Punitive Globalism

© 2022 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

“Oil” has found itself under the heel of vindictive globalists who stridently insist that the world is on the verge of an extinction-level event, a "climaticlysm", if you will. For them, a measured response is simply out of the question; it's much too late for anything other than a radical redirecting of policies and behaviors – a resetting of the global trajectory. Fortunately, history breeds cynics, and cynics recognize that power, wealth, and control provide compelling motivations to skew, warp, and suppress data – to lie. Thus, one can be forgiven for suspecting ulterior motives. My background, in part, is in Physics; I trust the scientific process, but have little faith in the character of Man, "good political intentions" and, in this case, the proclaimed "science". So now, the rational sector would like to offer the following prescription: nix the blueprint for the destruction (and humbling) of the U.S. and other prosperous nations – the punitive leveling of "playing fields"– and deselect the plan's architects, the big-picture illuminati who can’t see the trees for the forest. Mute the voices incessantly shrieking "CLIMATE CHANGE!" as if the Apocalypse were due the Tuesday after next. Panic is a lead-footed driver with no sense of direction, and it goes without saying, feigned panic to manipulate "unenlightened" masses is morally repugnant. In the United States, increase our fossil fuel production until we’ve, once again, reached a point of self-sufficiency; i.e., until we've regained our energy independence. Then, institute a policy of inverse reciprocity, where the gains made in “green energy” production are offset by commensurate reductions in the production of fossil fuels. In so doing, we can maintain the balance necessary to ensure both our energy independence and our security, while intelligently advancing toward that most noble globalist vision of averting "The Climaticlysm". Lastly and above all else, attempt honesty!

Justice and the American Temperament

 © 2021 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

There is concern as to what Special Council John Durham can (or will be permitted to) accomplish in his investigation. More specifically, there is a palpable sense of urgency that the culpable be held to account. The audacious and egregious, even criminal acts, perpetrated by the elite of our ruling class, intelligence agencies, military, media, social networking sites, et al – often in seeming coordination – feel indicative of systemic decay, and the players, like a necrotizing bacterium that has evolved resistance to our most potent antibiotics. They are the upper tier "untouchables". My expectation is that Clinton campaign attorney, Michael Sussman, will, in the extreme, endure brightly reddened wrists, despite being one of too many lawyers who should be confronting bars that cannot be passed (Kevin Clinesmith being another case in point). One could be forgiven for thinking that, with regard to the U.S. Constitution, these are a “people apart” – “AMINOs”, if you will: Americans In Name Only. They flout the rules, our laws, and basic morality with seeming impunity, and therein lies the rub. The belief that there will be no justice, no commensurate level of accountability, has altered the American personality. Where there was once passing anger, there is now a perpetual state of low-level rage, and perhaps, for the unstable among us, a yearning to personally exact “justice”. The danger is obvious, even to us, the lowly citizenry.

How Can Anyone Support President Donald Trump?

© 2019 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

Question: How is it possible for people to support President Trump, given all of his corrupt misdeeds over the last three years? 

Answer: Please don’t take this as an endorsement of President Trump. It is not! Nor is it an expression of sympathy or affinity for the man. It is merely my attempt to make sense of the thoughts and feelings of those of an ostensibly pro-Trump standpoint. 

I suspect that many (if not most) of the President’s supporters believe that his conduct and character are deeply flawed. Some, perhaps, feel they are condemnable; he is, at times, a loathsome bully who, most probably, has breached the law on an occasion or two. Still, they reason: There has been a move afoot since day-one of his tenure – a move perpetrated by an elite of a nature far more pernicious and repugnant than anything Donald Trump has exhibited – to dispose of him like a couple of hundred pounds of putrid, orange-tinged meat. And so, in response to an attempt at disenfranchisement by their venomous and vile “betters”, they bitterly, stridently, spitefully, and steadfastly hold to their seemingly untenable position. In their view, President Donald Trump is vastly the lesser of two evils, the "relatively-good Samaritan". He is the bullied bully who has become the beneficiary of profound resentment.

Freedom of the Press

© 2018 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

It has been reported that the U.S. news media - "the press" - have blamed President Donald Trump for the diminishment of their freedom. I would posit, however, that the U.S. press is not less free, not the pitiable victim of our truth-averse president; it is incarcerated, bounded by its own biases, purposes, and allegiances. It has become pathological in its vindictiveness, obsessive in its single-minded pursuit of an objective; namely the destruction of "THE ACCIDENTAL PRESIDENT". Its peripheral vision has blackened through atrophy and its movements are so conjoined as to appear orchestrated. The American press myopically perceives and bemoans a freedom fading in a barrage of "withering criticism" leveled by a crass and belligerent president, while it misses what is, in essence, a prison of its own making: nonobjectivity.

