On Spiritual Famine

The Bible mentions in Revelations that famine will strike the world in the end days, among other things. While this is universally taken as meaning a nutritional famine, it is clear that there is a spiritual famine of equal destructive power, if not greater. Make no mistake; there is no shortage of religion. The problem is, there is very little that is not destructive about what we call our religious institutions. They have become little more than hermetic bubbles of exclusion.

This is not news.

As we slide toward a prolonged time of excruciating trials, we go unarmed. Of course, I am not speaking of everyone, but I am forced to generalize that we are in deep trouble. One needs only look at our young people and their priorities to see what we have wrought. Though it could be argued that it could be said of any generation of the one that follows, I think the state of the entire planet shows that the writing is on the wall. But the knee-jerk response for some is to turn to our “spiritual leaders”, which is a meaningless term.

Today, political parasites disguised as “spiritual leaders” stoke the fires of discontent to their vacant throngs. The admonition of Richard III has become so: “Now is the winter of our discontent…”. The national media aids this completely and, of late, blatantly. After all, the only way to control a large population is by creating conflict among them. So these “spiritual leaders” seek power in this world, having had their collective conscience excised by greed decades ago.

In even worse moments, news anchors turn to religious “scholars” to talk about spiritual matters that are trendy. There’s nothing quite like intellectualizing the spiritual to confer oh so much validity upon it. Again, more two-dimensional people to be spokesmen for multidimensional issues. It’s like interviewing a paramecium to explain music…or a politician to explain himself.

And in politics the religious has become part of the armory. Jesus has become a weapon. I grow tired of so-called morality being injected into governance. Time and time again, in every election, what are called Christian Fundamentalists are looked upon to influence or ordain, if you will, the veracity of a given candidate. When this happens I have to wonder: why would anyone want the support of a point of view that actually anticipates the end of the world? In fact, one of the major factors influencing the Central Intelligence Agency’s blindness to the impending fall of the Soviet Union was that they were saturated with so many Fundamentalist Christians in their power structure, that they couldn’t bring themselves to believe the Soviet Union was falling. It wasn’t “supposed” to happen. It was “supposed” to bring about Armageddon.

I feel safe. Don’t you?

None of this does anything to nurture spirituality. It is impossible for affluence to give rise to the spiritual. Even Jesus said that. I contend that only true suffering and fear can jump start the spiritual famine we find ourselves in, and let me assure you the opportunity for both of those is coming very soon. This may sound negative, but it’s not. Jesus spent three days in hell before he ascended. An alcoholic must hit rock bottom before he has the spiritual awakening that will abate his disease. A dying culture must be brought to the brink – or beyond – to motivate the people to “change the towels”.

To be sure, there are powerful forces that have been at work for decades in an effort to bring about a race war, if not a civil war. In the winter of 2007, Halliburton Corporation was given a government contract to the tune of $400,000,000+ to build concentration camps in the U.S. Ostensibly, these are for the purpose of moving people into “new programs” if necessary. “Coincidentally”, in May of the same year, President Bush signed an executive order giving the president the power to declare martial law without the consent of Congress.

What exactly are we anticipating?

The spiritual famine that is pandemic in our world will inevitably lead to the massive unrest that is being prepared for in the above examples. What began as the simple lack of common courtesy, common sense, and common decency has metastasized into a spiritual cancer that is now spreading to the spinal column of our nation. And it looks like there will be no spiritual CPR, merely religious morphine to numb the pain.

What is the answer? I don’t know, and if I did I wouldn’t give it. This is an individual’s own journey. A nation of sheep will be sheared, without a doubt. What I do know is that whatever answer there is cannot be found in a book, a 12 Step program, a feel-good seminar or a relationship. For some, these things may work for a time. But only a wholesale return to our connectedness we call the spiritual can save what I am sure is the potential demise of society.

An answer? All I can say is do this at all costs, no matter what it takes. Find what is beyond the TV and the Web. Find what is beyond your stupid cell phone and your iPod. Find what is beyond your parties and your kisses.

And find what is beyond your fists.

And tell your “spiritual leaders”, “No, thanks. I can take it from here.”

(c) Andrew T. Durham, 2008

Propagandizing the American Public: The Cult of Science

And if Galileo were alive today, he'd still be condemned ... or denied funding.

