This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Promises, Promises!
Promises, Promises!
By
Cognitive Dissonance
Even when we know otherwise we still tend to think about big picture problems (i.e. The Fed’s money printing, out of control US Government debt, student loan bubble/defaults, corporate/governmental corruption etc) as if they are being rained down upon us and not as if we are in any way responsible for the problems or the solutions. In other words we tend to see the world and its troubles from the point of view of a victim rather than a participant, let alone a partially responsible party.
There is no doubt that the sociopaths are now running the insane asylum and that we are entering the parabolic blow off phase of social and financial dysfunction. And I would also agree that sociopaths in general are an opportunistic lot and will actively seek out and exploit strife, stress and social dysfunction wherever they can find or foment it. Simply put they strike while the iron is hot and light fires when it is not.
But there are always sociopaths lurking in the shadows of society waiting to pounce whenever there is an opening. Even during the best of times they are salted throughout business, academia, government and politics, always working people and situations to their advantage. That’s just who they are and what they do. So why do we seem to have a bumper crop growing amongst us at this point in time?
It is said that power abhors a vacuum, that in the absence of an expressed or perceived form of ‘leadership’ (it doesn’t matter in what structure it presents, albeit monarchy, republic, dictatorship etc) one will quickly form or appear to fill the void. The same might be said for sociopaths filling the (increasing) void, but what exactly is this so called ‘void’ and how does it form?

Codependent dysfunction
Several weeks back I returned to the Northern Virginia/DC area on business and stopped to visit an elderly family friend who was recovering in a rehabilitation center after falling and severely injuring herself. For the sake of clarity and flow let’s call my friend Diane.
When I visited Diane she was three weeks removed from her accident and rehabbing well……or at least as well as can be expected from someone in her mid 80’s with a multitude of chronic health issues. But she was in good spirits and her only real complaint was with the food and a few less than attentive nurses.
However she was quite concerned about her daughter (let’s call her Sue) who has been visibly and openly angry with Diane over the circumstances of her fall. Without going into details while Sue might be factually correct regarding her mother’s fall and fading cognitive facilities, Sue’s continuing angry response appeared a bit irrational and misdirected. After talking to my friend for a while and reading between the lines I felt I better understood the underlying issue behind Sue’s anger.
It seems that well over twenty years ago Sue made a solemn promise to her mother, one that was repeated often both publically and privately. Sue promised she would never allow her mother to be sent to a nursing home to live out her remaining days and that she would always take care of her mother. Of course, Sue’s promise was made when Sue and Diane were both in good health, totally independent and self sufficient.
But times and circumstances have changed dramatically for mother and daughter, in particular because Diane and Sue are both struggling with health and financial issues. With it now clear that Diane can no longer safely live alone it is time for Sue to keep her promise and take her mother under her wing. And to her credit Sue was already taken steps to do precisely that when her mom is released from rehab in a few weeks. But it seems the tension between the two is thick and unsettling.
In my opinion the issue was obvious though neither really wanted to talk about it to the other. And the solution, or at least the only solution they could see, was unthinkable to both parties. Since neither could go there, both were triggered by what neither wanted to talk about. To be fair Diane was fairly coherent in her thinking, at least when she was discussing this with me. As well, I was not able to speak privately with Sue to sound her out. But I suspect that given the chance Sue would also unburden herself and speak plainly and frankly with me. Of course I wasn’t the one she needed to talk to.

The End Game
From my point of view the dysfunctional energy was coming from both sides. While Sue was sincere when her promise was made (and constantly reaffirmed) all those years ago, and her intention to honor it now is equally sincere, the strain to do so is at times psychologically and emotionally overwhelming. While she believes she wants to keep her promise (because that’s what you do when you make a solemn oath, especially to a loved one) in truth she doesn’t really desire to do so because of her own serious personal issues.
Worse, the amount of the ‘due bill’ has been building for years as her mom’s health steadily declined and the need for Sue to ‘pay off’ on her promise became ever more apparent. Simultaneously with Diane’s increasing ‘need’ Sue’s ability to ‘pay’ declined as the years progressed. And both parties recognized this, both on a conscious and subconscious level.