Impossible?

© 2016 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

A few years back, in a conversation I’d had with a young, self-assured Chemical Engineer, the matter of extraterrestrial visitation arose. His position was clear from the outset: interstellar distances are so vast as to render such visitation impossible. Notwithstanding the obvious and begged question “Is this trip really necessary?”, my suspicion was (and remains) that this is a perspective shared by most Physicists, Astrophysicists, and Astronomers. From my perspective, however, “unfathomable” and “impossible” are not synonymous. One may not know how, or even if, interstellar travel is possible; one does not therefore know that it is not. A lack of evidence of possibility is not evidence of impossibility.
 
We seem desperate for certainty, so much so that we cling to our models of the world, of reality. We are, seemingly, bedazzled by them, as if they are a form of jewelry with gemstones so filled with light, so precisely cut and finely polished, that there appears nothing else worthy of a turn of the gaze. I am reminded of a simple, though remarkable, toy called The Levitron. In a sense, it is the physical embodiment of an answer to the question “Using ordinary permanent magnets, how does one stably levitate one such magnet above another?” The problem is one whose solution most in the scientific realm characterize as “relatively simple”; yet, until late in the twentieth century, the consensus among physicists as to the prospect for permanent magnet levitation could be summed up in a word: Impossible! In 1983, a heedless and most tenacious tinkerer named Roy M. Harrigan realized the impossible and patented what was to become known as the first spin-stabilized magnetic levitation device – the prototypic Levitron – employing essentially nothing more than permanent magnets. And, as if to furnish a line of cosmic poetry with an exclamation point, in 1984, a college drop-out named Joseph Chieffo, unwitting as to Harrigan’s brilliant, but still obscure, invention, produced his own distinct, spin-stabilized permanent-magnetism-induced levitation device. History is replete with seemingly impossible discoveries by inspired pioneers who are simply too passionate and intuitively attuned to be impressed by “impossibility”.   

Genius - Installment V - On the Nature of Genius

© 2014 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

Genius is inspired action, compelled by passion, by love. It is realized through engagement–a kind of melding–with an idea, a domain, or, most profoundly, the whole of existence. Genius can be manifested in a burst of illumination or creation, or in a trickling, sustained endeavor that may or may not yield a "work of genius". An extraordinary "intelligence quotient" is not requisite for the existence of genius; nevertheless, such quantity may reflect a narrow band or hue (or narrow bands or hues) of the spectrum of genius in that what underlies said quantity may, in fact, be passion–passion for numerical relationships and manipulation, for linguistic or symbolic expression, or the like; or for a subsuming domain that requires (and, through such connection, passionately embraces the development of) fluency in such domains. We sometimes refer to one as "a genius", but as has been said, genius is action, and as some who have "earned" the appellation might attest, such action is only as great as the self is small. That is to say, the action that is genius is impersonal. Uncontrollable, it flows fitfully from a tap in the vastness that is intelligence.

On the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, The Guess Who, and The Moody Blues

© 2014 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

Perhaps it's personal, those glaring omissions. Or maybe it's simply a matter of us not "getting it". Take, for example, the Canadian band The Guess Who, with its seemingly interminable string of memory-etching ballads and rockers: These Eyes, Laughing, Undun, No Time, American Woman, No Sugar Tonight/New Mother Nature, Share The Land, Hand Me Down World, Bus Rider, Albert Flasher, Rain Dance...; maybe it just never rose to the level of musicality and renown worthy of the Hall's recognition. And maybe The Guess Who's front-man, the profoundly gifted Burton Cummings, for all of his pianistic virtuosity and what is perhaps the most mellifluous and tunefully explosive voice to have ever graced rock and roll...maybe, in the arcane proceedings and deliberations that are the induction process, his exceptionality counts as nothing more than extraneous ornamentation. If so, then so it is for the band's counterbalance, world class guitarist Randy Bachman, the other half of the brilliantly innovative, woefully short-lived Bachman-Cummings compositional collaboration. But surely the Hall's modus operandi is to exercise exceptionally nuanced and unbiased judgment, a level of discernment commensurate, as one would expect, with notably lofty standards – standards that were plainly on display in its induction of, say, Green Day, Rush, Beastie Boys, Abba, and Blondie, each and all at the exclusion of The Guess Who. There is cause for doubt. Consider another supernally talented group, The Moody Blues. As is the case with The Guess Who, this band, according to the Hall, doesn't pass muster, and thus, still resides in the exurbs of Halldom; this, despite their giving genesis to a genre that melded classical music with rock and roll and yielded a number of stunningly gorgeous entries on their laundry list of wildly popular melodic gems. Call me a rock-sheltered hayseed, but the exclusion of The Moody Blues from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in favor of the noted, pronouncedly less contributive, less notable entrants is, well, somewhat irrational. It would seem the Hall's admission criteria are years overdue for an evolutionary spurt – a particularly radical one if it has been using criteria that weigh more heavily on what's "cool" or palatable to present-day popular tastes, or the Hall's personal likes (or dislikes) ...on anything that deemphasizes that which matters most: the quality of the music. And while it is granted that any estimation as to that quality will invariably and in large part entail subjective means, quality is the one criterion that warrants the Hall's considered efforts to shape and exercise such means. But mutative progression aside, one would hope that, in the near term, the Hall would, at the very least, right what needs righting concerning the two rock and roll marvels at issue. I can think of at least one scenario that would satisfy the avenging poet within: the Hall issues a groveling apology and, by way of a monetary mea culpa, pays The Guess Who and The Moody Blues for the privilege of admitting them retroactively, setting their dates of entry at twenty-five years subsequent to the release of their respective first records. But who heeds the poets?



