Democracy Divided

Solomon’s Dilemma 

Often when making a decision, it may become advisable and even necessary to visually project that if a particular scenario plays out to its logical conclusion, what are the ramifications and unintended consequences created. Next, without any consideration for the standard of evidence required to prove or disprove an assertion, it must be presented to be evaluated.

If such favorable evidence exists for consideration, why would it not be presented regarding voter fraud and election indiscretions as claimed? Denials of a result without counter-evidence are just outlandish claims or machinations of not accepting defeat.

It is a delusion that you were not defeated or could not have been defeated, especially when performing your personal best, although you were out-performed. 

Assuming any of these bellyaches which were repeatedly denounced and rebuked by authorities mostly considered favorable to you had any merit or sliver of truth, they indeed would have been upheld or revealed by now.

A preferred scenario to invalidate or rectify an election dispute instead of presenting evidence was to overthrow the Capitol violently and forcibly install Trump. First, however, it must be further explored for feasibility.

Assuming Ex-President Trump were to be installed as some form of ultimate authority by the violent dissent and frenzy of his followers after overtaking the Capitol and its politicians. What would that authority or title be? Would there be future elections?

To prevent Democrats from ever being able to ruin the country, would it then be a one-party Republican union? How would the majority and larger number of voters who rejected Trump be conceded?

A one-party political system is a monarch or dictatorship, especially if installed as a violent toppling of the existing government. These actions would exempt democracy from being practiced. Historically speaking, not many dictators have been democratically voted out after dissatisfaction arises among those who forcibly installed them.

I would assume then that there would probably be no need for the Senate, a House of Representatives, or Supreme Court since the boss would be running things. A new governmental structure would have to be established, solidifying his hold over the government and people, usually involving military obedience and gun control. He could and would not risk what happened for him to occur against him, including freedom.

It would seemingly invite military action against segments of the public deemed to be insurrectionists to your insurrection. Government, Military, and Law Enforcement would have to purge their ranks of sympathizers partial to democracy and the ballot box.

Many who fled these regimes worldwide would now be subjected to it in America, some by their own violent hands. So at least there will be something to compare it to when wondering what’s the impact on Freedom and Democracy.

The societal echelon would reflect the prevailing correction of the racial pecking order restoring America to immoral greatness again. Some religious Freedoms and groups would most certainly not be tolerated at all, hopefully amongst them, not yours, of course.

Returning to a time of core values might be a time that did not include acceptance of you. Remember when those core values did not trust a catholic to be President when JFK ran? At what point might your Republican fervor and ideology divert from the mainstream to exclude yourself?

Further assuming other implications such as the economic impact and the resulting global disruptions caused by a government overthrow is first and foremost the certainty that an unstable republic could no longer be the default currency of the world.

This action alone would overnight send markets crashing, devalue U.S. currency, annihilate retirements, wipe out pension funds, trigger government defaults, and collapse the economy. Perhaps it would even allow the likes of China to gain world dominance, and things would undoubtedly be different around here then.

The uncertainty it would create in the global economy for civil war to emerge in America is the most ingenious method to influence a conceptual change in politics and devaluation of money, not to mention political strength. Without hard asset value or fiat currency, the alternative is implementing a digital-only currency with no value except for perceived with controlled access.

Crushing financial and economic devaluations of banks, securities, debt, credit sources, mortgages, transportation, businesses, and insurance industries surely would suffer substantial losses.

On the other hand, the Covid 19 virus damage to the economy would pale compared to civil war notwithstanding dealing with Covid simultaneously. We would be sitting ducks while being too busy fighting amongst ourselves.

Medicaid and Medicare would most likely be disrupted severely, and methods of payment and delivery of medication and medical services. With the transportation of food and goods decimated, online delivery of products extinct, and civil unrest-related safety hazards magnified, the chaos would all need to be calculated.

If you thought Covid had you afraid to go outside and closed things down, think again. What company or currency would be sustainable if the government lost its spending and buying power and compromises to the operating systems that facilitate them.

The labor force would be made totally unstable and fractured. Additionally, Federal aid to states and cities uncertain, ceasing of federally funded or subsidized programs, societal disorders and criminal desperation spiked, despair for personal survival widespread, and the total dysfunction of the judicial, criminal, and penal systems across the nation simultaneously destroyed.

The power grid, water systems, and sewage and waste systems would cease to function or be sporadic.
Consider your subgroup treatment under democracy and then reimagine it without.

Sexual preference, sexual identities, interracial unions, racial protections, or religious freedoms, for example, which is not the consensus among the typical insurrectionist tolerances, would likely be trampled as your right not to be infringed upon.

Wherever your conduct diverts from these minority voter’s preferences as not aligning with their historic racist, sexist, or caste system indulgences or beliefs, what protections from persecution would exist for your subgroup? If you need a hint or assurances reflect on history, you would certainly be relegated back to the dungeon of society.

Once subjected to the imposed conservative values heavily influenced by so-called Christian values and enforced by radical violence and racist suppression follows the forced conversion and acceptance of a heritage steeped in the dormant biases of the past.

This practice has been preferred, and escape has proven to be quite elusive. The escalation and justification are moral and patriotic values under the cloak of religion manifested in racism, exploitation, sexism, and inequality as it always has been. Only blatantly and without remorse again under the new regime MAGA style.

Now those advantages can be relied upon by you with those nostalgic yearnings no longer frozen in the past. So great is this prevailing denial and deception; some are delusionally and utterly convinced the election was rigged against the restoration of division instead of its repudiation.
The variance within the ranks of those who would collectively argue election fraud fractionally disagree to the extent and manner it could be proven except as established by force.

This sense of acceptability on display now makes it comfortable again to proudly proclaim what was only allowed to be shamefully whispered. Backed by patriotic proclamations and First Amendment rights threatens any opposition that attempts to change this stagnant illusion of time and detachment from progression.

With your quality of life now no longer threatened by the advancement of other people but secured by the systematic advantages and suppression of other’s fair opportunity. Home of the brave’s valor bolstered by Second Amendment rights instead of the quality of your ability.

Most nationalities have been discriminated against at some point in their history, especially their origins in America, to now claim inclusion and exemption by white membership. That said, immigration standards would have to absolutely be adjusted to reflect the caliber of people worthy of populating the new republic.

What to do with the unworthy who are here, enslave them again? The moral insurrectionist would definitely have their immigration limits and standards. It most certainly would not be reflected by those who stormed the Capitol, whom then-President Trump complained how raggedy they were dressed for an overthrow while disguised as bums. Could this be a time when he was right, no?

No longer being a democracy, it then follows that Democracy could not possibly be encouraged or supported anywhere worldwide, having a collateral effect on other countries’ sovereignty. Moreover, the global political reverberations caused even beyond those mentioned could not be calculated by any measure.

There must be a comparative assessment of the purpose, benefit, and damages probable in this pursuit of the forceful irrational implementation of a minority of voter’s candidate. The succession of states is even more problematic, but I guess he could be the President of Texas or Florida.

If there is evidence as to why the overwhelming majority of voters’ democratic and constitutional rights should be discarded to install a minority of voters’ preferences, let it be presented.

If the bombastic claims have not been presented as proof by now, it may be time to shit or get off the pot if you are not going to use it. But, if it is to be told, then tell it and back it up with proof just as you would request of those who you would doubt.

It is way past time to put up or shut up. The shattering of the country has begun to show its fragility when force is the first discourse for the disappointment of legal voter choices of elected officials instead of providing the proof.

Four years in power and favorable supporters inclined to protect and promote Trumpism by concerted efforts to stack the deck to cajole and coerce the election outcome also failed. Still, there are no claims that withstood judicial repudiation.

Beyond the rhetoric, there must be a recognition that sometimes your team doesn’t win, and the officiating was just despite your wishful outcome. There are always reasons why someone won, and someone lost aside from someone has to look at themself first.

Consider it could have had something to do with dissatisfaction with Trump’s lies, judgment, or performance. But, with clear conscious and honest reflection, the impact of the mishandling of the Covid-19 virus, the racial discord, harsh policies of implementation of immigration, indifference to truthfulness and accountability, international political scorn, and the attack on voter confidence which led to a historical engagement of voters has to be factored into the loss.

The current condition of Lenin-styled scorched Earth tactics from a vindictive now-former President should expose all that needs to be known.

Brought into focus and reason, this version of society brought about by a treasonous insurrection aftermath would be deeply unfavorable to most. The majority forced adherence would, I assume, not be contrary to the spirit of the insurrection of Democracy and that brand of governmental control.

Many politicians have come and gone. But, no matter how popular or unpopular they were, the democratic republic has stood as a representation of the people’s will. Democracy is about collectively agreed-upon rules of conduct even when your choice is not preferred. It is not the galvanizing of force but instead consensus of votes.

The reality is a self-inflicted destructive feeding frenzy where extensive devastation and destruction prevail, or an eager opportunistic regime moves in to conquer in the chaos. This is not about one man but about how he created an atmosphere to cultivate and encourage an undercurrent of sentiment that frankly needs to be addressed and rejected.

By the same token, some would say that he merely exposed that which had been denied but insidiously present and vigorously demonstrated being used now against the very seat of Democracy. Either way, we all can agree from our own perspective that WE have a problem that needs a resolution, no longer being able to deny the corrosive implications and its destructive existence.

The agreement has always been our societal collective majority voting preference, not our minority voting preferences. Even when that preference was oppressive and evil, it was still the preference exercised until progress overtook ignorance.

Force had been was used to uphold injustice, the collective majority to change it. Now it comes down to the good of the many by consensus and healing, choosing survival or those rupturing Democracy by sedition for a debilitating future.

