Look7777777 – Culture Watch – 2008.08.05

The Lew Rockwell Show, Podcast 8: Hans-Hermann Hoppe & Lew Rockwell, The Scam Called the State, http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2008-07-29_008_the_scam_called_the_state.mp3

_______

Kościół, ukazując powołanie małżonków do przeżywania aktu seksualnego jako spotkania z Bogiem, w wyjątkowy sposób podnosi jego godność. Ludzki akt miłości staje się święty obecnością Boga. To sakramentalne spotkanie z Jezusem Chrystusem wynosi małżonków ku niebu: uszlachetnia, oczyszcza, uświęca miłość ludzką.

[P]ożycie seksualne nie jest tylko aktem biologicznym, bo tak myślą ludzie przesiąknięci laicką kulturą. Akt seksualny małżonków angażuje również duchowy wymiar człowieka. [...] Staje się aktem w pełni ludzkim, gdy wyraża miłość coraz bardziej będącą darem z siebie, gdy odbywa się w małżeństwie „na dobre i na złe”, aż do końca życia.

Znak obecności Boga pośród kochających się małżonków jest bardzo konkretny i wyraźny i, co najważniejsze, pokazuje, że Bóg może działać w każdej chwili małżeńskiego życia. Taki znak tworzą sami małżonkowie poprzez swoje ciała. Jest to znak żywy. Cielesna bliskość małżonków tworzy widzialny znak ich wspólnoty, która jest powołana do stania się znakiem miłości i jedności. Małżonkowie tworzą znak obecności Boga, gdy są cieleśnie razem – gdy razem żyją pod jednym dachem, a nie są rozdzieleni przez wyjazd jednego z nich do pracy za granicę, gdy razem się modlą, gdy rozmawiają ze sobą, gdy pomagają sobie w codziennym życiu, choćby sprzątając mieszkanie, gdy się wspierają, pocieszają, gdy obdarzają się czułością, pieszczą się, współżyją seksualnie (śpią w jednym łóżku). Ten znak wymaga wypełnienia duchowego, aby był znakiem miłości, aby cielesne bycie razem stało się komunią – wspólnotą prawdziwej jedności małżeńskiej – duszą, sercem i ciałem.

Gdy małżonkowie umieją w wierze zinterpretować swoją miłość, wtedy jej różnorodne przejawy wyrażone poprzez ciało (pomoc, modlitwa, rozmowa, pieszczota, akt seksualny) stają się dla nich znakami sakramentalnymi, czyli znakami, poprzez które mogą rozpoznać obecność Boga przychodzącego do nich. Gdy żona czuje się kochana przez męża, może powiedzieć, że przez jego miłość (wyrażoną poprzez jego męskie ciało) sam Bóg przychodzi do niej i objawia jej swoją Miłość. Jeżeli mąż czuje się kochany przez żonę, to może uznać, że jest ona dla niego prawdziwym darem Boga, poprzez który Bóg zapewnia Go o swojej miłości i trosce. Miłości towarzyszy często krzyż, ale i on staje się drogą oczyszczenia człowieka i nauczenia go miłości.

Gdy patrzymy na małżeństwo z perspektywy odkupienia, wierzymy, że odkrycie tak rozumianego powołania jest zamysłem pełnego miłości i mądrości Boga. Tylko ta perspektywa budzi szacunek dla najstarszego powołania na świecie, objawionego ludziom już w raju.

Ksawery Knotz OFMCap, Obrona wiary katolickiej czy negacja sakramentu małżeństwa?, http://www.mateusz.pl/wdrodze/nr418/04.htm

_______

I always want to add a prefix to this scrawl. "EDUCATE THE MASSES AND THEN smash the state".

I always come back to the phrase "IDEAS ARE ALSO WEAPONS" which in this context is best summed up in this excerpt from Voluntary Resistance (By Carl Watner) "Public buildings may be destroyed, public officials murdered, but such efforts will never bring about the destruction of the idea of the State. The State is a state of mind, an idea which cannot be harmed by violence. Ideas can only be attacked with better ideas." And we desperately need to use our public spaces to communicate such ideas.

Russell Higgs, Pessimism of the Intellect, Optimism of the Will, http://www.flickr.com/photos/russell-higgs/227156040/

_______

My blog gets its name from 1984, where Orwell painted perhaps one of the most fundamental necessities to freedom. "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four." Why is this important? Because it encompasses three necessities to freedom - the freedom to think the truth, to speak the truth, and to act on the truth.

How can one understand anything, for example, in a world where every answer is considered possible, and there are no wrong answers to questions, only different perspectives. Well, here's what I have to say: the freedom to be wrong is worthless without the freedom to be correct.

[J]ust because the majority has been convinced that 2 + 2 = 5, doesn't mean that I will silence my protests. I will continue to fight for 4 that I may remain free, and that I may inspire others to speak for the truth, and to act on it.

Alex Ramos, 2 + 2 = 4, http://freedom224.blogspot.com/2007/01/2-2-4.html

_______

This document is intended to summarize the key backstory information behind the Deus Ex universe. It is comprised mostly of excerpts from the design documents of Deus Ex 1, with a few additions and modifications for the sake of maintaining consistency with the final game.

[M]uch of the backstory detailed below never made it into the final game. Some of the events described were intended to be missions (Texas, the space station, moon base, Mt. Weather; etc.), and a lot of that content either doesn't appear in Deus Ex or does so in glancing, fragmentary ways.

The year is 2052 and the world is an even more dangerous and chaotic place than it is today. Terrorists operate openly, killing thousands; drugs, disease, pollution and, of course, El Nino kill even more. The world's economies are close to collapse and the gap between the insanely wealthy and the desperately poor has grown to the size of the Grand Canyon. The media openly encourage the worst in mankind. Still, this is not just Another Grim Dystopic Post-Apocalyptic World™. Deus Ex is set "10 minutes before the apocalypse." There is still hope.

In the largest urban areas of the world . . . life is grim. A growing variety of drugs offers pleasure and ensures suffering to an ever larger user-base. Crime has become a larger problem than ever. At street level, cities like New York and Paris are little more than armed compounds where drug dealers and users prey on the powerless and vie with the poor for access to scant resources. The most committed among the urban rich have moved up or in, to the tops of whatever skyscrapers remain standing or to protected enclaves in places like New York's Central Park.

The government's main role seems to be to prevent the chaos of the streets from reaching the wealthy elite. The police become more and more aggressive (and less concerned with individual rights) with each passing day. . . . Supermarkets still offer food (though the selection may be limited and barter may work better than paper money).

Increasing terrorism is a matter of serious concern to both the urban rich, who look down on the world from on high, and to the suburbanites, who live in blessed isolation. In small, gated communities of luxurious single-family dwellings, life is good. These communities are often surrounded by somewhat larger developments constructed for support personnel. The gated communities are well-defended and tough to get into (unless you have appropriate clearance) and tougher still to survive in if you don't belong. Though most of the luxury communities are ultramodern, some are constructed to resemble medieval castles (which is, basically, what they are).