The Moody Blues









The Guess Who





What Path, The Light?

© 2013 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved.

Following is a somewhat poetic, decidedly harsh indictment of the world’s loquacious guides to salvation. Titled World Over-heard, it was submitted to a forum known as "The Living Waters Message Board" in 2001.

No more words! Too long have flicks and drippings of tongues disserved as wispish proxies for solutions to heart-rending sorrows; promissory pacifiers assuring that miraculous play in fields of light is as near as the days of heaven. Too long have I accepted the currency of purposes, intents, promises, and ‘knowing’ as the medium of exchange, knowing well that weight, substance, and luster render action the basis for the gold standard in this world crying out for golden threads of life-essential light. It is time to pay up in precious nuggets. Enough of “Christ will come again, the meek shall inherit the earth, and then shall we know heaven; but in the meantime, please sit back and enjoy another episode of ‘As the world burns’’’. Enough of hope! Enough of belief! Enough of self-anesthetizing words! Please, Sir, just shut up; shut up and deliver the action – the action of intelligence... now.

– Joe

Below is an exchange in connection with the foregoing post.

Joe, I can't tell if you're trying to sound cleverly skeptical or are genuinely confused and troubled. Either way, I'm sorry to "hear" the hostility and misunderstanding on your part. I don't think you've had enough of hope or belief yet, it sounds like you could use a good dose of both. I do hope you are more open to truth than your message suggests, and that you are given an opportunity to come to terms with what is real and what matters.

–CFry


C, I can see how it might appear that my intent was to appear cleverly skeptical, but that was not my purpose. Yes, I am deeply troubled. Confused? – It would be best if you decided this. If you’ve retained interest, please see:
 

http://members.boardhost.com/Galaxey/index.html#mb

It appears that I’ve over-submitted my initial post by entering it at several boards, anticipating one or two responses at most. I apologize.

– Joe

Joe, I read your reply on the other message board, in which you describe a rapturous, ecstatic experience twenty some years ago. It seems unfortunate to have had an experience that you look back on after many years as a pinnacle event in your life when you almost had a grasp on something great and harmonious. I do not envy your perception of the significance of that moment in time, for as long as you cling to it you can only return empty and unsatisfied to the way things really are.

2 Cor 12:1-10
12:1I must go on boasting. Although there is nothing to be gained, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. 2I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know-God knows. 3And I know that this man-whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows- 4was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. 5I will boast about a man like that, but I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses. 6Even if I should choose to boast, I would not be a fool, because I would be speaking the truth. But I refrain, so no one will think more of me than is warranted by what I do or say.
7To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. 10That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
NIV

–CFry
 

C, In this, there is no confusion. There is nothing in ‘what is’ to be grasped, as to grasp is to become attached, and thus, to become disengaged from the action that is life. An event is not important in its capacity to overshadow that which is to come. Its significance is its transformative action, nothing more. One must not mistake citation for fixation.

–Joe


No, Joe, "to grasp" isn't to become attached, it is to comprehend, to understand. You say that the experience you cited has significance in "its transformative action, nothing more." Yet, when you wrote about this on the other board you used phrases like:
"The most meaningful experience of my life occurred at the age of 25..."
"In those fleeting moments I lived and understood more than in the entirety of my life prior and since (I’m 47 years of age)."
"In the years since, it has become painfully clear..."
"We are wasting precious life."
"But this is mere knowledge, and knowing is not the same as understanding..."