When the promise was made to Diane all those years back, while she was grateful and a bit relieved since she was single with no plans to remarry, she still had many years ahead of her and didn’t seriously consider the gravity of the promise made. However as the years progressed she began to count on Sue being there when she needed her.
In fact, knowing that her daughter’s safety net was there allowed Diane to splurge quite a bit more beyond her original plans during her late 60’s and 70’s and travel around the USA and several foreign countries. I suspect she spent more money than she would have if Sue’s safety net had never been offered.
So here we are at the end game. Diane is now at that point in her life where she needs ever increasing assistance with several aspects of daily living. While she informed me that it would be OK if she did not move in with her daughter she did not have all the financial resources to pay for the care she needed. She didn’t wish to be a burden, but either she moved in with another family member or friend or she required additional financial assistance to purchase the care she needed from professionals.
The bottom line was that Diane really did want her daughter to keep her promise since Diane had counted on it being kept. Sue was facing the pressure created by her promise and the added stress from this predicament was enormous when added to her ‘normal’ daily issues. These cognitive disconnects were creating a growing neurosis within both of them which if not settled now, would only grow and fester until it blew up and out.

Truth and Reconciliation
Earlier I mentioned that power abhors a vacuum. In the case of Diane and Sue the term vacuum or void is better conceptualized if we see it as an unbalanced equation or energy level. If Diane did not need ‘help’, starting from this point right up to when she eventually died, there would be no ‘need’ for Sue (or anyone else for that matter) to fill, no vacuum or void to equalize. It is Diane’s ‘need’ that creates the imbalance in the present status quo, in the level of power, in the equation. That giant sucking neurosis was air rushing into the vacuum to equalize the pressure.
It is this powerful imbalance that is creating (or more accurately fanning the flames of) the cognitive dissonance in both of them, this desire both to do and not to do what each feels compelled by conflicting desires to follow. This in turn is fostering the neurosis that presents as anger and psychological discord. Left to fester in this state for too long, serious dysfunctional behavior eventually expresses. What is rarely discussed is how this core cognitive dissonance affects in ways large and small nearly all aspects of a person’s ability to live a happy and healthy life.
We cannot ‘make’ another person ‘willingly’ change (the only type of change that is transformative and lasting) without their consent. We can force their body and condition their mind, but a true metamorphosis only occurs when we willing participate for our own inner reasons. However, we can be a catalyst for another person’s change, especially if we are part of the problem. But this requires that first we transform ourselves and most importantly our transformation cannot be initiated for others or with the intent to influence others.
What Diane and Sue are unable to see is that they are both locked into a narrow behavioral range; their choices are limited by the promise. Since neither can ‘change’ the other, the only way out is to make the decision to break out of the box and face what they are both avoiding. Neither can fundamentally change the fact that Diane is elderly and unable to fully care for herself. The only thing they can ‘change’ is how they perceive and then react to this reality.
Once they cease pounding on the locked door directly in front of them and look around they will find dozens of others doors unlocked and available…..including the formerly locked door they were just pounding on. These alternatives have been there all along; it is our narrow range of perceptual vision that blinds us to the blatantly obvious and sorely needed.

Free Yourself
After Diane had finished unburdening herself to me she fell silent for a moment, and then quietly asked what I thought she should do. Instantly I knew what to say, but hesitated for a moment because I did not expect my answer to be welcomed. “You must release your daughter from her promise. Only you can do this. I know it’s difficult and unfair, but Sue is unable to find the courage to ask to be released and the burden of the promise is too great for her and you to carry.”
I paused and waited for Diane to protest, but she remained silent, seemingly willing to hear more. “It will be extremely difficult for both of you. Sue will insist that she keep her promise; you must insist that the promise has already been discharged so there is nothing to keep. Most likely Sue will not accept your release and that’s OK, since the real purpose of your release is not to free Sue, but to free yourself from the burden of the false hope that what was promised can and will still be delivered.”