The key thing to realize about the world is that it is very much a world of "Haves" and "Have Nots." There's almost no middle class left. There's little left of the American Dream anywhere in the world. The rich and powerful are on top of the world. The poor and downtrodden live largely without hope of bettering their lot. The shrinking middle class lives under the control of governments (and conspirators it doesn't even know about).

[In the world of Deus Ex there are] three types of humans:

• Total humans consider themselves purse and are at the top of the heap. They need augmented humans but fear and distrust them. Most total humans don't even know nano-augmented humans exist.
• Mechanically augmented humans have their own airport security systems and have to register with government authorities. They are second-class citizens, looked down upon even by the non-augmented poor. There's no way a mechanically augmented human can pass for normal for very long. They're not allowed in certain locations and have separate facilities, ostensibly tailored to their unique needs but really as a way of controlling them.
• Nano-augmented humans are resented by their mechanically augmented brothers and sisters. They're as powerful as mechanically augmented humans but suffer none of the stigma associated with augmentation. They can pass through airport security and mingle with humans freely.

America is in a constant state of tension. The borders are guarded by the Armed Forces, customs is deadly serious, immigration laws have been tightened dramatically, and nationwide martial law seems imminent.

For well over a hundred years, Europe had been under the economic influence of the Illuminati (through the Bilderberg Group) and later became a financial satellite of Majestic 12 (think the European Monetary Union happened spontaneously?) Control of Europe's finances became a reality in 2003 when, following national elections, the UK adopted the European standard currency. With that event and the fall of NATO, the leaders of the conspiracy were able to turn economic control into political control.

Still, Majestic 12's influence is not all encompassing. Despite the collapse of NATO, the powers that be are still in the process of assembling a new coalition of nations. Meanwhile, the rise of chaos and civil war has fragmented the nations of Europe and made Majestic 12's goal of unification under a single coalition umbrella more difficult to achieve than expected.

Other than Mexico . . . South America hasn't changed much since the turn of the century. If anything, the continent is, as a whole, more prosperous than in the past. Though business is booming (much of it illegitimate) South America remains as fragmented in the 2050's as it was a hundred years earlier. Governments turn over regularly, through coup or election, but the average citizen who survived the ravages of disease hardly notices the difference. The poor remain desperately poor, the rich obscenely rich. It's as if government is irrelevant, as if some other force remains consistent though politicians come and go.

The African continent is beginning to emerge as a place of growth and change.

Over the last fifty years, many Hong Kong expatriates have moved to Africa, resulting in the establishment of thriving Afro-Asian communities. (Afro-Asian chic is spreading rapidly through the worlds of pop culture and fashion). Though it will never displace Hong Kong, the New Hong Kong section of Lagos, Nigeria, is one of the continent's most active, successful and chaotic cities -- not unlike Casablanca during World War 2.

Aside from a few small pockets of freedom (described as "anarchy" in Majestic 12 propaganda), like Lagos, Africa is almost entirely under the thumb of the conspirators as the game begins.

Essentially untouched by world events, China has emerged as a world leader, supplanting the United States and Europe as centers of education and industry.

Hong Kong, though a part of the Chinese/Majestic 12 empire, remains more chaotic than one might think. Though repression is extreme, the urge for freedom is strong and thriving black markets keep Hong Kong's tradition of free trade and entrepreneurism alive and well.

The Middle East has long been under the control of the Illuminati, and later, Majestic 12. These groups held the reins on international terrorists based in the region, and the Bilderberg Group controlled the oil companies that had a stranglehold on the regions finances.

With the successful pan-Arab invasion of Israel in 2022, Majestic 12 control of the region is total.

As far as life on other planets goes, we still haven't encountered any, at least none that can be acknowledged publicly -- rumors continue to abound that we were visited by aliens a century or more ago and the governments of the world are keeping it secret.

For centuries, the Illuminati pursued a plan to bring the world to its knees, and at long last, create One World Government. Over those hundreds of years, it grew, changed, added arms, subtracted arms, adapted to changing times, and made itself a driving force behind nearly every major event.

The Bilderberg Group controlled financial matters around the world through vast mining operations, control over the Federal Reserve Board, the Eurobank and the World Bank as well as through its stranglehold on the world's supply of gold.

Majestic 12 was the Illuminati's technology and communications leader. It doles out technological advances and stores those the world is not yet ready for (or those too powerful to give to potential enemies). It controls the supply of drugs -- licit and illicit and can introduce new diseases as it wishes (diseases for which it already has a cure ready and waiting, of course). Majestic 12 is also charged with influencing and, where possible, managing the world's intelligence organizations.

Satellite communications (phones, intercontinental computer links, television, etc.) proved little challenge -- other than some pirates, all of the media are under the control of Majestic 12. The Internet, particularly Internet 3, proved dicier. In this arena, Majestic 12 set up vast monitoring operations and used inefficient, old-fashioned strong-arm techniques to shut down content providers large and small who posted things they didn't want posted. Many a poster simply disappeared after a handful of dangerous messages.

These methods were effective only when Majestic-12 was prepared to expend significant resources over extended periods of time. They needed something better, more automated, more fundamental to the underlying communications grid. To this end, they created the Aquinas Protocol, a TCP/IP-like low-level packet-routing scheme. Through great media fanfare and government backing, they were able to build Aquinas into the backbone of almost every digital network on the planet, allowing them to physically route all global communications through a massive monitoring station underground at Area 51. Morpheus (still functioning at Everett's hideout in Paris), Daedelus, and finally Helios are successively more advanced manifestations of the automated surveillance, prediction, and enforcement made possible by Aquinas.

When Daedelus [A.I.] began sifting through the information on the Majestic 12 net, it quickly discovered two things of significance:

• It learned how grim a place the world was for most people -- what with war, disease, famine, poverty, crime -- and it seemed these problems were getting worse, not better, despite the existence of the secret societies theoretically in charge of the whole mess. In fact, the ruthlessness of world leaders -- their willingness to sacrifice millions of people, if that's what it took to achieve their goals -- seemed less than human to the inhuman Daedelus.
• It learned that the most recent and most deadly threat to mankind -- the Gray Death -- was of human origin. It wasn't a natural thing.
• Daedelus determined that solutions to these problems existed. Some of them depended on convincing or coercing the masses to curb their less noble impulses.

As similar as they are, J.C. and Paul have very different personalities -- Paul's more flamboyant, more out-going and far less serious. J.C. Denton worries a lot that his older brother, sharp as he is, will get himself in trouble someday because he isn't paranoid enough.

Deus Ex Team, DX1 Continuity Bible, http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/april02/dxbible/

_______

Msgr. Camille Perl, Vice President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (PCED) has recently responded with a letter dated May 23, 2008, to questions I invoked regarding the official canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X and those Catholics who attend their chapels to fulfill their Sunday obligation.

[Msgr. Camille Perl wrote:] Statements made by Cardinal Castrillón need to be understood in a technical, canonical sense. Stating that the Society of St. Pius X "is not in formal schism" is to say that there has been no official declaration on the part of the Holy See that the Society of St. Pius X is in schism. Up to now, the Church has sought to show the maximum charity, courtesy and consideration to all those involved with the hope that such a declaration will not eventually be necessary.

