PsychSem Analysis and God* use

PSYCHOSEMIOTIC ANALYSIS AND GOD* USE


I.
By "psychosemiotics" is meant, here, the study of the psychology of sign-use*, by which is meant the use of signs to communicate.

This study takes acts of communication between persons as data, the way linguistics and etymology take use of language and words as data, generalizing from these as particular types of tokens to whatever serves the same function as these, namely, transferring a content (meaning, message) from one consciousness to another. Conversation, in a face to face living context, are the paradigm communication situation. Writing, now almost universally injecting alphabetic sound letters, is a substitute for spoken communication, and regarded as individualized through the esoteric "voice" heard in particular styles, such as in Platonic dialogues.

Acts of communication in general involve: the person(s), as active, conscious, self-aware (remembering, observing, intending, interacting) embodied beings; units and complexes of particular sign tokens (S*)
to which the person(s) attend for a short duration, usually occurring in verbal strings, read substitutes; exchanges (or allowing for such) with actual or silently assumed audience-evocateur; process, as in the receptor/reactive nervous system connections between perceptual in-put (hearing what someone is saying) and cognitive output (responding coherently to the understood meaning); and context. With these formal elements: consciousness, S*trings, cross-nose-bridge exchanges, process and context -- rendered constants in talking about (predicating on) sign uses, the entire domain, sector or dimension* of consciousness given to itself under uses of signs, by their meanings, becomes the independent, "philosophical" factor variable in communications, available to analysis through itself or its conditions.

In experience in general, it is objects perceived ('read') as tokens (empirical particulars) of signs, which by definition stand for something other than themselves. This "standing for" is the sign's meaning -- what is not seen or heard in the S* considered as an object in non-semantic relations to other items of experience (color, line, sound, etc.). This meaning can be called the sign's text. The text of a sign is what is given in understanding its meaning, and this is a self-contained unity that can be brought back in different situations by other tokens, these being fungible. In general, tokens may be either inner images, or outer objects, but the text is always "in your head". As the meaning factor amid the other constants it is the continuous, self-contained, wholly presented recurring identity, under its own unique form or matric called here "tokenspace (TknSpc*). As wholly given under a particular occasion of sign-use, text is "non-extended". Measurements of line-distance do not hold between S* as contents of consciousness; it is absurd, a category mistake to say "take half the length of the Pythagorean theorem" (or: "onsider a pair of number 2's") It was this observation that led Descartes to distinguish Mind (or "soul", as the immortal part of the person they are born with) from extended, divisible body, on ultimate, metaphysical grounds as categorically different essences. Thought and extension are irreducible, unavoidable opposites. (Yet both are contents of consciousness under sign-use.) This dualism can never be overthrown or negated. It is a metaphysical given, through communication itself.

Analysis of any instance of sign-use, therefore, can begin with the assumption of some token, S*, in a field of consciousness, communicating some meaning by its text. The text is what S* says; the token is the fact that S* is saying it* (*the message in TknSpc).

As text, analysis of S*trings begins with grammar. Grammar, presupposing a way of pre-sorting tokens into repeatable forms of text, compounds S* in ways that allows truth and falsehood of propositions. This requires a literal declarative intention in the use of sentences: the intention to say something, in the simplest case by attaching a predicate, "blue" to a subject "the sky". S*trings singled out in this manner organized into scientific theory are assumed under the notion of "one universe", the totality of objects and situations as content of consciousness, to belong to a unified field of all true self-consistent propositons as a single system. Grammatical analysis of S*trings consistent with the concept of a unified language of science has been formally pursued to logical syntax, and the theory of axiomatic deductive systems in quantificational logic (including, but not included under, set theory).
The "variables" in the systems of quantificational analysis, as in the context of "the values of the variable 'x' in 'f(x)' are objects to which predicate f applies, are assumed to be replaced in actual use of formal logic by designating expressions: names, or, in syntactical terms, undefined descriptive constants. Grammatical analysis, having originated in subject-predicate sign-use, reconnects to non-formal (in the sense of logical) content of consciousness via names ("udc"'s). One notes that this is almost a reversal of the relation of constants to variable in regard to analysis of sign-use in general, where the variable is the (textual) meaning. In the analysis of that meaning, the variable appears as the letter "x", standing in TknSpc in S*trings of structures connecting names of objects; if truly, then connecting them in ways the objects themselves connect. It is necessary to define this, or assume it is defined, abstractly, in order to apply the rules of deductive inference, which are designed to transfer truth-value from premisses to conclusion with certainty in valid arguments. (This is what is left of Descartes' use of the term, reconstructed. His intuition of a separate and distinct type of knowledge through relations of S* in consciousness, only, was accusrate, but it took the intervening centuries for its rigorous formal elaboration. )

Psychology, including the psychological conditions for conscious discourse, does not occur in the object-language of the empirical sciences (of objects extended in space and time around the percipient body). In fact, reference to psychological entities by name are logical embarassments to the physical sciences. They organize experienced content under theoretical domains by names. This presupposes the experience and its articulation in communication. Within deductive domains, texts cannot deviate from tokens; that is to say, the substitution of tokens with the same meanings in different contexts must be presupposed, which cannot happen if 'subjective expressions' -- "he thought that x was f" -- are mixed with statements of objective fact. The entire realm (dimension, domain) of conscious meanings must be theoreticaly omitted from referential or "extensional" discourse.

However, nothing is more notorious about actual conversational sign-use than its customary non-fact stating intention. In the main, it's motive is to entertain, 'deal with' -- economic exchange; relate to the other person, occasionally swap information. Here the grammar of sentences that permit them to be arranged in regular deductive order is helpful, in information-sharing mode, but gives way as standard form of repetition to gesture templates. These are basically image-forms, or pictures we have of ourselves as actors momentarily on the stage in a give-and-take situation. (cf. the metaphor of "leaving blood on the floor" after a bitter dispute)

Psychosemiotics takes up the analysis of S*trings through non-grammatical relations. Names, rigid designators that serve as values for variables in symbolic logic, are respected, walked around as it were, when objects of scientific study are referred to; but prepositions, verbs, metaphors in tokens convey non-linear, un-quantifiable complexity of content, far exceeding literal true-false textual representation. ("One dream can condense an entire book," Freud said.) These templates of completing gestures in communication -- "hello","goodby", "have a nice day" -- constitute the synthetic apriori Kant's Critique dismissed from pure reason in knowledge. It is the Jungian Unconscious, with Archetypes as logoi in TknSpc; the Transcendental Unity of Apperception brought into sign-use in general as "mine" -- that is to say, in relation to the individual consciousness for which/whom all content is a unity. These portals are what actual name and gesture use open, when brought back by analysis. From this standpoint, outside textusal consciousness, but including it, meaning is life (oxygen in the blood of communication). That is one of the teachings arrived at in psychosemiotics.


II.

GOD* USE

Maybe in saying "God" no one is doing exactly what they think -- whatever that is, as part of the context of sign-use. Referring to "a higher being?

Philosophers in general, starting from the human standpoint in regard to knowledge, have repeatedly taken users of "God" to task for not knowing what they were talking about, tacitly re-assigning reality-pretentions to sign-use in relation to consciousness. Thus, Descartes, again, was the first to explicitly demote what the medievalists (mostly Christian, but also Muhammedan and Jew) had called "God" (Adonai* Zeus* Elohim/Yhwh* Allah*) to an "idea". He could be sure (if not certain) by 1600 that someone wasn't going to appear to repute him in person in the name of some actual God-entity because from what was becoming known and gradually understood about the world at that point, these then-ancient deities had been replaced by scientific explanations of change through causes, leaving only the S*trings of their stories as "real" beings, as in the incarnation to project in TokrnSpace. Descartes' metaphysical dualism assigns use of "God", to stand for an "idea", to the category of thinking/non-extended substance, related to the world of physical objects as the self-subject unity of consciousness is in each perception and sign-use. Thus philosophers, along with strands of others, such as hermeticists and alchemists who retained and accumulated knowledge of actual causes, even if disguized in fantasy, are owed a great intellectual debt in ridding learned discourse of superstitution, pretentiousness, pedantry, if not symbolic pedophilia in calling the hand of God -Users possessed by who knows what. The Cartesian co-ordinate system, onto which trajectories of projectile motion can be analyzed as sequences of point-sets, generating geometrical shapes by lines drawn through continues magnitudes, is still in use in mapping motion in three-dimensional outer space onto the two-dimensional plane of a sheet of graph paper. The sheer power of this brilliant psychosemiotic scheme, based on mapping the constructs in TokenSpace, laid out with the rightly ordered tokens (number-sequences from 0 - / + in intersecting horizontal/vertical lines) onto space in general, as surrounding the body and filling the cosmos. It was not so long ago that learned people could be genuinely wondering what this all-suffusing "simultaneously given" (Kant) thing called "space" IS -- as if the relatedness filled with light, cosmic particles, and gravity, were something real to be predicated on, itself: Space. According to early modern cosmology, "aether" filled it, and "rays" swept around the whirling sun to keep planets in orbit (Kepler). The Cartesian co-ordinate system with its tokens of textual description and rules of use (map codes), provides intellectual mastery over that Space as pure extension, while leaving consciousness, God* and self intact, as a unity for each other, "on the token side". On the token side of sign-use, when the sign used is "God", the "idea" of totality of the extended, external world is brought to unity for consciousness under formal, "clear and distinct" truth, including mathematics. This is why God* can be regarded as the Father (extra-spatial, non-terrestial) progenitor of the "son", as "logos" incarnated through the speech of the Man of Light, reproduced in modes of self-and-other relationship by The Spirit. Thus the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Gost is a symbolic dispacement of the three-stage hierarch of sign-use tokens of the upper triad (whose contents are wholly contained as simple units of meaning in the individual conscious moment). On this view "God the Father" would be the token of totality incarnating in the logos of the son's obedience, re-incarnating in the consciousness looped into that story by the Spirit in the Inner Church throughout history to now, if it undergoes re-birth.

