contemporary politics, for that matter) in Europe and the U.S. 

Come to think of it, the resurgence of Masonic interest in the 18th and 19th centuries was probably closely connected with destroying the Church and reclaiming the lands which it had stolen.  In Mexico, I've heard, the Church is still not allowed to own property, and exists only under strict state control.  

==========

It's often remarked that the Ku Klux Klan was a Masonic-style group, probably started by people who had been trained in Masonry.  So was the Knights of Labor, the first successful labor union, which was made up of equal parts Lincoln Republicans and active Freemasons (the leader was named Stephens, and seems to fit our  family type, which was how I discovered this).  Most of the American Founding Fathers were Masons, as well - just to  show this  wasn't some recent fad.  Not to mention Mozart.  

I've got the basic 32nd Degree "Morals and Dogma" in a book right here, compiled by someone named Pike in the Southern Jurisdiction in the 1890's.  I haven't read the "Morals" carefully, but I flipped through it.  Basically, it's sort of like the Rosicrucians - they may  have common roots - where the wisdom and knowledge of every great religion and philosophy is combined and "syncretized" (if that's the right word) to make a workable everyday philosophy or belief system, and its wider community.  We might say, now, that it has a somewhat elitist bent.  It's the old "esoteric" vs. public understanding of things.  The  Enlightened Ones, the Illuminati, as they called themselves, know  best, so just trust them.  They are wiser than the rest of us.  

I've  been in Mensa and other groups  which purport to  represent some "higher thinking," including the Objectivist movement.  (Never quite got into Scientology, but I've known a few who did).  The whole academic  game is based on this, for that matter.  You have more "education" so  you get  more money.  That makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?   For the educators, anyway.  But it totally paralyzes and locks into classes everything that a free people would value or want to do!  Most importantly, control their own "cultural infrastructure" instead of having it "managed" by a bunch of professional racketeers...

Against State Socialism

That's the real argument against "state socialism".  There's simply no way to prevent it from being taken over and diverted to private gain.  Look at that wretched Obamacare!   And then imposing a further tax on young working people (whose real health-care costs are low) in order to pay off the rotten drug cartels and as well as doctors and hospitals which have apparently no concept of economics, except to maximize their own incomes from the public purse, and enslave or pillage everyone who is forced to use their services.

As bad as direct provision of public services often is (that's our present model for so-called "public education"), at least it can be changed on short notice and must be responsive to public outrage.  No such thing happens with "Obamacare" or the various "contractors" who now run most of our public services as well as the military.  

Then there's the insurance racket bailout.  In the guise of "fixing" such "problems" as "pre-existing conditions", and the added risk to the pool by having to insure such people, they simply made it compulsory, thus immediately raising premiums for everyone by about 15% (and there was a lot of tightening up on other benefits, too, in order to keep the premium increase that low).  

No problem!  We just subsidize low-income people so they can now "buy" this low-grade "health insurance" with higher deductibles and limited coverage for maybe twice what the same product would have cost them, before the ACA.  

Besides, it's FREE MONEY.  The Federal Government just prints it, or borrows it from the Chinese.  What could go wrong?   Essentially, that was main argument (often used by Gov. Bullock) in favor of approving Medicaid Expansion.  It was almost all "free money", and even if it was cut off later (as the Republicans claimed to fear, since they were trying to do the cutting).   But the real selling point was that this would allow us to establish real health care for some 80,000 low-income people who presently "fall through the cracks".  

We should never worry whether it's state or federal money - not, at least, until we have our own state money to replace it - as some have proposed.  It's all the same money, but we have to get ours (on the state and local level) from taxing the people and businesses who are actually here.  We can't borrow the difference from China, although we can make deals to give them our coal at rock-bottom (no pun intended) prices.  We are becoming an economic colony of China.  

It happened before, to a certain extent, with Japan, which has invested heavily in Montana to support and maintain its food supply.  Now, the Chinese want "equal treatment," and they're actually building a pork packing and distributing center in Shelby, MT.  From Jack Dempsey (who won a world Heavyweight Boxing title here in the 1920's) to the  Hog Farm in less than 100 years.  And I know a lot of people from Shelby - it was one of the authentic hippy towns in the '60's and '70's, too.  The fabled "Highline", or did they write it "Hi-Line," maybe.  In any case, as the crossroads between East and West and the main road to Alberta, it always had a special place in Jim Hill's Empire.  

Now, it's dominated by a CCA prison, along with the hogs.  What a fate for its beautiful people.  Yet, a recent poll showed wide local support for both projects (and employers).  When all the good jobs have already been exported to China (ahead of the hogs), they'll have to take whatever they can get and not  complain, I guess.  A whole new meaning to "Oriental Despotism."  

Which brings us back to the Masons.  When the Shriners have a parade, we now see the cities of their various "cauldrons" and other sinister-sounding collectives with names like Algeria, Baghdad, etc.  They're essentially black-face Muslims (as opposed to Black Muslims, whom they tend to fear and despise).  Then they get drunk, roll dice, hire a stripper, and otherwise have a jolly-good time.  Not much of an inspiration to our best and brightest youth, right?  But we don't want our country run by a bunch of sissies, either.  And they have their Women's groups  - Eastern Star, Rainbow Girls (not  to be confused with Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition), etc. to keep the men and boys in check, more or less.  