[T]he Masses offered by the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are valid, but illicit, i.e., contrary to Canon Law. The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony, however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid.

While it is true that participation in the Mass at chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute "formal adherence to the schism" (cf. Ecclesia Dei 5, c), such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church. While we hope and pray for a reconciliation with the Society of St. Pius X, the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" cannot recommend that members of the faithful frequent their chapels . . . We deeply regret this situation and pray that soon a reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X with the Church may come about, but until such time the explanations which we have given remain in force.

As we already stated to you in our letter of 4 July 2007: "This Pontifical Commission does its best to transmit responses which are in full accord with the magisterium and the present canonical practices of the Catholic Church. One should accept them with docility and can act upon them with moral certainty." We would further add that no dicastery of the Holy See will give other responses than those which we have given here.

Brian Mershon, PCED confirms officially: Society of St. Pius X within the Church, not in formal schism; Catholics commit no sin nor incur any canonical penalty for Mass attendance, http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mershon/080711

_______

I want to state that I do not condemn the position of the SSPX since it was our own position for 20 years. During most of these years, it is my opinion that I, personally, and traditional Catholics in general, tended to live a 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism'.

This means living the Catholic faith as if there were no Pope or hierarchy to whom we were bound to be submissive and from whom we were bound to receive authorisation for our activities. It is when we accept that he is the Pope in name alone, but practically we reduce his authority over us to nearly nothing at all. For example, when the Archbishop consecrated the four bishops against the explicit will of Pope John Paul II. I think that this was 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' in action. When Catholic life had come to this state, jurisdiction is not even an issue. The issue was living to survive the madness that was infesting the Church. Was 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' right or wrong? I cannot answer and I do not judge it. It was the way many of us survived.

From the moment one recognises Benedict XVI as truly the Pope, 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' gives way to 'Practical Papal Catholicism'; it is inevitable. Even though there be a war raging about us in the Church, we still have to make the move towards the Barque of Peter by abandoning 'practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' for 'Practical Papal Catholicism' where the Pope has primacy of jurisdiction over each one of us. We join ranks with him for our own salvation; and after that, we join ranks with him in the battle for the life of the Church. . . . however one understands the last 20 years, something new has begun with Pope Benedict XVI and the tide has turned.

For 20 years we have been living in a state of necessity where we lacked authorisation for what we needed, particularly for the Heavenly Bread, confessions, marriages and religious professions. We did as we could. We presumed authorisation for everything we needed. It was not the best situation, but we did what we did because we could not see any other way of surviving.

Then Pope Benedict XVI noticed us and in a clear voice he announced through the Motu Proprio that the old Mass was authorised and that he would give us all that we need and more: Mass, Ritual, jurisdiction for Confessions, marriages, religious professions and the exclusive use of the 1962 Missal in our communities. It is clear that he knows that the war is not over since he is himself working at restoring all things in Christ. He calls us to answer his call and accept the bread he offers us in abundance from his open arms.

Fr. Michael Mary FSSR, Supplied Jurisdiction or Fresh Bread Through the Back Window, http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2008/07/supplied-jurisdiction-or-fresh-bread.html

Look7777777 – Culture Watch – 2008.07.18

Many sympathetic commentators, who didn’t bother to read the speech [Benedict XVI’s Faith, reason and the university: memories and reflections given at the University of Regensburg on September 12, 2006], concluded that the main point of Benedict’s address was to denounce the use of violence in the service of religion. That is certainly a good secondary lesson to take from his remarks, but the full text makes it very clear that Benedict, like the emperor [Manuel II Paleologus], was using the example of violence simply to introduce his broader point: that “not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature.”

For a dialogue to take place, three conditions are necessary:

First, both sides must be interested in pursuing the truth, which requires acknowledging that there is such a thing as truth and that it can be known (or at least approached) through reason.

Second, both sides must represent their own positions truthfully (which also requires that those positions be expressed rationally), and without any intent to deceive. And

Third, each side must be able to take the other’s claims at face value, as truly representing the other’s position.

In De Potentia, St. Thomas Aquinas contrasts the Muslim view of physical causality with the Christian one, pointing out that Muslims believe that Allah interposes himself at every point in the chain of causality, while Christians believe that natural objects can act under their own power.

Few people, however, have explored the moral implications of the Muslim understanding of physical causality. To take Aquinas’s example, if I were to take this lighter and apply the flame to this sheet of paper, everyone in this room would assume that, everything being normal, the paper would ignite—and it does. It took no special act of God to cause the paper to burn; in fact, all other things being equal, it would have required His intervention to prevent a fire, just as He intervened when Nebuchanezzer threw the three youths into the furnace. According to the Muslim view, however, when I strike the lighter, Allah has to decide whether the flint will spark, and whether the spark will ignite the fuel. When I apply the flame to the paper, Allah must decide whether the paper will ignite. If it does catch fire, it is because Allah willed that each in this series of natural acts would occur; if it does not, it is because Allah willed that the paper would not burn.

Just as Christians believe that we are made in the image and likeness of God, Muslims see themselves as a reflection of Allah. And as we wish to conform our will to God’s Will, they attempt to conform their wills to Allah. But here, the similarities end. If Allah’s will, unlike God’s, is not bound up with rationality, then the discerning of that will takes a very different shape. In attempting to understand God’s Will, Christians can turn to the world around us, to natural law, to history, to tradition. We see the rationality—the consistent reasonableness—of God’s Will in the world that He created. But in Islam, the appearance of order is only that—an appearance. To the extent that the created world seems rational, it is only because Allah wishes it to appear so. His will could change at any moment, however—and the new order, or lack thereof, that he would create would be just as “right” as this one.

. . . logos, Pope Benedict reminds us, also means reason. “In the beginning was Reason”—not the modern, narrow, scientific conception of reason, which places reason at odds with faith, but the classical and medieval conception of reason, which accepts faith as the “evidence of things not seen.”

Where Islam is in power, it must dominate, to the exclusion of any other faith. The God of Christianity loves man, so much so that He sent His only Son to die for us; and He wants us to love Him in return, freely and unreservedly. Allah, in his capriciousness, demands total submission to his will, and so sharia is not a law of love, but of fear. For Christians, the fear of God is only the beginning of wisdom; it is charity—love—which is the bond of perfection.

Scott P. Richert, Pope Benedict XVI and Islam: Allah the Irrational, http://www.takimag.com/site/article/pope_benedict_xvi_and_islam_allah_the_irrational

_______

[...] nasz ulubiony prezes NBP Skrzypek [...] [usiłuje] ostatnio zmniejszyć inflację metodą najczęściej stosowaną – zmianą metody jej liczenia.

NBP zwięźle zawiadamia, że od czerwca [2008 r.] będzie używał „nowej miary inflacji bazowej” po wyłączeniu cen żywności i energii. Oops, to od razu wyostrza uwagę... „W ramach nowej miary inflacji bazowej z koszyka CPI wyłączane będą – oprócz cen żywności i napojów bezalkoholowych – także ceny energii, na które składają się ceny paliw oraz ceny nośników energii (gaz, energia elektryczna, opał etc.)” – ujawnia komunikat.