God*, as grammatical variant of "the Christian Trinity", as some speak, is distributed through the three "centers" or "brains" of organized content, as their highest, in the sense of ideal completing function: of intellect, the logic (reason); of inter-relatedness, the love; of egoic being, the nutriants for inner growth. That is why it cannot be significally asked "Does God exist" when "God" is used for the Christian Trinity. To raise this question after 0 AD is to tacitly re-instate the Old Testament ELOHIM/YHWH token, where to be sure it strictly applies, and begs rigorous answer. (Probably composites, back to MARDUK). This replacement is displacement of history into Now.

But that is what unrestricted God* use leads to. By-passing the incarnation as a secondary theological construct off the parent psychosemiotic tree, the Spirit is left ungrounded in the metaphysical triad. Oh, it's around. Churches capture it some. Preachers ooze unction when you raise the subject. But it has been grounded for incarnation in the mainstream media as "Judeo-Christian tradition", and attached to the war in Iraq for Israel. That is why it is of utmost importance today to categorically disconnect the notion of "God the Father", in Christian terms, from "God the Father" in any other (broader, more generic) terms. Jesus did not call the Semitic deity "Father" (argued elsewhere).

"God", as the single word-sign for the totality of totalities, comprises under its use a nested hierarchy of metaphors. Father Son and Holy Ghost are the unity of the upper triad of consciousness, distinct, but not separated from the content supplied by the lower triad. These are: the neurophysiological (cellular level), phenomenal (ur-conscious sense-datum level), and organic/orgasmic (imbodied level). Sexual ejaculation with the pleasure acme as mapped by Wilhelm Reich's arousal/tension//release/relaxation schema is the "God" of the lower triad, to which the phenomenal and neuro-psychological levels submit in function. It is the energy that reproduces the species. Each of these three levels of conscious content is co-ordinate with spatial 'tentacles', intra-anatomically organized extended matter: chemical, in cells; electro-cortical, in the brain; libidinal in the body* (*incl. fantasy embodiment). These coordinate levels of anatomical function deposit rings, as it were, around the omni-present "ground zero" of conscious awareness, which are reconstructed by critique of token-types in regard to content. They are, again, the base-neuron arousal, phenomenal/aesthetic consciousness, and libidinal awareness.

The "Fourth" of each triad, where they overlap, as in the Masonic symbol and Israeli flag drawings in TknSpc, is the Moral dimension: where the upper triad and the lower combine, under will, to act. If the upper triad is assigned to super-ego functions, and the lower to id-functions, the Moral realm mediating between the "God"'s of both is the realm of the Ego: situated as a conscious unity, at level 5 (first level of the upper triad), acting on, and through the body (level 4) through the energy of the spirit (level 3/ sublimated to 6).


So from below, the nested hierarchy of metaphors is: birth (breaking through the neurophysiological embyo to fetal life to the "external world", by wining Cosmic battle against the Placenta); spiritual re-birth, through re-union with the split-off, nurturant Placental container; maturation, mating and reproduction of kind -- as the functions of God* to organiz species activity.

From above, the upper triad hierarchy descends from God* as token of the completing totality (of totalities); to Sign-use for all sign-uses; to Sign-uses by "I" for myself as conscious being. (7,6,5: theological, philosophical, existential levels of content under sign-use)

The work of sublimation is begun with re-birth, to transform object cathexis of a portion of libido to objects that complete the upper triad. It is that which can sail on the seas of time through space.

Self in Situations & Predicates

Self in Situations, Objects predicated on

It is obvious from the general analysis of experience that objects referred to differ in kind according to the communication situation. Telling dreams is obviously different from describing a remembered landscape, as content of dreams differ from content of perception. Thus, in a perceptual situation, objects are identified in one way; in a dreaming-sleep/trance situation, they are identified differently, by different laws, one thing changing into another.

If "self" is a sense of continuity, with feeling of familiarity (Russell) belonging to content remembered, "it" is the common totality of consciousness distributed through all sign-uses. We can therefore speak of self-awareness in a dream situation, phenomenal waking life situation, amorous situation, moral situation, egoistic existential situation, philosophical (metaphysical) situation, and theological (hypothetical closure) situation. These seven situations, in order of object complexity of content encompassed between dreaming and cosmic container, correspond to the seven "notes" between middle -C's on the musical scale.

The predicates appropriate to the objects experienced are determined by the self-situation. Predicates that apply to John, the person (Ex.: "...is 30 years old") do not apply, categorically, to congeries of sense-data or firings of neurones. Objects located in three dimensions of space including one's own body belong to a different way of ordering experience than by phenomenal complexity or micro-magnitudes.of energy. They have their own hierarchy of complexity, from organ tissue (including blood) to individual molecules, cells, chemical compounds and atoms. There are thus two hierarchies of complexity correlated with sign-use: external, through causal aggregation; and internal, through increasingly differentiated and more developed reactions to situations.feeding back through the processing loops to create higher level objects.

Why Civilization Needs Jesus

Why Civilization Needs Jesus

(sub-topic: Writing Original Sin out of Christianity)

This has not been adequately explained before, though of course preached a lot.

To preach what can be explained pitches the message to the token level of the preacher. This is why preachers have to either be a fool or think they have a calling
(although people will extend lots of slack to whoever does their best, for doing so).

"Jesus" forgives sin. For "God" worshippers -- those who assume the word has a meaning independently of incarnation -- "believing in Jesus" connects with "reconciliation with God", through the story of sacrifice on calvary paying the price and redeeming the soul from punishment "God" originally attached. These include: 1. Those who worship the Old Testament god "YHWH"; and 2. those who worship what they call "God" through the New Testament but take Jesus as claiming sonship to that deity.

This cannot be supported by the text. Jesus is Jewish on the mother's side only. The most explicit lineage on the Father's side in the New Testament is Hebrews 7: a priest on the order of Melchizedek. This refer to the pre-Abrahamic (non-semitic) priesthood at Salem (later Jerusalem) in Genesis 14.18. "God Most High" here translates "YHWH/ELOHIM". "ELOHIM" connects etymologically with the ancient Sumerian pantheon, and some scholars think Abraham's father, Terah, had been a priest in the temple of Ninurta (son of ENKI) in Kish before migrating west to Ur. The first chapters of Genesis are known to be condensations of their ancient literature, the creation story from the Marduk-Babylonian era (circa 2000 BCE), for instance. Much, much history had elapsed in Egypt and Mesapotamia before the Bible was written and its traceable historical characters appeared. It is far from the only, or best,source of ancient history civilization has, though almost the only continuous one for the last millenia or two. The association of "ELOHIM" with priests Abraham came across at "Salem" is a definite link to the larger-than-Biblical past, therefore a link between the one recognized in Hebrews as Jesus' Father.
"Before Abraham was, I AM," John quotes Jesus as saying (Jn. 8.58) "Whereupon the took up stones to kill him," he goes on to say.

Further, the newly published "Gospel of Judas" explicitly disconnects Jesus from the god his Jewish disciples prayed to; he laughs at them. "And the discipels said to him "Master, Why are you laughing at our prayer. We have done what is right." And he answered and said unto them "I am not laughing at you are not doing this of your own will, but because through doing this your god will be praised." They immediately say: "Master, you are the son of our God." In spite of his having said "your God"; not "ours" or "my". His reply is: "How do you know me?" -- prohibiting them from identifying what they took themselves to be praying to with himself. As to "knowing him", he goes on to say "Truly I say unto you, no generation of the people among you will know me." The word "generation" connotes "starry eons" here, so this could be a prophecy based on a Zodiacal transition from Pisces (the star of Bethlehem he was born under) to Aquarius. (Judas is allowed back in before the end -- kingdom of heaven on earth -- which could correspond to the Anti-Christ of the Revelation; two names for the same phenomenon.)

The Way he taught incorporated forgiveness of sin. The mythic or metaphysical text is one thing, of course, and what he taught was another. It is important to disentangle YHWH from ELOHIM, however, in order to put to rest the notion of "sin" as sexuality. This goes to the dialectic of law and grace. YHWH "created the world", then laid punishment for the act leading to pro-creation onto it, which is remitted in return for blood sacrifice. That is the theological story of the Pentateuch (traditionally, Moses scripture). There is an evolution of the spiritual tradition through the Psalms of David (1000 BC), the Prophets and Babylonian captivity (through 500, to Job, then Christ (for those who followed this line). But the historical mythic metaphysical origin, the actual human roots of this great spiritual tree, go back to Sumerian-Egyptian context. In it, traditions of animal sacrifice abound: the Great White TAURUS Bull at Memphis, to BAAL at Baalbek; the burnt offerings on the altar Noah made of "every clean bird and every clean animal" after landingd the ark, from which "YHWH smelled a soothing aroma." In no other major tradition is there a connection between blood sacrifice, sin, and sexuality. Yet, no piece of literature has dominated human consciousness, I dare say, than the first chapters of Genesis, pertaining to Adam and Eve. This scroll from some Edomite son-in-law (Moses) who led the children of Israel (Isaac, Abraham) out of the land of Egypt (1750 BC?) imprinted the connection between the cosmos, Jesus' Father, and punishment for sex, on many, many generations of the human species that advanced into Modern Europe and America. Those who take the story of his death as the unique fulfillment of the sacrifice idea from the Biblical -- Original Sin -- find in it the completion, and end, of any blood sacrifice required to pay off YHWH for sex (or anything else). Jesus completed that myth without being defined by its metaphysic.

"But what IS "sin" if it's not sex?"

Transgressing a higher, inner law of the spirit, through grace.

The New Testament radically transforms the notion of "sin" by taking "the blood" involved in sexual arousal to a higher level of "oxygen"-satisfaction. In Jungian terms, the enacted drama of salvation is a symbol of transformation. Understanding it is participating in what it was brought to communicate. In Freudian term, it is sublimation: the substitution of a non-sexual object-cathexis of libido, for the instinctual one. This is the way of Catholic priests, saints, and other clerics.