The simplest perspective to apply is the wisdom of King Solomon, reputed to be the wisest man ever to live. When confronted with the two women’s dilemma, each asserts themselves to be the child’s birth mother. Wisely, the King instructed that the child be split in two, with one half given to each woman, surely killing the child.

The King knew that the birth mother with genuine love would sacrifice their preference for the child’s survival. The child is Freedom by way of Democracy. The question is if God-fearing patriotic insurgents would rather suffer the ramifications of overthrowing the government, ensuring the death of Democracy? Is your Patriotism conditionally unconditional?

To preserve their lie while providing no proof of former President Trump winning, they are proven not to possess a genuine love for Democracy. No one has put any meat on the table proving he won, even while some Republican voters flocked away from him. So, by default, supporters have demonstrated their ultimate claim, loyalty to a lying sycophant.

To split the child is to kill the child; Democracy and Freedom murdered and cannibalized after withstanding many foreign threats only to succumb to domestic upheaval without merit. There are indeed those in favor of splitting the child. Some will not loudly and explicitly denounce these domestic terrorist actions and sentiments threatening the country’s split.

The temporary faint of outrage identifies their motives and cowardice to displease Trump, although he has no qualms about talking all under their clothes. They succumb to his bully tactics and their own power grab instead of their pledge of office and obligation to the wellbeing of the republic they should serve without fear of Trump’s scorn.

Their obstruction of anything by default that the new administration proposes and constant reliance on Trump for approval in government affairs is borderline treason by Republicans. Those Democrats sitting around waiting for bipartisan conciliation are borderline remiss by de facto when considering the Republicans had no such reservations when they were in power.

United, there is strength but also survival. Survival for the country’s existence cannot endure what it has been allowed to become, nor can it survive just as a baby split in two cannot survive. Democracy and the virtue of fairness must be allowed to expand to all segments of society to survive.

There is a lot at stake for partisan disappointment in one election to ruin the country when there is always the people’s majority vote for the next time. For a former President to advocate for dividing the country, we should know that he has no concern for Democracy and would rather see it split if not under his power.

King Solomon would definitely see through this ploy and not divide the child or give it to the callous heart of a deceitful liar bent on vengeance.
The choice is simple mutual compromise or civil self-destruction by sheer cannibalism. AS always our fates remain intertwined.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Essential Workers

Your dependency is required.

Dependency applies to many concepts in ways that are personal, interpersonal, substance-related, and financial, to name a few, but have you ever considered the dependency of countries and nations? I have considered countries and governments to exhibit the same dependent addictive behavior as an individual.

It is called the Dependency Theory and gained prominence in the United States in the 1950s most certainly as an adaptation to the societal shift in the cheap labor pool. It uses a Marxist concept of Surplus Value applied to our beloved Capitalist society to exploit resources in the form of raw materials but primarily cheap labor for the benefit and advancement of those in power or the elite.

The theory is to mass-produce an excluded class of poor and underdeveloped states or people to benefit the wealthy, enriching themselves at the expense of the subordinate states and people it creates. In short, a cheap workforce that will be competent but obedient and deemed “essential workers” for the elite’s wealth accumulation.

Dependency is a state of the individual, the collective, or a controlled situation to produce a form of reliance and expectation that is almost always viewed negatively and judgmental toward the subordinate position. All dependency has an element of submission to perceived power, fear that carries the insecurities of exclusion, or the expectations of some continued benefit.

In other words, an excellent way to look at it is not so much what is provided but how badly you can be made to rely upon it. Dependency is an unequal balance of what is irresistibly desired and required for it to be provided. The balance of power is always against the one who is dependent or beneath.

Being beneath the power of that which you are dependent on is recognizing and submitting to it because you feel like you don’t have a choice or dread being without. Dependency introduces a state of despair that lessens your initiative, resistance, and hope. Complacency is used to rock you to sleep by accepting the distortion that you cannot function without it or its guidance, but mainly that’s just the way it will be or has been.

The resulting void produces a weakness for the dependency followed by the continued discouragement of opposition that leads to addiction. Your willpower has been compromised and captive to your wants, elevating them to something that becomes a need. This mutation of you adapting a want to a perceived need stamp out your power to resist or refuse, elevating this power over you by your very own desires, like dope.

Fueled by hope and belief becomes the very thing that has power over you, not realizing that emulation is not assimilation. It is the carrot the mule chases but never or rarely catches. The illusion to obtain it is part of the psychological motivation but was never intended to allow you to achieve it.

It is effectively used to exercise control for reproducing the conditions for its survival and advancement while denying yours. The wealth of Europe was primarily obtained through this manner of exploitation and force. The more suitable method of exploitation today is coercion and restricting opportunity.

For this to work as a sociological theory for cheap labor to persist since colonialism, it was based on the inhumane and economic abuse and exploitation of a designated class. This theory had to be expanded to include those who were viewed as undesirable or expendable. All cheap labor is secondary to, virtually interchangeable with, and “essential” to that theory.

Territories and nations were made subordinate to other countries, creating a form of economic captivity by suppressing and high jacking their benefits from their own labor and resources. The swindle is accomplished by establishing debt and using compound interest to create disparities for their utilization of your funds and resources. This is by pure systematic economic exploitation of the lower class masses.

Another way quite prevalent and noticeable today is overpricing and fees that prevent you from using your money for your own interest. It places constraints on your prosperity and makes it less likely and more difficult to rise above these manipulations of wealth. Just notice a pattern of your money going out as opposed to coming in. It takes a lot longer to make it than it does to spend it, keeping you in a financial spin cycle.

The tools used to maintain a constant generational supply of an underclass labor population for economic gain are systematic and on purpose. Extending your reach educationally and financially beyond your station can be done, but it takes an enormous effort to elevate yourself against the system. Often to achieve and maintain an elevated status, you must then adhere to the standards of that status. That creates a different level of benefits and a different level of constraints.

The more you have, the greater the need to protect and maintain it becomes. Same game, different level but more at stake, which puts you in a position to really embrace the system you thought you were escaping, dependency.

You are now more invested in producing or maintaining your position only to become a more valuable commodity but still a commodity. Therefore, to elevate yourself, you have to position yourself to have a commodity beneath you to produce for you to maintain their position that supports yours.

According to business dictionary.com, the definition of a commodity is a reasonably interchangeable good or material, bought and sold freely as an article of commerce. A service-based economy depends less on goods or materials than it does you, the service or servant. You are that “service” becoming the interchangeable thing bought and sold freely as an article of commerce.

Being interchangeable means being just another brick in the wall easily replaced with another one just like you. You either give out or wear out, but eventual time or circumstances prevail to replace you. So being interchangeable also makes you expendable but nonetheless “essential” to generating more commerce.

Check and see if your value to your employer remains the same during good and bad times, especially if they might get the short end. Often their benefit is preserved despite what might happen to you. It is being done for profit margins.

It creates an efficient cycle of reliance where the top of the mountain must sit on a broader base or foundation, meaning there must be more at the bottom to support those at the top. When applied to a service industry, it creates an abnormality from the top-down. All who are below in reliant subordinate positions are conditioned to be obedient and tolerant to maintain their dependence or status, hoping to raise or sustain it.

Imagine if you are a professional athlete during Covid and the terms of your contract were coerced into far more hazardous working conditions for less pay depending on how those above you do. Participation in the losses but not the surpluses.

Imagine if you are an “essential worker” under the same circumstances. Your pay is less or the same under the severe hazard of contracting Covid or dealing with a disagreeable public. The difference is the perceived value of the commodity to generate revenue. Tariffs to the king to maintain the kingdom enriching themselves by concessions expected from you. Done despite the value of or risk to the commodity of you as the essential worker.

Reliance is the bait held before you to expose your habits that feed your wants, revealing just how plain old thirsty you can be made to be, and the thirstier, the better. Labor unions and collective bargaining came about due to the exploitation of how thirsty you can be made to be to maintain a cheap labor force.

A cheap labor force must hustle to increase their individual value, but by design, cheap labor works best when it lacks initiative and resistance. Practices of Marxism, Colonialism, Capitalism, and many more at their peak all are cheap labor by design at their base to survive. This labor theory has gone from nations to individuals as a societal structure and systems that support it.

This is just a little thought for research and conversation to more fully understand the underlying, the behind-the-scenes, or flat out in the open for all who want to see to notice. A significant influence in what is going on and the societal objective is to quantify you as a commodity for your benefit but for others much more substantial benefit, valuation, or expectation.

Getting a better job, a bigger house, a more prestigious neighborhood, more money, or hand to mouth surviving with the shoes tight, the more you are required to hustle to achieve and sustain expectations to secure your gain. To excel at the game and play it well, there is an expectation that the rules would be honored, so you work hard for a fixed calculated reward.

Congratulations if you enjoy the reward, but you should also recognize the efficiency of designing a societal structure that produces a population for depriving economic mobility by restraining opportunities and resources not equitable with the labor you invested or profits produced. For those who can excel at getting the most profit margin from others’ labor, a perspective is sometimes to view those who have not as being less than or being lazy.

Notice the smug comfortability of some not affected by the reality of the struggles that those considered beneath them endure. At a time like this, one can see how influences beyond our control can put us in positions that we never imagined. In a blink of the eye, jeopardizing our lifestyles and wellbeing. Economic dependency is interrelated from the bottom up as well as the top down. You need a paycheck, and they need you to produce their wealth. A general needs soldiers, but there are always many soldiers and few generals.

The status of a profession has different levels of prestige within the profession. The more the prestige, the farther the fall and the more required to maintain the exploitation, though undoubtedly mutual but still exploitive and dependent, making you the essential commodity for their wealth accumulation. If you need further proof, look at the discontinuation of unemployment benefits and the powers that are eager for you to return to the way it used to be, even by economic force. It is mandatory and essential for the machine and cycle of dependency to work.