I've done my time as an atheist, as well.  And I was actually a DeMolay, for about a year.  I've compared my experience there with a number of other  local drop-outs, and we all left for good reasons.  I still live in the apartments which were once owned (and provided income for) the adult "supervisor" of the DeMolay's, which turned out to be merely a conduit for his orders and predjudices.  

I don't consider myself a Mason, nor a Lutheran, either - the other "church" in which I was made to participate as a child.  Mostly, it was the women who were for it (Lutherans and DeMolay), while my father, uncle, and even cousin and brother discouraged it entirely.   Ron, who is now a lay preacher of sorts, never went to church because Abraham Lincoln didn't.  And that was accepted - plus his father was pretty much a non-believer (in anything).  

Unitarianism was a nice compromise, after I had been immersed in Buddhism, Transcendental Meditation, and other spiritual movements in the 1970's.  And I can still call myself  a Unitarian, although their main church seems hopelessly "professional" and elitist in many ways, plus not providing a whole lot of spiritual sustenance.  It seems to flourish where there is already a diverse intellectual community.  Where there is none (like GF), it withers and dies, like our public library and local broadcast media.  

Seeing with the Third Eye

Seeing with the Third Eye
 It's time for a reset....

When you're not a member of either  "major party", it's easy to see how all their fun and games is in pursuit of an established duopoly.  They simply don't care what happens to the rest of us.  We're the "chips" they play with between themselves, for votes and campaign contributions (which amount to extortion, not bribes, as those providing the loot used to think). 

So, we're all being exploited, and it's a negative-sum game even between the D's and R's (ever wonder where that R2-D2 came from?).    EVERYONE would benefit by a reset.  We must redesign the game for Pareto Optimality (everyone is better-off, instead of some being sacrificed to others - with added incentives to "help the poor", promote culture, etc), instead of this mindless gang warfare, which doesn't even compute on a level of 7th graders, let alone "responsible adults."

And we need a different legal system, obviously.  The one we have panders only to political demagogues, and has almost nothing to do with justice, fairness, sympathy, morality, or any of those good things usually attributed to courts of law (but not by those who run them).  Without an ethical society with ethical values shared by nearly everyone in some form, there's no point in having a legal system like we have, now, which is little more than organized gang enforcement of its edicts and territories.  No one here has any real "rights" or "protection under the law."  You only get what you pay for, or can extort from others. 

Ayn Rand and socialized medicine

If you're wondering why we don't have anything resembling "socialized medicine" in the US, it's the same reason behind the current obsession with "the failure of the public schools"  (which are, in fact, "socialized education").  The only people who opposed socialized medicine originally were some of the wealthier doctors, or more accurately, the "consultants" they hired to identify and promote their interests, which they took to be monopoly control of the supply (and even the definitions) of medicine, in order to maximize their own wealth and power. 

Enter Ayn Rand

Her essay, "The Forgotten Man of Socialized Medicine, the Doctor" (c. 1964) became almost a manifesto to "block" or "repeal" Medicare and other "paths to socialized medicine."  The fact that Ayn Rand squandered her vast personal fortune, and had to rely on Medicare in her old age is beside the point.  This occurred when she was dying of lung cancer - no doubt a karmic consequence of her advocacy of smoking, which was based on totally wrong arguments that cigarettes represented "power" or "man's control over nature,"  instead of the social rituals which some Native Americans still practice. 

The Crows (into which Barak Obama was adopted, probably because of the Unitarian Mission School which influenced their  subsequent development) held the Tobacco plant sacred.  There's even a Tobacco Root Mountain Range in Montana/Wyoming, and it was Montana mythology and real history which inspired a lot of Rand's work - mainly because of Jewish-Scandinavian Baltic culture which was also transplanted here. 

Anyway, I'll see if I can find a link to the "forgotten doctors" essay.  Of course, "Objectivists" claim absolute property rights over every word their prophetess has written, so you might have to buy or check out the book.  Can you find Rand's works in your local public library?  It's doubtful, which is why taxpayers no longer want to fund them (the libraries, I mean), and why they have been turned into corporate work-slave-stations, or free video-rental stores (a function which Netflix will soon have eliminated).  Now, it's the NSA which can examine anyone's library records without  a warrant, and the librarian can be prosecuted for telling her clients that they are on a "watch list" or otherwise "a person of interest"  to "the authorities."  Surely we must all want that - to be a "person of interest." 

Of course, everyone agreed to Medicare because caring for one's elderly relatives was a major burden, now assumed by the Federal Government.  Local communities which had county rest-homes and other successful local program (usually discriminating by race or class) were soon bribed or coerced into selling them to private companies, who had "more leverage in Washington".  The Democrats ran on the "socialized medicine" gravy train for 50 years, until they were finally forced to promote the reductio ad absurdum of corporate medicine, "Obamacare", with all its racist and classist overtones.  And now, all the drugged, dumbed down, middle class "liberals" are out there selling it like snake-oil. 