Once again I paused and this time Diane replied. “But I’ve told her several times that she doesn’t have to take me in, that I could find somewhere else to live.”
Her facial expression was almost childlike, hoping that her answer was enough to satisfy me while at the same time knowing it would not. It was a response I was expecting. False hope binds us to impossible situations and accepting that we are not being, and have not been, truthful with our ‘self’ often dies a hard and painful death.
I slowly took a deep breath, gathered up my own courage and pressed on. No one wants to tell anyone what they don’t want to hear. “Was it a sincere offer? Were you ready and willing to find another place if she accepted or were you simply saying it to help both of you feel better about the burden you believe you’re placing on her?” Diane winced when I said that and I immediately wished I had been gentler. Honesty was needed, but bluntness was not and being so can at times be cruel.
“Before you say anything to Sue you must be completely settled with yourself on this matter and be willing to accept any and all consequences of your actions, even if that means moving into a state paid nursing home or seriously damaging the relationship with your daughter. I paused to gauge her response, and then continued on when she said nothing.
If you cannot find peace with this before speaking with her you will not be able to fully and completely release yourself, and by extension her, from the damaging hold the promise has on both of you. You must become willing and able to do what at this moment you are unwilling to do. Consider how much power this has over you if you can’t bring yourself to release its grip. Then consider how free you will be once you have dismissed the promise that binds you to your distress.”
After a few moments of silence I gently changed the subject. Diane will have plenty of time to wrestle with her demons after I am gone. No sense forcing the issue anymore. Truth is instantly recognizable for its self evident nature. The difficulty isn’t in knowing what to do; the difficulty lay in doing what needs to be done.

Self Betrayal
During my six hour drive home I had plenty of time to mull over my visit and what I had said. I was struck by the parallels between Diane and Sue and the promises made by society to society, oftentimes hidden in the guise of public government or private corporation’s promises to “We the People”.
Regardless of whether the promises come in the form of financial, governmental, regulatory, judicial or political, they have not and will not be fully kept from this point on. We cannot force those who have no intention to keep them or can’t keep them to perform even if they actually wanted to do so. Nor would shaking awake the slumbering majority to the approaching crisis force the promises to be kept. If anything that would just accelerate the crisis since the entire system operates as a confidence game. Shake confidence and you break the game board.
The exponentially increasing Federal government’s (and private corporation’s) spying on its own citizens, public and corporate corruption and crony capitalism, glaring judicial injustice, blatant police state tactics and escalating social safety net breakdowns are the symptom, not the disease. ‘We the People’ have known for decades, or should have known if we had not outsourced our own personal responsibility to know what was being done (or not done) in our name, that promises were being made that could not be kept.
Rather than step forward and demand accountability from our so called ‘leadership’, something that also demands accountability from ourselves for believing the lies of the sociopaths that it will all work out if we just leave it to them (when obviously it would not), ‘We the People’ pursued a policy of don’t ask, don’t tell and narcissistic naval gazing while growing fat and increasingly unhappy. The neurosis feeds upon itself in a positive feedback loop until it reaches the blow off phase and the social organism collapses. This is the disease.
The runaway train has now reached the terminal fascism phase and the collective and individual courage to step onto the tracks and meet the problem head on is lost and nowhere to be found. The general public, including you and me (I do not exclude myself from blame) have resigned ourselves to our lot in life and are hunkering down (or exploiting the final frenzy for personal gain) to wait out the explosive destruction with the hope of surviving to live another day. Once again it is selfish pursuits that stand in the way of solutions.
In the face of mass self betrayal, all you and I can hope to do is work towards releasing ourselves from ourselves. We must release ‘them’ from the false promises they have made so that we may release ourselves from the anger, resentment and false hope that currently has us all tied up in neurotic knots and dysfunctional depression. We must release ourselves from the past in order to move each other forward into the future.
It all begins within.