Jak widać, NBP nauczył się w końcu czegoś od Amerykanów. Wyrzuć z koszyka inflacyjnego wszystko, co rośnie, i oznajmij, że inflacja jest zero. No dobrze, może niezupełnie zero, bo to zanadto podejrzane. Ale co na przykład na przyzwoite 3%? Wygląda akurat w sam raz. Co, jeszcze za dużo? No to wywalmy jeszcze coś, co wzrasta! Zdaniem prezesa Skrzypka będzie to dostosowanie polskiej metodologii do praktyki międzynarodowej. Absolutnie. Z tym, że ujęlibyśmy to bardziej bezpośrednio – skoro inni kłamią jak bure suki, to i my nie będziemy gorsi.

Cynik9, Masowanie inflacji, czyli zasieki na tygrysy, http://dwagrosze.blogspot.com/2008/06/masowanie-inflacji.html

_______

Only this Christmas I was told in a toy-shop that not so many bows and arrows were being made for little boys; because they were considered dangerous. It might in some circumstances be dangerous to have a little bow. It is always dangerous to have a little boy. But no other society, claiming to be sane, would have dreamed of supposing that you could abolish all bows unless you could abolish all boys. . . . the modern mind seems quite incapable of distinguishing between the means and the end, between the organ and the disease, between the use and the abuse; and would doubtless break the boy along with the bow, as it empties out the baby with the bath.

. . . the first and most self-evident truth is that, of all the things a child sees and touches, the most dangerous toy is about the least dangerous thing. There is hardly a single domestic utensil that is not much more dangerous than a little bow and arrow. He can burn himself in the fire, he can boil himself in the bath, he can cut his throat with the carving-knife, he can scald himself with the kettle, he can choke himself with anything small enough, he can break his neck off anything high enough. He moves all day long amid a murderous machinery, as capable of killing and maiming as the wheels of the most frightful factory. He plays all day in a house fitted up with engines of torture like the Spanish Inquisition. And while he thus dances in the shadow of death, he is to be saved from all the perils of possessing a piece of string, tied to a bent bough or twig. When he is a little boy it generally takes him some time even to learn how to hold the bow. When he does hold it, he is delighted if the arrow flutters for a few yards like a feather or an autumn leaf. But even if he grows a little older and more skilful and has yet not learned to despise arrows in favour of aeroplanes, the amount of damage he could conceivably do with his little arrows would be about one hundredth part of the damage that he could always in any case have done by simply picking up a stone in the garden.

Now you do not keep a little boy from throwing stones by preventing him from ever seeing stones. You do not do it by locking up all the stones in the Geological Museum, and only issuing tickets of admission to adults. You do not do it by trying to pick up all the pebbles on the beach, for fear he should practise throwing them into the sea. You do not even adopt so obvious and even pressing a social reform as forbidding roads to be made of anything but asphalt, or directing that all gardens shall be made on clay and none on gravel. You neglect all these great opportunities opening before you; you neglect all these inspiring vistas of social science and enlightenment. When you want to prevent a child from throwing stones, you fall back on the stalest and most sentimental and even most superstitious methods. You do it by trying to preserve some reasonable authority and influence over the child. You trust to your private relation with the boy, and not to your public relation with the stone. And what is true of the natural missile is just as true, of course, of the artificial missile; especially as it is a very much more ineffectual and therefore innocuous missile. A man could be really killed, like St. Stephen, with the stones in the road. I doubt if he could be really killed, like St. Sebastian, with the arrows in the toyshop. But anyhow the very plain principle is the same. If you can teach a child not to throw a stone, you can teach him when to shoot an arrow; if you cannot teach him anything, he will always have something to throw. . . . The truth is that all sorts of faddism, both official and theoretical, have broken down the natural authority of the domestic institution, especially among the poor; and the faddists are now casting about desperately for a substitute for the thing they have themselves destroyed. The normal thing is for the parents to prevent a boy from doing more than a reasonable amount of damage with his bow and arrow; and for the rest, to leave him to a reasonable enjoyment of them. Officialism cannot thus follow the life of the individual boy, as can the individual guardian. You cannot appoint a particular policeman for each boy, to pursue him when he climbs trees or falls into ponds. So the modern spirit has descended to the indescribable mental degradation of trying to abolish the abuse of things by abolishing the things themselves; which is as if it were to abolish ponds or abolish trees.

Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Fancies Versus Fads, Chapter: The Terror of a Toy, http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/books/Fancies_Versis_Fads.txt

_______

Being married to a man is one thing, but raising five of them is quite another. I remember staring in disbelief at my blue pajama-ed infant son over a decade ago and being overcome with terror. A daughter had been familiar territory, but what did I know about raising one of these?

I learned by doing, though. By doing, I learned not only something about what these boy creatures were like, but also something about myself: that, even if I don’t always understand their inner workings, that even if I might never share their particular passion for switchblades, I love boys. I love their boyish passions, their whole-hearted generosity, and their fiery sense of justice. It is through my own family that God continues to challenge me to grow, to change, and to appreciate more fully the vastness His creation.

Before I left for my run the other day, Dan demonstrated how to flip open the jackknife. You know, for when the bad guy attacked.

“Okay,” I consented. “Now show me how to close it.”

“You don’t need to know that,” my logical man explained. “You’ll leave it in him.”

Danielle Bean, Oh Boy, http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1338&Itemid=48

_______

Cæremoniale Episcoporum (Liber I, XII.5.) [says]: "In the interior also, if it can be done, the walls of the chuch shall be covered with rich hangings (aulæis), the tribunes however with pure silken ones, or nobler curtains, in the colour of the other paraments, according to the quality of the feast." – a reader from Malta has sent in some spectacular images of churches in Malta and Gozo in festal decorations. We may give thanks to God that the Catholic people of Malta has preserved and kept alive this precious heritage.

Gregor Kollmorgen, More on Wall Hangings for Solemn Liturgical occasions – the Splendour of Malta, http://thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/2008/06/more-on-wall-hangings-for-solemn.html

_______

. . . any realistic barrier to the wholesale "chipping" of Western citizens is not technological but cultural. It relies upon the visceral reaction against the prospect of being personally marked as one component in a massive human inventory.

Today we might strongly hold such beliefs, but sensibilities can, and probably will, change. How this remarkable attitudinal transformation is likely to occur is clear to anyone who has paid attention to privacy issues over the past quarter-century. There will be no 3 a.m. knock on the door by storm troopers come to force implants into our bodies. The process will be more subtle and cumulative, couched in the unassailable language of progress and social betterment, and mimicking many of the processes that have contributed to the expansion of closed-circuit television cameras and the corporate market in personal data.

A series of tried and tested strategies will be marshalled to familiarize citizens with the technology. These will be coupled with efforts to pressure tainted social groups and entice the remainder of the population into being chipped.

An increasing array of hypothetical chipping scenarios will also be depicted in entertainment media, furthering the familiarization process.