It is Constitutionally illegal for the United States Government to propagandize the public. While I believe they do this anyway, that is not the point of this piece. The truth is, the government does not need to propagandize the American public. They have science, the media and no one to stop them

In true American tradition, the cult of science is propagandizing the American people. You’re in dubiously good company.

The scientific establishment has for too long put themselves in the precarious position of lying to the public. Look at NASA. Some have stated unequivocally that scientists had proven that all crop circles were man made by “pranksters”. This is flatly untrue. The huge majority of so-called crop circles are unexplained, having been created in a matter of hours, with the stems of the plant life being disrupted at the cellular level. One of the latest circles appeared in North Korea. Now, Americans, how could “pranksters” do something as intricate as a crop circle in a country where you can be shot for relatively minimal offenses, let alone a nation that is vastly difficult for our own officials to enter? You need to research the entire story before you decide that something is proven. Period. And no scientist has ever proven that all crop circles were made by hoaxers. Science, like drug addicts and alcoholics, find denial a great way of ignoring something.
Science used to be about investigating the unknown. They weren't professional debunkers.

But scientists are a cult you can’t rely upon. Since the release of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, scientists have fallen all over themselves saying the crystal skulls that exist in the world are “fake”. If one actually reads what these smock-jockeys are saying, you find that they are saying they could not have been made in the time period the are claimed to be from. That says nothing. That says what people have been asserting for decades: These things are a genuine unknown. That doesn’t mean they’re “fake”. That just means the fragile egos of the scientific priesthood can’t figure it out. Neither can any of us. So get therapy, and shut the hell up and go find a cure for something or we’ll stop our taxes from paying for your whining.

By far my favorite pseudo-discovery of science was this past year, when scientists asserted they had discovered “another universe”. If you think about this, it’s hilarious if only on a semantic level. Any idiot knows that the word “universe” means everything, everywhere. You can’t have more than one EVERYTHING. Parallel universes may exist in the same physical space, but they are part of everything, even then. No, what these childish oracles are really saying is this: “We’re saying we discovered a whole other universe because we’re rather embarrassed that we have been saying for years that we have been able to quantify, map and assert that our universe is finite.” In other words, its all a diversion from the fact that THEY WERE WRONG AND THE UNIVERSE IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THESE SHALLOW LINEAR THINKING PRIMATES THOUGHT.

People like these are terrified that there may be someone somewhere else smarter than they are. They are exactly like the hierarchy of the Vatican, or any religion. If they are seen as inferior, their fragile self-images will shatter their power on Earth. They are terrified of the so-called paranormal because it doesn’t fit their narrow paradigm of reality…or the constraints of their grant funding.

What really is going on here is that reality is far larger than we know. There is no such thing as the supernatural or the paranormal simply because these phenomena exist as part of a larger part of reality that, for some reason, seems to be bleeding more and more into our perceptions. And for countless thousands of years humans have reported all manner of apparition or being, with little or no qualms expressed by their peers until, that is, a bunch of dead German philosophers a few hundred years ago convinced us that our intellect was more important than our intuition, or our very souls. So we have paid the price by becoming soul-blind, forever divorced from our ability to entertain a much larger, more vital reality.

Some things just are. And because one chooses not to believe in a certain thing does not confer non-existence upon it. I don't know why people can't get that through their head.

As early as last summer scientists announced that they had proven that parallel universes exist. My understanding, though admittedly limited, is that this new discovery allows for the existence of parallel worlds in which every conceivable possibility plays out. This concept was long held as solely within the purview of science fiction. Yet here it is. Where do the so-called unreasonable phenomena start and where do they stop? Who judges it or those who perceive it? Certainly not reporters.

A village magistrate in a European country during World War II was told by an eye witness about the atrocities committed by the Nazis in the concentration camps. The magistrate simply could not believe the witness. Understand, he did not think he was lying. He just could not allow himself to believe it. I think many do this regularly in their blindness to the rich, teeming reality around us, seeking comfort in the ridicule, shunning the cold chill of their insignificance in the shadow of great wonder. Sadly, scientists do this regularly, depriving real investigation into the real final frontiers.

To simply dismiss the unknown because you haven’t personally experienced it is an arrogance that is both pathetic and poignant at the same time. As an example, ask yourself this: how many credible, sane eyewitnesses does it take to convict someone of murder in this country? One? Two? Hundreds of thousands of people have seen UFO’s, the majority of whom were sane, credible and some were trained observers. Yet this is discarded out of hand. This makes no sense. None. Let me say again: simply because you choose not to believe in something does not confer non-existence upon it. Things just may not depend on your belief to exist. Imagine that. And even if UFO’s are not machines from another world, no scientist would say that there are no unidentified objects seen in the sky, no matter what they were. UFO means: unidentified flying object. It doesn’t mean: Holy crap this is an alien ship. It simply means no one knows what it is.