Tell me again that there is no confusion, and that there is no fixation, as your words lead me to a different conclusion. The description of your "experience" and the aftermath does not conform to your assertions. You also confuse feelings with knowledge. Your transitory feelings will betray you and leave you in despair without answers, whereas genuine knowledge will inform and equip you for decisions and action.

grasp v. grasped, grasp·ing, grasps. 3. To take hold of intellectually; comprehend. (The American Heritage Dictionary)

1 Corinthians 14:11
If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and he is a foreigner to me. NIV
 

Eph 3:14-21
For this reason I kneel before the Father, from whom his whole family in heaven and on earth derives its name. I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge-that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.
Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.
NIV

– CFry

Yes, C, indeed grasp means to comprehend, to understand. And if that was your intent when you noted that

“It seems unfortunate to have had an experience that you look back on after many years as a pinnacle event in your life when you almost had a grasp on something great and harmonious”

I won’t quibble. But please, endure my wish to convey another meaning, viz., to hold, to control. It was in this light, and with respect to the foregoing sentence that I took, or mistook your application of the word. It has been my custom to say ‘grasp of’ when meaning understanding, ‘grasp on’ when implying to hold in the sense of containing, restraining, or controlling. Meanings are easily mistaken.

CFry: You say that the experience you cited has significance in “its transformative action, nothing more." Yet, when you wrote about this on the other board you used phrases like:

"The most meaningful experience of my life occurred at the age of 25..."
"In those fleeting moments I lived and understood more than in the entirety of my life prior and since (I’m 47 years of age)."
"In the years since, it has become painfully clear..."
"We are wasting precious life."
"But this is mere knowledge, and knowing is not the same as understanding..."

Tell me again that there is no confusion, and that there is no fixation, as your words lead me to a different conclusion.

Joe: Then I shall try to explain. An event has significance – meaning, when it is one of action in the stream of life; when the sense of separation from that which we feel as being ‘out there’ ceases. The psychological sense of space, time, observer and observed is now meaningless. One has become the action, the action of life itself. This is the ground of transformation. It is with this in mind that I note that the experience of that 25 year-old was his most meaningful. Yet, I should note that there have been other ‘frolics’ in the stream, just none so profoundly affecting. But, it is essential that I relate that these moments of clarity do not, nor can they ever, arise from fixation, purpose, method, desire, obsession, concentration, purpose, or any other ‘vehicle’ directed toward that end. Truth is pathless.

CFry: “The description of your "experience" and the aftermath does not conform to your assertions.”

Joe: Please, C, explain how this is so and I shall try to clear up any misunderstanding.

 

CFry: “You also confuse feelings with knowledge.”

 

Joe: I’m not clear on this. Perhaps you are alluding to my statement that ends:

We are wasting precious life. But this is mere knowledge, and knowing is not the same as understanding...

What was meant by this is simply that the assertion was coming from the known, from memory, and not from engagement; that is, not from the profound and immediate sense of the crisis that it truly is.

CFry: “Your transitory feelings will betray you and leave you in despair without answers, whereas genuine knowledge will inform and equip you for decisions and action.”

Joe: C, I am not your enemy, nor am I an adversary of truth. I sense that some of our differences arise from differing perspectives on the meanings of the words being used. But, if you feel that it runs much more deeply, and you think it worthwhile, then let us confront it head on. If you are right and I am lost in confusion, then your counsel will not have been for naught.

Thank you.

– Joe


Joe, I mean no disrespect but you seem to use a lot of words to avoid clear communication. Language is not a mystery, it is a means of sharing information, but with effort we can make it seem mysterious by investing personal coding and nonstandard meanings in standard words. The net effect is a hindrance to mutual understanding, the very function of language.
When you say that "truth is pathless" you seem to be saying, in the preceding words, that insights into meaning or existence come about through no personal investment or choice, no effort or pursuit on the part of the student. I completely disagree, and say again that such a perspective can only lead to disappointment, frustration and despair. Truth is apprehendable, it can be pursued, learned, and built upon. Insights into value and meaning come through seeking knowledge, particularly of God, who has revealed himself in meaningful language in the text of the Bible, not through capricious experiences in unexpected moments of unaccountable ecstasy.
 

Proverbs 23:23
Buy the truth and do not sell it; get wisdom, discipline and understanding.

Psalms 119:30 I have chosen the way of truth; I have set my heart on your laws.