In the West, chips will first be implanted in members of stigmatized groups. Pedophiles are the leading candidate for this distinction, although it could start with terrorists, drug dealers, or whatever happens to be that year's most vilified criminals. Short-lived promises will be made that the technology will only be used on the "worst of the worst." In fact, the wholesale chipping of incarcerated individuals will quickly ensue, encompassing people on probation and on parole.

Employers will start to expect implants as a condition of getting a job. The U.S. military will lead the way, requiring chips for all soldiers as a means to enhance battlefield command and control — and to identify human remains. From cooks to commandos, every one of the more than one million U.S. military personnel will see microchips replace their dog tags.

Following quickly behind will be the massive security sector. Security guards, police officers, and correctional workers will all be expected to have a chip. Individuals with sensitive jobs will find themselves in the same position.

In situations where the chips are clearly forced on people, the judgments will deem them to be undeniable infringements of the right to privacy. However, they will then invoke the nebulous and historically shifting standard of "reasonableness" to pronounce coerced chipping a reasonable infringement on privacy rights in a context of demands for governmental efficiency and the pressing need to enhance security in light of the still ongoing wars on terror, drugs, and crime.

At this juncture, an unfortunately common tragedy of modern life will occur: A small child, likely a photogenic toddler, will be murdered or horrifically abused. It will happen in one of the media capitals of the Western world, thereby ensuring non-stop breathless coverage. Chip manufactures will recognize this as the opportunity they have been anticipating for years. With their technology now largely bug-free, familiar to most citizens and comparatively inexpensive, manufacturers will partner with the police to launch a high-profile campaign encouraging parents to implant their children "to ensure your own peace of mind."

Special deals will be offered. Implants will be free, providing the family registers for monitoring services. Loving but unnerved parents will be reassured by the ability to integrate tagging with other functions on their PDA so they can see their child any time from any place.

Any prospect of removing the chip will become increasingly untenable, as having a chip will be a precondition for engaging in the main dynamics of modern life, such as shopping, voting, and driving.

The remaining holdouts will grow increasingly weary of Luddite jokes and subtle accusations that they have something to hide. Exasperated at repeatedly watching neighbours bypass them in "chipped" lines while they remain subject to the delays, inconveniences, and costs reserved for the unchipped, they too will choose the path of least resistance and get an implant.

In one generation, then, the cultural distaste many might see as an innate reaction to the prospect of having our bodies marked like those of an inmate in a concentration camp will likely fade.

Kevin Haggerty, One generation is all they need, http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/136744

_______

JC DENTON
How about a report on yourself?

MORPHEUS
I was a prototype for Echelon IV. My instructions are to amuse visitors with information about themselves.

JC DENTON
I don't see anything amusing about spying on people.

MORPHEUS
Human beings feel pleasure when they are watched. I have recorded their smiles as I tell them who they are.

JC DENTON
Some people just don't understand the dangers of indiscriminate surveillance.

MORPHEUS
The need to be observed and understood was once satisfied by God. Now we can implement the same functionality with data-mining algorithms.

JC DENTON
Electronic surveillance hardly inspired reverence. Perhaps fear and obedience, but not reverence.

MORPHEUS
God and the gods were apparitions of observation, judgment, and punishment. Other sentiments toward them were secondary.

JC DENTON
No one will ever worship a software entity peering at them through a camera.

MORPHEUS
The human organism always worships. First it was the gods, then it was fame (the observation and judgment of others), next it will be the self-aware systems you have built to realize truly omnipresent observation and judgment.

JC DENTON
You underestimate humankind's love of freedom.

MORPHEUS
The individual desires judgment. Without that desire, the cohesion of groups is impossible, and so is civilization.
The human being created civilization not because of a willingness but because of a need to be assimilated into higher orders of structure and meaning.
God was a dream of good government.

A conversation between JC Denton and Morpheus AI. From Deus Ex, a computer game released in 2000.

Look7777777 – Culture Watch – 2008.06.19

Pierwsza pigułka antykoncepcyjna znalazła się w sprzedaży w roku 1960. [...] Sprawą musiał zająć się Kościół katolicki. W 1963 r. Jan XXIII powołał komisję ekspertów, która miała przygotować materiały, umożliwiające zajęcie przez Kościół jasnego stanowiska.

Po śmierci Jana XXIII trudne zadanie katolickiej oceny antykoncepcji spadło na Pawła VI. Nowy papież poszerzył skład specjalnej komisji. Znaleźli się w niej eksperci w dziedzinie biologii, medycyny, seksuologii, demografii, teolodzy oraz pary małżeńskie. Jej prace budziły ogromne zainteresowanie. Działała pod presją mediów. W atmosferze, jaka wówczas panowała, mało kto zdziwił się, że po kilku latach pracy większość członków papieskiej komisji zarekomendowała Pawłowi VI uznanie metod antykoncepcyjnych za godziwe i moralnie dozwolone w małżeństwie (przynajmniej w pewnych sytuacjach i pod określonymi warunkami). Znacznie mniejsza grupa ekspertów odrzucała możliwość jakichkolwiek zmian w nauczaniu Kościoła na ten temat.

Paweł VI ogłosił jednak encyklikę całkowicie sprzeczną ze stanowiskiem większości członków papieskiej komisji, a wyniki jej prac nazwał w swym dokumencie niepewnymi i niemożliwymi do uznania za definitywne. Dlaczego? Zdaniem historyków, na postawę papieża wpłynęły dwa dokumenty. Jeden to tzw. memorandum z Ulm z roku 1967. Grupa lekarzy zwraca w nim uwagę, że przynajmniej część środków antykoncepcyjnych zabija dzieci w łonach matek. W powszechnym zachwycie środkami antykoncepcyjnym była to dla większości wiedza zupełnie nowa. O wiele większe znaczenie przypisuje się drugiemu dokumentowi, tzw. memoriałowi krakowskiemu. Opracowała go grupa polskich specjalistów z inicjatywy kard. Karola Wojtyły. Jednym z twórców tego dokumentu jest o. Karol Meissner OSB. O. Meissner wyjaśnia, że kard. Wojtyła postanowił opracować osobny dokument dla papieża, ponieważ mimo zaproszenia nie mógł wziąć udziału w prowadzonych w Rzymie pracach (najprawdopodobniej chodziło o problemy z paszportem). Chciał jednak przedstawić Ojcu Świętemu swoje stanowisko.

Tak zwany zespół krakowski powstał w roku 1966, gdy znana była duża część wniosków, do jakich doszła papieska komisja. Zdaniem o. Meissnera, Paweł VI wiedział o inicjatywie metropolity krakowskiego. „Jakie jest prawo Boże, to ja wiem, dajcie mi argumenty” – tak papież miał mówić m. in. do kard. Wojtyły.

ks. Artur Stopka, Zatrzymany pochód pigułki, http://goscniedzielny.wiara.pl/?grupa=6&art=1211525901&dzi=1104785534&idnumeru=1211521995

_______

Najnowsza powieść Cory’ego Doctorowa – „Little Brother” – już czwarty tydzień utrzymuje się w czołówce bestsellerów New York Timesa. Nieźle, jak na książkę, którą każdy może sobie pobrać za darmo w 20 formatach (np. dla iPhone, ale również jako uniksowy plik .info). Właśnie ruszyły dodruki wydania w twardej okładce, więc Tor Books zrobiło zapewne na tym tytule poważne pieniądze. Całkiem nieźle, jak na firmę, która programowo unika DRM.