01-07-2014
Cognitive Dissonance

- advertisements -


CD,
You know I'm a fan and a friend, so please take this the right way.
Neither Diane nor Sue are sociopaths. Sociopaths by definition have no sense of moral obligation whatsoever. They live to exploit whatever situation they are presented with for their own personal gain, period (you said so yourself). You simply can not extend them the same courtesies as normal human beings.
In my opinion a real solution can only be reached if we are willing to identify these people and pry the power from their hands.
If you don't, the concepts of shared sacrafice, amnesty and greater good will be exploited and twisted into genocide.
knew some kids in h.s. when they graduated they came home and found their stuff packed up on the sidewalk. every relationship is personal, parents who throw their kids out at 18 aren't better or worse, but that does absolve the child of any obligation, (and therefore might be the kinder gesture) i have known adopted children who as adults wonder who their biological parents are, and i say enjoy your freedom, that's the cards you were dealt. it has its advantages, just as family has advantages. just as a tough father, or a cold mother can be an advantage. once the die is set, (not always or ever of our own choosing, we have to go on with it)
on the matter of sociopathy, (which is 90% endemic, otherwise why are the people running the country not hanging from trees?) people refuse to accept their destiny as defined by their parents, which is history of the most poignant kind. when we do things out of indifference thats sociopathy. we are indifferent to our father and mother, (parents are state defined official guardians) just as they may have been indifferent to us.
Good to see you haunting the threads Mark.
My apologies if I did not make myself clear. In no way am I saying that Diane and Sue are sociopaths. In the first section I asked how so many sociopaths were popping up all over the place and described a vacuum drawing them in. I then transitioned to Diane and Sue to help illustrate some of the social dysfunction that was causing a portion of the vacuum. I then tied it all together in the last section.
Thank you for pointing out the uneven flow. I will try to do better next time.
I got you, CD.
I wasn't implying that you thought they were sociopaths. What I'm saying is dysfunction among decent people is one thing, rule by people with no conscience is another. And I'm really uncomfortable invoking warm and fuzzy feelings without being brutally honest about just how dangerous and ill-willed the latter group is. In my opinion, they are a cancer that trumps everything, and no amount of goodwill will change that.
I realize the value of your proposal, but I think we really have to recognize and deal with the root problem first. There are people in this world you should never compromise with.
I agree that we should not compromise with the sociopaths. If you give them an inch they will take ten miles.
But "We the People" do not and will not have the courage to confront the sociopaths when we can't even deal with our own issues. Thus the purpose of this piece, to illustrate that point. The reason I told Diane to 'release' Sue from her promise was not to allow Sue off the hook. It was to enable Diane to release herself from the embrace of the dysfunctional relationship she was so tightly bound to. Once done Diane will be better able to see other choices, including the real damage done by the sociopaths, and actually function in a dysfunctional world and situation.
"We the People" must heal if we are to shake off the parasitic sociopaths. Otherwise we remain locked in a terminal dysfunctional co-dependent relationship with the sociopaths. And they are so much better suited to survive that dysfunction than you or I.
People do not rise up because they are afraid of losing what they have. They do not understand that by rising up, win or lose, they will gain much. After all so much of what we have is transitory at best. Convuletd I know. Apologies.
Indeed.
In a similar vein, restoring a sense of community is something that can and should happen independent of taking on the establishment.
Something like that, right?
While there were at least a dozen reasons for our moving to the mountain, joining a community that already had some self sufficiency and neighborly tendencies built in was important to Mrs. Cog and I. This was immediately confirmed when, within a few months of moving in, I began a project of installing a 17kw standby generator by myself.
The very large generator delivery tractor trailer turned onto the main dirt road to our place and stopped, not wanting to go further for fear of getting stuck. Unbeknownst to us at the time (we did not know the truck had stopped a mile away and wasn't coming down the road) the neighbor at the corner gathered up the driver and drove him down to our place to scope out the location.