At this turn, "sin" becomes the infraction of an inner law, that is, a consciously self-imposed restriction. This is the mechanism of libidinal development Freud learned. We mature by learning to substitute higher, more differentiated satisfactions of libido for lower ones, thus vitiating the need for sacrifice for them. This is marked as a stage of symbolic development by the inner yielding of ego-self consciousness in participation with the sacrifice for humanity -- the Jesus trip. This became conscious in the 1960's. Defined them, actually. But this is now (2006).

That which is given as "sin" in the New Testament context, is , in the first place, a self-constraint imposed by grace, not force (it is developed from that). That is to say, by something that meets libido ("love") spontaneously, from within, to within. This would be a bond of communication of spirit, originating outside of, but passing through, individual consciousness. In Christianity, the Church represents that mythic/metaphysical symbolic bond. There has always persisted the tradition of an inner, or esoteric Church; a communality amounting to Archetypal identity communicated by the gospel story, overtly celebrated in institutional Churches. For those who have experienced that completion in themselves, no external confirmation is needed. Those for whom an external confirmation is needed have not internally confirmed it for themselves. The Freudian super-ego is the Father of the Christ beyond/in Jesus' body. This is not to say "Freud explained God"; they belong to different token-levels of discourse.

How Time Is Overcome In the New testament.... tbc

What "sin" remains if not sublimated, today.

Time must be depended upon to bring or excuse punishment. It you can "get by with it", you win. This is when "sin" is wrongdoing in time, by particular acts. Post new-Testament "sin" is eternal wrong doing. That is why there can be only one remedy in time. "For if we sin willfully after we have received knowledge of the truyth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." (Heb. 10.26)

WHAT'S LEFT?

After the sublimated id-constraint is removed

Repressive de-sublimation

At the conscious level, return to the instinctual (sex-death) cathexis: this is desublimation

Decrease in the constraint against instant gratification; "go for it", "be here now -- its all you've got."

At the unconscious level: loss of grace and increased unconscious anxiety about punishment for sexsin.

Both together: More acceptance of sin at the conscious level, more punishment required to atone. The root of the idea is that pleasure deserves punishment. But since that is not just an "idea",but the form of a repetition-compulsion dynamic form of cyclic energy-discharge, it is not "cured" by being "disbelieved". It is a condition, and requires a metaphysical jolt to be corrected.
*******

The key argument, then, is this. Without the consciousness of human sacrifice ending the way of sacrifice, punishment for "original sin" will resume -- with a vigor renewed by despair.

That is one implication of leaving it to time to erase wrong-doing. If what is OK in ultimate terms is what you can get by with until it is forgotten, or obliterated, then there can be no inner peace, only despair of the soul.

*******

Jesus Christ is of mythic metaphysical importance because his story makes conscious and gets rid of the acceptance of sex as sin. One might say it opens another dimension of reality.

Science and Religion: the Consciousness War

SCIENCE AND RELIGON:

The Consciousness War


There are two aims here:
1. to distinguish religion from science according to the way signs relate to reality through consciousness;

2. to distinguish "God" used in the history religion, as a kind of object that exists or not, from it use in connection with the Christian Trinity.

A third aim, to connect substitution of the "concept"-use for the participatory Triad-use with the psychohistorical devolution of American group consciousness and attendant phenomena such as the "war on terror", and Abu Ghraib, has been completed previously.

********

DOCUMENT 1 Anti-religious Dawkins and Dennett. Consciousness is "raised" by shedding belief in the existence of God.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/books/review/Holt.t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

October 22, 2006

Beyond Belief


By JIM HOLT


Skip to next paragraph


THE GOD DELUSION


By Richard Dawkins.


406 pp. Houghton Mifflin Company. $27.





Richard Dawkins, who holds the interesting title of “Charles Simonyi professor of the public understanding of science” at Oxford University, is a master of scientific exposition and synthesis. When it comes to his own specialty, evolutionary biology, there is none better. But the purpose of this book, his latest of many, is not to explain science. It is rather, as he tells us, “to raise consciousness,” which is quite another thing.


The nub of Dawkins’s consciousness-raising message is that to be an atheist is a “brave and splendid” aspiration. Belief in God is not only a delusion, he argues, but a “pernicious” one. On a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 is certitude that God exists and 7 is certitude that God does not exist, Dawkins rates himself a 6: “I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”.


Dawkins’s case against religion follows an outline that goes back to Bertrand Russell’s classic 1927 essay “Why I Am Not a Christian.” First, discredit the traditional reasons for supposing that God exists. (“God” is here taken to denote the Judeo-Christian deity, presumed to be eternal, all-powerful, all-good and the creator of the world.)....
******


But .. to interrupt right there .. that ("the Judeo-Christian deity"), as any historian of religions will remind you, is not what "God" means for many, even if it were coherent with itself.





Which it is not. There is the little difference between the Old and New Testament uses in the Bible, glossed over by the hyphen between "Judeo" and "Christian". One is considerably older, a personified monotheism of the same general kind as Babylonian Marduk, circa 2000 BCE, composit consolidation of the earlier Sumerian pantheon. The other is a unique One-in-Three representation, the word "God" applied indifferently to the Father as chief source" of the.Three, or to the triad Father-Son-HolyGhost as a unit.





The fundamental logical difference is that, while some monotheistic version of "God's existence" might just be barely conceivable, what the Christian Trinity is about (communicates) starts from the notion of an Incarnation, the Second Person of what "God" previously meant (for the Jews, others; whoever used it objectively), which is disclosed to consciousness by the Third Person, the Spirit. Thus, even understanding of what "God" means, for Christians, invokes a kind of communication existentially prior to "belief", as if an inner act of affirmation or denial of a proposition (Russell's use). The Spirit does not present itself to consciousness in propositions, but as an energy vivifying tokenspace itself. To have natural-minded philosophical types proclaiming denial of "the existence of God", in the interest of raising consciousness , calling themselves "Brights" for having done so, is probably a pertinent, if not correct response to monotheisms. However, it is not pertinent to, perhaps not hostile toward, the Christian notion, from the standpoint of which they may well be "Dims".





Clearly, if a generic phrase is required for what historians (and psychohistorians) review as "God" use, by different people, bringing it home to individual consciousness across the millenia and continents, it will have to be a construct: the God of Gods. This requires a psychosemiotic analysis to decode. -- an exposition of what is attributed as a common intent to all uses. This is a presumption only satisfied by refernce to consciousness, itself, as the totality of content under sign-uses as such. "God", as a quasi-grammatical name, is a putative completion of that totality: All included under One.





This reconstruction of "God" as the Completing Totality (of totalities: the unity of all text under a single token) can be shown common to the Christian and the monotheistic representations, the last for unity of the external, cosmological container (of consciousness, through the physical body), the former for ("existential") unity of conscious experience on the token side.





DOCUMENT 2 Pro-Religion: defends consciousness against materialism.




http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/061015/23soul.htm


Is There Room for the Soul?


New challenges to our most cherished beliefs about self and the human spirit


By Jay Tolson


Posted Sunday, October 15, 2006


A mind is a tough thing to think about. Consciousness is the defining feature of the human species. But is it possible that it is also no more than an extravagant biological add-on, something not really essential to our survival? That intriguing possibility plays on my mind as I cross the plaza of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, a breathtaking temple of science perched on a high bluff overlooking the Pacific ....





There is, indeed, something troubling, if not downright offensive, about the effort to reduce human consciousness to the operations of a 3-pound chunk of wrinkled brain tissue. Such reductionist thinking seems like an assault on the last redoubt of the soul, or, at least, the seat of the irreducible self. Deny or attempt to disprove the immaterial character of the mind, and you elicit some of the same passions that have animated the culture wars over evolution in the classroom, exposing the deep divide between hard-core religious fundamentalists on one side and the equally hard-core scientific fundamentalists on the other..

******

DISCUSSION
And lo here it comes to pass; religion framed as the metaphysical custodians of consciousness --the consciousness materialistic Brights would "raise" by refuting religion? !.

Let's go figure.

The paradox we have to work with is this: according to Dawkins and Dennet, religion is a "delusion" (cf. "Transcendental illusion", Kant for a "believed in" ens realissimum)

According to journalist Tolson (speaking about, if not for, Salk Institute researchers and some philosophers), it is religion that refuses to identity consciousness with the brain (even switched on and running).

Thus, religion, declared by natural minded scientists and philosophers to be a delusion, is the mode of consciousness that keeps natural minded scientists and philosophers from the delusion that that within them which knows is a physical organ (the brain).

Which one knows the truth about the other?

At this point, the impulse may be to save both. We are both brains and consciousness; conscious brains.

However one thing cannot be both of two things if they are essentially incompatible, as these are. Back to Descartes: bodies are extended; but thoughts, by means of which bodies are known via perception, are non-extended (non-material, not divisible, wholly given in a present moment). The attributes are essential to their respective instances "("substances"). As the extended cannot be identical with the non-extended, the same thing cannot be material and conscious; "the person", as a self-consistent thing, cannot be both conscious thought and material body.

The way mental things exist is not the way material things exist. The perception of a wheat field is not spread out, dotted with shocks of grain; that is its content, what the perception is "of". The type of content varies from visual through the other kinds of sense qualities, and according to causal vrs. subjectively determined succession within them.

Hypothesis: let consciousness be in relation to the functioning anthropological preparation, as TokenSpace -- the field of SIgn-Uses (S*) -- is in relation to space proper (extension). The logical relations (grammars for text, templates for tokens) of S* provide models for knowing the cosmos intellectually, and relating to it from within, as a thing knowing itself through thought.

Thought and consciousness2 are the upper segments of Plato's divided line; consciousness 1 (without thught) and the extended body are its lower segments. "Knowing" is putting together those S*-strings (S*trings) in consciousness that anticipate relations between what they are about in space.

Thoth and The Christian Trinity

Thoth and the Christian Trinity:
A Reconstruction of the link through consciousness

The template of communication of Hermeticism and Christian metaphysics is the same, rebirth transformation. The Cross adds the blood of the Son, as redemption, to the Supplicant who receives the Heavenly Father's teaching. This addition brings in the idea of "soul" peculiar to Christianity as the scene of psychic transformation.