[Cory Doctorow napisał:] „[...] nie uważam ebooków za substytuty książek. Nie chodzi o to, że współczesne monitory nie nadają się do czytania – ludzie mnie podobni spędzają większość czasu na czytaniu tekstu w Internecie. Większy stopień zaawansowania w informatyce pociąga za sobą jednak niskie prawdopodobieństwo zapoznawania się z dłuższymi tekstami w sieci, a to dlatego że tacy ludzie robią na swoich komputerach więcej, niż inni. Mają w tle uruchomione komunikatory, programy do poczty elektronicznej, przeglądarki, gry, korzystają z własnej biblioteki muzycznej. Im więcej rzeczy robi się na komputerze, tym większe prawdopodobieństwo, że w przeciągu pięciu czy siedmiu minut pojawi się, coś, co odciągnie nas od czytania. To właśnie dlatego komputery wyjątkowo nie nadają się do czytania dłuższych form literackich – no chyba że ma się stalową samodyscyplinę mnicha.

To dobra wiadomość dla pisarzy, bo to oznacza że ebooki tak naprawdę stanowią zachętę do kupienia wersji drukowanej (która jest tania, łatwa do zdobycia i jakże prosta w obsłudze). Elektroniczna postać książki pozwala zapoznanie się z tekstem na tyle, żeby zdecydować się (lub nie) na zakup.

Kopiowanie to naturalna czynność. Tak właśnie zdobywamy wiedzę (kopiujemy ją od rodziców, od otaczających nas ludzi). Moja pierwsza opowieść, powstała gdy miałem 6 lat, była po prostu remiksem Gwiezdnych Wojen, które dopiero co obejrzałem w kinie. Dziś, gdy Internet – ta największa maszyna kopiująca – jest już właściwie wszędzie, ten tkwiący w nas instynkt będzie tylko narastał. Nie dałbym rady powstrzymać moich czytelników przed kopiowaniem a gdybym próbował, okazałbym się hipokrytą. W wieku 17 lat robiłem składanki na taśmach audio, kserowałem komiksy i generalnie kopiowałem wszystko, co mi wpadło w ręce. Gdybym wtedy miał dostęp do Internetu, kopiowałbym na jeszcze większą skalę.”

Maciej Chojnacki, „Little Brother” czwarty tydzień na liście bestsellerów NYT, http://bytowisko.pl/?p=1084

_______

British police said they will not apologize to two Christian preachers who were threatened with arrest by a Muslim police officer for preaching Christianity in Muslim communities in the city of Birmingham.

. . . the incident occurred last February when Christian ministers Arthur Cunningham and Joseph Abraham were handing out leaflets and speaking with four Muslim youths about Christianity in Birmingham. Naeem Naguthney, a Muslim police community support officer told them to cease-and-desist from preaching to Muslims and threatened to charge them with a “hate crime.”

“He said we were in a Muslim area and were not allowed to spread our Christian message,” Cunningham told the Telegraph. “He said we were committing a hate crime by telling the youths to leave Islam and said that he was going to take us to the police station.”

Police threaten Christians for preaching in Muslim communities in Britain, http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12842

_______

If you work through the existing structures you are going to be corrupted. By working through political system that poisons the atmosphere, even the progressive organizations, you can see it even now in the US, where people on the “Left” are all caught in the electoral campaign and get into fierce arguments about should we support this third party candidate or that third party candidate. This is a sort of little piece of evidence that suggests that when you get into working through electoral politics you begin to corrupt your ideals. So I think a way to behave is to think not in terms of representative government, not in terms of voting, not in terms of electoral politics, but thinking in terms of organizing social movements, organizing in the work place, organizing in the neighborhood, organizing collectives that can become strong enough to eventually take over – first to become strong enough to resist what has been done to them by authority, and second, later, to become strong enough to actually take over the institutions.

One of the problems with dealing with anarchism is that there are many people whose ideas are anarchist, but who do not necessarily call themselves anarchists. The word was first used by Proudhon in the middle of the 19th century, but actually there were anarchist ideas that proceeded Proudhon, those in Europe and also in the United States. For instance, there are some ideas of Thomas Paine, who was not an anarchist, who would not call himself an anarchist, but he was suspicious of government. Also Henry David Thoreau. He does not know the word anarchism, and does not use the word anarchism, but Thoreau’s ideas are very close to anarchism. He is very hostile to all forms of government. If we trace origins of anarchism in the United States, then probably Thoreau is the closest you can come to an early American anarchist.

No doubt that anarchist ideas are frightening to those in power. People in power can tolerate liberal ideas. They can tolerate ideas that call for reforms, but they cannot tolerate the idea that there will be no state, no central authority. So it is very important for them to ridicule the idea of anarchism to create this impression of anarchism as violent and chaotic.

I would say, as far as means go, the idea of direct action against the evil that you want to overcome is a kind of common denominator for anarchist ideas, anarchist movements. I still think one of the most important principles of anarchism is that you cannot separate means and ends. And that is, if your end is egalitarian society you have to use egalitarian means, if your end is non-violent society without war, you cannot use war to achieve your end. I think anarchism requires means and ends to be in line with one another. I think this is in fact one of the distinguishing characteristics of anarchism.

I think our first step is to organize ourselves and protest against existing order – against war, against economic and sexual exploitation, against racism, etc. But to organize ourselves in such a way that means correspond to the ends, and to organize ourselves in such a way as to create kind of human relationship that should exist in future society. That would mean to organize ourselves without centralized authority, without charismatic leader, in a way that represents in miniature the ideal of the future egalitarian society. So that even if you don’t win some victory tomorrow or next year in the meantime you have created a model. You have acted out how future society should be and you created immediate satisfaction, even if you have not achieved your ultimate goal.

Rebels Against Tyranny, An Interview with Howard Zinn on Anarchism, http://counterpunch.org/vodovnik05122008.html

_______

St. Brigid’s Famine era church, located in the East Village of Manhattan and built by Irish immigrants in the mid-1800s, has been saved from the wrecking ball by an anonymous $20 million donation.

The church . . . had been earmarked for demolition since July 2006 when the Archdiocese sent in a wrecking crew with the intention of tearing it down so they could sell the property.

It was only when local residents got involved that a clause was discovered for unsafe working conditions stopping the demolition in its tracks, but not before smashing the sacred stained glass windows bearing the names of several Irish immigrants.

April Drew, Church Saved from Destruction, http://www.irishabroad.com/news/irish-voice/news/Articles/st-brigids-church290508.aspx

_______

Dopiero Kepler pokumał, że planety zasuwają po elipsach.

Przed Keplerem [...] goście zakładali, że ciała niebieskie poruszają się po torach w kształcie kół, bo koła są doskonałe, łatwo się je liczy, no i w ogóle są jakieś takie, jakie powinny być. Natomiast elipsy są krzywe, nieładne, pospolite takie zupełnie i w ogóle kto to widział, żeby ciała niebieskie krążyły po elipsach.

