Being involved with family violence control puts me in an odd situation.

I have avoided physical fighting my whole life. Childhood became the most significant influence on this. My father had told me, and I took it as holy law, that you as a guy, do not strike women. I cannot say that my older sisters and I did not have shoving matches, but for me that would have been self defense. Our family dynamics was heavy on the mental sparing which can seem actually more devastating.

The physical violence in our house was later done, after my mothers death, by a step mother-guardian. She would not hesitate to hit, throw objects and threaten with knives. She sent my father to the hospital with a big gash across his forehead. I slept with the largest kitchen knife under my pillow as a self defense plan for a knife attack while I was asleep. She had hit me in the face while I was asleep, then locked me out in the snow in my pajamas. My father committed suicide not long after that.

Earlier I had incidences when someone seemed to be threatening my life as a freshman high school. I was literally about 100 lbs. and someone morbidly obese around 500 lbs, held me under water to near drowning during pool time in a crowded pool. He had done this more than once. It became so serious to me (swallowing-inhaling watter) that I thought I would have to take matters into my own hands. One more time, and I was going to put him in a headlock with my legs around his neck and hold him under until it meant something. I was a totally inhibited kid and did not trust authority to do anything but blame the victim. So I had to weigh in my mind, possibly causing someones death and being called and treated as a murderer.

As it turned out, he never did that again. But I was sure it would have been me to blame and I would have felt I had no options in my own self defense. No one seemed to notice him doing this during the pool commotion, so I believed no one would accept my story. It just never came through to experience. In physical confrontations during boyhood, I found I had to keep the potential for rage out of me, especially since I had no doubt that I would take down someone twice my size. It took someone quite a bit larger and older to overcome me. I was afraid of my rage and how if unleashed it would seem out of my control.

(As evidence that I am not just delusional about this strength proclamation. When it rained a lot during physical education, outdoor activities were called off and we were put into the gym, we freshmen and the sophomores, to have a thing called “bombardment”. This is where there are two sides chosen, a line across the middle of the gym, where the two sides throw rubber balls a little smaller than a soccer ball at each other. Out of about 150 students divided in two, little me was one of the last picked, last or second to last.

Well the first game I discovered that being in the lower 10% in size had me a bit afraid, so I hung back as many did. All it took was the guy next to you ducking and a ball out of nowhere taking you out, while leaving a big red mark somewhere. I decided to risk all and take it to the line next game.

You could see most of what was being thrown up front. I found out I could catch any-ones ball thrown at me, but no-one could hold onto mine. I was also very accurate. I won that game. The last guy standing. I was picked second of all players next game. The team first picking, picked his seeming best friend first, so I was first on the other team picked. The next game was the last. It oddly ended up being me the last standing on my team, and a very out of shape guy hiding and dodging in the corner on the other side when the period ran out. I could no longer throw fast enough to eliminate time for him to move. That is how little old me was as a skinny five feet two.)


What I just said I cannot say to someone involved in family violence. As far as physical violence goes, I do not hit women. I have told ones who gave me any actual physical provocation that, “If you do that again, we are over!” I do not tolerate fighting, especially in the home relationships. I try to avoid physical confrontations with anyone. Now that I am a “senior citizen” I find you are not seen as a threat overall, or there is a kind of automatic respect. Most of that sense of being on guard is much diminished now. I take peace as my way and it path is most often open.

I have found that emotional abuse has prove a bit more difficult to not take part in, compared to a sense of law that one just never does such a thing. I grew up that way, making fun of someones mistake or being ridiculed. It is then a model of behavior I have had to contain and reverse. To do that requires a will and an understanding of the Golden Rule or Categorical Imperative. I need to establish the sense that not only does “what goes around comes around.”, but it is already damaging my life. Abusing others in any way is profoundly self abuse.

I need to see (learn to recognize) when I am treating another like I would not wish to be treated, and immediately review what my self respect or control problem really is. We are often given the information from another that we are on some kind of attack and they becoming defensive, or initiating their own retaliations.

Still, when expressing guidance to someone, it will often fall flat if it is preached or describes as something I am so above, and can’t understand how someone could do such a thing. That fits as a key with very few dysfunctional programs. I have to speak out of and through my own life, the love in your heart has to be in it, to be a gift expected to have a chance at being received.