Wombats exist. I’ve seen pictures and some film. Thousands if not millions of people have seen wombats. But I haven’t. What if I chose not to believe in wombats, simply because I have not experienced one up close? That would just be silly.

Damn right.

I suppose the ultimate expression of the supernatural would be God. I’m not going to get into an ontological debate. I will, however, say this: God is to be experienced and seen in the swirl of events that form the tapestry of our lives. A professor of mine in college called it “radical mystery”, which is to say God is that which cannot be defined or comprehended, yet we as human beings must suspend our desire to classify and accept that we cannot know or comprehend what God is. In effect, it is a surrender to the unknown, something we all must do eventually.

Atheists amuse me in that they are the eternal children who never got that train set they wanted for Christmas when they were a kid, so they take it out by not believing in anything. It is a bittersweet blindness that consumes them, one which can create a husk where a man once stood. This optional blindness usually culminates in the definitive statement: “I don’t believe in God”, at which point I reply, “I’d be more concerned about whether God believes in YOU.”

I mean, even Ray Charles could see that when he was alive. What does that make you?


(c) Andrew T. Durham 2008

The Army of Money

In a war of secret souls,
When all that can remain in the end
Is rust and blood,
The instruments of the end,
However come upon,
Are at the expense of the forgotten;
To be forever debated
In the dimly lit halls of our tabloid age,
Never to be told in truth and honor,
Never to be told in truth and honor.

And the obituary page is our black wall of carved names,
With no mourners but those we have touched,
And the icy stare of those we have wronged,
Making us the destitute sages of forbidden wisdom,
Until all that has gone before
Spirals into the swirling vortex of resentment,
Into the swirling vortex of resentment.

But perhaps in some distant future -
Maybe on some crisp autumn day,
With the painful blue sky illuminating the pallet earth -
Our descendants will expose the army of money,
And its clandestine sentinels that brandish chests with medals,
And bright red ties,
Forever feeding the starved
With the very flame that burns their spirit,
Living, never changing, in every neighborhood;
Every studio apartment;
Every single skull
Bending in silent servitude to the army of money.

All that is left,
After this holocaust of the soul,
Is the very silence within where the Prophets heard voices.

© Andrew T. Durham, 2007

Why is Dressing Down the New Dressing Up? by Steve Amoia and Andrew T. Durham

Even as something as monumental as the twilight of the American way of life stares us all in the face, some time should be spent on the arguably trivial point of the way we dress ourselves. It has been said "The clothing makes the man". Well, that may be. But today the man makes the clothing...or males, anyway. More, they design it. The point is that, coupled with the complete lack of common courtesy, common decency and common sense in this waning culture, the "insult to injury" shows itself in what we can now call our National Dishevelment.

Not too long ago the unshaven look became the norm. Now, multiple face piercings are a plus in some industries (albeit not in the industries involving electrical work). The simple civility of showing respect to others by respecting your appearance - which has been replaced by so-called "fashion" - has been lost. Apparently the need has arisen for our populace to express themselves by how closely they can mimic the homeless.

Have you ever see those old newsreels of American baseball games? All of the spectators were dressed to the nines. Compare that to what we see today. People don't respect themselves in the same way. It is as if they go to great strides to dress down, sloppily, or to follow the latest fashion trends by someone in Milan or Paris. Who then changes their minds next year to tell us what is now in fashion. As Forrest Gump might have said, "Shallow is as shallow does." But designers cater to an appetite to conform. Even in the most self-absorbed place on earth: North America. If a famous fashion designer said, "Men should wear Fedoras, and women should wear white gloves," guess what we would see on the streets on America? Rugged individualism, aka "The Marlboro Man," has yielded to robotic conformity based upon the judgment of strangers.