Even people like myself, with a degree in Economics from a leading university, can make little if any sense of our overall "welfare system."  It is positively designed to fail, and those who end up taking it over (corporate "contractors" - often major banks, credit card, or even aerospace "defense" contractors like Grumman-Northrup) have no incentives other than to maximize their own "cut" of the loot - often about 20-25% of the "gross" as a "commission" or "service charge."  And  in the case of Medicine, the doctors are anything but "forgotten."  Instead, they are further empowered to loot and bankrupt  the patients whose fees were already supposed to be paid by Medicare or Medicaid. 

How is this possible?  It really does have a lot to do with Ayn Rand, who is believed by conservatives and liberals alike to have been fundamentally evil and malevolent, albeit for different reasons.  Now, that doesn't matter.  Rand (and the Greens) are the New Reds.  We're the bad guys, by definition.  So, anything we do or say will be tainted, with each side of the duopoly blaming the other for the bad parts, and taking credit for the good.  I formulated a principle maybe 25 years ago which says this: 

Each major party is half-right and half-wrong.  They run for office on the good half, and after winning, then proceed to implement (with the assistance of the losers) the bad half, so that each side has an even chance (to begin with, anyway) in winning the next election, since no "track record" of good leadership by one party will be allowed to exist. 

Enter Baucus and the other "bi-partisans" who "broker" these deals to maximize the errors and subsequent policy disasters so that there can always be a cry for "more money" and "more programs - more jobs" for those who serve the state so dutifully. 

Ultimately, it gets down to that - serving the state, and in the particular case, party loyalty.  The only party besides the Greens where I ever participated or held leadership positions was the Republicans, so even when I despise them, I respect the real Republican tradition.  And this was where Rand and the Libertarians in general were correct.  Their arguments go back to Thomas Jefferson, Adam Smith, and other Enlightenment thinkers, as well as Marx and the many Left critics who saw only misery and disasters in the "unbridled capitalism" which Jefferson and Smith supposedly endorsed (actually, they warned continuously about the power of business and trade elites, and their motives to enslave and impoverish the rest of us).  Abraham  Lincoln, who may be counted as a founding Republican Intellectual, actually read and corresponded with Marx, and always claimed that "Labor is Prior to Capital," and Labor's interests the more important in government decisions. 

Intellectuals, the workers, the taxpayers, the drafted or bribed soldiers, spies, and Homeland Security Gestapo all have the same interests.  To make sure that the owners of capital and war profiteers do not take over the  state, by impoverishing and demoralizing the rest of us to be their slaves and cannon-fodder.  For reasons listed above, that has not happened.  The Ruling Class, supposedly glorified in Rand's "superman" novels, has consolidated and concentrated its power and control in ways that more resemble Fascism or Stalinist totalitarianism than any sort of "freedom" or "free enterprise."  Our first Black president (we'd call him a Metis in Montana), instead of acting to reverse some of the murderous "foreign policy" as well as domestic Gulag of the biggest prison system the world has ever seen, has become its best (or worst) practitioner, until finally even a few of the hardened party operatives have  conceded that this might be a good time to reduce the prison population, and quit prosecuting the slaves of the drug cartels who are themselves a creature of bought and paid for legislators.  Unfortunately, no such sanity or remorse extends to the victims of US-Zionist foreign policy, which kills 100's of thousands each year. 

I was reading Jessica Mitford's "Cruel and Usual Punishment" from the early 1970's last night.  We think the Prison State is a recent consequence of the "war on drugs" or the worship of wealth and power in general, but it was all there in 1970, with the largest and most corporatized prison system in the world, at a time when the Chinese and Soviet Gulags were the main objects of American media attention.  Mitford is an institution in herself, and so the book was widely read and discussed, and she got access to people and places which even then was unprecedented.  Someone should suggest it to the First Family as a "must-read." 

Of Pearls and Pig Diarrhea

Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus

Have you heard of this?  It's spread throughout the mid-west "hog belt" - vast, factories for hog breeding, fattening, and slaughtering - they actually call it "hog confinement operations" or some such thing.  Apparently it affects piglets, and is said not to provide any "health hazard," but decimates herds and profits...  Yet, the price of live hogs is (and has always been, for decades) about 50 cents a pound.  And they are drugged to the gills with all sort of antibiotics, hormones, etc.  In many counties, their by-products are the single largest source of point pollution, even with lagoons, cesspools, etc. which often leak or overflow.  It isn't even fit to be spread on the land as fertilizer.  

If there's any issue I would want to follow, it's the negative consequences of swine confinement operations in Montana.  The Hutterites are some of the biggest producers (along with ducks, turkeys, chickens, etc.), but they probably do it a little more humanely and cleanly.  Unfortunately, they're part of that larger corporate food chain, and often swindled by the agri-biz con artists.  I've urged people to work with them on this, and I think AERO and some others have done so.  They do produce healthier food in most cases, and most importantly, it's local, thus avoiding wasting more energy in bulk transport over thousands of miles.