Essential workers are dependent on the system and the system can not function without essential workers. It is a comparison of pennies vesus dollars.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Aubrey’s Deadly Jog

 Posse Comitatus

First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest condolences to the family of Ahmad Arbery and hope that my intent to shed light does not in any way deepen the family’s grief and mourning but be an instrument to assist in achieving justice and perspective. Every person is born with a purpose in life, no matter how long or brief that life may be, sometimes to achieve a higher purpose.

The purpose may be beyond our understanding and reasoning, which only deepens our pain. However, that purpose may not have been for them to achieve longevity but rather to be the catalyst for the advancement of a cause. In this situation and similar situations, the grand purpose may be to become the straw that stirs the social consciousness and brings about historical change. Yet, for whatever reason, some are chosen to be bona fide crusaders to advance a cause greater than themselves.

All law enforcement and prosecutors should know as part of their mandatory training that the only thing that separates the general public and the police in authority is the police’s ability to arrest for misdemeanor crimes and issue citations within their jurisdiction. In addition, all citizens have the right to make a citizen’s arrest regarding felony crimes, although not recommended and strongly discouraged.

Although that action comes with strong recommendations to avoid making those arrests, encouraged instead to have minimal contact or interference outside of notifying the police. An off-duty policeman’s standard of intervention is not mandatory but only to take a police action that can be as simple as calling the police or reporting their observations.

To make a citizen’s arrest in a felony matter, you must first have intricate knowledge of what constitutes a felony and the various exceptions that should be considered, such as the force continuum. The main exception is you cannot legally shoot anyone over property regardless of the property’s value or the felony status of the theft.

Not only do police know this, but anyone with a concealed carry permit is taught this as part of their CCW training for receiving a certificate and permit. You also cannot instigate a situation and then claim self-defense or being in fear for your life. This information is disseminated by the instructor giving the certificate in a mandatory state-issued handbook educating you on the matter. That is why they have police academies and extensive training to distinguish arrest powers.

Civilians attempting to hold someone forcibly on nonfelonies for them refusing to submit to your curiosity and lack of authority is kidnapping. That person is essentially being kidnapped and not even close to meeting the legal threshold needed for a felony citizen arrest. He had no reason or legal obligation to comply with his own kidnapping or legally comply with someone who had no right to confront him brandishing weapons. Kidnapping is to remove someone and restrict their movements without authority and against their will or consent.

Did this group of self-appointed champions of good know his intent and if he may have been an investor, interested home buyer, had approval, an employee stopping to check, or if he was in fact trespassing? Their knowledge of the law would have to extend to understanding criminal mischief, criminal trespassing, criminal damaging, vandalism, unoccupied structures, petty theft, and grand larceny to start with, in addition to Aubrey’s constitutional rights. He clearly was not carrying stolen property.

None of the above mentioned would grant them the right that they acted upon, especially not being directly affected as owners. Did they notify the contractor for confirmation? What was their authoritative jurisdiction? Did they have the minimal legal corpus delicti to affect an arrest, detain him, or make a voluntary request that required him to submit? What was the evidence of a crime? So now their prima facie probable cause was based on what felony crime they were reasonably sure that he had committed. What authorization did they have to confront Aubrey violently?

Their lack of in-depth investigation required at the very most being warned or advised? Their proliferation of fabricated burglaries in the neighborhood, which went unreported, had nothing to do with this situation since you cannot burglarize a place with no doors, windows, or encasement to prevent or have the expectation of preventing access or entry. If these vigilantes were aware of the others who committed the same atrocity, are they now justified to hunt them down, or how did they confront them?

Were they most likely already aware of others who had done the same, but something differentiated Aubrey from them? Were others disregarded for the same violation and their actions permitted because of their race? If he were white, would they have reacted differently, also overlooking him?

You would expect a veteran law dog to be slicker rather than a principal participant in killing someone over property and not even his property. Also, Aubrey was a gentleman jogging and not using furtive moves, evasive actions revealing a criminal intent, or any urgency resembling fleeing a crime. So, why would it be necessary to confront him in the highest threat pyramid mode instigating a code red situation with weapons?

Armed private citizens can be assumed to be robbers or an assault attempt. The real police must announce who they are loud and clear and advise you of their suspicions when ordering you to comply while in uniform and with a patrol car. Private citizens demanding compliance while their authority is unknown or nonexistent leads to these sorts of issues. That is why citizen arrests are ill-advised unless life is endangered.

What was the vigilante’s declaration that would make Aubrey react in fear for his life from a good old fashion roundup or threat of serious physical harm? The only reason for the weapons display was a projected fear of a deliberate intent to confront him while armed. Even with a numbers advantage while confronting him, why would the cowardly lions go that far if they were that afraid.

They could have just followed him until the real champions of doing good on the city payroll could have arrived. Having a shotgun drawn for a conversation was unnecessary, revealing the fear that they claimed which was their creation. Governed by using the minimal force necessary, what were they afraid of going even beyond police authority, and if they were that afraid, why did they?

In law enforcement, there is a natural progression of how things routinely unfold. But, unfortunately, this would appear outside of that natural progression in the lack of their initial arrest for nearly two months and the appearance of a suspected coverup. The coverup has to stop creating a dangerous atmosphere that significantly damages a portion of the public’s trust in believing that you must abide by the law when applied against you. Unfortunately, however, it isn’t applied for you.

The law must also abide by its own standards when broken against you and applied against another even if they are white. Thus, by law, all the affirmative defenses are useless if you place yourself in harm’s way intentionally, are an instigator in the wrong, or third-party defenses that arise out of lack of right or authority with no obligation or danger except that undertaken and created by you.

They exhibited more authority than the police are allowed, and no one had a problem with that. I guess even the retired law dog forgot that he was retired. There are too many discrepancies and other exculpatory facts unknown to the public revealing misconduct to be defended.

The examination of tapes or radio transmissions between dispatcher and responders, any separate dispatcher tape and log or notes, landline conversations and texts outside the official system, frame by frame scrutiny of the video taken, and visual enhancement to determine specific elements, electronic devices, emails, conversations had and statements made after the fact will definitely expose their criminal intent and any concealment efforts.

Their story is prone to crack under closer scrutiny exposing their true motivation, racist state of mind, past discriminatory beliefs, validating deceptions, and glaring inconsistencies. The law is specific but frequently manipulated and ignored as a matter of principle regarding these incidents on a racial basis and a case of selective enforcement. This has been justice the American way.

Others get off on what we routinely are arrested immediately for or are imprisoned. I guess justice really is blind but seemingly only to the facts. Some are routinely afforded concessions not made available to us, even while merely jogging. Some who would state they are absolutely diametrically opposed to racism and categorically deny their hypocrisy still saw no need for immediate arrest for this cold-blooded murder.

Brazen negligence and dereliction of duty must be punished, accompanied by a firing or resignation in addition to the prosecution of any coverup undertaken. Someone like that, despite personal views, cannot remain in a position of exercising that degree of lack of judgment, regardless of their color.

When will public officials be held accountable as a general deterrent, powerfully demonstrating that the public and other public officials will not tolerate it? The hypocrisy of it all, not to apply a proper and consistent legal application, is obviously stacked to white privilege or law enforcement bias.

Any official coverup is almost as egregious as the crime. It reveals an acceptance and approval for the offender and the offense while a murder did occur. The injustice you cannot feel is revealed by your barbaric inclinations reflected by your inaction. Bigotry unfit for public office and a tacit approval condemning your fitness to serve.

As for the vigilantes, there could not be hatred without a hater, nor could there be a lie without a liar to tell it. When characterized by fear or hate, it reveals the weakness in your mind that cannot be concealed. You absolutely cannot claim to stand your ground or be in fear for your life when you run up on someone trying to put the smackdown and get scared because they didn’t wither.

Why did you initiate a conflict then cry out to the universe of being in fear of your life but not in fear of committing your savagery or bigotry? If some crazed bigot chased you down carrying a shotgun and armed with murderous intent, what are you to then think? You were probably outraged that a courageous Black Man still would not submit and cower in the same fear that you showed while consumed by your racism.

If you were a victim of what you are a practitioner of, imagine the victim’s perspective jogging one minute and life slipping away the next paying your price without proof of a crime because you wanted to be a cowboy. Practitioners of the unspeakable and sympathizers within the system that aligns with you saw no fault in your actions have exposed themselves. They should be prosecuted along with you.

Considering the violation of human dignity after the murder and essentially the abuse of a corpse by violating all human decency to take a trophy picture and video your escapades led to your demise. Reversing the roles and you would be outraged and rampaging for justice but recommend endless tolerance from us.

Now you want to throw a rock and hide your hand? In fear of YOUR life, what about Aubrey having more reason to be in fear for his life while hunted by multiple assailants? Those officials who aligned themselves with your actions have effectively identified themselves as accomplices after the fact to have attempted to aid and abet concealment of a murder. No one can be proud of your lack of courage, lack of human decency, and inferiority complex disguised as vigilantism that proves nothing is beneath you or your supporters.

Devout no doubt in your religion that states thou shall not kill, but still indiscriminate killers because you are entitled, afraid, and think you have a better spoon to be beyond the law. Needing someone to discriminate against to make you feel better about yourself, but the racism and fear remain even when the numbers are disproportionately in your favor and carrying a shotgun. Maybe the answer to curbing this racism is to give you some spinach-like Popeye or a pretend medal like the cowardly lion, perhaps even some decency of character.

Veteran law dog must have forgotten that this is not the 1950’s. But then, I guess at least now you don’t have to worry about the old neighborhood or your house anymore; accommodations will be provided for you and hopefully for life. The contractor or owner of the structure is at home eating dinner while you and your vigilante gang are headed to prison, not realizing that being the neighborhood enforcer was not your role. Now you are being held accountable for your vigilante murder.