******
Alchemy is the transformation of lower-centered (body) into higher centered (spiritual) consciousness, transformed by projection onto the mythologized process of transforming base metals (lower self) into gold (higher self).

The Divine Pymander is the Spirit in Word-teaching to transform consciousness
*******

Redemption is achievement of return to the purity of consciousness sans content; the tabula rosa, before written on by "expereince". In adult reflective life, this is a concept arrived at by reductive analysis of continuity of awareness by the individual, traced by Locke;s "plain historical method", but including the realm of realization of necessary truth through abstract innate* ideas (*sign-uses in the Logos of TokenSpace).
This concept corresponds to the psychological site of "redemption" by providing thought with an object touching its own origins; thus re-achieving in consciousness the unity of the duality of consciousness and experience. As thought is to consciousness, as a type of segment of its content under signs, so consciousness (containing thought) is to the body. The "I" of conscious unity in the adult mind aware of itself as a unity (hence, able to use words for thought to communicate), is a psychophysiological continuation by development, with various memory, is originating, already, as a latent dialectical seed-point of future organization of "the booming, buzzing phantasmgordic" flux of overwhelming body- experience, each one over against an Original Other, their own Placenta, inside a mother's womb. Much that was regarded as "innate" in philosophy, including perception of clear and distinct relations of ideas in formal logic, mathematics, geometry, astronomy, harmonics; and in the East, sacred dances and esoteric rituals; are component in the visible world that don't just reflect, as projections, various forms of subjectivity through which they are experienced; but genuinely correspond, through text (true sign-use) and token (objective process templates by participation) to reality. Therefore, to to the world as a totality for thought, separately contemplated (un the upper segment of the upper segment of Plato's divided line).

This return to consciousness common to all thought, through thought, is "redemption" because it is the point of metaphysical unity, at the beginning and end of all cycles or other figures connecting sign-uses in consciousness. It redeems the part of experience that has been added by, and belongs to, the world, by calling it home, as it were. This location of the scene of transformational self-awareness as "return" to consciousness before birth agrees with, is a restatement of, the Christian doctrine of rebirth in order to achieve "the kingdom of heaven." The "heaven" spoken of in Hebrews 9.13.-23, for instance, is entered through the portal opened by the self-sacrificed blood of a High Priest of the order of Melchizedek (Jesus Christ, as Son) in order to fulfill, and at the same time terminate, the practice of ritual blood sacrifice for sin, as required by the Jewish God YHWH of His people. .

9.13 For if the blood of bulls and goats ...sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God....(W)ithout the shedding of blood there is no remission (from sin). Therefore it was necessary that the copies of things in heaven should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with the better sacrifices than these."

The "Eternal Spirit" here seems to be the inner side of the sacrifices, that which originally motivated them as approaches to God. Thus, the self-sacrifice of a perfect instance of the human species, itself, to be released from any and all debt accrued by humanity due to its mode of reproduction by means of sexual intercourse. (How the copies of things in heaven regenerate.) It opens the portal into another holy place: "For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." The sins of which this is redemption are not those of the flesh, but of the spirit. In Thothean terms this would be the sin of turning people away from the light toward darkness. In Christianity, it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This is access to the higher levels of conscious completion.

In Archetypal terms, Christianity adds Christ's blood to Thoth's thought.
.
The Voice of the One addressing the Supplicant (one who would know) is The Father. It speaks of The Logos* (double*: the Logos in speech), Directing the Son (the addressee: recipient consciousness) to follow THE LIGHT; which is to be found IN THEMSELVES (in one place, AS LOVE -- of Being; To understand what is) This template would have been taught in many Hermetic priesthoods, acted out endlessly. Add to it the powerful image of blood sacrifice of a perfect, beloved male son of a favored tribe, and the pre-historical mythos comes crashing into history. Thus, a broadly shared, deep psychic sector of advanced human experience on earth was condensed into a millenial group-fantasy 2000 years ago, when sacrifice psychology and objective knowledge converged in a singular act.

There is a new Triad of trinities here: In the Hermertic tradition, a Voice of Thought is teaching consciousness (of the Logos in the Sign-use). In Christianity, the Voice of the Logos incarnated as "Son" teaches obedience to the Holy spirit by blood-sacrifice, testament to higher conscious reality. In modern psychohistory, the recovery of innate psychodynamic imprints from pre-natal life deposited on mental templates and functioning as existential grammar of group life. ("we" = fetal siblings in One Great Womb of nature). In this fantasy setting, both the above are Voices are echoes in TokenSpace The Placenta, the First Other in human life, connected to the sensitive, pre-infant "to-be" individual nervous system by the umbilical flow of blood and oxygen between them.

Question: What affect will having all three of these sources of the Archetypal Trinity brought together have on consciousness?

The personal individual transition from fetal to post-fetal experience through birth, including trauma, is repeated developmentally in the transition from blood-organized experience, through sign-use controlled by primary process, to spirit-organized experience, through sign-uses controlled through desire to follow the Light, through uses of signs for the cosmos. (Note: Let the two segments of Plato's divided line correspond to two different tonalities of light/dark difference; the higher within the light. See below.)



From Thoth:

First Philosophy: Learn to Know the Light


1. From the Poimandres

http://www.gnosis.org/library/hermes1.html
6. Then saith to me Man-Shepherd: Didst understand this Vision what it means?

Nay; that shall I know, said I.


That Light, He said, am I, thy God, Mind, prior to Moist Nature which appeared from Darkness; the Light-Word (Logos) [that appeared] from Mind is Son of God.


What then? - say I.


Know that what sees in thee and hears is the Lord's Word (Logos); but Mind is Father-God. Not separate are they the one from other; just in their union [rather] is it Life consists.


Thanks be to Thee, I said.


So, understand the Light [He answered], and make friends with it.





2. From The Divine Pymander


http://www.alchemylab.com/pymander.htm





The Vision of Hermes


It chanced once on a time, while I was meditating on the things that are, my thought was raised to a great height, yet my bodily senses had been put under restraint as in sleep, though not such sleep as that of men weighed down by fullness of food or bodily weariness. Methought a Being more than vast, in size beyond all bounds, called out my name and said:


"What would you hear and see, and what have you in mind to learn and know?"


"Who are you?" said I.


"I am the Pymander, Divine Mind of the Sovereignity, the Shepherd of Men. I know what you desire, and I am with you everywhere."


"I long to learn the things that are, " I replied, "and comprehend their nature, and know God. This is what I desire to hear."


"Hold in your mind all you would know," the Shepherd answered back to me, "and I will teach you."


The Above and the Below


Forthwith all things changed in aspect before me and were opened out in an instant. And I beheld a boundless view: all was changed into Light, a mild and joyous Light; and I marveled when I saw it. And in a little while, there came to be in one part a downward-tending darkness, terrible and grim, and methought it like unto a snake. And thereafter I saw the darkness changing into a Watery Substance, which was unspeakably tossed about. Coiling in sinuous folds, it gave forth smoke as from fire; and I heard it making an indescribable sound of lamentation, for there was sent forth from it an inarticulate Cry. But from the Light there came forth a holy Speech, which took its stand upon the Watery Substance, and methought this Word was the voice of the Light. And the Divine Mind spoke for me to hear:


"That Light is I, even the One Mind, the first God, who was before the Watery Substance that appeared out of Darkness, and the Word which came forth from the Light is son of God. Learn my meaning by looking at what you yourself have in you, for in you too, the Word is son, and Mind the father of the Word. They are not separate one from the other, for Life is the union of Word and Mind. Now fix your thought upon the Light and learn to know it."


FROM PLATO: the Divided Line

Let the two parts of the line correspond to consciousness (upper segment) and body (lower segment). Considered as one thing, the line represents the unity of self as consciousness-in-body. It's two parts therefore correspond to the visible (lower) and the invisible (higher).

H2S at Harpur

H2S at Harpur

(rotten egg gas -- to cleanse the atmosphere, and get a clean breath of fresh air....read on )

The following three items taken together raise questions and call for comment:

1. "Explicit language, derogatory terms and swastikas directed against blacks and Jews" was George Basler's description of the graffiti in Hinman College's Cleveland Hall September 19 (reported September 28 in Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin).

2. "An attack on the entire community," President Lois DeFleur called it. "At Binghamton University, hate or bias-motivated behaviors are viewed as attacks on the entire community and run counter to our principles and values." Governor George Patake conveyed New York State's similar intolerance.

3. "Student charged in graffiti case: A Binghamton University sophomore faces a misdemeanor criminal charge in connection with racist and anti-Semitic graffity found Sept. 19 in his residence hall. Justin Friedman, 20, has been charged with fourth-degree criminal mischief .." was reported October 6.

This sequence is what the public has been given as information to date (Oct. 17). Friedman was arraigned in Vestal Town Court, is no longer on campus or taking classes, faces charges under the University's judicial system.

*******

The first question is whether the judicial proceedings are treating the Sept. 19 event as a hate crime? --as the President's remarks indicate it was taen as; or as a fake hate crime -- a hate-crime hoax.

Since it was a resident trashing his own dorm, it is almost certainly the latter. Further, if he is a Jew, the erstwhile "attack" on Jews would amount to faking an attack on himself. This fits a pattern that has become all too familiar on college campuses, including Harpur's. I myself was involved in an apparently almost identical incident in 1988, speaking out against hate graffitti on the Jewish Student Union wall as fake, with JSU President James Oppenheim arrested for doing it. I am emboldened to write, partly on my own behalf, for being seriously harmed by accusations and actions taken against me by various university factions. And partly on behalf of those who are slandered, demonized and menaced by the "flip side" of the attack: those who would be associated with hatred of blacks and Jews in the public mind, whether they were over that, not guilty except by association, or guilty, but not violent. This act by Justin Friedman is a slap in every one of their faces. They have become victims of Jewish dirty tricks. Or so it seems. If that is not so, it is up to the University to refute it, presumably by requiring a statement from him as to motive, and intent to harm. It is a provocation this aggrieved group endures unjustly..