Anyway, when this story appeared on the Noon News today (not the infomercial Northern Ag Broadcasting segment, but in the main newscast), I was astonished.  Apparently, it's been happening since last April, and a law passed last year actually prevents the Montana Department of Agriculture from releasing the location of the outbreak!  [Go for it, public interest lawyers.]  I follow most of the Montana press and media fairly closely, and this was absolutely the first I'd heard of it.  

Barber, barber, shave a pig.
How many hairs
to make a wig?
Four and twenty
should be enough
 nd give the poor barber 
a pinch of snuff." 

- nursery rhyme  

Right after the pork story, there was a story on state crop insurance, and the massive losses last year because of climate change (although they certainly didn't mention climate change as the cause - that would probably be grounds for immediate firing at MTN news).  

Here is another case where the word "insurance" is totally corrupted to mean "corporate welfare".  Real insurance is risk-pooling.  It's a very good - even necessary - strategy for a farmer if being hailed out (flooded, wind erosion, or whatever) would put you out of business.  Since the chances of a major loss are only maybe 5% (one year out of 20 equivalent), then an insurance company can take the 5% each year, and in effect, capitalize it so that in the 10-year average before a claim is made, it can invest the money and make a handsome profit.  That is how insurance companies came to dominate the economy.  

When hail insurance was strictly private, I believe they charged about 10% of  the value insured , but many were "mutual" insurance companies, too - real co-ops where the profits stayed with the insured.  It's  hard  to tell, but from this report, the state hail insurance fund may be just that - and not relying on taxpayers to subsidize risk.  But that is not usually the case, or what I am objecting to, here.  

"Health insurance" has nothing to do with real insurance or risk-sharing.  Health care isn't a "risk" - it's a public service, and perhaps the most vital one.  By turning this into someone's "profit center," the whole idea of insurance (and medicine,  itself) is violated.  Insurance is what  people buy to protect themselves or their heirs  from loss.  The illness is a loss, which happens whether we are insured, or not. And the monetary compensation goes, not to you, who suffer the accident or illness, but to the "health insurance" racket, and the predatory, criminal "medical industry" riddled with every kind of graft and fraud - even from its most "respectable" elements - the senior doctors, hospitals and established clinics.  

You can almost depend on primary care to prescribe extra tests, X-rays, etc. to "protect themselves from law-suits," they might tell you (at your, the patient's, expense).  Or, in my case, recently, "because I  am a smoker" (which I will never admit to, again).  Often, they have a financial interest in the local lab or diagnostic center, for which "services" they often charge from 4-10 times an actual competitive, cost-based price.  The same is true for "patent medicines" - prescriptions, which are monopoly products.  They charge whatever they can get to maximize revenues and profits. 

Even when the generics come out, major pharmacies (like Target, in a recent "60 Minutes" segment) still continue to bill at whatever price they think they can get, and "rely" on customers to challenge their price with competing stores.   Target is happy to match a lower price shown to them, but you have to make a point of asking, and most people just assume they (or their "coverage") are being charged a fair price, which in fact hardly ever happens.  

Thus, our present health care system is often involved in "cultivating illness" just as agribiz corporations "farm" the government (or taxpayers-consumers) rather than the soil.  Just listen to the ag-promotion shows - even on public television, from most Land Grant colleges, anyway.  Monsanto is off the table (or rather, just assumed to be a normal, public-spirited business), along with factory farming in general. Our station ran Food Inc. all of once, I think, and it was a year or more delayed.   And yet, all the rest of the world is most concerned, and blocking US food imports at every turn - the main reason for the TPP and other "free trade" agreements, incidentally, and why Baucus and Tester support it.  GMO's and Monsanto, itself, have been completely banned in several countries, and the evidence is mounting that this is the only way to "fix" this world's worst corporation.

By making hail insurance or the ACA a mandatory federal program, and calling it "insurance," everyone is defrauded.  It isn't insurance; it's corporate welfare.  Instead of government looking out for the well-being of the people, it enables corporate criminals to exploit them -  even mandating and fining people for not participating (How did this ever stand?).  Instead (and in both case, above), the government provides nothing for the people - least of all, healthy food produced locally and sustainably to maximize health, wealth, and good government.  

Surely this is one of the most perfect extortion rackets ever imagined. Even though most people can easily be shown that we are paying at least twice as much for healthcare as any other country (with taxpayers already providing half the money) with a system that ranks 23rd in the world, or some such thing - behind many "developing" or "emerging market" countries - they seem to think that they are obligated by some sort of coercion of social expectations to partake of it.

This is Max Baucus's real legacy - subsidizing (and even making compulsory!  No shame!) private, profit-making insurance companies, and forcing every citizen to buy their fraudulent policies, whether or not we want or need one.   As Senate Finance Committee Chair, he was also criminally responsible for Medicare Part D  (some $50 billion/year more to the corporate drug cartels), most of the Bankster bailouts (in cahoots with his buddies at Goldman, Sachs and the FED) which many place at $20 trillion or more exposure of US taxpayers to these racketeers.   