Justice and arrest were delayed for over two months. There were repeated refusals before an arrest was made or proper handling of an apparent state murder violation of an unarmed black man, as well as DOJ civil rights hate crime specifications violated. Justice will not be complete until the murder conviction and imprisonment of the three vigilantes.

The dereliction of duty by police, prosecutors, and district attorneys demonstrating beyond bad judgment after the fact to absolve murder need to be identified and exposed. Once exposed, they need to be prosecuted according to the degree of their wrongdoing that undermined their office, positions, legal responsibility, and public trust.

A prevailing national mentality has emerged from the shadows to reflect seething racism seeking to justify and implement alternative interpretations and unlawful applications of law to ignore atrocious crimes and murders against Blacks. Those whose actions have identified themselves to exercise these mentalities with illegal ramifications demonstrate a criminal act that merit prosecution.

Behind the scenes at the highest levels, the Trump presidency, the dog whistle has been issued in a not so discreet or subtle way stating fine people on both sides. But, unfortunately, this dog whistle creates an atmosphere where this racist conduct is encouraged and applauded by the racist puppet master, delighted how the puppets dancing on strings are ignorantly carrying out a racist agenda.

The 2020 election in Georgia revealed resistance to lawful changes that didn’t meet your expectations and ignited extreme opposition to the rule of law. The law is to be upheld when contrary to other’s expectations but disregarded when applied to yours or somehow deemed fraudulent when you are disappointed. The legal process must be equally applied without compromise or variations of compliance by those who enforce it, even if not by those governed by it.

Racist consent no doubt created the atmosphere to draw these bigots out of their vigilante closet. Perhaps politics gassed them up to make America great again by divisive rhetoric, racist tolerance, and assumption of white immunity. Nero, a mad man, was said to have fiddled while Rome burned; he now tweets while America burns and while you will sit in jail. You should have chosen more carefully your actions and your inspiration.

These perpetrators of murder and enablers of these murderers share an overtly appalling commonality which is a blatant mockery of accountability and scorn of prosecution. They are cohorts of the same criminality. That cannot be allowed to go unsanctioned while justice is mutilated to anemic integrity and corrupt contortions.

Vigilante’s actions circumventing the law and standard of justice when committed undermines the legal system for civilized expectations of conduct and due process. Ongoing and collective intent to minimize this murder transforms individual acts of atrocity into unacceptable systemic indulgences in violation of state law, the RICO Act, Consent Decree investigation, and DOJ hate crimes or civil rights violations.

The murder and coverup investigation regarding all participants should leave them subject to the highest degree of legal condemnation. This is mandatory not only for the loss of Mr. Ahmaud Arbery’s life by murder but the integrity of the legal system to be respected and representative for all. If not, the law is respected by none, not those committing atrocities or those refusing to be subjected to them.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Cultural Differences

Cultural Differences?

We are all culturally designed by the initial foundation of our existence in accordance with our environment. Our parent’s circumstances determine our environment and their environment, which we did not choose and, to an extent, was probably selected by someone else other than them, perhaps their parents. Even if they decided to change their environment or circumstances, they decided, we may have just influenced their decision but were born into it.

Where we are born has just as much influence on us as who we were born to. Yet, this environmental influence has an inverted effect. As we get older, the influence of our environment expands to adjust to changes while the parental influence declines. Of course, parental influence remains strong because it is part of our experience and our experiences shape our perspectives, but still, it decreases in a substantially active manner over time.

The status and cultural vindication among our self-identifying group or the norms of our geographical location is the measurement by which we primarily evaluate ourselves. However, others also probably assess us as a collective standard of that place and time. Thus, we endeavor to assimilate to our environment and subgroup that we aspire to become a part of or have found ourselves to belong.

If we are not choosing, then someone has chosen for us, and often our environment has made the choice. Our subgroup has many different levels, developed preferences, and motivations that constantly change with time. What is permitted, tolerated, encouraged, or prohibited changes regularly which require our constant adaptation? As the circumstances change, we must adjust for the present and future instead of functioning in the past.

Clinging tightly to the cultural pull of tradition or ritual can create an illusion—one of a present constructed of the past without considering the reality of these changes. Thereby stuck in time and ignoring the practical application outside of our subgroup. Remaining comfortably contained within our subgroup normalizes that group but not interactions with those outside that subgroup.

There is never an issue when everyone agrees. Still, any deviation results in some fraction being dissatisfied and exploiting a distinction solely based upon opposition to their preference or choice. Therefore, with those outside our subgroup, cultural and geographical disparities allowing for some degree of other’s dissatisfaction, we expect them to allow for a mutual degree of our discontent.

When in Rome, you do not have to do what the Romans do, but practices that do not infringe upon us are of consequence to only those who practice them. A perspective or tradition imposed upon a different environment other than those in agreement or harming others develops a problem.

Perspectives need to be in step with time as the world has become global, and movement is not confined to our little piece of real estate or experiences. There needs to be respect for others’ differences and geographical influences without abuses of their rights as human beings and residents of the universe. Assimilation is not to become identical to some subgroup or environment at the expense of your culture but to reflect the collective commonality of coexistence.

Assimilation is more of an idea than action because control of what someone self-defines themselves as is strictly subjective. For example, suppose you are categorically opposed to someone for whatever reason. Can you stop that person from feeling the opposite for you if that is what they choose? What about a sport’s fan-favorite team? Can you stop a person from cheering for that team despite your disapproval or knowledge by claiming it as yours?

It becomes an illusion projected outwardly without the detachment to travel outside your perspective. So, it remains within you, having no influence or effect on other’s shared preferences. We are a member of many groups that, without our consent, we do not sanction the membership of. What about a song we like? Can we control who else likes it, or a particular flavor of ice cream whose favorite it also maybe?

We share cross-culturally far more when examined from a humanistic perspective than from a cultural or geographical perspective. Just as people everywhere want the best for their children, why can’t others be allowed to want the same as well. Geography limits our imagination and acceptance because it restricts the definition of our commonality to a location, nationality, religion, or race.

This restriction is reinforced, diluted, and distorted according to who has conquered who at what point in history. What external challenges are to be faced and overcame. During times of crisis, danger, or needed solidarity, any division within or among these subgroups is expanded beyond these allegiances to the maximum mutual demographic affected.

In other words, it grows exponentially from our home to our neighborhood, from our city or state to our country. Then, finally, globally and to every other subgroup such as gender, race, wealth, poverty, religion, and so forth, when faced with a common threat.

When the shoes get tight, and the rubber meets the road, need seems to be the overwhelming unifying factor across all cultural and geographic boundaries. As language can travel without a passport and across all boundaries, commonality of interest travels even further, is more understood, and universally embraced within a common interest or need.

If a global threat from an invading celestial force descended upon earth, then we would all suddenly become earthlings or the human race and not of our identifying subgroup but binding together for the greater good and our mutual survival against a shared threat. The necessity of a universal definition and purpose realigns any subgroups to a consolidated identification and determination.

To assemble under specific affiliations is essentially a matter of comparing preferences to an outside group’s preferences. This, in turn, establishes the group’s criteria and beliefs with various hierarchies within the group as far as deeds, acceptance, and dedication. Thus, there are levels to everything, and their corresponding judgments, prestige, or values.

Validation that confirms your identity within the group deprives you of your individuality because you must submit to that of the group’s external projection in exchange. Reinforcing your desire to belong becomes the goal for your participation. Commitment to defined expectations supersedes adaption to external perspectives. Stubbornness sets in, leading to foolish rigidity and shortsightedness in a vacuum. A tunnel vision of them and us.

Justifying our preferences producing our reality within a larger reality that interacts and encompasses ours does not function outside our smaller reality. Instead, the larger reality functions outside the limitations of our limited acceptance and understanding, creating an impracticality in time, function, and ideology.

Somewhat illogical when you think about how often you indulge contrary to your biases. The denial of a culture you reject often has foods, influences, and products that you accept but not the people or culture that produces it. Cultural differences should be embraced as the variety of life that stimulates life’s experiences.

We only experience portions that could comprise the whole of our experiences when not allowing for things beyond our culture and understanding to expand our completeness. That which threatens your identity is a byproduct of your lack of self-acceptance and dissatisfaction with your circumstances projected upon another group justifying a convenient lie over the uncomfortable truth. The conscious mind convinces and deceives you of what the subconscious mind knows to be painfully true.

A group’s validation of their worthiness based upon perceived deficiencies of others thereby increases their own value by comparison having a better estimation of themselves. The validation of their value within the group becomes their cultural exclusivity, their membership. Preservation of their group culture surpasses their need for change, tolerance, or acceptance to maintain group approval.

Hiding securely within the comfort of association and exclusivity. It is upon you to celebrate your experiences concerning your parents, culture, and traditions that formed your identity as a cultural foundation. Others who do not share the same influences have their own inspiration to observe. These preferences should not be discredited or cheapened by any practices that further insult the dignity of others, celebrate discrimination, or are widely associated with reminders of atrocities.

Different is often a moral assumption and judgment of better, not a reflection that others could view you the same way. It is wrong to celebrate an injustice against someone, whether that injustice is performed by you or someone else. The perpetrator cannot determine the impact upon the afflicted; the afflicted must assess their own grievances and the impact of the injustice.

Celebrate and be proud of your individual spirit since there is only one of you in your uniqueness and embrace accepting your diversity from everyone else who walks the earth. The eyes see outwardly as a projection of you into your environment where there is still only one of you to celebrate and cultivate. Therefore, embrace your uniqueness and accept other’s uniqueness because there is only one of them. In the end, we all share the same uniqueness and commonality; there is only one of us.