There are other important considerations pertaining to the University's responsibility in the matter, since it, and New York State, have injected such a heavy hand of institutional authority when it looked like a real hate crime against blacks and Jews. A. As a matter of justice, it is responsible for seeking punishment commensurate with the crime. Should perpetrators of fake hate crimes receive less, more, or the same punishment of real ones? This is legal and moral untrod territory; fake hate crimes have only recently been tracked.. Some, such as the notorious Claremont College radical sociology prof who spray painted the usual ugly stuff on her Volkswagon, create large-scale disruption and shock in the community, where rallies and treach-ins ensured, until she was arrested for doing it herself. But these are not semi-innocent college kid pranks.

B. The second responsibility the University pertains to its role and mission as an educational institution. It owes the entire community a full accounting of its acts, beginning with whether Mr. Friedman is Jewish, when it was suspected it might be a hoax, and why such a relatively minor incident was so inflated These are all relevant in understanding what has happened, as all have the right to do.

C. If, and to the extent that, the University glosses over, covers up, essential details pertinent to understanding the character and motive of its perpetrator; does not let it come to light if it was a deliberate attempt at political manipulation using hate slander; it is guilty of academic/intellectual malfeasance. Of hiding, not exposing and working through the truth about the situation. .

The University cannot allow Justin Friedman back in. To do so would be equivalent to allowing those who deceived us into the Iraq war debacle, knowing they created a false threat to wage war against. This has been showed by political scientists Mearsheimer and Walt to have been largely a war for Israel. Radical crazy-right wing organizations such as Daniel Pipes' http://www.danielpipes.org/ and David Horowitz http://www.frontpagemag.com/ are outspoken advocates of Jewish student activism on campuses. Perhaps this incident, which went across the line to criminal mischief, is a tentacle of that hydra which could be used against it. The University must stand up to these people.

IZZYCREEP -- more reversal study

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301425.html

IZZY Creep

Kristallnacht revenge on the Nazis (aka Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamists, Arabs, Palestinians – whoever opposes them)

The abused abusers -- Andrea Yates returns to the Holy Land

******
First, it was only ….. “all we want to do is be let alone; live and let live”.

Then followed: Sharon and Bush using the term “Zionist” in 2004 in the context of “The Zionist State of Israel”. This is an ideological escalation from the previously used “Jewish State”. It’s Biblical connotations effectively violate the first amendment to the U.S. constitution by using the name of a particular religion as proper (individually referential; predicated on as if existing). “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.” The president’s act created a defacto circumvention of Congressional responsibility. Doing so cancels all legal and financial contracts between the two entitites, since one has taken on a religious cast which the Constitution bars.

This should have been immediately brought to the Supreme Court’s attention, as I demanded at the time (ha ha, one says). However, since the same Jews represented by Ariel Sharon control the U.S. media, Congress, K street, both political parties, and foreign policy, fuggedaboutit.

Next on the docket: total uncritical support of Israel’s “right to exist” and “right of self-defense” claims -- adduced to justify its massive military assault on Lebanon and Gaza. Some call it genocide.

Now from ZOG punditry:
“We’re all Israelis now (Kudlow, Mehlman); “It’s OUR War” (Wm. Kristol, equating US and Israel fighting Hizbollah; “NOT” – P. Buchanan); “The Israelis are fighting for us” – M. Peretz. Translation: America is now linked de facto by the capture and blood of Israeli soldiers to protect the Zionist Jewish State of Israel. That is their take on the situation.

But let the link be cut. “The self-same moment I could pray, and from my neck so free, the albatross fell off and sank like lead into the sea.” (-ancient mariner) They have no right to foist their group-fantasy token off on unsuspecting American Christian citizens, many of whom are simply too good hearted to believe such conniving calumny of the ones of whom the Old Testament God saith: “I will bless those who bless you, curse those who curse you.” But it is high time that Christian American citizens make their difference felt, if the God they honor really is The Father of The Son through the Holy Spirit by way of the womb of the Mary. This one includes Christ as the inner side of Jesus. He owed his body side, as the Jews are always insisting, to the mother biologically, and this (according to them) his spirit to the OT deity known through their father Abraham. This body is what they crucified on a wooden cross outside Jerusalem. The relationship of that scene to the city whose people committed it was a condemnation of it and them. The kingdom of God He had spoken of was not of earth. It’s city of followers was a New Jerusalem, not the one near the Jordan river. However, they were linked in most ancient times by a sur-planetary priesthood (cf. Genesis 14, Hebrews 7).

These things are of the last importance because there is no barrier to Izzy creep after that they have sealed the deal in blood (in their mind) except by cutting the theological umbilicus between the monotheism of Judaism and the Christian Trinity, between the Old and New Testaments.

Now is the time, this is the situation, in which there must be a parting of ways, forever. They have gone too far.

*****
New topic started next --10.17.'06

******

DEFEATOCRATS AND YOU
(EVERYTHING IS TWO)

How the (reverse-) Gay Old Party Intends to Cudgel America the Beautiful from both sides and all over.

From Pathology Beyond Hypocrisy... to Fake Hate Crimes

"The split between the Republican's outward homophobia and inner gayness isn't just hypocrisy; its pathology" Frank Rich writes in Sunday's NY Times' Week in Review (October 15, '06). Gay's didn't "infiltrate" the party apparatus, as evangelicals fime; the ARE the party apparatus, he notes. "Rare is the conservative Republican Congressional leader who does not have a gay staffer weilding clout in a major position."

One could have said that about Jews in the foreign policy establishment, too, leading up to the Iraq war. Wonder if there is any overlap.

Gotta be. What tokens dominate the newsw, and the unconscious, more today than homosexuals* and Israelites*?

Examples of both surely appear where wedges of unconscious force intervene, such as "Department of Homeland Security", e.g., the homosexual pal of New Jersey's Gov. McGroovy. But it suffices here to trace their pathological reversals separately, allowing that they curve around and reconjunct at a higher level.

In the case of gays, the reversal consists in pushing ANTI-gay issues to win elections. This was specifically strategized in '04. The same sex marriage issue was promoted in order to rally the "sanctity of masrriage" vote and carry the Red States for Bush. Ridin' into a second term on Brokeback Mountain sensitives.

This injects an edge of metaphysical ambivalence into the atmosphere -- about them, even themselves, as if 'dumping' resolution of the dichotomy into the arena of politicized public opinion. This is what the "outwardly homophobic, inwardly gay" Re-pubes have done.

The pathology in this reversal, explained more fully elsewhere, is the mechanism of: l. splitting off (an incompatible content: "gays" are "bad/good", choose one), 2."dumping" the rejected, abhored content; 3. expunging the unclean (defiled, corrupted, poisoned) toilet-bowl/poison containers. (The notion of "poison container", a fantasy token into which has been dumped "bad", split off psychic effluvia, is a highest-level sign-use construct in psychohistory. All id-representatives are potential poison containers when the punitive super-ego rules the roost. The paradox (irony, return of the repressed) is, the more energy is devoted to stamping out "evil" (inside the poison containers), the more "evil" is empowered to fight back. ("Al Queda" has diversified, spread...'the enemy is always disappearing into the night'.) "Evil" is what is created by the split-dump-kill projection. "Evil" is what is recognized-in-order-to-be-opposed: the form of negativity itself; the phantom placenta, battened onto beneficent "God" use. (The poisonous placenta was the original "torturer" of the fetus.) .

Congressman Mark Foley was made chairman of the House Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus. This is another reversal; he is a border-line predator. The Republicans appoint a wolf to guard the chickenhouse. This is gaynxiety: they are trying to guard against their own raging homoerotic/pedophiliac desires.

All tokens related to protection of children (incl. "kids") are tincturede by reversal. "No child left behind" translates to "kill all the kids." "Security in schools" = (hysterical defense against predators) Insecurity in schools. (Kids under attack by teachers; cf. Principle in Wisconsin shooting two cats on school premises.) In general, children and youth, as bearers of the group.s vitality, are also carriers of sinful desires (in the adult fantasies identified with them) and, therefore, must be vigilantly protected (from others like themselves).

As a psychic wave-front, this preys on "gaynxiety" in straight males -- the unconscious dread of turning feminine, queer, emasculated. Those who are more conscious will not want to stone queers to death, probably, though "extremists" (those who simply hate everything about it, for whatever reason) will have such impulses and some may act out. This potentiates (makes useful) a mechanism of "patsy-provocateur" control: paying or inciting an "extremist" to act out, so that all who might sympathize with those who felt that way (such as Willie Nelson) are judged shameful. On the token side, the blame game is the shame game.

Homosexuality, itself, can be seem as a reversal of the role of male and female, as active-passive libido arousal-discharge. Freud, the first to tackle the psychology of sexuality from a developmental perspective, referred to them as "inverts" (contrasted with object cathexis of libido toward females as "extroverts" -- Jung uses these contracting terms differently). A good deal of PR work has gone into neutralizing and negating the impact of his point of view, including the claim of geneticism. "Born that way". Well, maybe some are. But the defenses against it are enormous; are religiously grounded; and are extremely ancient. The Coptic Enoch 2 writings violently condemn pederasty and male homosexuality, which are equated (as in Genesis). It is bad faith to cast all this aside, claim people are (and have been) born that way all along, "come out" and organize into a self-promoting network to prey on gaynxiety and hot dudes at the same time.

******

"Izzyangst" -- Anxiety originating in ambivalence toward Jews.

Seque to Harpur College's Cleveland Hall dormitory: "explicit language, ethnic hate slurs and "swastikas against blacks and Jews (sic)" are discovered on boards and the RA assistant's door (9.18.06) This apparent hate crime was kept out of the public eye until ten days later when the local Gannet newsrag spilled the beans. Binghamton U.'s President DeFleur sternly denounced it as "an attack on the entire community" in a letter. Even NY State Gov. George Pataki weighed in with a condemnation, as I recall.

On October 6, notice appeared that "A Binghamton University sophomore faces mideameanor criminal charge in connection with racist and anti-Semitic graffiti found. in his residence hall." (Press & Sun Bulletin, 3B). In other words, the hate attack on the entire community came from inside the dormitory itself, the police investigation says.