Of course he was forced to do it, manipulated, bribed, threatened, blackmailed, and otherwise made to sell out Montana and the rest of the country - not to say the planet.  We can't hold him accountable because he is a "no-account" - he "counts no costs", as Atticus Finch says in "To Kill a Mockingbird."  He's like the bag-man.  He uses the power we have given him, with our votes and recognition, to enrich some gangsters.  It's a familiar story, and as long as we continue to vote for such people, that is what we will get.  

THAT is the real flaw in "democratic" government - the  more power that is concentrated in a few hands (or a "strong central government" with permanent wars and domestic police state), the more easily it can be corrupted and made to serve evil purposes.

Never forget - we spend more on weapons, prisons, and the police state apparatus than most other countries, combined.  (NSA, Homeland Security, CIA, FBI, etc.  Only the Secret Service (and regular military, as well as state militias) is constitutional, and their powers are strictly limited).   We must hold those "Representatives" and "Senators" responsible for the many calamities we face.  They were informed, warned, cajoled, and pleaded to all the way.  

And what have they advocated and supported with their (our) sacred votes?  More military spending, more wars, more attacks on civilians and allied countries.  More drugs, more corporate domination of the world.  More surveillance, more prisons, more torture and assassinations.  

Fewer independent farmers.  No independent thinking or media.  ("Stamp  it out, before it gets established.")  The reduction of education and health-care standards to the lowest in the world among "developed" countries, while paying far more than any other country.  Just look at us.  And thank the Bushes, Baucus's, and other "old money" and "noblesse oblige," as well as the professional crooks and liars who make it all possible.  The academics, the planners, the strategists, the media stars ("presstitutes, " as Paul Craig Roberts says - I'll stick with "mediawhores"), even the Holy Gurus who rarely say anything wrong, but whose lives and actions are the worst possible example for people wanting to be sane, free, and independent thinkers in an independent economy and culture.    
It's the Twilight of the Wine God!  Time to sober up. I don't think the Chinese will be fooled.

An Exaltation of Marx - poem

An  Exaltation of Marx 1-7-14

I was listening to public radio
this morning.  A quartet
by Jennifer Higdon.  

I was cooking in the kitchen, 
where I also have a small radio
and when the title was announced, 
I thought he said
"An exaltation of Marx"  
(actually, it was "Larks").

"Hey, that's pretty cool,"
I thought.  I was just thinking
about how today's right-wing
"business class" -
the Neo-cons, the war imperialists,
the monopoly-finance capitalists
were all brainwashed
by basic Marxist doctrine.  

How many generations of 
stupid academics
have been injected
with this stuff,
passing it on to their 
backward students, 
while their bad-boy clubs
seduced them into 
criminal celebrations
of wealth and power.

Isn't this the essence of our
"higher education?"
Capitalists are bad, 
the business cycle is inevitable -
the rich get richer
while the poor get 
progressively starved, 
or as Marx said, "immiserated."

I must admit, I had 
great teachers who explained 
all this stuff to me.
American Marxists 
weren't really Marxists.  
Marx was a philosopher,
not a politician,
or tenured professor  
at an Ivy League school.  

Denny Davis, 
my World History teacher, 
from St. Olaf's,
later to be the father 
of US Figure Skating Champion,
Scott Davis.
(Just last year, I learned
that Scott was the product
of an illicit student-teacher
relationship.  Funny no one
ever mentioned that
at an appropriate time!)

Denny was also 
the Offensive Coordinator
for the CMR Rustlers football team
the most successful in the state
in those years.
An amazing exercise
in suspending punishment
for the best  and brightest.
But  Denny paid a price,
becoming cynical and 
devoid of hope.

That's where I first learned about
Marx and Machiavelli.
It's all about status,
not truth.  
Power, not ethics 
or righteousness.
Not even benevolence,
or a desire to serve humanity.
These Marxists were Hegelians -
it's all about patterns and process.
The Phenomenology of the Market,
one might say.

Isn't that a different department?
We don't do that 
in Business Schools or 
"Agricultural Economics".

I remember a couple 
of lone environmental economists
in my last year at UCLA - by then,
a Philosophy grad-school drop-out
(this was 1970), just beginning
to smoke pot and dance
with Mescalito (although I'd 
wanted to since age 15, when 
I'd read about it in Playboy).  

It hardly seems conceivable, now,
in that crowded, chaotic place
called Los Angeles.
It seemed more like 
Victoria de los Angeles
than the Lakers, Kareem, 
or the Johnny Carson show.

Yes, this was where the movies
were made, and since I watched movies
(but not TV - not since Leave it to Beaver,
anyway), I knew LA.  
It was cool.
Even the Watts Riots didn't bother me,
although it freaked out my mother
and other former Midwest, Chicago
white people - even the "liberals." 

Kareem was in my class.
They only lost one game 
while I was there - to Houston. 
I never attended one, either.
And I attributed that loss
to HASP, the Houston 
Automatic Spooling Program
used in our mainframe computer-
the IBM 360-75, 
which later went to Santa Barbara, 
after being replaced
by the NASA-standard 
360-91 at UCLA.

I actually watched 
the first moon landing
from the computer-room at UCLA.
It almost seemed staged, 
that's for sure.
It was like celebrating 
a naval victory
from a sister-ship, far away.