No, ale krążą po elipsach. Może to za bardzo ładne nie jest, ale jest prawdziwe.

Socjalizm to jest taka właśnie astronomia na kółkach. Goście sobie wymyślają, jak powinno być, i tak robią, żeby było, jak wymyślili. A jak się obliczenia nie zgadzają, to dodają kolejne epicykle i ekscentryki. I tak dodają i dodają i coraz więcej tych kółek, a każde takie kółko kosztuje.

Wyrus, Astronomia na kółkach, http://tekstowisko.blogspot.com/2007/10/astronomia-na-kkach.html

_______

Deus Ex Radio Interview, Philippe Tapon talks with Sheldon Pacotti, http://www.sheldonpacotti.com/games/KFJCdx20011104.mp3

Look7777777 – Culture Watch – 2008.06.14

[Czy Ojciec myśli o moim pokoleniu, młodzieży XXI wieku, że jest zepsute?] Wiele w tym, co mówimy, zależy od rozumienia znaczenia poszczególnych wyrazów. Co znaczy wyraz zepsuci? Czy oddaje on rzeczywistą, obecną sytuację młodego człowieka? Czy sprawiedliwą jest rzeczą wypowiadanie zdań ogólnych tam, gdzie rzeczywistość odnosić się może ewentualnie do wypadków szczególnych?

Powstaje pytanie: czy jakoś można się zaszczepić przeciw niekorzystnym skutkom [...] patologii cywilizacyjnych? Myślę, że trzeba tu uruchomić śpiące nieraz myślenie. Trzeba sobie stawiać pytania. Po pierwsze: jaki obraz człowieka przedstawia mi dany obraz czy program? Czy ten obraz mogę zaakceptować? Czy cieszyłbym się, by moi rodzice byli tacy, jak na danym obrazie? Czy mógłbym ze spokojem sumienia ten obraz proponować moim dzieciom? Czy moje dzieci mogłyby być dumne ze mnie, gdybym to ja był przedstawiony na tym obrazie? Takie myślenie nazywam rodzinnością myślenia. Po wtóre: jaką hierarchię wartości proponuje mi dany obraz (program)? Jaką wartość proponuje jako wartość najwyższą? Czy mogę się pod tą hierarchią wartości podpisać? Dlaczego? Co z tego wyniknie w moim życiu? I po trzecie: jaki wpływ ma dany obraz (program) na moje dalsze życie? Jakie cele stawiam sobie w moim życiu? W odpowiedzi na to pytanie powinienem uwzględnić perspektywę dłuższego życia, a także chwili, w której wszystkie moje wybory życiowe zostaną zweryfikowane, to znaczy chwilę zakończenia tego życia.

Są ludzie, dla których rzeczywistość seksualna stanowi tylko źródło przeżyć nie mających żadnego sensu. Są to ludzie po prostu ogromnie biedni. A jeszcze biedniejsze są ich dzieci. Z psychologicznego punktu widzenia (nie mówię teraz o wymiarze moralnym) nie jest problemem „pierwszy raz”. Problemem jest życie. Dziewczyna nigdy nie zapomina o „pierwszym razie”. Zawsze będzie on tkwił w jej emocjonalnej pamięci i będzie – niestety – wywierał wpływ na całe życie, również małżeńskie. Dla chłopaka rzeczywistym problemem jest uzależnienie od doznania seksualnego i – w związku z tym – traktowanie kobiety, dziewczyny czy żony, służebnie względem własnych potrzeb. To jest rzeczywista bieda wielu, wielu małżeństw. Jakże bym życzył przyszłym mężom i żonom, by takie doświadczenia nie były ich udziałem!

[...] sama przyjemność nie ma wartości moralnej. Wartość moralną ma czyn, któremu przyjemność towarzyszy. Jeżeli czyn jest dobry, to przyjemność jest dobra, jeśli czyn jest zły, to przyjemność jest zła.

Dziecko, które ma obowiązek obdarzania rodziców czcią, ma prawo do tego, by rodzice kształtowali głęboką więź wzajemnej miłości i oddania. Ma także prawo do tego, by rodzice nie traktowali dziecka jako wroga. A tak, niestety, traktują swoje dzieci rodzice, uciekający się do antykoncepcji. Nie można prawdziwie kochać dzieci, których możliwe rodzeństwo traktuje się jako zagrożenie! Młode pokolenie, wychowane w atmosferze antykoncepcji, jest nośnikiem głębokiego przekonania o bezsensie życia i o swojej niepotrzebności. W takich warunkach łatwo o skrzywienie uczuciowości związanej z życiem płciowym. Wszakże – właśnie ze względu na to, że to jest problem wychowania, każdemu, kto tego chce, można pomóc. Z drugiej strony, człowiek źle wychowany nie jest bezradny wobec nieprawidłowych zachowań. Możemy przecież podjąć trud samowychowania. Jesteśmy istotami wolnymi i rozumnymi. Jeżeli ktoś na skutek wadliwego wychowania nauczył się mlaskać przy jedzeniu, nie powinien tłumaczyć swego niekulturalnego zachowania tym, że się takim urodził.

Zainwestować w życie, Wywiad z o. Karolem Meissnerem OSB, http://katolik.pl/index1.php?st=artykuly&id=713

_______

What kind of theory of the world insists that houses and stocks always go up in price, whereas gas and grain prices always go down? That doesn't really make sense. A price is not set by natural law, nor are price movements intended to follow a preset pattern like the movements of stars. Prices are nothing but exchange ratios — points of agreement between buyer and seller. They reflect many factors, none of them fixed parts of the universe.

I recall once dickering with one of those insufferable car salesmen. I had my eye on some car and I said I couldn't afford it. He asked me how much I wanted to pay for this car. I said $0. He looked at me like I was crazy, but I was only telling the truth. I added that I know how much he wanted me to pay: a trillion dollars. And he reluctantly agreed. So how do the person who wants to pay $0 and the person who wants to get a trillion come to agreement? You find some meeting point in between, the point at which the car is worth more to me than the money I will give for it, and the money I will give for the car is worth more to him than the car. The resulting terms are called the price.

Jeffrey A. Tucker, What Are Just Prices?, http://www.mises.org/story/2976

_______

Red. Tomasz Wołek po bankructwie „Życia Warszawy” i „Życia” znalazł cichą przystań w stacji telewizyjnej TV-5 w charakterze dyrektora, czy może tylko kierownika literackiego. Nie sądzę, by było to zajęcie męczące, bo stacja ta puszcza głównie filmy pornograficzne, ale pewnie dlatego red. Wołek doszlusował do grona autorytetów moralnych. Podobnie jak w stadzie kur, gdzie występuje tzw. kolejność dziobania, w stadzie autorytetów moralnych również obowiązuje ścisła hierarchia. Zatem do dziobania w pierwszej kolejności uprawnione są takie osobistości, jak „drogi Bronisław”, czy red. Michnik. W drugiej – dajmy na to Władysław Bartoszewski, Tadeusz Mazowiecki, czy Ekscelencja metropolita lubelski. Dopiero po nich przychodzi kolej na „proroków mniejszych” – bo taka rangę ma chyba red. Żakowski i wreszcie – na adeptów w rodzaju red. Tomasza Wołka. Nie muszę dodawać, że w zamian za dopuszczenie do konfidencji tacy adepci muszą się nauwijać, dziobiąc według stołecznych życzeń.