The threat to our mutual survival is not of a celestial adversary but one that has been engineered on earth that threatens our children’s future and our co-existence as a species. If you want to exist, then you must allow others to exist, including plants, animals, and humans, all equitably. We are all citizens of the universe, whether we like it or not.

It would be best to make the best of it and bring cultural differences and socially engineered deceptions to examination and adapt from the past to the future. The greatest empires and civilizations the world has ever known have had an exploration date for one reason or the other.

We should at least make our demise something out of our control instead of protecting a global threat or festering our inability to denounce current and past atrocities and exploitations. Everyone must concede at least a little sacrifice; the world has change dimensionally, and so should we. It is not always where you are from but where you must adapt to and make allowances. We are all different but in most ways the same.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

God-Truth be Told

Choose Correctly

First, I wish my mom, affectionately known as Pudding, Happy Birthday on June Third. Second I would like to issue a disclaimer and indemnify myself from any judgment as I will make none or request none. Finally, I would like to offer ten questions for your consideration.

In the privacy of our own minds, it should not be taboo to contemplate perspectives that will strengthen and perhaps clarify our beliefs or explore other’s point of view against our own. It is more like a premise for debate or forgive the term but devil’s advocate.

The context for the premise in which the final answer is deemed correct according to whatever you choose is you cannot be wrong, at least by my standards and the design of the questions. Under this structure, I will pose ten questions, and you will answer them and be the judge of your answers to make whatever determinations you choose.

But first, riddle me this, you have an Atheist, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or any other religious denomination or designation you would like to substitute for these. The riddle at the end that has a correct answer is, what do they all have in common? Let us begin.

One. Many religions faithfully practiced now and in the past, which the followers have steadfastly proclaimed for their salvation and guidance. Complicating matters within these various religions, there are many more factions or sects with perhaps slightly different teachings and observances.

Most of them and their followers staunchly forbid the worship of another God before them or beside them as being false idols or false teachings. If this is true, then which of the many religions is worshipping the one God, and why are they correct and all others incorrect? Other than it being your religion, of course, but what is the reason why? Who is right?

Two. The God of these many different religions is worshipped according to that particular religion, beliefs, and traditions. So if there is one God, why are there so many different beliefs and faiths, or is it unlikely that everyone can’t be wrong with only one getting it right? Why are there so many saviors from God born of a virgin mother and crucified?

Examine the concept of God mysteriously entering a virgin’s bedroom in the midnight hour impregnating her. There was no indication of consent instead depicted as a mind-altered state not able to resist. Would God take liberties in a serial fashion? Imagine God shockingly appearing as a supernatural entity fornicating with virgins for a holy reason. This resembles incubus activity and deception, although for a holy cause.

Virgin mothers were allegedly impregnated by spirits, visions, the wind, white elephants, and other forms giving birth to saviors and messengers from God such as Jesus, Chrishna, Buddha, Mithras, and others allegedly long before Christ was conceived.

How authentic is the claim that other saviors have been crucified before Christ? How many virgins did God need to impregnate and messengers to be crucified? Would that make Jesus not the only begotten son but have many equally divine siblings? Was God promiscuous in spreading his holiness?

Three. Does the Priest, Ministers, Preachers, or Rabbis conduct resemble the teachings and doctrines they proclaim? Principles including discipline, obedience, celibacy, poverty, humility, compassion, or do they practice deviations from the word they were called to spread? Do they make allowances for others to deviate from the scriptures and accept clear violations of the word? Are they Christ-like, Prophet Muhammad-like, or Buddha-like, etc., in their actions?

Four. Are miracles divine acts, alchemy, magic, or some other godlike or extraterrestrial manifestation? Can the descriptions of these acts or miracles be characterized under interchangeable definitions from opposing beliefs to describe them?

Is God a way to conceptualize and quantify what we can’t explain or provide a structure where we can transfer responsibility for our actions or fate? Does God encourage our need to follow as opposed to our willingness to lead? Are we obedient because of fear or desire to do right? Do we crave the love of God or fear the wrath of being smitten?

Five. Suppose we believe divine acts which are beyond our understanding and defy logic, science, or explanation are attributed to “God” or a higher being with unlimited power to command wonders and blessing as well as wrath. Would it be too far-fetched to believe in an extraterrestrial being of superior knowledge and power that resides in the heavens? Is there a difference, and why or how?

Feats both that are unearthly or divine have to be attributed to some being or deity, but what about earthly and common acts? If favorable, God is responsible, but if unfavorable, is it nothing but the devil or the adversary at work? On the other hand, is God at work at all times, good and bad, to bless or punish with no rhyme or reason, just our acceptance of his divine will?

Six. Are our beliefs reflected in our actions, or are our actions a true reflection of our beliefs or thoughts? Is it do as I say not as I do or by our deeds so are we known? Are our beliefs are reflected in our actions or our free will to commit so many sinful acts? If we have the free will to sin or disobey, don’t we also have the will not to sin and be obedient? Perhaps, what you thinketh so are your actions, but does that make us flawed or hypocrites to our beliefs? Is falling short of the grace of God different from being disobedient?

Seven. Do we seek solace in the gift of the message or the skillful tongue of the messenger? Are they a crusader for their belief of the message or themselves as the messenger delivering the message? Are we? Remember, few are chosen. If the word is constantly coming from the same book, then why is the silver tongue of the purveyor of the word what we base our fellowship on? Is it entertaining our spirit, flesh, or something else that sometimes the messenger matters more than the message? Do you believe in religion or God, can you tell the difference?

Eight. If current practices are handed down from ancient times, what methods and manner of worship were determined to be a tradition or determined to be pagan rituals by who and why? Were some religious traditions discarded and some pagan rituals embraced and still practiced today?

 What of the many religious or biblical books that were not included in the Bible or religious teachings? Why not Enoch, who was said to have walked with God and had mysteries revealed to him? Who edited the accounts of God’s word? Was it Constantine? Like God gave his word directly to Moses, did he also give it directly to the many others who proclaim it is the word of God they present? Were they working on the honor system? Are we? 

Nine. Did you choose your religion, or was it chosen for you by inheritance from our family who embraced it before us and passed it down? Do we believe because we choose to believe or because we were taught to believe? Are we religious or spiritual, and is there a difference? Can they co-exist?

Would our beliefs still be the same if we were indoctrinated differently? If we switched religions, would our old belief have been wrong, even believing it wholeheartedly like our new belief?

Ten. Is God a deity or being, or could God be a place or destination? What if God is a destination, then what would that resemble? Is God a figment of our mind and imagination or truly omnipresent and everlasting? Either way, whatever we did, we would do in the literal presence of God, wouldn’t we?

Would God exist if humanity did not? Do other life forms or nature worship God somehow? Do we have to exist for God to exist because can something exist without knowledge of its existence? By that standard, how do we know that God exists without knowledge just on faith? If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a noise if there is no one to hear it? 

This makes me wonder if it is more important to believe or more important what you believe in. Have you seen a vehicle speeding and darting in and out of traffic only to end up at the same traffic light down the road as us? We arrive at the same destination but by different methods. 

Could it be that someone’s belief that guides them to a principled and fruitful life is just as valid as someone else’s belief that guides them to the same end? Could belief be a hidden bridge between the subconscious mind and the conscious mind?

Respect their belief as you respect yours because if we all have faith and believe in the abstract without concrete proof, who is wrong. That is why it is called faith because we believe not by sight or proof. So seek out your own confirmation knowing that no one can claim you chose the wrong belief for yourself.

With that said, let me ask you these questions. God was in the beginning, but what is the origin of God as a singular deity with unlimited powers, and how was that power amassed to have dominion? Also, how does the science of the big bang theory and single-cell organism’s evolution reconcile itself to the God version of creation?

Why does God demand to be worshipped and obeyed, ruling out God’s vanity, of course? Are there others, could there be universally speaking? Is that dominion over earth or all that exists in every universe and dimension which would indeed extend God’s power?

Wouldn’t God transcend gender or human form if this is the case, but what form would God be recognized as, or would it be by his word alone? Even as we worship faithfully, how will we recognize God if presented before us? Truth be told, what would we accept as proof?

The answer to the riddle about what the various believers have in common is they all believe in something, even if it is nothing in the atheist case.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz 

In fear for your life

 Deadly Force.

The standard for legal justification of deadly force is the same for police and civilians, but it is interpreted and applied differently. Therefore, following the law and exercising your rights must include adherence to the application of the law and the procedures or scrutiny if deadly force is used by you or against you, whether civilian or law enforcement.

The standard default declaration is to proclaim being in fear for your life. It has no meaning but is generally understood to mean something that is subjective but not specific to the situation. You only think you know what it means but it has a different meaning to everyone projected upon and applied to a situation. It is vague and supports a spectrum of fear levels based solely on fearful anxiety.

The time when that is acceptable as the primary justification for using deadly force has passed and defies objective reasoning or quantification. Thus, fear should no longer be sufficient or a factor for using deadly force. Instead, the actual circumstances should constitute a code red threat or tactical disadvantage creating an imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, not to gain compliance or quell any fear.

Being in fear for your life is very subjective. It can primarily reflect your psychological frailty instead of the actual circumstance you are in or confronted with actually being a serious bodily harm threat. Specific physical and mental allowances must be made for a variance of vulnerabilities, the prevailing circumstances confronted with, and the objectively reasonable response. Still, an actionable threat must be the primary reason for any legal lethal force response.

Realizing that most civilians have uncertainty regarding when deadly force is appropriate and required lends itself to a tendency to erroneously use deadly force based solely on fear, not the threat. Sometimes law enforcement being unaccustomed to high risk or confronted with unfamiliar situations, can react with certainty but erroneously or prematurely from fear or anger, not the threat. Force must be reasonable and unavoidable, and prudent in its exercise where your actions did not create or escalate the threat.