I did that.  I must have died,
and went to heaven, 
to sing among the angels.  
And I didn't even believe 
in God, 
although I was forced to make
some adjustments in that,
after studying Medieval Philosophy.

I was told Prof Moody was famous,
and this was his final year and class.
One of my preppy friends
wrote a Latin farewell
appropriate for such occasions.

You can imagine my sense 
of deep inferiority
coming from rural Montana,
with hardly a cultural experience
or connection to my name. 
The one trump card I held,
I never used.
That was being Jean Arthur's 
cousin, 
and actually having met her, 
and hung out with her 
(at about age 10).

But I never understood
it's significance.  You couldn't simply
check out an old movie
and watch it.
It was Taboo.
I  don't think I mentioned it
to anyone, although a few
already knew, 
it seems in retrospect.

Nor was I a displaced Rebel
VP of the Confederacy
(Jean Arthur, Selznick's mistress
tried out for the Scarlett O'Hara
role.  She was then pushing  40.)

Somehow, all that information
was kept secret.  Yes, a Stephens
was the first head of UC 
Southern Branch, the original UCLA.  
Yes, this was Southern California.
Surely I fit in somewhere.
And so I did. 

Alonzo Church,
of Church's Theorem fame.
He was there,  at UCLA, 
in the Philosophy Dept.
as well as Mathematics.  
His office was near the computer center
where I worked, so I knew who he was.

It would be nearly 40 years later
that I learned that A H Stephens
had  been befriended by a math prof
with the same name, in Georgia - 
when?  The 1820's, or thereabouts.
That was the school at Athens,
that became The University of Georgia,
and a classmate, LeConte,
would be the father 
of a famous UC Berkeley Chancellor.

Meanwhile, the frat-boy future
MBA's of America, the CEO's,
the politicians, 
the "social networkers"
droned on or dropped out.
The successful ones
were also engineers or 
computer nerds - a species
just being born, 
with me attending 
(at the UCLA and Santa Barbara 
computer centers, birthplace
of the DARPA science network), 
laboring for 2 1/2 years
in ecstatic obscurity.

Operations, you understand.
Not the systems programmers,
who even then seemed
barely human.  
And there were drugs.  
Every kind, of highest quality.  
Psycho-cybernetics.
Ceremonial chemistry.
Call it what you will.

We didn't  think of ourselves
as criminals, 
for having "broken the law."  
We were creating law,
not breaking it.

Natural law.  People's law.
Cosmic law.  Spiritual law.
All  without a single judge
or lawyer.  We,  the Jury.
The Educated and Enlightened.
We thought of ourselves
as scientists, explorers, 
the Galileo's of this 
unfolding Cosmos.  

All the fundamental issues
were on the table. 
Nothing
need be left unsaid, 
and yet everything was.
I was not the person 
people thought I was - 
some Caligula, some war-lord
reincarnated from the Viking Age.

By that time, family networks
were shredded 
beyond recognition.
Nothing fit together 
in my mind.  
The women, of course,
had different perceptions
and ambitions.  I tried to stay
clear of them, but of course
they wanted to control me,
and  claim a share
of whatever booty
I accumulated, 
if not be rid of me 
completely.

I never really knew
what I wanted to do, except
I was always told I'd get the ranch,
and be the 4th generation 
on that homestead.
I gave it a shot, 
and missed, apparently.

Should I have killed myself?  
I came close 
a couple of times, anyway.  
The Buffalo spirits
always with me. 
A real Commons 
of the Mind.  
I just couldn't
seem to get it together.
Everyone was playing 
a different game.  
A stranger
in a strange land, indeed
but  that was  something I knew
how to do.

I remember saying,
"After moving to Southern California
to go to UCLA."
(and that, in large part,
in imitation of Nathaniel Branden)
"it took me two years to adjust  to it.
Then, everything was fine."

"But when I returned to Montana,
I simply couldn't cope with it.
Nothing seemed right.
Everyone was playing games
which somehow, I was a part of,
but never understood. 
And that  is still true, today."

I knew my relatives 
must hate me, or be jealous
of my greater "privileges".
The Ugly Duckling
might be the right metaphor.
So as not to disappoint them
I went to jail
and otherwise became 
an outcast.

Human nature, I suppose.
Why some men become gay,
or else brutal and tyrannical.
Boys cannot hit girls.  
All we can do 
is stay clear of them.

So, thank you Marx
and your daughter, Ayn Rand.
My sister was named Eleanor -
we thought, after Eleanor Roosevelt.
And we didn't like Roosevelt.
Both, perhaps, were named after
Eleanor Marx, who did kill herself
in despair at all the evil in the world.

- Paul Stephens (revised 1-14-14)

+++++++++++++

I've written several essays  on "The Tragedy of Economics" and other  basically "economics denial" subjects.  Here's  an excellent one from the current press:

The corruption of the economics profession
by Dean Baker @DeanBaker13 
Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and author, most recently, of The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive.
December 30, 2013

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2013/12/economics-sciencecorruption.html

The public needs expert guidance on economic issues, but moneyed interests have gotten in the way

It is remarkable that the public has been convinced that the earth revolves around the sun. This is remarkable because we can all look up in the sky and see the sun revolving around the earth.