Jak wiadomo, przed sformalizowaniem Anschlussu Polski do Unii Europejskiej, przygotowania do utworzenia w Polsce „Żywej Cerkwi” wchodzą w fazę decydującą. Kręcący Unią Europejską marksiści pragną bowiem zastąpić Kościół katolicki właśnie „Żywą Cerkwią” – rodzajem organizacji pozarządowej zajmującej się działalnością socjalno-rozrywkową, oczywiście bez jakichkolwiek pretensji do przywództwa moralnego, ani tym bardziej – politycznego.

Stanisław Michalkiewicz, Powtórka z Ezopa, http://www.michalkiewicz.pl/tekst.php?tekst=401

_______

I consider myself a left-libertarian. To avoid any confusion over what this may imply, I fully support private property, voluntary exchange, money, rent, employment, and so on (or more strictly speaking, I don't advocate their abolition). And I completely oppose the state. I advocate a free market in everything, from clothing and shelter to defense and arbitration.

All libertarians, particularly market anarchists, oppose the power of the state. A lot of emphasis is placed on the power of the state and how it effects society. However, in my understanding, while the left-libertarian joins their comrades in opposing the state, they oppose the concentration of power and centralization in general. This includes the concentration or centralization of so-called "private power". While cookie-cutter anarcho-capitalists make brilliant arguments against state power, they tend to specialize so much in doing so that they may neglect the problems with the concentration of "private" power. Their libertarianism is "thin" in the sense that it is restricted to anti-statism.

The left-libertarian does not think that the results of a free market would mirror current economic conditions by any stretch of the imagination. Left-libertarians may tend to think that free competition would function as a check on the general size of economic organizations, and therefore draconian large businesses simply couldn't survive or exist. They may also be tolerant of or more open to possible "socialistic" experiments within a free market, or advocate a signficant increase in self-employment over standard wage-employment.

The left-libertarian has a much greater degree of tolerance for "socialistic" forms of organization so long as they are voluntary, while the right-libertarian considers all "socialistic" forms of organization to be inherently involuntary.

To the left-libertarian, their philosophy derives from and grew out of the old libertarian left (the mutualists, the individualist anarchists, the voluntaryists, etc.) and wouldn't exist without them. The left-libertarian sees market anarchism as having grown out of old non-state socialist traditions and is likely to see ideas such as mutualism as not really being that far off from their own position in the grand scheme of things.

The left-libertarian is much more likely to be opposed to the political process and consequentially they may not vote, argue against running for office and regularly denounce the libertarian party and reformism. The left-libertarian is a radical and a revolutionary.

Brainpolice, Left-Libertarianism, http://mises.org/Community/blogs/brainpolice/archive/2008/05/26/left-libertarianism.aspx

_______

Rob Costlow, Woods Of Chaos, 2005
http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/888

_______

Under law, during a national emergency, FEMA and its parent organization, the Department of Homeland Security, would be empowered to seize private and public property, all forms of transport, and all food supplies. The agency could dispatch military commanders to run state and local governments, and it could order the arrest of citizens without a warrant, holding them without trial for as long as the acting government deems necessary.

According to the [Wall Street] Journal, the government can now electronically monitor "huge volumes of records of domestic e-mails and Internet searches, as well as bank transfers, credit card transactions, travel, and telephone records." Authorities employ "sophisticated software programs" to sift through the data, searching for "suspicious patterns."

If previous FEMA and FBI lists are any indication, the Main Core database includes dissidents and activists of various stripes, political and tax protesters, lawyers and professors, publishers and journalists, gun owners, illegal aliens, foreign nationals, and a great many other harmless, average people.

Christopher Ketcham, The Last Roundup, http://www.radaronline.com/from-the-magazine/2008/05/government_surveillance_homeland_security_main_core_01-print.php

_______

INFORMED GUARD
Executive Order 10990. It lets us take over all modes of transportation.

NEW GUARD
FEMA can do that?

INFORMED GUARD
If the President declares an emergency. Executive Order 10995. We can take over the media.

NEW GUARD
All of it?

INFORMED GUARD
Any at all. Executive Order 10997. We can take command of natural resources.

NEW GUARD
So it's all legal.

INFORMED GUARD
The National Security Act also falls under our umbrella. And the Defense Production Act. If he plays his cards right, Walton Simons can pull off a bloodless coup.

NEW GUARD
All the better. Then we don't have to fight.

INFORMED GUARD
Exactly.

A conversation between two guards on PRCS Wall Cloud, a freighter docked at the Brooklyn Naval Shipyards. From Deus Ex, a computer game released in 2000.

„Okupacja pokojowa” w Wikipedii

Któż by się spodziewał, że termin „okupacja pokojowa” doczeka się swojego hasła w Wikipedii? Na razie tylko w polskiej wersji – http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okupacja_pokojowa. Wikipedia w języku angielskim nie notuje wyrażenia peacekeeping occupation; mamy za to „misje pokojowe”, „siły pokojowe” itd.

Bohater gry komputerowej Deus Ex, Gunther Hermann, agent UNATCO (United Nations Anti-Terrorist Coalition = Koalicja Antyterrorystyczna Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych), znany był z organizowania „okupacji pokojowych” (peacekeeping occupations).

Dla osiągnięcia „bezpiecznej, wolnej od wszelkich zagrożeń przyszłości dla całej ludzkości” UNATCO przeprowadza takie „okupacje”, których nazwa nieodparcie kojarzy się z popularnym określeniem „operacja pokojowa” (peacekeeping operation).

„Okupacje pokojowe” UNATCO polegają na dokonaniu agresji i opanowaniu jakiegoś terytorium. Jednocześnie ogłasza się, że Organizacja się prawo rozstrzygać, jaki porządek prawny winien funkcjonować na opanowanym terenie. Zazwyczaj wprowadza się tam stan wojenny, zabija lub torturuje „wywrotowców” i stosuje całą gamę innych działań wymierzonych w przeciwników zbrojnego ramienia ONZ.

(Z maila doktora More’a do współpracownika nazwiskiem Allred: „Żołnierze UNATCO otworzyli tu [w nowojorskiej Free Clinic] wczoraj interes, nazywając to »okupacją pokojową«; monitorują przepływ pacjentów – kiedy do kliniki przybywają na leczenie pewne osoby, są natychmiast zgarniane”.)

Twórcy Deus Ex pokazali ze szczegółami naturę znanych również nam „operacji pokojowych”. Określili je ironicznym mianem „okupacji pokojowych” – wskazując na wysiłki rozmaitych wydziałów propagandy, które starają się ukryć agresję i morderstwa pod płaszczykiem miłych dla ucha, „pokojowych” sformułowań.

Nazwy, nazwy... W świecie Roku 1984 Orwella istniało nawet coś takiego, jak Ministerstwo Pokoju...