The individual staged an attack on himself as resident. That is the same sort of reversal as gays pumping up hatred of gays.

The name of the student is Justin Friedman. "No longer on campus," University spokesman Ryan Yarosh said. "No longer taking classes pending charges under the university's judicial system."

The question that must be asked: is he a Jew? Did he stage this attack of "swastikas against blacks and Jews" in order to incite racial and anti-Semitic hatred which would empower those fighting it?

If so, it falls under the same analysis as reverse-gay politics. It creates needless hate, to battle against and extirpate. Fighting something from within themselves, drawing everyone else in by their own ambivalence toward Jewishness.

Whatever the punishment -- and it should be double that meted for a real hate crime, in my opinion -- it should be accompanied by public shaming, declaring those of similar mentality persona non grata. The overall PR effect of the stunt is to greatly harm those who would speak out against the US-Israeli alliance documented by political scientists Mearsheimer and Walt. They are menaced by those who would retaliate for Cleveland hall hate attack, who may not have learned it was (likely) a Jew who did it.

Finally, in the way John Mark Karr got himself set up with prime time Larry King air space by faking the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, unless Justin Friedman is exposed and shamed, what is to keep him from coming back in reverse-Jewish glory, to take a nexst round of dirty tricks to another level? From celebrity child stalker to celebrity hololcaust promotor. (These are the connections through the unconscious on the token side)

There are suspicions afoot that the University was prompted to go public with a hot-potato case, from political motives, to turn the incident against those on campus who are straight, white, Christian and male, and tend not to regard multiculturalism as a theological given. And, that it is pandering to ethnicism, allowing the perpetrator to be punished far short of "an attack on the entire community."

Defeatocrats de-fetal-crats: Jungian clang assoc.

Prediction: The next three weeks counting down to the '06 mid term election will feature this word, DEFEATOCRATS, distributed through every media outlet in the world by Republican politicians (re-pube pols). This stands in the line of succession from "bleeding heart liberals", "tax and spend democrats", "girliemen", "pussification of America", others as tokes of The New Manhood (not:).

Although they strike consciousnessas as blase, merely clever accidental correlations, such "clang associations", as Carl Jung called them, may demonstrate conjunctions of metaphysical significance. They are conjuncts at which the text (meaning) of the word sign is modified, and conveys a double sense, by the token sound-similarity, when prnounced, to This (second thought) is then re-folded into the text of the sign-use as a metaphor. Democrats are fetuses (a word many right-wingers have a problem with pronouncoing, anyway). They are going to be defeated come November. (=text of "good guy" champion: has the will-to-prevail over defeatists who want to turn tail and run from Islamic Fascists in the Middle East. Defeated fetuses, that's democrats. This is the unconscious group fantasy template from the fetal origins of experience common to placental mammals. That is why it is a metaphysical metaphor, and why the Re-pubes just might ride it to glorious victory, hallelooyah! Once they've got you "in bed", "inside the womb-surround" of their group-fanasy, you're dead. That is the position Democrats are put in by this projection-with-identification. They are symbolic representatives of Re-pube's fetal origins, their own pre-infantile wishes in utero, recalled through the swirls of later vicissitudes of instinct (incl birth trauma "TO BE")

Thus, "defeato-" is ALMOST "de fetal", the "l" sound resonating where the voice relaxes after tongue clicks. Defeatocrats, defetalcrats. This will not be picked up on consciously, but it will be there (functioning) ANYWAY.

The psychodynamidcf form of sign-use in which the "good text" (intellectual PC) conveys, but also covers for, a "bad token" thought comes into group discourse at the point of trauma-reversal: willful reversal of reality in order to get "TO BE" -- in group fantasy.

This trauma revesal can come about in different ways. The associations linking conscious-unconscious content need not be merely "clang" type; it can be sight-gags, composite picture overlays, others. The content will allude to matters relating to trauma, usually packaged in imagery of childhood terror, since that is where conscious recall picks up and overlays earliest pre-verbal memory. Birth and sexual orgasm are the two psychodynamic sites of common trauma (shared with greater or lesser degreee of intensity by all).

Collecting bits and pieces of fetal experience prior to, imprinted under, the trauma of birth (the most powerful anxiety-flashback, where oxygen in the blood dips to 70% of that needed for vital functioning), Lloyd deMause has sketched the template that groups historically act out under the dominance of the repetition compulsion "TO BE". The work of Mirceas Eliade, documenting the Myth of Eternal Return among virtually all peoples and cultures, is the textual recovery of the token process.

In the course of psychological development, "return" of the fetal traume, virtually the same for everyone, is overlaid by what takes place at the sexual level, which is more highly individualized but still sharing a generic template by virtue of shaping the personality. The "ego", as sense of "I" over against parents (after the placenta), gains its permanent stamp during the Oedipal period; the organization of personal being, as a libido/pleasure-driven organism, is capped off, sealed up, at the point the child is learning voluntary inner control over instinct, and moral anxiety, as opposed to reacting in fear or fusion toward external forces. The ego-function, responsible for relating the personality to reality, is taken by Freud as more or less unified until l923 ("The Ego and The Id"), when it is analyzed as "gappy", light spots linked by dark stretches (which Jung had already surmised). The Oedipal period, culminating early childhood sexual development and distributing childish family romance fantasies between mother, father, siblings and 'authority', remained as a staple in Freudian psychology, however, to this day.

It is important to see both -- fetal and sexual --developmental levels of trauma overlaid and playing out, in order to decode and analyze "double" text/token sign-uses. The analysis of "DEFEATOCRATS" is: "We (Male/Father Re-pube traumatizers) are going to slit open your mother (Americas) belly, yank you out, kill you, and stomp the squishy pulp into chum, you little %*^*98u0U&(#5t*yJ43'S". This is the archetypal Rapist/killer father in every child's darkest dreams, materializing into actual figures the further back in childhood history one goes. When adults regress, first to semi-conscious common childhood trauma fantasies; then, to deepest never-was-conscious fetal fantasy ("what it was like 'in there'") levels, the adults will split off and project their sense of total, tiny,helplessness onto 'sibling' representatives -- "its not us who have a defeatist complex! -- It't Them!" -- Democrats. Who also, by symbolic overlay, become opposites, standing between them and their "TO BE" not wanting them to come out ("on top"). The reverse defeatists tend to consolidate all obstacles to their maniacal drive toward REBIRTH into One Enemy: the Poisonous Placenta, phantom Monster snaked, squeezing, and sucking all oxygen, vitality and will out of the person. This is perhaps deMause's most brilliant conribution: The overdetermined "terrorist enemy" is invariably a return of the phantom poisonous placenta, which the group must fight off, appease, play with, and kill. Whatever is serving this psychodynamic function will invariably be tokened as such, e.g., "The Al Queda network" (with "secret cells" as "hotspots" -- of "terrorist activity"/areas of sexual arousal on the body). And Bin Laden always shown striding around looking wise, in robes, AK 47 nearby.

******/

As if connecting with an entirely independant, but strikingly related phenomenon,the text-token reversal can be found in the "pathology beyonf hypocrisy."

And in the rash of fake hate crimes, one of which has hit Harpur College Campus.

tbc

Frank Rich -- posted in the Nation

These remarks by Frank Rich in todays NYTimes Week in Review are most pertinent:

1. "The split between the Republican's outward homophobia and inner gayness isn't just hypocrisy; its pathology." He doesn't elaborate, but in Freudian terms that pathology would be: to externalize what is inner in themselves, and punish it in a "id representative" (others needing punishment: liberals, Arab/Muslims, all children in Iraq, Iran and N. Korea and domestic "extremists"). In order words, the Re-pubes have 'dumped' into the electorate the fear of their own inner gayness (their sh!t)-- gaynxiety, one pundit called it -- then dedicated themselves to waging war to eradicate it. ("it's not in us! -- its out there, in them!")

2. "...(G)ay people did not "infiltrate" the party apparatus -- they are the party apparatus."

In other words, the "Gay Old Party" (Rich's barb) is an instrument for the American people as a group to cleanse themselves of felt sinfulness for raging homosesual desire, repressed, by projecting it into this borderline actual case (Foley and Hastert's wrongdoing) and PUNISHSING THEM LIKE HELL. The re-pubes, who got Bush elected and started the Iraq war are expected to lead the purge.

Note: psychodynamically, wars are always unconsciously waged on the children (inner id-representatives of the old). Tokens of sexy youth and virile males (soldiers) must be beforever killing and dying, because in group-fantasy, they ...and of course all "liberals" -- are sinful animals in essence, and out of control. Wars are a guilt-purging ritual -- in America, this one, for the late Clinton years + '60's "excessive exuberance" blowout ... so much sin, so much blood needed to atone ... bodies of dead children are turning up alongside roads, in schools, University campuses .. in Iraq ...

And here is the kicker Rich delivers: "We now learn from "The Architect", the recent book by the Texas journalists James Moore and Wayne Slater, that Mr. Rove's own (and beloved) adoptive father, Louis Rove, was openly gay in the years before his death in 2004. This will be a future case study for psychiatric clinicians as well as historians."

Let help them along. I am a Freudian + Jungian psychohistorian.

First, one notes that Rich relates this spasm of gaynxiety, architected by Rove's huge ambivalence toward how you show honor to father, to the Jewish question, in two places, both interesting. 1. He compares "the grotesque canard that homosexuality is a direct path to pedophilia" to "the kind of blood libel that inanother era was spread about Jews." 2. "...(T)his attack was soon followed by another classic from the annals of anti-Semitism: the shadowy conspiracy. "The secret Capiton Hill homosexual network must be exposed and dismantled"" Rich quotes Cliff Kindaic of Accuracy in Media as saying.