In some ways I have described political tactics and ways of manipulation. All manipulation is in some way an abuse of the truth. Its vibrational disturbance will not go unnoticed, except perhaps, by like minded dysfunction. The same situations and rationalizations that come to effect home life are used in the greater life of our world. Even if everyone does it, doesn’t make it right.

We will find manipulative arguments covered if various guises meant to hide their intention, and instead, be represented as your own interest. Fear and insecurity are great hiding places for manipulative interest. Optimistic vision can also be used as a trick to catch someones interest, then later prove to have been a ruse. We need to be both critically minded on the one hand, and have our heart held out open in the other. True adults can do this.

The upcoming election seems to be being based on fear and insecurity vs. hope and optimism, both of these being held as paramount in differing ways by the candidates. I am not saying that we are not justified in having these inclinations. What I am encouraging is the “true believers” and the doubtful to have their wits about them. As citizens and voters, it is up to us to determine the fact from fiction, the hidden agendas from the promises of safety and security. For power will seek to inject its corruptions into all areas of life if let be.

We each are freedom, love, and truths best and last hopes. Better to stand with understanding under their tall light, than the ignorance that festers in the shadows of misunderstanding.


It is usually called patriotism.

It can be flag waving, lots of flags everywhere, Nazis and communist do that to. It is usually some test of abstraction to determine in the abstract, if you are for those promoting the abstraction from their own angle, or against it. Against it in their definition equates with I, or you being opposite that abstraction; say freedom. To be against it equals something akin to being a traitor, seditious, or ungrateful to the place where that abstraction abides in the testers mind and intentions. But is implied to pertain to everyone as such! No other views about it. You then become the target of loathing and a parade of persecution, if it can be taken (manipulated, construed) that you implied differently than the framed parameters of one groups definition of an abstraction.


It happened to the Jews is Nazi Germany. A cult takes over that many thought was just a fringe movement. Then it puts up its own purity test, then targets those unwilling or unable to pass (nose size?), for the test was meant to rid the nation of those who look or think differently. The abstraction, the Grand Good Thing, has become a vehicle of subjective bias into minds who support good things, perhaps unknowing that that goodness has been altered to be unconcerned with much objective perception.

It is alleged that Jesus Christ faced this same scrutiny from status quo conservative interest at the time called the Scribes and Pharisees. They questioned him in his allegiance to their own sides view of noble cause, as if that were the only cause of confirmed truth. Why did He hang around with the unwashed poor, the sinners and outcast of society? Why is it that He finds value there and not with the distinguished citizens and interest of the status quo’s conceptually pinned down paradigm? (power interest know where their own interest lay) In the end; So you think you are a king? Well we agree. Here is your bloody crown then. The dominator sycophants cheer.


Terror and mystification are routinely applied across history, for entitled minority interest to control the whole of the public. It may be hidden behind law, it is the safest place to hide self serving deceptions, there and in religio-spiritual interpretation, that leaves the target audience, fearful and contained in a dominator paradigm. Questioning it framed as consorting will ill or evil cause.

Conservative interest usually are the originator of these test, but any totalitarian interest would promulgate them into the culture. I’m sure that men who wanted women to vote were considered, effeminate or emasculated. Whites who stood up for blacks as equals under God and the Nations founding intention, where considered enemies of their own people by, yep, fear based insecurity driven conservative interest.

We now have money as symbolic power of the beholders, all that makes someone “big” someone of substance and influence automatically, and religio-spiritual charlatans, also usually very wealthy in the background. these “naturally” come to see both corporate interest and church interest as primary, against the will of the many, by assuming they have the right to control and manipulate the population, because money and position allows them access to.

Some conservatives of the Constitution, The Bill of Rights and even the Bible, actually stood up for the rights of Blacks and Woman as human beings, deserving the same treatment under the law. These would have been called names such as “blank” lovers. Plus much else of the vile and vitriol that these kinds of demonizers spend so much of their consciousness roiling in, for their own spiritually self punitive reasons.