The delivery driver determined that he could not get his truck to my place. The neighbor then offered his pickup as a transport vehicle for the generator to be delivered the last mile. While I readied my place to off load the pickup truck rather than a lift gate trailer they drove back to the tractor trailer and the driver and several other neighbors off loaded 600 lbs of generator and accessories onto the pickup truck and drove it down to my doorstep.
I was floored and extremely grateful. We made quick work of off loading the generator and I sent everyone on their way with heartfelt thanks, a few fiat tips, and the strong sense that we had picked our location perfectly. Now that's community. :)
CD,
I read through your article and find it quite captivating. I've made a note of your quote "The difficulty isn’t in knowing what to do; the difficulty lay in doing what needs to be done".
To be honest, I never really thought about government, society, banking, monetary systems or any of these subjects. I like to imagine that I am somewhat intelligent, but as you know intelligence is different than knowledge. Garbage-in, garbage-out. And so I slept, hypnotized by the messages bombarding me via the institutions for higher learning, the free press and boob tube. It was not until the crash of 2007/2008 that I started to question anything. How can >90% of the people be screaming not to bail out the banks yet our representative government bails out the banks? At this point I finally started to see beyond the illusion. I opened my eyes dazed, startled and confused. The dream was still in my head though reality would smack me in the face. I would read articles on ZH and think, my god, this can't be true. Then I would look to see that much of it was true. My belief system was literally turned on its head by what I was finding at every turn. The truth was always there, but the government/corporate cast mass herd spell kept the eyes closed. It was time to either believe the popular message, or believe my eyes.
I am angry. I am angry that I have been lied to my whole life. I am angry that I am being robed (and always have been). There was no promise made to me out of sincerity and love, but rather out of greed and deception.
If a thief were to come into your home and steal everything you owned, the natural and proper response would be anger. Of course, that would not get you back your belongings, but it would motivate you to do something like hire a detective, prosecute the criminals when found, install a security system, upgrade the locks, etc.
When you look at the reality of it, of the expense of every single possession being stolen out of your home probably pales in comparison to what the government steals from us every year. Think about what is taken over a lifetime. But, we have been conditioned like dogs and like fleas on the dog to accept this as normal.
Getting angry won't get back what was stolen, but it will hopefully lead those of us who were previously naive to the true nature of our benevolent overlords to take action to protect ourselves.
I don't expect to receive a damn thing from this criminal, corrupt, and illegitimate government now or ever. All I expect is for the thievings to continue. Hopefully this anger will lead to positive changes I can make for myself, family, friends, and close people with which I do local business. Taking positive action will realize change in ones condition.
The system will not change until it is forced to change. On this point I agree.
Again, thanks for the well written article.
Hahaha.
I believe that is called...
Cognitive Dissonance
Once you lose all that you have you recognize what it is you really needed. How much energy do we spend chasing that which will end up in closets when the novelty wears off.
What was "stolen" was but an illusion.
We pretty much got to where we are by mass illusion (which was mostly borne on the backs of third-world countries- exploiting their resources and labor).
It'll still likely be a bit before you get to this point (and past the anger point), but if you continue to progress you'll get here.
"The system will not change until it is forced to change."
The system is the system because it is doing exactly it is needed to. Any signficant changes and it won't be the System. Keep in mind that everything centers around growth and that w/o growth the System is unlike to function. Best to understand that the System can no longer serve us (either in it's "demonic" or "benevolent" way). Let go...
Yes, the thieving was not only of our fortunes, but very much the plunder of resources of the third world! They got it way worse than us. When I think of all the things done overseas in our name, I must hang my head in shame that I did not see sooner.
I am angry. I recognize the anger as a powerful signal that something is wrong and that I must take some type of action. Emotion must be removed as much as possible from the thought process if an effective and prudent decision is to be made. Yes, I am slowly coming to this point, but the now daily scandals don't make it easy!!
Generating anger in others does not truly motivate them, but rather manipulates them on the short term. It can also drive people away. To effect any real change we need to hold together as a group and bring in others. I will not take a defeatist attitude as in "what's the use", but I will admit that things do look somewhat bleak.