Ps 119:33 Teach me, O LORD, to follow your decrees; then I will keep them to the end.

Ps 119:34 Give me understanding, and I will keep your law and obey it with all my heart.

2 Corinthians 4:2 Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. NIV

– CFry

C, avoiding clear communication has never been my purpose in this discussion. But, if I have failed to convey my meaning, perhaps there is an alternative explanation. Possibly, wittingly or unwittingly, you’ve become genuinely disinterested, even afraid to step away from that which you believe just long enough to learn the meanings behind the words, to examine matters from a different and unfamiliar perspective. Perhaps you are contented with your life, oblivious to the truth that you are the world, a world crying out for immediate solutions, a world ablaze. I sensed that I’d lost you from the outset when I said “Enough of ‘Christ will come again, the meek shall inherit the earth, and then shall we know heaven…’” Maybe I should have noted that in the teachings attributed to Christ I have found profound meaning and beauty; that it is the peripheral commentary – the interpretations that I have generally found to be misguided. But, I suspect this would not have helped matters.

CFry: “When you say that "truth is pathless" you seem to be saying, in the preceding words, that insights into meaning or existence come about through no personal investment or choice, no effort or pursuit on the part of the student. Truth is apprehendable, it can be pursued, learned, and built upon. Insights into value and meaning come through seeking knowledge, particularly of God, who has revealed himself in meaningful language in the text of the Bible, not through capricious experiences in unexpected moments of unaccountable ecstasy.”

Joe: What I am saying is that truth, reality, what is, or whatever label one applies, is realized simply – no investment, no preparation, no schooling, no gurus, no initiation, no ‘winding up for the pitch’ required. It is as near as breathing, as conspicuous as the words you are reading, as accessible as life itself.

C, it is clear from your responses that my writing has served only to annoy or perhaps even anger you. I can understand this. I have entered your ‘realm’ and spouted ‘heresy’. I take no pleasure in the misery of another. I won’t disturb you again. Besides, wasn’t it me who said ‘No more words!’? Goodbye, and best wishes in your pursuit of truth.

 

– Joe


Joe, there has been neither anger nor annoyance in my responses to you, only an attempt to speak directly and honestly to the premises you stated. I did not want to be offensive to you in any way, and I'm sorry that you've taken my replies that way, but I also know it would be of no benefit to you to have a dialogue that did not address the issues at all. Though you have said farewell, I hope that you will return to read this comment, and realize that I have spoken from concern, not misery or hostility, and I hope that you will continue to consider the words of Jesus and of all the Bible, for there is substance there that you've not yet found. Despite your denial of the need, I hope you'll search for it.

As Jesus said, "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it."
Matt 13:45-46 NIV

– CFry

 

A Shaded Path Alight

 

 

Delicate Balance: The Threshold Of American Revolution

© 2013 – J C, An Anonymous CFO. All rights reserved*

We Americans, as a whole, are a fairly adaptive lot. While there is much that makes us hot under the collar, we tend to take the wide-angled view and note that things are rarely so bad as to warrant anything more than the occasional rant. When confronted with news of the latest scandal or crisis and the implicit or explicit message that we’ve again been robbed of our wealth or our liberty, we commonly observe “We’ve been screwed again”, ingest antacids, and carry on with lives less fair, less full. What is it that allows us to suffer the manifold indignities and the diminishment of life and self at the exacting of agents of injustice? Is it that we are sufficiently comfortable, satisfied, and thus, disinclined to stir the pot lest we become scalded through our righteous agitation? Are we too contented to face systems of seemingly impenetrable, laminar complexity to right what are obvious and profound wrongs? My suspicion is that the searing, tensing affronts and injustices wrought by the immorality of our spiritually barren, feckless "leaders" and the "movers and shakers" who retain them–these perfidies that we have come to expect and to which we have become inured, that we assimilate and adapt to–are indeed counteracted by comforts, pleasures, and trappings that are balm in the lives of “ordinary Americans”. We will continue to endure the bursting of bubbles, the scandals, the crises, the inequities, iniquities, and mendacities symptomatic of our condition–the condition of an America on the gurney–as long as there is the soothing and the balance. Is there a breaking point at which we say (and mean) enough is enough? Most probably, but the noted agents of injustice have become remarkably skilled in their art, ever refining, ever testing and stretching the limits of our adaptability, and, it is hoped, ever regardful of our modulus of elasticity and that which constitutes the delicate balance.




Thomas Jefferson's Original Gravestone – Lessons Lost?

Courtesy of Jenni Feathers