When deadly force is used, the standard for reasonableness, even when justified, requires it must remain within that which is not excessive. The standard applied by law for both civilian and law enforcement is to use the minimal force necessary to neutralize a threat based upon the known or reasonably perceived circumstances at that time but not to your level of fear.

Your perception is formed by the actual events or circumstances existing at that time and the threat’s ability to carry them out, resulting in serious bodily harm to you. According to the law, it is explicitly forbidden to use deadly force to protect property regardless of the value of that property. Deadly force is only supported as a counter to serious bodily harm.

The subjective factors that influence deadly force use are age, size, gender, physical limitations, specific previous victimization, etc. The list is long, but the actual justification must be supported and based on specific factors justifying the action to be warranted and always from a defensive perspective.

These many considerations are supporting factors of articulation but not justification for deadly force. The harmful threatening act is the only primary justification that can be legally considered. The rest is just supporting elements of that action or threat. The perception of a serious bodily harm threat must also be of the nature to be carried out at the time of your reaction.

You must have the fundamental knowledge of what perceptions of a threat you were responding to, why you reacted that way, and whether you can legally respond that way with a force that will likely cause serious physical harm or death. It must be a reaction to their actions supported by a reasonable response to a specific pending or imminent articulated threat.

Being in fear should not be the emotional state you are in; instead, the apprehensive projection of the threat if allowed to progress to a reasonable conclusion. You cannot instigate or agitate a confrontation and claim to be in fear of the situation you created. It would be best if you remained near blameless in your contribution to the circumstances causing the conflict.

For example, a vehicle moves forward and backward, not sideways. If law enforcement knows this places themselves in the forward or reverse path of a vehicle without escape options, they have essentially created their own danger. Therefore, deadly force should not be used. Instead, better judgment should.

Everything articulated should be their actions and your response. You must only do what someone’s actions force you to do. Reacting for your safety must be warranted and justified by your right not to submit yourself to the discretion of whatever misfortune, harm, or criminal intent that may be forced upon you.

If placing yourself in harm’s way and then the assumed harm is attempted, then by default, you ultimately initiated that attempt. If it was expected to possibly occur, knowing the risk and danger, you actually allowed it to happen by your actions.

Deadly force must always be reactionary to a threat unforeseen or unavoidable. Knowing the standards under which you will be judged, feeling confident in your response, and committing yourself to restraint as necessary increases your advantage of legally responding to a deadly threat with little hesitation and minimal scrutiny.

Understand that fear is where your concerns and insecurities overcome your confidence and commitment. What may weaken your resolve to resist or survive is strictly subjective to your fear of inadequacy and not a response to the actual threat. Reacting to the actual threat is responding to the resolution of the threat and not the resolution of your fear. Under this perspective, fear has no place in the equation for consideration of your actions.

There is a distinct difference between a response for your life or being scared and frightened. Fear is from within; it is something that you choose to accept and project. Fear is closely related to your level of preparation, familiarity, comfortability, and any unfavorable circumstances present. When these levels are low, your anxiety is high, so fear is more of a reflection of your personal state of mind than the threat confronted with, even when lethal action is necessary and unavoidable.

Anger is fear projected outwardly, and fear is anger projected inwardly upon yourself. No one can account for your or another’s fear, biases, or insecurities. No one should have to account for why you or anyone is afraid of the dark or an impending danger that does not exist outside your mind.

Fear is often a stereotypical or conjured projection causing an irrational override of reality. So, fear must be removed as the primary criterion for using deadly force. Fear is an admission and display of irrational behavior and most likely an indictment of your confidence.

Legal justification is the principal standard and level of responsibility that anyone carrying a firearm consent to by carrying that firearm and definitely by using deadly force. Insinuated by implication and association are also all bullets fired being accountable to the shooter. It has nothing to do with the shooter. Instead, the person getting shot to provoke and justify that action of being shot.

What did they do to get shot that was a reaction to and material reflection of their behavior? From the shooter’s perspective, they did this, and I reacted as such. Not, I did this due to my fear of unwarranted anticipation of an unobserved action or being absent of any overt indication of danger. Much like chess, only one move is made then the opponent must make a move until checkmated. Your move is executed only after the opponent has made their move which you then counter or prevent.

When deadly force is used, there is a legal responsibility to stop when it is no longer necessary, even if initially justified. As the threat level changes, force adjustments must change, adhering to minimal force necessary to discontinue the threat. Excessive force occurs when the adjustment is not made or justified in the beginning. That standard applies to less than deadly force as well. Passive resistance is not a justification for deadly force.

The standard criteria already legally established for deadly force should be firmly applied and enforced with violations fully prosecuted to discourage the motivation and occurrences of its violation by civilians and law enforcement. Law enforcement and vigilantism must especially be scrutinized to diminish violations of publicly accepted legal expectations and legally established statutes.

Even cowboys recognized in the wild west that shooting someone in the back or from behind was inherently wrong because it was cowardly and suspect of the threat they posed with their back towards you or running away.

Multiple gunshots to the back should be assumed murder absent some extraordinary circumstances and articulation to justify the nearly indefensible. Possessing a gun that is not in a position to be used most certainly falls under the same reprehensible cowardly actions since it is legal in most places to possess a firearm.

In the use of deadly force, there needs to be fully transparent investigations and personal accountability according to the governing state and federal laws, police department general police orders of operation, the departmental expectation of conduct and tactics, and civilian or officer-initiated encounters. In addition, civilians should be vigorously held to the same factually based reactions rejecting their reckless behavior, frivolous encounters, and fear of situations they created or had no legal standing to enforce instead of an imaginary justification of fear.

Being comfortable in situations requires mental preparation to visualize likely scenarios prior to encountering them. Lack of knowledge and preparation manifests itself in panic and fear, which is prone to overreaction. Memory retention and muscle memory are then trained by conditioning them where your only concern is logically and methodically dealing with the threat or circumstances without panic.

Proficiency in your craft, whatever it is, breeds confidence, even if it is baking a cake. Target acquisition is the next issue of paramount importance. You must be sure before firing what you are shooting at, why you are shooting at it, with what you are using to shoot at it, can you strike the intended target, and how many times is reasonable to fire to eliminate the threat but not necessarily the person.

You should not just unload on someone out of fear without articulating why it was necessary. At this point, it becomes suppressive fire without a confirmed target or justified circumstances. Controlling your anxiety avoids reckless behavior and unreasonable actions which are regrettable or debatable.

Recent news examples that illustrate the lack of these principles are the Breonna Taylor, Jacob Black, and Duante Wright shootings. In the Taylor case, the lack of target acquisition and discipline under stress laying down suppressive fire. The Black case poor tactics and poor suspect control to prevent him from moving contrary to risk aversion.

Mainly seven shots to the back being excessive to repel the perceived knife threat, which had not yet become direct. The Wright case where panic and overreaction mentally short-circuited the motor skills and muscle memory familiarity to perform an act your body knew was wrong but that your mind overruled to grab the wrong weapon.

You can train for stress, but only stress simulates stress and fear is always present with the uncertain where you feel unprepared, even taking an exam or a critical event. Still, fear must be processed and redirected to heighten the ability not to immobilize it. The first consideration is always to minimize risk to yourself by your tactics to maneuver to minimize danger.

You must be proactive to predict, eliminate, prevent, or minimize the risk, escalation, or damage you must do to someone by limiting their opportunity to harm you before deadly force has to be used. You cannot account for other’s actions but are responsible for your tactics and actions, so control what you can control, yourself.

Excessive force and deadly force must be responsive to the deafening outrage and continued advancement of transparency and accountability regardless of who the violators are. The public now demands it, and the law requires it to be applied equally without prejudice or reservation, thereby minimizing the fear that others have for their life in these encounters.

The police must now also police themselves to raise their shared duty of accountability to these known standards and restore public trust to the previous levels enjoyed and beyond. Ongoing training should reflect this, and violations should be exposed to protect the integrity of the uniform and profession to establish a law enforcement culture in line with the changing times and respect for life. Civilians must adhere to a standard of conduct that does not initiate or invite deadly force to stay out of the gray zone subjecting themselves to fear.

Remember to eliminate fear; you can practice until you don’t make a mistake but can also practice until you can’t make a mistake to be genuinely proficient and eliminate fear. It is about taking life seriously to invest the time and resources into training yourself lessening fear and promoting better judgment when carrying a firearm.

Taken from my forthcoming book, the Pointman.

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

The Theory of Critical Race

Why the past matters for the future.

If history suddenly doesn’t matter now, why would telling it accurately and truthfully matter, and why is it so crucial for you to sugar coat it? Critical race theory has been a hotbed issue of late and not because it is divisive or misunderstood but because it is both liberating and accusatory by history’s revelations. As the Big Tuna once said regarding football, “you are what your record says you are.”

Racism is no longer a barrier to success but a burden to success with the subjective suppositions, expectations, and connotations as a standard others are not subjected to. Discrimination is when a unilateral standard is not applied whether you overcome it or not. It is like running a race with extra distance only for you.

Increased perseverance to compensate for diminished objectivity is not burdensome unless it is you that are impositioned. It may not prevent you from being what you can but it may dictate what it takes and where you can be that. So CRT does not promote black victimization or white condemnation, racism does. Systemic obstructions often reflect the sentiment of the persons involved execution of their duties. These personal sentiments manifest themselves in the system.  

These systems then become extensions and reflections of the perspective and biases of the people who comprise and operate them. They are consequently calibrated to that persuasion despite whatever the stated letter of the law. Despite the scope of operation, there is a discretionary or selective aspect that can be applied biasly creating preferential or prejudicial determinations.