Most of us are willing to believe the direct opposite of what we can see with our own eyes because we accept the analysis of the solar system developed by astronomers through many centuries of careful observation. The overwhelming majority of people will never go through the measurements and reproduce the calculations. Rather, our belief that the earth revolves around the sun depends on our confidence in the competence and integrity of astronomers. If they all tell us that the earth in fact orbits the sun, we are prepared to accept this view.

Unfortunately the economics profession cannot claim to have a similar stature. This is both good and bad. It is good because it doesn’t deserve that stature. Economists too often work as hired guns for those with money and power. It is bad because the public needs expertise in economics, just as it needs expertise in medicine and other areas.

Theories for sale.....

Eunice Belgum's Akrasia Project - Links and podcasts

Who was Eunice Belgum?   

Eunice Belgum was a Montana girl, in the matriarchal line, daughter of  Esther Holberg, of Fairfield, MT.  She was a Westinghouse  Scholarship recipient, a graduate of St. Olaf's, with a PhD in Philosophy from Harvard.   And she killed herself after her second year of tenure track teaching at William and Mary (her first job was at Trinity College in Connecticut) - after being voted Teacher of the Year, or some such thing.

Even after gaining a large following among young feminists,  peace and justice people, etc., she was sure that she didn't deserve it.  She had "the imposter complex".   Her "self-concept" did not match her reality.   Along with medical ethics (some published in the Harvard Law Review), her main work and life obsession was something called "Akrasia" - knowing better but doing the worse. 

Akrasia has a long history in philosophy as one of those questions that don't get solved.  Psychology has had better luck explaining various kinds of self-destructive behavior.  But Eunice's PhD Thesis at Harvard was later re-published as one of the 50 best Harvard Philosophy Theses of the  20th century.   I  have a copy of it, and I was just lamenting this morning that she didn't simply write her own "account" of this problem, rather than "researching" what every white dead male in history had already written about it.  Unfortunately, that is the nature of the academic game.  

Esther was very free about discussing Eunice's "death", and was active in survivors and suicide prevention groups.  Eunice smoked, and was unable to quit, so that was kind of a metaphor for her own "Akrasia."  And she seemed to have become a lesbian, which Esther blamed on "radical feminists" who used guilt and other illicit methods to "convert" Eunice to their "cause" (which rather astonished me, but these were people who grew up in the 1930's and  '40's.  Eunice would be 67, now - a year older than I and a year ahead in school).  

I wrote some poems and other things and showed them to Esther, hoping she would pursue the idea of writing her own book about Eunice, which she intended to do.  One I remember was called "The Will to Suicide", which I'll try to locate and attach, later.  

The Peace Movement in Great Falls

As major agents and promoters of the Peace Movement (especially Beyond War, the Sanctuary Movement, and other Peace and Justice projects) in the Nuclear Garrison Town of Great Falls, the Belgums' work and values were not especially welcome to the  "Base Boosters" and Nuclear Mafia which  largely control our town and even the whole state (we have an army general as Lt. Governor at the moment).  Joe was from North Dakota and a graduate of North Dakota State, which didn't help much, either.  Esther had attended the Normal School in Dillon, and taught at Greenfields School (part of the Fairfield district), where she met Joe, who was  doing a Lutheran minister internship, or something.  Pastor Lunde, who was based in Great Falls and confirmed my father and aunts, was also Esther's pastor.

It's important to note that Eunice's uncle, David Belgum was a well-known professor and authority on religious psychology at Iowa, and her father, Joe, was one of the most memorable characters one is likely to meet.  So, with this pedigree and expectations, who can fail to  understand the magnitude of this human tragedy?  Nearly everyone who knew me and/or the Belgum's, apparently, for whom it was a great scandal.

Although I met Prof. David Belgum a couple of times, I never really discussed Eunice with him.  I wish I had.  He was all compassion, and professional in his response to this, but of course family dynamics would have prevented him from intervening, and Joe seemed resentful of his greater success, in any case

I devoted 4 years of my life to their service - literally - starting in 1985,  when I met them at a Beyond War presentation, and house-sat for them.  This was about 7 years after Eunice's death.  I never met her, but read some of her private journals, etc. - all of which have since been destroyed, I think, by her brother - mainly to preserve his parents' (and his own) sanity.  Aside from him, whom I am not in touch with anymore, I might still retain the best overview of this whole bitter drama, and its implications for everything from religion and morality to mental health, political sanity, etc.  Eunice and I had very similar philosophical interests (as well as sexual identity confusions, family dysfunctionality, being Norwegian-American, etc.)

After Eunice's death (which basically drove Joe mad, and understandably so), the Belgum's retired from Lutheran Social Services, where he was employed in San Francisco, and returned to  Montana, where Esther's deceased mother's home was available.  Esther nearly always worked as a teacher and school counselor - an even greater burden (considering the outcome for her daughter), but one which she was trained to handle, and did quite well with it.  