Watering down the abstract conceptual purity of a status quo, the entitled have’s, or otherwise oligarchies interest, produces in them defensive fear. In that sense then, only what is good for them is to be held good by you, the dependent on them public. An abstraction, a symbol, then can stand in as your sub-servitude to a dominator’s point of view. Those fawning and wanting respect from the “big” to rub off onto their own lives, must then scurry out to test the population.

Now you are in the intended place; subjected to propaganda disguised as emotionalized fact, and guided by implied fear and terror into conforming to the elites interest mindset. The implied high minded and holier than thou symbol, now used as a club, on freedom, self responsibility, and full expression of the self into life; life as it is in its wholeness of reality, had potentiated in you. A subjective interest can masquerade as the interest of all. The followers are in the objective sense, slaves to both fear and terror. Loyal and patriotic pawns of special interest.


The attacks on the very nature of freedom and responsibility often spew from the mouths who claim to represent just those things. Cults who attempt to control consensus reality and personal identity of all followers, need to see themselves differently from the whole population, yet hold that whole of society up to their myopic standard. Here is where the test of some symbol often is used as a wedge to use fear as the threat to conform, or else. We are seeing these test show up from the right wing as they usually do at election times.

Usually flag burning, or the pledge of allegiance, come around as a fake test of patriotism. Once, not so long ago, it was long hair and bell-bottom pants hippies. They are used as wedge against alleged liberal indifference or antagonism towards the notion the conservatives hold as abstractly sacred, but which they maintain as reality check impaired.


I have read post on this site host, where not wearing a pin, or not putting your hand over your heart, shows you are in essence, one of the enemy, or minimally a bad guy or gal at heart. What a pile of deception.

Firstly, knowing politics, I would trust a photo as being taken out of context, just as many words are used in context of false association and comparison. But even more importantly, where was it ever said that you were to act like a robot to be certified perfect? The pledge of allegiance was originally written, not so long ago historically, by a socialist. I can understand at that time the Utopian dream that suddenly, all would fall into line into a beautiful society of equals who’s symbol would be used as a collective hammer to mold the group into a loving cohesive whole; an abstract pledge. A whole of act a-likes, unable and afraid to stand out. Cowering in a bonding psyche stranglehold of a mass action, afraid to stand up for their own allegiance to truth, God and nation. Instead of to one groups self serving interpretation of it.

That kind of leftist Utopian conservatism hybrid was a made to order weapon on the right. Adjust a word, later, throw in God, and now everyone acting alike would be alike. (conservatives primarily separation motivated delusion that appearance and behavior actually demonstrates union) It is peer pressure and threat of ostracism of the non conformist, (ancient tactics of shame) codified in the song, the salute, the seig heil, the flag, whatever the symbol of conformity is, even a cross of execution. It may be fine until it is used as a test of loyalty, for then we have left the realms of truth, justice or honesty, and entered the convoluted matrix of power and control. It is freedom of thought and being the abstraction throwers hate. It is free thought that is their nemesis.


Why would they fear the individuals own test of truth over the imposed collectivist one? It seems to oppose the favored conditions they associate in their psyche with the symbol, that seems to place them above the worlds of “others”. Others whose identity is now molded into a duck in a fear based shooting gallery.

Many a libertarian opposes the left and the right for these very status quo attempts to control their own unique nature. In that, I see the founding’s of the libertarian fears. Remember the “Dixie Chicks” (country music group of three woman) just telling their own feelings to other human beings, was seen as betrayal, because it did not pander to power.

It is now an implied betrayal amongst these kinds of conservatives, to tell the truth of your feelings to others. George Orwell would be shocked at how fast and furiously, freedom is stabbed in the back in the name of freedom, and all because of not conforming to a machine like mindset, too timid and ashamed or shivering to speak your own truth. Land of the free and home of the brave indeed.



I started writing this post when I heard that right wingers, (conservatives, certain kinds of conservatives, whatever one wished to tag the fear merchants with,) when these people let up an uproar when one Black presidential candidates Black wife said; “People in this country are ready for change and hungry for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.” As I often say, context is everything, it can even make a word seem its opposite when it is taken out of context.

Whatever kinds of conservatives these were, they were shocked and appalled that this meant she had no pride in her country until her husband was a top candidate. What an insult to the nation it was, implying there was nothing for her to be proud of until her interest somehow is benefiting from how America is. The context was about her own view of hope from her conditional to subjective reference viewpoint! Not theirs!