So, I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!!! Now what? I'll have to give it some time, dispassionate thought and see how I can be the change I wish to see.
Did Diane take care of her mother (Sue's grandmother) when she reached this age? If so, that will set a precedence I believe as in my observations. What was embedded into the family dynamics over generations will mean something when it comes time to act on family situations such as this.
An acquaintance of mine went through this, left both her parents in nursing homes to die. Two daughters who were fully capable of bringing their parents into their homes (spare bedroom, sufficient money, both women aged 50 and above, so homes not filled with chaos of growing children). But, the children were raised to take care of their parents, it was the goal (let's have kids so that when we are old and vulnerable, a loving family member will be there for us). I think both women knew that their late births (father's age 40, mother's age 38 at time of my friend's birth). It was an expectation without it even being discussed but that did not ensure that it would happen. Inheritance was involved that much needed and when the time came for a decision on a surgical procedure for the last living parent, the dad at age 96, the acquaintance of mine refused the procedure, her dad died 3 days later and she began remodelling her kitchen in under one month. No real tears but a sorrow that I thought was guilt and a need to justify her decision. Her guilt is swallowing her whole, and I say that because of events that pose a danger, this person connects to her fate after having decided the fate of another, and ending their life sooner than otherwise (he was mentally alert).
Many more people would be wide awake if they were sitting patiently awaiting their parents demise and the subsequent inheritance they have long awaited. Thank you for your article.
The issues we struggle with personally (the disease) are reflected in the larger struggles of society (the symptom).
And Yes, Diane took care of her mother until her mother's death.
Amazing piece.
Happy 2014 to you CD!
Thank you.
Lots of stuff, including a new website, coming in the next month or two. Stay tuned.
CD, thank you for the thought provoking essay.
Among what I term my personal "twelve spokes of anger" is "geoengineering" (www.geoengineeringwatch.org), though the simpler descriptor "chemtrails" remains, in my view, more accurate from the perspective of one with a single vantage point on the ground, subject to weather that certainly appears modified to the extreme, especially in the pervasively and continually engineered drought in California and elsewhere. The program seems massive, funded by immense black budgets, with virulent aims and objectives uncaring for humanity. Weather as weapon, I (we?) find myself under attack chemically, by extension biologically, and I have family and animals for whose care and well being I take responsibility.
I recall a definition of "responsibility" from the (lost, near forgotten) world of the est Training, in which I explored Self for more than a season or three. Responsibility, intoned WE (Werner Erhard), extends to taking responsibility for others' experience, not just your own (paraphrase). Helps greatly if one were GOD-realized, I suppose.
Other, perhaps more overtly spiritual paths counsel similarly. We be One, One is All, I be you, you is me. So what if sociopaths (?) put into place a system to debase the prevailing currency, designed an educational system to ensure ignorance, took control of means for mass communication to direct energies of the multitudes, poisoned water, land, and air to reduce the resiliency and vitality of current residents, having eliminated the previous contingent of "natives" brutally and without mercy. Let's move on, nothing to see here.
I cry out, "Wait! Now that I have awakened, surely I may now receive absolution from sins committed by others that I did not know, even sins about which I read and which occurred so long ago, I had no place on this plane(t)." How I can rightfully take responsibility for a sociopathic system so immense and well developed, individual humans appear ant-like in its path of (re)destruction? I did not know, I received education to the contrary for so many years, I find myself in my tenth seven-year cycle only now appreciating the depths and direness of our situation!
No, I do not take personal and individual responsibility for this situation, so rightly characterized by CD. I shall take responsibility for dealing with it. Currently, the crossroads offers four ways, two of which include "fight" or "flight". I ponder the other two, roads less traveled by, as Mr. Frost described.
Any path you travel will eventually lead you to a fight or flight situation.
"I recall a definition of "responsibility" from the (lost, near forgotten) world of the est Training, in which I explored Self for more than a season or three. Responsibility, intoned WE (Werner Erhard), extends to taking responsibility for others' experience, not just your own (paraphrase)."