So the systemic discrimination and racism are a by-product of the routine practices of the individuals within the system to restrict or deny fair and equal accommodations contrary to legal expectations thereby violating equality. It is technically irrelevant if you overcome it because you should not have to, others don’t.

 The persistent reason for this condition is rooted in historical perspectives that insidiously avoid detection and offer plausible deniability of protections. It then becomes accepted and commonplace as to not be viewed as a violation normalizing it. Once normalized it becomes invisible to all who it does not affect.

Here are ten queries of the foundation for critical race theory that may clarify any misconceptions regarding the basis of its purpose or intent for you to ponder. It is not to assign oppressed or oppressor status to anyone but to either accurately tell the history or discontinue the deceptions regarding the historically known facts affecting systematic injustices.

One. Who has more to gain or lose by the truth being exposed? Is it the victims of the racial atrocities and prey of crimes against humanity that are not exclusive to the Black or Native American experience? Could it be the Caucasian/British Colonial Anglo-Saxon European transgressor’s modern-day descendant’s image that is at risk? After what was done for centuries, what do you have to gain now which has not already been gained?

The transgressors stand to lose their societal masquerade as superior, privileged, religious, honorable, and so on. Can this be the real reason to oppose the truth of critical race theory teachings as being irrelevant to history? If the truth is irrelevant, how could the manipulation of it passed as the truth be more acceptable when we know it to be a lie? 

Two. Supposing the Confederate heritage is so great and endearing, why not reveal its totality for all to see in all of its infinite glory and brutal deeds, to arrive at the point where it is today portrayed as the apex of conservative values and southern civility? Why would there be shame and division associated with the actual unadulterated history of America or the experiences of any race here in America, including yours? There is plenty of shame to go around yours and ours.

Three. How much longer do you think these original sins can be concealed from your children as they are being vomited forth, revealing the degree of depravity that this country and your ancestors committed?

Since it is not your crimes, actions, brutality, or inhumanity committed long ago, why hide now?. Does it not become yours when you embrace, conceal, or support its heritage and perpetuation by deceit and privilege today? Would it not be more devastating for your children to learn that the truth was withheld from them, that they were purposely deceived by the ones they trust the most, you? 

Four. If your actions were not divisive and destructive, how can the revelations of them be divisive or detrimental to the self-image of yourself or your children? Why would there be any shame attached to them if they were noble in cause or actions? CRT is not to promote inferiority or superiority but truth and a factual depiction of America.

Five. Some would protest CRT as indoctrinating their children with the truthful history of this country. Where is their concern for historically and criminally brainwashing other races and nationalities’ children with lies about America?

Then what you complain about would be the very thing that you have committed against others and refuse to acknowledge or discontinue but yet resist subjecting your children to the truth? What manner of nonsense is readily taught in schools today with the truth being concealed?

Should we start with the genocidal thief Christopher Columbus or the first President of the United States of America, slave owner and friend to slavery George Washington? Andrew Jackson, another President, did more than any other person in the United States history to exterminate the Native Americans, so should that also be put on the twenty-dollar bill to honor his accomplishments?  

Six. Do we need to look any further than a former daytime talk show host who would proudly state that “everyone knows Jesus and Santa Claus are white” as evidence that factual and cultural brainwashing is real?

Is this blasphemous against the Christ to be compared to a fictional commercialized character? Is this blasphemous against the bible to depict Jesus in any likeness, especially one where the rest of him is a different color than his bronze feet?

What is the purpose of a blue-eyed blond hair white Jesus if not propaganda and the perpetuation of a lie? Would CRT violate your religious covenant to persecute, exploit, and exterminate races you deem inferior using the bible as justification?

 Would CRT prove these races not to have been inferior but instead exploited? How many casual deceptions are embraced as truth known to be false? ? This is the danger of growing old and being blinded to the truth but guided by the lie. Why lie when the truth would be sufficient, or would it?

Seven. Are there any accomplishments in this country that Black people were not here for and participated in achieving? Beginning with Crispus Attucks, who was the first to die in the liberation of this country from British rule or the Industrial Revolution, and the cotton gin whose idea was a slave named Sam.

Automation is what really so-called “ended slavery” and gave America a competitive economic edge better than slaves. Every war this country has ever had involved Black participation in winning, such as The Tuskegee Airmen contribution!

Eight. Every perceived measure of negative human endeavor in America reflects the image attributed to or associated with blacks from lack of education, lack of wealth, a natural tendency for criminal conduct, drug addiction, scattered family tree, other negative stereotypes, and so on except for the pervasive image of racial injustices committed against blacks?

We can’t mention that part because it makes you look and feel bad. Imagine how bad we feel and look being on the receiving end. Bet you wouldn’t trade feelings and switch places, would you?

So everyone’s record is their record except for yours? If the past should not be levied against you, why do you levy against those whose crimes and atrocities are less than the injustices you committed? Shall we now indiscriminately do away with your accountability but not others? If we can not tell your history, are we also forbidden to tell ours? Is it not a shared history of experience and one of occurrence?  

Can the Confederate Heritage be a source of pride but the Confederate deed a source of shame? What separates them from being the same? Is not slavery the defining element of contention for the Confederate resistance? Should the truth of slave atrocities be ignored but the stain of the Confederacy tolerated? If you are so proud of the Confederacy, surely your children can not be ashamed of its history, can they? 

Nine. Why deny CRT? Is it necessary to stroke fear and deceit while in the annals of history and the recesses of your mind, it can’t be concealed without history shamefully betraying the truth? Is it your obsession with race or history from the intellectual pursuit of accuracy you fear being exposed?

The factual pursuit of history could not be racist unless the history itself were racist at its core and the immoral practice standard. CRT represents a ledger of advantages and disadvantages from the volumes of history. If racial advantages and disadvantages still exist, can there be parity while you still enjoy concessions that no one else enjoys but you?

 

 

Ten. Why do your American dream and core conservative values have to be a discriminatory nightmare for so many? As your demographic advantage shrinks, it would seem wise to balance the ideology and racial equilibrium associated with your diluting subgroup despite the historical blemishes of your morality.

If racism was a major part of building this country then it would stand to reason that it has to be a major part of what was built. It has to be deconstructed with the structural and systematic remnants of racism identified and addressed.  While the oppression of racism has diminished it still is a reality. The obstacles are not insurmountable but they do exist where they don’t for non-blacks.  

Lingering resentment dismissed by denying but perpetuating the sin only fosters the continuation of it remaining an issue that should have long ago been put to rest. Denying the hurt will not make the pain or damage go away.

Since you will not feel other’s pain, do you see it can only bring yours? No longer do all others have to beg and submit themselves to your graces and permission or denounce their identity to assimilate with you. So, the grasp of your grip is slipping while losing control to exploit or convert others. Has the curtain finally been pulled too far?

You have nothing to fear but yourself as your most significant threat to yourself by insisting on a weak adaptation of a stolen Nazi ideology and slogan to make America great again. Hitler was able to rise on make Germany great again propaganda, America has risen from the same doctrine regarding slavery and racism. Variations of this ideology sully your fragile self-image exposing your moral inferiority insistent upon hiding the truth. 

This concept at its core eliminates not only certain races but religious freedoms, sexual identifications, economic viabilities and marginalizes everyone except the white prototypes. Your denial and refusal to deal with the historical truth through CRT or any other substantial means of truth only exacerbates the problem and prolongs its relevance.

If we should get over having it done to us, how much easier should it be for you to get over having done it to us? Your feelings and self-images cannot take precedence over truth. What damage could the facts do to your history that it has not done to ours? So let’s be reasonable and forthright that we need education and correction, not continued concealment and oblivious posturing, to make for a sustainable society. 

We cannot live in the past, but a discriminatory past should not thrive in the present and into the future. Therefore, it is unreasonable and unwise to reject viable solutions when projecting the harmful effects of your continued opposition moving forward.

The first step is an admission of historical fact as a beginning to a solution for these actions. They are too enormous to simply forget or cover-up. Secondly, solutions are problematic when you deny and promote the mentality of injustice as fair. Thirdly, it is not so much the act as the mentality and tolerance of the justifications without remorse or accountability. Finally, it is the utter impunity in which it is done.

When will it be time to teach the historical accuracy of the truth since silence and pretending will no longer cover this deeply a national wound? This is a wound that infects all directly or indirectly and globally.

Has the time come to tell the truth as a reflection of history, not race, guilt, or blame but fact? Contaminated soil can only produce a poison tree. The foundation of truth and education changes the mentality on all sides, re-aligning the future.

Critical race theory is incidental to race but essential to history progressing through to the future. More important than the race factor is the historical manipulation, minimization, and ignoring of the intentional occurrences that formed this country. Race only matters in identifying the victims and perpetrators because the facts speak for themselves just as the identity of any group’s participation. Also, you prefer race doesn’t matter when it exposes you and casts contempt on your actions but race is the only thing that matters regarding discrimination.

Does your unconditional love for America include its blemishes? If history and heritage are so important, shouldn’t it be essential to depicting its factually blemishes included? The past should be of contrast to improvements made over time. Otherwise, the albatross continues hanging from the indignity of this country. 

With humanity seemingly on the brink of another evolution through science, technology, biology, quantum physics, medicine, space exploration, and yes, maybe self-destruction, can we afford to adhere to politics and policies which are antiquated or detrimental to the expansion of our societal evolution? 

We can surmise that change, nature, science, and universal forces do not care or respond to what we think or want but to their own harmonic circadian rhythm according to physics and evolution without our consent. Time will only move forward even if we remain stagnant or resist. Change is inevitable, and the desired change is just a matter of time as a function of evolution.