But let's stop the kidding around right there (just kidding around) Rich ses self-hating re-pube homophobic homosexuals in a way that's goog for tyhe Jews? His first comparison is bizarre. Accusing re-pubes of pathological twistedness is like accusubg Jews of drinking Christian children's blood? ...ugh ? maybe they did. As for the second comment, call it conspiracy or not, the butt-banging apparatchiks surely could tell Rove was basically one of them, his own father, for crissake! This is surely like the underground connection between Aspens in the Libby Lobby. There have been two raging conspsiracies: reverse gays and Jews. As for reverse Jews: consider the anti-Semitic slurs scrawled in the student dormitory at SUNY Binghamton, for which police have charged one of the residents, Justin Friedman, who was apparently doing a hate crime hoax, menacing the straight white Christian male kids. (The President issues a letter declaring it "An attack on the entire community" -- then prosecutes it as a misdemeanor.) This happened in September and is under adjudication. Jewish dirty tricks for Re-pube politics, aided and abetted by State Universty dip sticks

So much for Rich's rambling. He sees the connection between queerness and Jewness as the most powerful unconscious components, but does not see their basic similarity in point of conscious reversal (sacrifici8ng their own kind for group solidarity). By linking them, he plays a positive role, conjoining what is "above" (conscious) with what is "below" (the punishable hate impulses).

But by juxtaposing them,as he does, ignoring the ing the way Jews politicize victimhood also, he performs a serious disservice. He obfuscates the way re-pube-ism, in general, represents a homosexual-Jewish apocalyptic metaphysic foisting itself off as America's inner child; and how that, as a dominant force everyone panders to, is what has brought us down.


Posted by JONES 10/15/2006 @ 2:36pm

THE DEVIL AND JUSTIN FRIEDMAN

THE DEVIL AND JUSTIN FRIEDMAN

Jewish Dirty Tricks and Republican Politics
(I want to show the linkage: the common template is reversal* --Jewish and "Gay")

******
Did Chavez' words cross the mind of Chenango Hall residents on the night the racist, anti-semitic griffiti was found? (September 18, '06) "Yesterday, the devil came here. Right here. And it smells of sulphur still today." Of course not. The Vezuelan president didn't speak in the UN until weeks later. But dates get lost in memory; in the unconscious there is no time; and for we who have been taught by Reagan to think "back to the future", the same sulphuric odor emenates from dormitory
and Ofal Office.

The tone of Fresident DeFleu's letter conveyed as much. "Hate or bias-motivated behaviors are viewed as an attack on the entire community and run counter to our principles and values", her letter said. "Explicit language, derogatory terms and swastikas directed against blacks and Jews (sic)", were the content scrawled on an RA assistant's door and 2 hall boards. ("The graffiti could be wiped off and caused no long-term damage," the report notes.) New York Governor George Pataki personally seconded that message. Not on his State's University precincts. The entire attacked community includes everyone affected by the psychic strain and tensions which such behaviors arouse.

A student named Justin Friedman, resident of the dorm, was reported October 6 to be "charged with fourth degree criminal mischief" in connection with the case. "No longer on campus...also no longer taking classes pending charges under the university's judicial system."

These are the sole documents in the public record concerning the incident to date. Satisfaction of grievance must be made on behalf of three classes of affectees: 1. On behalf of the community as a whole for assault on civility and order, responsibility for which falls on the University administration as expressed in the president's letter. 2. More particularly, on behalf of blacks and Jews, because they were singled out; responsibility for the satisfaction of which would presumably fall under the penalties the University's charges provide. It's hard to think such flimsy dissing is going to cause blacks and Jews much actual existential discomfort, though they would expect punishment.

3. But more particularly still, there is a third group injured by implication, namely the ostensible perpetrators': racists and anti-Semites. One does not have to sympathasize with racists and anti-semites to understand they are greatly aggreived by this act. It should come as no surprise that there are a growing number of good American individuals I know who have come to be proud to proclaim themselves one or the other or both. Neither KKK lynchers or Holocaust deniers; just white Christian -- straight male goes with that on the interface lines. If it was one of their own who did it, they would have brought shame and dishonor to this group. They are summoned on stage like stand-by pariahs; one of them has been caught exploding what they think, maybe mostly unconsciously -- hoping to make it become more so, perhaps -- in history's face. Increment in this defamation, bordering on menacing attitudes, is sown on the wind by this act's invasion of the space of group-communication (TokenSpace*grp). Spraying swastikas with hate signs in public deconstructs the higher, more sublimated social consciousness that existed before it occurred.

Unbeholden to and unproded by any organization of Nazi or KKK groups, I represent their cause in principle, in pursuing this one question: was this a Jewish Dirty Trick political stunt? It happened before, in '88 -- at least according to an Occams razor reading of that history. If Justin Freidman is a Jew who acted as a Jew to push America's Big RED BUTTONS, in order to stir up a ruccus that could be used for pro-Israel rallies, hurling condemnations against anti-war "extremists" (Cindy Sheehan, David Duke, Mearsheimer and Walt, Naom Chomsky and anti-Israel leftists in general, paleoconservatives, libertarians -- whoever opposes AIPAC, PNAC, AEI, and the Libby Lobby) ... if that is the case, responsibility for satisfying that grievance falls: first, on the court proceedings, not to cover it up by accepting a deal that avoids finding out whether Justin Friedman is Jew, and if so, what kind, and what motivated him to act.

The principles of justice calls for punishment prorportional to the crime. There is a gray area in law concerning hate crime hoaxes. They are in fact the Achilles heel of such legislation. The more hate hangs in the atmosphere, the more likely an attack will be faked. If people are ready to 'go off' anyway, a little nudge pushes them over the ede. What has not been recognized, but I will press here as attorney for the aggrieved group, is the "double sin", when the attack is self-inflicted and the hate blamed on a framed enemy. It requires something of a mental effort to bring the elements in this complex, but thoroughly 'logical', according to the template unfolded as a whole in consciousness. .

To Whom It Concerns: a grievance

TO THOSE WHOM IT CONCERNS

Statement on the Cleveland Hall racist anti-Semitic graffiti incident
(September, 2006)

By Sid Thomas, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Philosophy, emeritus
SUNY Binghamton


"An Attack On The Entire Community"
-Binghamton University President Lois DeFleur

********
Why I am writing

This incident appears to be a redux of the 1988 spray painting of swastikas and "Kill k---s" on the Jewish Student Union walls in the Old Student Union, which I spoke out against loudly at the time, on a basis that it was a likely hoax. This judgment was vindicated by the way it played out. Then-JSU president James Oppenheim's fingerprints were on the can, but he got off on a technicality. The essential character of that event, assuming he did it (and the thorough police investigation never followed any other lead, as I recollect), was never made clear; and that left a hole in the moral-legal universe of campus discourse big enough to drive a Mack truck through. Odd as it may seem, 20 year old student Justin Friedman, sophomore, might be that Mack truck. I am writing in order to erect a barricade against that attack truck, and plug that gaping hole by confronting its essential character.

The statement will be organized around four "talking points":
1. The sin lies in use of the symbolism by the one who used it; 2. The de facto victims of its venom are Nazi (for anti-Semitism) and KKK (for racism) affiliations. 3. If the university knew or had good reason to suspect it was a self-inflicted hate 'crime' scene, but proceeded to make a federal case out of it, this is malfeasance. 4. If the university does not seek penalties for Justin Friedman equal to the gravity of "an attack on the entire community" -- to the extent that it falls short of that -- it leaves the principal sin unaddressed. It can be accused of coddling Jews who slander white Christian (straight males, but leave these aside) affiliates.

******

1. The difference between merely ugly griffiti and "explicit language, derogatory terms and swastikas directed against blacks and Jews"( sic. G. Basler in the Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin, 9.28.'06) is the difference between two entirely different levels of public awareness. One is a matter of dormitory discipline. The other is an attack on the entire community. What constitutes the difference is the violence of the symbolism. This is as close as "acting out" gets before ugly turns uglier, and its too late.

This is why it is important to understand the motive clearly here. Is it being treated ("framed". grammaticized) as a fake hate crime, staged by a Jew to gain sympathy backlash from ant-Nazi/KKK sentiment?

2. Those who will be damaged in the public mind to the extent the hoax is not exposed in these terms are those who stand mostly "on the right". The straight (homophobic), white, Christian (anti-semitic) male sadists. This now constitutes an aggrieved group, for which I speak as delegate in this matter, only, and not from identification with any other causes than those I have defended on-line in several forums, and set forth details of in my website sidthomas.blolgsspot.com.

This sector (SWCM) stands in relation to Friedman's act, if it was a hate crime hoax, as the Muslim/Arab world stood in in relation to the fake "Allah" zealot anthrax attack. They had nothing to do with it, but public opinion is manipulated so that people think the worse. Since the
process takes place mostly at an unconscious level, resolution is never achieved. How can you reply to something you were supposed to be guilty of -- willingness to express those sentiments and go over the line, like the perpetrator did, as if 'extemists" were about to "go off" -- when
it was never put into words, and would shift shape to avoid being pinned down? There is a "all bets are off" viciousness built into that.

3. It is assumed that the administration had full awareness of the typicality of fake hate crimes, how college campuses are preferred, how insidious their effect. The metaphor of "poisoned atmosphere" applies. Also, the original crime scene didn't look too threatening, they would have noticed. Were the police saying it was probably a resident? When was Friedman busted, and by what means? After the incident had taken place on 9.18, the public announcement didn't occur until 9.28, which indicates some decision had been made on the basis of early investigations to blow up the ballyhoo. Was there pressure to do this? If so, from who? Was it inflated to the status of cause celebri for political reasons? Was it perhaps done deliberately to put the victim group (SWCM) at a disadvantage? Throw the book at 'em, maybe have to crack down if they pipe up.

4. A charge of "fourth degree criminal mischief" does not bring out, but glosses over, the twistedness of hate-attacks by perpetrators on themselves as a particular pathololgy. This is of the essence. Everyone gets drawn into the coils of the 'evil' dialectdic. Cases abound. Towanda Brawly; the woman who pushed her car into a river to drown the kids in it and blamed a black man; the Claremont college prof who spray painted the usual graffiti on her Volkswagon then told the police, media and who ever would listen that white skinheads had done it; black students at San Francisco State framing white racists by spraying "Nigger" in their dorm; the 'comic' Borat framing the entire culture of Khazakstan with anti-Semitic grossness; ... and so forth.