Sounds like the definition of a strong and vibrant community.
"No, I do not take personal and individual responsibility for this
situation, so rightly characterized by CD. I shall take responsibility
for dealing with it. Currently, the crossroads offers four ways, two of
which include "fight" or "flight". I ponder the other two, roads less
traveled by, as Mr. Frost described."
Don't stop now. What are the other two paths?
Thank you for your feedback.
And with advanced age comes dementia. At one moment there may be a fully understanding of the situation, and action might even be initiated, but then as another moment passes so too does the entire thought...
Somehow we're just going to have to hope that our death isn't too painful...
I have no idea if the legend is true of elderly Eskimos knowing that it was time and setting themselves adrift upon a piece of ice to die so as not to burden family, friends and tribe by living beyond their productive capability. But the thought is extremely interesting.
The ultimate in self sacrifice for the greater good of the family and local tribe.
I'd even heard that about Eskimos (of the past), thinking that I'd read it in the book "On Death And Dying." However, a quick check to see if it in fact was contained in the book I ran across this from http://www.theinitialjourney.com/features/eskimos_01.html
It's hard to ignore that I looked up that 1922 video on igloos yesterday.(and anything esle I could find) I did not think anyone else would be bothering to look up the Inuit people.
Igloos, they just ain't making them like they used to!
Sorry, the thought just popped into my head :-)
Well, you are correct as usual Seer. I suppose I was influenced by the tremendous MSM propagated horror that were the cold temperatures of late and how we were all near to frostbite death due to global warming.
I agree, an art is being lost along the way and global warming has nothing to do with it.
Thank you for the research. I found this passage particularly interesting.
"And in the Eskimo culture, the person asked to assist was bound to comply with such requests, without expressing any misgivings."
When difficult subjects are not only broached openly but an honor code is developed among the tribe on how to deal with difficult situations the dead are less likely to burden the living after death.
We are only as sick as our deepest darkest secrets. This applies individually as well as the group. Invariably the group is sick because the individuals are sick.
Which brings to mind how a group formed by people trying to become healthy can become very sick. Synanon for example. But there are many.
On the Eskimo meme, what are the odds that Grandma's idea of when to go correlated well with the rest of the family? Might have been a little tension there.
Eskimos aside, how did our own deal with these issues out on the cruel plains 150 years ago? I've never seen a history on this.
Actually, death was a fairly regular frequenter of many households up through say the 1920s. Onec we started dealing modern medicine we started losing our closer realationship to death: of course, this is only temporary as super bugs spawn and wealth deterioriates, making such "cures" no longer reaily available to the masses.
I went through scads of deaths earlier in my life. It was pretty nice having a stretch when that tappered off. Now that I'm getting older I see the wave reforming...
I have been considering an article about our divorce from death. As you said, in days past death was a familiar companion and while certainly not welcome it was a part of life. So too was the taking of (farm) animals for nourishment and trade. It was simply a way of life.
Now-a-days a death in the family is downright shocking, particularly if the person is under 50, and people want the burger, but don't want to meet the cow. Worse, even though people 'know' otherwise, they tend to think food comes from a grocery store rather than a farm (factory).
One of these days.......
I have sat with friends while they passed. Amazed the nummber of close friends and family that stayed away. Yet somehow I always gained something from the experience.
can you imagine the stresses on the system when 75 million baby boomers start dying off......the medical/health care industry (like the debt-based monetary sysyem) is choking on its own success trying to keep people alive
im old school so......''Hope I die before I get old''.....
When one has seen how life is like in third-world countries one can really see the contrast (and think about "opprtunity costs").
"Hope I die when I get old" (and not linger)
I would hazard a guess that disease quickly took many of the sick and elderly. But politically correct history, at least the variety taught in school, would never broach this subject directly.
Well done CD. A thoughtful and thought provoking article.
I'll second that comment. It's too bad that we are not dealing with homogenous parties, but throngs of collected individuals, both in the populace and our government. A satisfactory deal could not be amicably made in these conditions. The stuff of revolutions unfortunately.