Well, if you have read my post and pages, you will see how this nation, clothed in some minds in glorious abstraction, actually treats its citizens and those who have served it in battle. Bring that truth up and you are against your country? Or are you telling the truth as you know it, because you love your country, standing up for freedom by applying it! A natural desire to change the nation for the betterment of all, not just elites.


Another candidates allegedly politically savy wife, brought the other woman’s words up as a contrast to her husband who was imprisoned by the enemy while serving his country. In effect this throws one persons past context into an others experience as being some kind of opposite. When in fact there is a large element of apples and oranges in the comparison of historical fact to an off the cuff personal reflection of current hopeful experience. Both are entitled to their feelings are they not? But have we really seen an opposite proved to be true?

Her comment even seems understandably true; why would you not be exceedingly proud to see a barrier that seems to represent oppression in the land of the free broken? Particularly one so personal to your own roots. Seems patriotic to the very core identity of American independence. Cultist hate independence. I doubt if there would be any “fire storm” if the primary “Christian” candidate said he was never so proud of his country since they are embracing Christ via his candidacy?

There might be some rumblings by the left and libertarians, plus constitutionally minded conservatives who know the necessity of church and state separations as independence defenses built into the constitution. I predict in this opinion that these latter ones who bring up questions would be treated as oddities, who are part of the problem of moral decline. Probably would hear much as well, about persecuting a Christian, and why you are against people being proud of their religion and Savior.

Suddenly we would hear all the nuance and ambiguities in handling a candidates unbridled excitement about his religious and soon to be government connections.


When the public is in the position it is now in; left helpless to consolidated corporate media interest; manipulated by ideologically driven “fact” to emotionalized conclusion; left disabled and unwilling to challenge the ruling paradigm due ignorance, societal disconnection and doubt, we are in need of hope as never before.

If superman or superwoman are not dropping in to stand up for truth and justice united as the American Way. It is up to each of us to so stand, uniting the abstractions from the ground up and not the elite down position we are so accustomed to as inevitable.

We The People, as the actual land of the free and home of the brave. Well, that requires each one to act that way does it not? But cowering to some test of political interest and pundits who profit off of promoting divisions to enable elites? Afraid if we hold our hand “right” or where a pin like all the others are? That is the land of the ashamed of freedom and home of the subservient to other human masters, instead of the true One.

People write about their pride and goose bump feelings at large events when the Star Spangled Banner is sung. It is a song made to elicit that kind of response, but en mass, we humans feel part of something infinitely larger. Other countries and groups know of this phenomenon. With the Pledge of Allegiance to start of the day in Catholic school, one just did what one was asked. You could even feel that common purpose from doing a common thing that is directed toward something greater. It is good to feel part of something grand.

But for years I had that same sense even while not knowing the proper wording. I thought it said; and to the Republic where witches stand… That even added more mystery for me. I had heard about the Salem witch trials.

I am always proud of America for its dreams, and its daring to be a home for the individual to live both freely and responsibly. Yet I have no illusions that the old warlord dominator ways are not always trying to retake this land and all lands from the Common One. I have no pride in the attempts of prejudice, to masquerade as honor, nor robot conformity to define freedom.


No really?

This is about abstraction, then contradiction as evidence of untruth=a truth.

If I have said it once I have said it at least once; CONTEXT.

We have de facto a priori truths that are in effect theory’s based on experience. I do not think of them as my opinion however. My foot going forward is an assumed certainty, in that it will meet matter and continue my walking. I am trusting looks are not deceiving and not even knowing it.

I don’t know I trust some joke is not being pulled, my next foot falling through some illusion, like a trap in the jungle. My mind is quite closed as to my belief seeming as fact but having the potential of illusion. I trust I have not been drugged and am imagining where my next step is actually going. We can keep going on in this way regarding the first example that popped into my mind. It did that probably because it is such a universal belief we most all have, but would get only into an existential circulating pool if we argued about it as a belief I have but you do not, since you know where your next step is going.

Why am I talking about this today? What determined my interest on this topic? It was a post about liberal legendary open-mindedness and conservative strong willed closed opinion. Sometimes I am bugged about the false dichotomies that are used regarding generalized abstractions that then go on to prove a point philosophically, believing a questionable belief is proven truth.