The pathology of what is to be seen in these and other cases has not been given legal elaboration commensurate with the degree of symbolic aggression. What punishment is appropriate to "an attack against the entire community", when it comes in this form? An attack "in TokenSpace" as I call the dimension of experience opened up by communication, is, fortunately, not the same as an attack in physical space, and is urged by peacemakers as where best to restage conflict. Therefore, a poisoning of that dimension, has the effect of increasing likelihood of violent conflict breaking out in confined physical space.

One condition of just settlement is leveling the dialectic between Nazi-KKK slander and pro-Zionist PR stunts.

********

Note on applies psychosemiotics:

Confronting Psychotic Reversals

The political position of individuals in today’s group-situation requires them to employ a certain kind of “reversal” in the use of signs. This may be innocent and well- meaning, as in reversing the impression of stuttering by stuttering more (reversing impressions); sarcastic, as in uttering “nice try” for bad miss; onus-shifting and blame-reversal, as in “It wasn’t me who called you.”, “he hit me first.”; self-referring, as in “this is not me sayong this”. A formal exposition of these sign-uses, as such, has not previously existed. That is because formal analysis of discourse about discourse, about …. has not previously been pursued to the level of communication in general. What has been presupposed all along, from the beginning of philosophy, the use of signs to communicate, has been taken for granted and left largely unexplored as a field of its own. The study of psychosemiotics (unpublished by author) fills this gap.

This last kind of reversal can lead to logical paradoxes, as in “This is a false sentence”.

"An Attack On the Entire Community ..."

"AN ATTACK ON THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY..."

Commentary on the recent hate graffiti incident in Chenango Hall, Harpur College

By Sid Thomas, Ph.D.



Documentation of the factual assumptions made here is given elsewhere (http://sidthomas.blogspot.com/2006/10/victimizing-victims-victimizing-you.html). The discussion here considers the graffiti incident from the point of view of it as an event in TokenSpace, the headspace all who would communicate about Harpur college, and America, must enter in order to relate to historical reality. This comprises a distinct, unique dimension of analysis, one required to comprehend relations between the unusual events of our time.

*****



- There was a large discrepancy between the seriousness of the original incident and the big fuss made over it. Maybe it was a personal dormitory spat taken too far?. Why blow it up?



The answer, of course, lies in its hate-content symbolism. "Explicit language, derogatory terms and swastikas directed against blacks and Jews (sic)" the report said. The content of these expressions (sign-uses*) mark the act as beyond vandalism, by its message hate. Like using the "N-" word, or "J-Word" in an assault converts the act into a hate crime, with added penalties, so, too, such content converts scrawlings on a wall from vandalism to "an attack on the entire community ...counter to our principles and values" as President DeFleur stated in her letter. Gov. George Pataki weighed in on behalf of New York State. The reason to pump it up is to neutralize the poison. The offense must be met at the level and to the degree it inflicted harm. If not, hate-vapor remains in the air.



This is why the announced penalty is grossly disproportionate. Vandalism is a misdeameanor. Graffiti with "swastikas aimed against blacks and Jews" is an "Attack on the entire community.". To charge the perpetrator with merely a misdemeanor totally ignores the element that made it obligatory to confront it as an an attack on the community in the first place.



Why did this happen? One can only surmise, but I'll go "all in" on the following.

1. Justin Friedman is a Jew, and the administration had a hot potato on its hands.

2. If the perpetrator -- the police say its Friedman -- is a Jew, then the incident is one of a "self-inflicted attack" -- blacks presumably got thrown in because they are viewed as victim siblings: one group has the Holocaust, the other Slavery.

This fits the pattern written about by columnist Sam Francis, who notes that those who pull off such stunts (a group not researched as yet, as fake hate crimes, or (better) hate crime hoaxes have not received separate legal attention) are usually victims acting out victimization ("reversing the abuse").



3. If the above hold, Friedman must speak publicly about his motive to clear the air:

a. Does he really hate blacks and Jews, as the overt messages show? (Despite being one.)

b. Did he act knowingly with intent to arouse the community to an unnecessary hate ritual?

If so, it illustrates the politics of reversal* in TokenSpace of positions in collective consciousness polarized by unconscious opposites. Sam Francis' last line says it best: "Maybe the real hate is already inside those who are so eager to find it". In other words, on this alternative, if the motive is political, we have a case in which the mental content of the perpetrator is projected in abhorrent messages as if coming from an eternal "terrorist enemy". Then, by its being publicized, the public gets ensnared in this projected self-hate dialectic by sympathy for one cause or the other. Buit it is just this bringing down of otherwise just causes to the level of paranoid politics that constitutes the true abomination. It is something no individual has no right to lay onto others who must communicate with each other, be they president or paeon.





4. Disparity of penalty to provocation -- further connections.

It is self-evident that failure to charge the perpetrator with a crime commensurate with that originally addressed negates the allegation of its importance. Anti-Semitism anti-shmemitism. This represents malfeasance on the part of the administration.



There were indications that they had a hot potato hoax on their hands. The scrawlings didn't seem to reek hatred. Similar incidents on college campuses, where fake hate crimes mostly occur, often have a victimizer-victimizing reversal narrative. Then on this campus in '88, a redux it was, in some memory banks. The question arises as to whether the administration was not complicit in, first, arousing; then, glossing over or covering up relevant details about this incident, leaving behind a situation more loaded with hate than ever.



5. The political polarization is along the lines of

black - white (in re racism)

Jew - Christian (in re religion - tacit)

When assimilated to the political template, these polarities go over to:

female (as in "feminism") - male (in re gender)

homosexual - heterosexual (in re sexual orientation)



Thus, the particular objects of this "biased-motivated hate behavior" were the ostensive perpetrator: pro-Nazi, KKK supporters, aka straight white Christian males, in the liberal's group-fantasy. This group, the SWCM team, are the symbolic target of the symbolism for the Black, Homosexual, Jewish, female (BHJF) team. This may be gasped at and denied, but, however one personally aligns, this is the political split along the psychological dominants (race, sex, religion, gender).



6. Reverse gays. In the scandal involving Florida Republican Congressman Foley's inappropriate contact with page boys, which his lawyer said he wants us to know has gone with his being sexually molested as a minor, not to blame it on that, one most salient point regarding reversal* is systematically omitted: The scandal is not just a maybe borderline case of over-exuding ramblin' namblaman that happens to involve a good-looking Republican politician. THIS WAS THE PARTY THAT GOT ITSELF REELECTED BY BASHING GAYS -- THE LIFE STYLE AND THEIR DEMAND FOR SPECIAL RIGHTS. And there were many individuals themselves gay who were in the forefront of leading this charge (A. Irving, K. Mehlman, J. Gannon/Guckertr). Their projected self-hating behavior is the "reverse gay" template. It mirrors the same twistedness, in the mental condition, as stirring up images of the dead 6.000.000 and lynched negroes in order to fill out someone's hate-activist-in- reverse quota.



Another related reversal was that Foley, the predator, was put in charge of defending youth against such as himself. This was astounding. Putting the fox in charge of the chicken house. Almost as if the group, acting through the unconscious fantasies of its elected delegates, was determined to make youth (=themselves, as children) victims (over-stimulated, degraded, kidnaped, tortured, raped, then killed, execution style). The soldiers in Iraq are similarly victim-ologist's delegates, targeting all who oppose them taking over that country; spreading like wildfire throughout all Muslims, Arabs, Islamic lands and people.







7 What cannot be allowed to stand in the public domain is the sense of justification of this as a scandalous-but-hushed up virtually OK act. "Over zealous Zionist prankster. Who was really hurt?" No to that. It reduces to the principle that the ends justifies the means, each one's ends against the others, and this violates the principle of perpetual peace (Kant: "though it be nothing but a pious hope, no moral act affecting a people as a whole can deliberately violate it." Allowing the ends to justify means does so.)`



8. As it stands, there is an unjust situation prevailing. The SWCM sector has been left grievously slandered by the hard-core condemnation, followed up with soft- or whiffle ball judicial proceedings. Have you no honor.



. To clear the atmosphere, certain things must be dealt with:

a. the principle that the punishment should fit the crime must be affirmed, independent of whoever is guilty, and the crime is hate-mongering. If it is intolerable, those who do it should not be coddled because they belong to one group or another.

b. It should be made public by an official whether Friedman is a Jew, and whether or not his sense of solidarity with Jewish causes entered into his motivation.

c. The question of outside incitement should be investigated. Radical Zionists such as Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz call for action by Jewish students on their campuses to aggressively push Israel's cause. Mearsheimer and Walt also write of the efforts of the Israeli lobby to penetrate universities and agitate for radical causes. But this is entirely unacceptable, and that must be made clear, now that a criminal act has occured. It incites nothing but hate when the liberal atmosphere of college campuses is taken advantage of to stir up biased (in this case, anti-Palestinian) attitudes and incipient violence..If the act was in fact linked to these organization, the matter should be taken up along a broad ideological front, with denunciations and lawsuits.



Finally: the link between A. fake hate crime hoaxes; and B. Reverse Gay Republican politics (to focus on these) is in the reversals*: psychologically swapping places with an enemy, an alter-ego, a phantom man-in-the mirror pursuer. This results from the abused (victimized) going over to become abuser (victimizer), on the verbal bridge of twisting the grammar. "You" become "me" (=them) and "we", and vice versa; "they" become the enemy.



The most horrendous of such acts in America, if 9/11 was not one of them, was the anthrax poisoning. Here, too, fake hate of "Americans and Israel" was effected ostensibly by a mad Allah-worshiping Islamic radical. Thus, the framing of the Islamic "enemy" by these people goes hand in glove with the framing of straight, white, Christian males (paleocons and cro-magnon liberals).



It is to relieve this political situation that President DeFleur, the newspaper editor, and Justin Friedman, are obliged to speak out, now, to avoid the rising charge of hate mongering. And everybody else who has anything to say.



I propose, at a minimum, immediate installation of an open, monitored forum discussion board devoted to the issue. A clearing house for contention where everyone can have their say, and logic rules. That is my challenge here. We must stand up against manipulation.