Adults Who Dress Like Children

For example, adult men wearing baseball caps backwards and indoors, failure to comb their hair properly, and wearing dress shirts outside of their trousers. Adult women showing inappropriate bare skin, undergarments, tattoos in an office setting or in public. And we will politely dance around those with enormous (as the British would say) "sit-upons" crammed into tight jeans. In the United States, there is a general lack of respect and civility for other people. We convey that by how we dress. Sadly, the standard has declined in massive proportions. "There is no more civility in this society." Coach Joe Paterno on "The Charlie Rose Show." That is so true in so many ways. And never.....EVER...complement someone on how they look. The severe irony of this is that they will say "What do you mean by that?". Which means two things: a) they know they look ridiculous and b) you're headed for a harassment suit, pick the category.

Why Has Prison Culture Gone Mainstream?

Andrew was walking down the street recently, and a police officer was talking to a rookie, explaining the real reason why young men wear their pants halfway down. Such a display is a prison code, which means a willingness to engage in a certain activity. Andrew - unable to let this go - stopped and said how pleased he was that someone knew the real reason for that behavior. But why was the behavior adopted and subsequently accepted in the first place? The same with torn jeans, dirty sweat pants (and don't get us started on the backward baseball cap) that used to be associated with personal shame and lack of communal respect are now common fare in public. Is Sunday "best" even a viable option any further? No, because anything related to Sunday has been rendered filth by the ACLU. And, as we all know, they run Newspeak.

Tattoos in Suburbia

It seems that if you don't have a tattoo, or "body art,"' it is the exception. Suburban women, with kids in tow, have a new acceptable fashion statement: The "tramp stamp." Or images sketched on their bare shoulders. What message does that send to their children? Add low rise jeans that leave nothing to the imagination, along with blouses that are not tucked in. Perhaps in strict Islamic societies, women cover themselves because they understand that certain things are not for the whole world to see. But in North America, what used to be acceptable at the beach is now seen routinely in offices or the local shopping malls. What was de rigueur in red light districts is now as common as a barber shop on Main Street.

Flip Flops at the White House

In 2005, a group of college students from Northwestern University's womens championship lacrosse team went to the White House. In a photograph that was widely circulated, many were wearing flip flops. Parents spend thousands of dollars on college tuition so that their children can attend a "good school," but is it too much trouble to teach them to show the President of the United States a modicum of respect? Were it 10 years earlier, it was apparent that clothing was optional in the Oval Office, however.

In a recent photo by the Politico, Congressional staffers were seen changing their flip flops before entering the Longworth House Office Building. "Robert Primus has a pet peeve he is reminded of between May and September. 'I actually have a problem with how most offices dress or how they allow their offices to dress,' said Primus, chief of staff for Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.). 'I don't care if it's summertime or not. I always say that staff should not look like tourists' he added."

The Workplace

Work is not a playground or an extension of our homes. Despite those who receive constant calls for personal matters, or who bring their private lives into full public view. It is curious to watch shows such as "Mad Men" to see what was an acceptable dress code back in the 1960s compared to now. If you walk into a McDonald's, you will see the staff dressed very neatly and with ties in many cases. It sends the message that they have self-respect, along with a high regard for their customers. Despite earning minimum wage, they display a much higher standard than we see in "Casual Corporate America." Because wouldn't we expect jeans, tee shirts, and flip flops at the most famous fast food restaurant in the world? They don't have to sell us anything except the food, but they go the extra mile. But, alas, this is not consistent in all McDonald's. Nor is the quality of the food. What you're selling should be reflected by the people selling it, should it not?

Is it too much to ask outside of McDonald's? Is that too much to ask in an era of political correctness and the suffocation of values for the simple tapestry of appearing with genuine character to our fellows to have at least some meaning?

"The difference between style and fashion is quality." - Giorgio Armani

"I dress for the image. Not for myself, not for the public, not for fashion, not for men." - Marlene Dietrich

"Got to be good looking ‘cause he's so hard to see.." - Lennon/McCartney

"I see that the fashion wears out more apparel than the man." - William Shakespeare

"A fashion is nothing but an induced epidemic." - George Bernard Shaw

But let us close (clothes?) this erudite commentary with the eternal Dante:

"When I had journeyed half of our life's way, I found myself within a shadowed forest, for I had lost the path that does not stray. Ah, it is hard to speak of what it was, that savage forest dense and difficult, which even in recall renews my fear: so bitter - death is hardly more severe! But to retell the good discovered there, I'll also tell of other things I saw." - Dante's Inferno, Canto I.

Dante had no idea. He didn't have to walk behind some people. And McDonald's was but a dream.

Steve Amoiai's website is sanstefano.com; Andrew T. Durham's is andrewtdurham.blogspot.com/