In the case mentioned, if a liberal holds an opinion they are proven as deceptive to some; cause they are not being open minded. Then conservative opinion does not face this same criterion. Are these alleged opposites merely on a polar continuum? Might they actually be on a circle rather than a line? How about a triangle with closed mindedness being one point, and liberal, all the rest of the whole?

It is my assumption that we all have both conservative and liberal tendencies. They are conserved for some functional reason. One can argue endlessly over false dichotomies (the talking heads on cable news often do) because they are insolvable, being that one or both sides are not honestly in any full context.

Should I be open minded about where my next foot is landing on the sidewalk? Most likely not, unless there are some unknowns I am blindly waking into. But unfortunately I do not know of them and experience has suggested I need not have a concern. If someone points out that I am not being open minded about my opinion, am I then a proven conservative or dishonest liberal?

Like the sidewalk analogy, experientially we are guided into many beliefs, by experience and our particular place in family and culture, that are nowhere near as certain as cement. But we are sure they are!

The cliches over left and right are often such a morass of misunderstanding that arguing over them is often tantamount to poking your own brain out of your head and using it as a soccer ball. Really pointless, because neither side is willing to hear with the ears of the other. On those occasions they may try, can that try be honest? Is our upbringing going to raise its hand and shout to our mouths; I know the true answer!? But I’ll give you a listen for respect and courtesy in giving understanding a try, and not knowingly, subconsciously, cherry pick what bounces through my ears.

I read another tag yesterday that was going around in anti-government circles all in a fuss over some couples cheating on our taxes. This couple allegedly did not wish to work, were found to be illegal aliens, and on, in that welfare state big bad government huff so opinion pulling on the right.

While I was reading this post the TV news was on, an investigative show, talking about 200 billion in no bid contracts that seem to have gone out to what amounts to war profiteers who got the job by personal and political contacts, thus having that lack of oversight and accountability now infamous as cronyism in the supposedly conservative administration.

Point being; who is really getting away with what and what is the true context and scale? Why does one inflame ones emotions and yet the other keep off the radar? Doth we sense the scent of cognitive dissonance?

Liberals are not exempt from cognitive dissonance, or being false to ones convictions but not owning up in awareness to that reality. This is a departure example, but I knew of someone who was always excited over a relative of theirs getting off of drug addiction. That is something to be excited about, but this was perhaps the fifth time I had heard this same response to that persons getting “clean”.

Well my experience about these things tells me this; I quit smoking over thirty years ago, and drinking alcohol over twenty, when I met one criterion in myself. That threshold was an absolute surety of a new power of control in me, one that can overpower addiction. It is what I call spiritual transformation, in that your spirit arrives at a higher place (life’s Love) that can overcome the chronic addictive failure one has known. Some higher step, places you in an overview that will not bargain with physical pleas from the addiction to give in and enjoy yourself; you deserve it after all. You poor suffering one you. No. You become joyful in ending something “externals” control over you. Freedom rings!

So whenever I hear of those leaving addictions, I probe if some new understanding has occurred in their lives, do you notice other new and healthy qualities emerging? If not, I become doubtful, hopeful but cautious. I have found all to likely the addicted one is telling you what you would like to hear from them. This is especially important to note on the addictions that are so immediately a threat to self and others.

Some of us are more concerned of cultural oil addiction than others. Some of us are rewarded in stock dividends by our oil addiction. The environment may be passing a deadly threshold, where our very reason to acknowledge such a pivot point may be compromised by the addictions apparent benefits to identity and immediate security. The security we often spend most attention on.

Instead of arguing opinions, standing our ground as if it guaranteed holiness, or being indifferent about conflicting interest, not knowing our own interest is dependent on those very conflicts, maybe we should learn to listen differently.

Maybe we should understand that no ones interest is separate from any others. See that their hearts are just as real as our own. Maybe we should find the deeper dimensions to honesty, looking into myself and wonder; why do I believe that so emphatically, or why have I payed no attention to the others viewpoint?

We have a mind to gain and only misunderstanding to lose.

It is one addiction where we do if we so declare, get to chose.

To live more near to honestly than deception.