The powerful and wealthy will not let go of the reins willingly. Essentially they have bluffed their way here....so why would they not try to bluff some more.
They are willing to carry their bluff all the way to the end. Are we?
to cynical skeptic: congrats! you actually made a comment longer than a CogDis piece.
if you would be so kind to abridge with link, i would be more than happy to read it.
Yup.....he beat me by a country mile. His 4,138 words makes my 2,765 words look like a ADD special.
<Maybe I can add a chapter two?> :)
LOL
A tale about Davy Crockett
from: http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/Constitution_Issues/davy_crockett_and_char...
When citizens of any democracy realize that they can vote to have government give them 'benefits' they will continue to so until they bankrupt that government for they will NOT ever vote to willingly pay themselves for those 'benefits'
CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.
I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support — rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:
"Mr. Speaker — I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.
We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.
There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt.
The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.
Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.
Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.
I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:
"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."
He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said:
"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."
I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
SEVERAL YEARS AGO I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.
The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.
So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."
I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and —"
"'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'
This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."
"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."
"No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."
"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"
Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.
So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.
No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.
The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."
I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:
"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."
I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."
He laughingly replied:
"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."
"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday a week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."
"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."
"My name is Bunce."
"Not Horatio Bunce?"
"Yes."
"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."
We shook hands and parted.
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.
Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.
I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him — no, that is not the word — I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted — at least, they all knew me.
In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
"Fellow citizens — I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."
He came upon the stand and said:
"Fellow citizens — It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."
He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.
"NOW, SIR," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men — men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased — a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
@cynicalskeptic I was going to leave my comment of the day to CD, then came across your mammoth post. That Davy Crockett story was so absorbing, it puts everything I've read recently in the shade. Many thanks.
Fuckers like Corzine and Madoff are born without a moral compass.
The runaway train has now reached the terminal fascism phase and the collective and individual courage to step onto the tracks and meet the problem head on is lost and nowhere to be found.
I think this is a fruitful analogy.
Imagine a 'runaway' train moving at 1/2 a mile an hour, on a very slowly increasing slope. A single person could step in front of it, push against it, and conceivably bring it to a stop.
The faster the train is going, the more dangerous it is to get in its way, and the more people it would require to bring it to a halt.
At this point in the train's progress, thousands of people could throw themselves in its path and the only result would be what Joseph Heller memorably described as lots of 'hairy strawberry ice cream'.... which might even lube the axles and cause the train to run even more swiftly.
If I'm reading CD's thesis correctly, I think he's right - forgive your fellow man* and just accept that the social contract is about to become seriously unravelled... and prepare accordingly.
*'humans' just doesn't have the same ring to it.
.....'hairy strawberry ice cream'.....
Now that's just wrong and an image I wish not to carry all day. :)
Regardless of what we do the 'social contract' will not be kept. Period. So once we accept this as fact we can move on and actually begin the process of removing the manic in the driver seat. We.....as in society in general and many of us individually......are so frustrated and angry, with many also dependent upon those promises, that we are frozen in place and cannot stop the sociopaths from further rape and pillage. For lack of a better word, we are impotent and the sociopaths know it.
We must first heal from our trauma before attempting to stop the train lest we all become little more than 'hairy strawberry ice cream'.
let it go amigo
let it go
and our society is set up such that these types thrive... in fact, are glorified.
john39
We have the right to vote for or against any candidate, and to always vote against incumbants, which probably is the right thing to do, but we don't do it. Why don't we?
For many, walking in faith with God solves the dilemmas described. I do not see too many spiritual humans fail with these issues, not to say that they do not wrestle with them. In fact, I like to think that God wants us to wrestle/struggle with these types of issues, and to find a relationship with our higher power as the solution.
I am currently reading William James, The Varieties of Religious Experiences: A Study of Human Nature. I think you would find it quite interesting, CD. Also, you may want to consider C.S. Lewis' book, Mere Christianity.
Peace!