The main thing, for these devoutly Christian people, was whether or not Eunice had lost her faith (which several of her friends assured me she had, but Esther didn't think so), and if she had, whether or not Universal Salvation would still apply.  That, of course, was Esther's view, while Joe knew in his heart that his beloved daughter was utterly damned.  And so they fought and blamed each other incessantly, and had done so all along, which might have been the most significant factor in Eunice's decision to "end the pain."  

Universal salvation was actually the basis for a small sect in New England called "Universalism,"  which later merged with the Unitarians - they are now "U-U's".  And the Founder of Great Falls, Paris Gibson, was a Universalist, and a serious one - a fact which is rarely noted or understood in local history and lore.  Lutheran doctrine, it should be noted, is strongly against Universal Salvation, where you must somehow "earn" or "deserve" God's Grace in order to be saved.  It's the difference between welfare and workfare, I suppose.  

Or  more to the point, the difference between "universal health care"  and the "health insurance" extortion and protect racket, where all you're buying is ACCESS to the care, after which they can still take your house, pension, and every other piece of property in your name to satisfy their fraudulent claims for minimal or palliative treatments, at a price of thousands of dollars per day, and send you to the poorhouse.  

Since our local hospitals were established as Christian institutions, the importance of ethics in medicine has been thoroughly undermined by the "secular humanists" and their "business plan" for political control and directing revenues to Wall Street and the power-wielding 1%.  A Harvard tradition, it would seem.  

Many highly accomplished (and ethical) people are driven to despair, if not suicide, when they finally  come to understand just how totally criminal nearly everything our "benevolent" welfare/warfare state has become, and how it throttles and destroys all human values in the name of "efficiency", "jobs," and "national  security."  

I'll be writing more on this, and inviting feedback.  

****************

Here's a brief bibliography of information and links about Eunice Belgum and the endowed lectures in her name at St. Olaf's.

Amazon lists the version of her dissertation that I have.

http://www.amazon.com/Eunice-Belgum/e/B001KHYGRK


Eunice Belgum Memorial Lectures
Each year for three decades the department has sponsored the Belgum Lectures, which honor the memory of Eunice Belgum, who graduated from St. Olaf College in 1967. The lecture series was established in the hope that Eunice’s tragic death in 1977 would not end her impact on the profession, teaching, and scholarship she loved so much.  While the lectures may be on any topic, the philosophy department makes a special effort to choose topics in areas of special interest to Eunice, namely ethics, philosophy of mind, and feminism.  These lectures are supported by a fund established by Eunice’s family and friends.

http://wp.stolaf.edu/philosophy/eunice-belgum-memorial-lectures-podcasts/

35th Annual Eunice Belgum Memorial Lectures
"Character"
Daniel Robinson, Oxford University
Monday, September 23, 2013 
Viking Theater, Buntrock Commons
More Information
http://stolaf-web.streamguys.us/podcast/academic/2013-09-23_belgum_two.mp3
MP3 Available

Previous Belgum Lectures
1979    Kathryn Pyne Parsons, Not Judge, Not Victim, Nor Savior
1980    Dagfinn Føllesdal, Understanding and Rationality
1981    Gareth B. Matthews, Conceiving Childhood
1982    Martha Nussbaum, The Fragility of Goodness
1983    Georg Henrik Von Wright, Truth, Knowledge, and Freedom
1984    Naomi Scheman, Authority and Paranoia: The Social Construction of Gender and the Philosophical Self
1985    Merold Westphal, The Religious Uses of Modern Atheism
1986    Kenneth Sayre, Myths for Our Technological Future
1987    Rosemarie Tong, Feminist Social Philosophy
1988    Laurence Thomas, Living Morally: A Psychology of Moral Character
1989    Keith Gunderson, The Aesthetic Robot
1990    Allan Gibbard, Moral Meanings
1991    Nancy Sherman, Virtue and Ethics
1992    Arthur Caplan, Ethics and the Genetic Revolution
1993    Amelie Rorty, The Many Faces of Morality
1994    Helen Longino, Scientific Knowledge and Feminist Theoretical Virtues
1995    Georges Rey, Superficialism about Mind and Meaning
1996    Gary Iseminger, Aestheticism: Defined and Defended
1997    Hilary Putnam, Mind, Matter, and Making Sense
1998    Jean Bethke Elshtain, How Far Have We Fallen?
1999    James Harris, After Relativism
2000    Stephen Darwall, Two Dogmas of Empiricism in Ethics
2001    Lydia Goehr, Listening, Laughing, and Learning
2002    Frederick Stoutland, How To Believe in Free Will
2003    Margaret Urban Walker, Forgiveness and Moral Repair
2004    Bas van Fraassen, Seeing and Measuring: Connecting
            Science to Experience
2005    Jonathan Lear, Ethics and the Collapse of Civilization
2006    Galen Strawson, Episodic Ethics
2007    Julia Annas, Virtue and Happiness
2008    Barbara Herman, Making Motives Matter
2009    Elliott Sober, Philosophical Reflections on Darwin
2010    Thomas Carson, Lincoln’s Ethics
2011     Rachel Cohen, Hume on Virtuous Action and Character
2012     Lynne Rudder Baker, Persons: What We Are and How We Persist in Time
2013     Daniel Robinson, Consciousness, Again and Character