Anything without the flexibility to bend is snapped or broken. The past matters as a lesson for adaptation and evolution to survive into the future. We already know there are powers beyond our denial or resistance, such as time, history, and change. We cannot change history or avoid change but can affect the future. 

The theoretic mission statement and tenants of this country’s founding need to finally ring true from sea to shining sea for all who occupy it or collapse will follow. Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it same as the insanity of those who refuse to change, seeking a different result when the current condition is unsustainable.

Are we all that naïve to believe that the white race or any other race on this earth is superior to the entirety of all universes and dimensions that exist? Or, for that matter, any race on this earth inferior except for opportunities denied? Are we to sacrifice the future living a historical lie that breeds dissatisfaction against the equality of creation?

History is not a condemnation of anyone or their children, be it accusatory of the oppressed or oppressor. Still, the liberation from the ignorance of its past over time absolves all of its control. Facing the truth of the past rids us of our collective shame, but only if we veer from the same mistakes in the future.

The division, shame, and embarrassment claimed and sought to be avoided by concealment is no affirmation against the truth. It is your historic skin tone distinctions that have made it a problem. You can not condemn complaints of racism while still practicing racism.

That would effectively promote its silent furtherance preserving your image’s fallacy instead of correcting it. You then, by default, would not be condemning racism but the exposure and discontinuation of it.

If knowing racial atrocities and injustices might damage your children, what effect of having been subjected have on our children? If not knowing would make your children love themselves, the Flag, and America; what does knowing make our children feel or love, certainly not discrimination?

If your children are not taught the evil of racism, how can they know it is evil or not perpetuate it. Is it not your obligation to not lead them astray with evil but away from evil? If expecting Blacks to demonstrate love for symbols of oppression, does your behavior demonstrate condemnation of oppression and racism or disregard?

How does the doer of wrong not be attributed the shame of that wrong? Repentance and remorse belong to the wrongdoer. Restitution and anger belong to those who have been wronged. Is not the criminal justice system built on punishing the doer of crime and not the victim of such crimes? Your redress to ignore is subjective to your benefit.

What is not good for the goose can not be good for the gander. So how does the wronged become vilified for acts committed against them becoming known? It only makes sense if the wrongdoer wants to continue the wrong. Should you continue preserving your image and injustices at our expense? How can we allow it?

It will not just magically go away. That is where the shame lies for your children and you to continue it on your watch. Your children know what is shown and taught them. Changing both would solve both of our racial problems moving forward. The past always instructs the future if lessons learned are applied wisely.

Otherwise, it is just a sprint, a senseless race to the finish line of implosion. Now, how is that for a critical race theory or the theory of a critical race?

Thurston K Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Pharaoh’s Temple

Red Sea Catastrophe

Time passes seemingly at varying speeds, with good times lasting not long enough and bad times that seem like they will never end, but the stagnant times might be the worst. Though time passes forwardly, ticking away methodically, no matter how much time has passed, it always seems to repeat itself.

Times lessons are often ignored and suffered again when time has expired on something and change is unavoidable. The powers that rule fight to maintain their favor or return to a time that has passed. Time is an illusion, and the past has proven to be a ghost.

Many years ago, and so many civilizations have crumbled since then, stood a mighty empire in what is commonly termed ancient Egypt ruled by Pharaohs. One Pharaoh seemed eerily to have reach forward with a lesson in time that is currently repeating itself before our oblivious eyes in a cautionary tale of ruin.

Pharaohs were worshipped as deities above humanity possessing pure bloodlines or a divinity to be revered and exercise rule over the common subjects, being God on earth. Ordinary peasants were just along for the ride, submissive to their ruler to facilitate the rulers’ glory and commands. Decisions were made from the top concerning the transfer of power and the behavior of the masses, similarly to this ex-President towards the public.

Very little room was at the top for giving orders but plenty of space at the bottom to receive orders. Pharaohs were gods on earth destined and ordained to use the people for their own glorification, often despite the ever-increasing toll on their servants. This Pharaoh’s ego and deification were the only considerations.

Egypt had an established structure and recognized hierarchy with the Pharaoh, his bloodline, his chosen elite, army, laborers or merchants, subjects, slaves, or disenfranchised was the pecking order. Everyone and everything served at the Pharaoh’s discretion. Freedom was an abstract reality that, in practice and practicality, did not exist beyond what was sanctioned by the Pharaoh.

The Ten Commandments, a traditional Easter favorite, told of Moses’ journey and a people he was destined to lead to the promised land against the mighty Pharaoh Ramses II. Worship and loyalty to the Pharaoh were demanded under harsh penalty or death. The ruling method was with an iron fist, even if it was sometimes inserted in a velvet glove.

Ramses II is translated to mean “born of Ra or son of God” and worshiped as such, a god himself. In ancient Egypt, Ra was believed to be the “sun god” creator of all that existed, much like the God of today. Ramses II representing his heritage and Ra’s hand, his God, guiding him, opposing Moses.

The two opposing parties competing for the same undisputed title for their God. The battle for supremacy of their Gods’ power over the others’ God was what played out in the movie. Despite several warnings from Moses to Ramses II and displays that his God was to be taken seriously, Ramses II stood on his spot and dismissed all deterrents as fake magic, including a deadly plague. Reminds you of a foolish President, proclamations of fake news, and the Covid-19 virus of modern times.

After several, I can show you better than I can tell you moments, Ramses II knuckled under to Moses’ demand to let his people go. Once Moses headed out with his people Ramses II decided he couldn’t leave it at that, so he gathered his chariots in pursuit. His ego and entitlement bolstered by his thirst and belief in his own power emboldened by his cronies enraged him to strike out where he had relented before.

So, he vigorously pursued Moses and his people until cornering his pain and humiliation against the Red Sea. While no military man would be caught with no escape route having his back against a sea of water, Moses, as it turned out, had a final trap to prove the power of his God.

By the power invested in him by his God, Moses parted the Red Sea leading his people on faith to safety. This is where it gets interesting because a normal person would have seen this parting of a massive sea as something beyond their pay grade. I can understand Ramses II commitment because he was blinded by his ego and propaganda to maintain power at all cost.

Ramses II nor Ra had demonstrated such an impressive feat as this (like in the one Batman movie where the Joker says, “where does he get all these wonderful toys”). Nevertheless, Ramses II gave that dreadful order for his chariots to pursue through the parted sea. At the same time, he majestically poses safely on top of his chariot upon a rock watching, the equivalent of retreating to the White House while they stormed the Capitol.

Okay, how can the power of one man’s ego send an army of gullible followers on a delusional rampage to placate him and most certainly to their own demise, basically to drown in his ambition? Maybe blind obedience to an oppressive symbol ingrained in their DNA overruled any logic or morality suppressing their instincts for survival? His actions and their obedience to them essentially led the kingdom to collapse and ruin.

Favored servants pledging allegiance and resigned to their fate in the face of being confronted with extraordinary circumstances of death were needed. No power to resist being ordered to your detriment to satisfy a sycophant leading to a Red sea calamity.

It seems like it would have occurred to them that this doesn’t seem like a good idea, realizing that destruction would eventually be cast upon them. A coward dies a thousand death but a fool many more. Fear of righteous reprisal should be more critical than any foolish allegiance to a man that swallows his own credibility and dignity while sacrificing yours.

As we continue with our cautionary journey, we find Moses and his people at rest near the mountain’s base, having escaped Pharaoh. Finally, Moses takes a stroll of enlightenment when met by a burning bush followed by the BIG GUY himself for further direction of the people and their order for prosperity in accepting the new land.

Now wouldn’t you know it while Moses was aging and taking care of business on high, you had some nonsense brewing at the base. Some easily persuaded, and some who were never convinced just masquerading were now being led astray by their desires. It is always one primary agitator, Dathan, played by the legendary Edward G, reputedly questioning sarcastically, “where is your Moses now?” to get the party started right. A Mitch McConnell or Lyndsey Graham-type rebel rousing.

The crowd is whipped into a frenzy; in comes the golden calf to really turn it up. Now it is on and cooking, the crowd is hyped, but some stayed true to the game. Some remained faithfully loyal without supervision, but in the end, all were judged to suffer the same fate by association.

Once Moses descended and was greeted by his greatest disappointment, he knew they had blown it and had earned a judgment upon them all. They wandered around in the wilderness deprived of the promise that could have been, that should have been, but could never be by their member’s own device and corrupted spirit.

This should be a tale about being so close to having it all and blowing it by self-destructive behavior preventing your deliverance to the promised land, but that would be too easy, would it not? Maybe the tale that has revisited us is the lesson of how unchallenged lies and questionable deeds committed by great egos awry invites self-humiliation and divisiveness, if unrestricted, will lead to mass destruction.

The dastardly deeds, irrational obsessions, and excessive efforts executed to maintain power is the very thing that leads your ego to the errors that deprive you of the power you were seeking to preserve. Maybe the more damaging penalty was for Pharaoh, who lost everything by his arrogance. Moses, whose people were delayed suffered the delay. Eventually, after those with the old way of thinking had perished, they were gifted what was promised.

It’s funny how the few, along with their supporting cast of enablers, have always controlled the many. The choices are often binary, either this or that, good or evil, Ramses II or Moses, Democrats or Republicans, Red or Blue, you get the point. Either way, the choices are made for us mainly on a traditional basis leaving us with a selection among those choices giving us the delusion of choice when it was in essence chosen for us.

Reward and atonement are always balanced to compel us in a desired position or decision based on a subjective optimism managed and manipulated by Pharaoh. This resonates throughout time and history, even to this very day. In needy time the equivalent of a crumb of bread or a morsel of grain to sustain yourself can either be granted or denied by Pharaoh.

Meanwhile, you build Pharaoh luxurious chambers, kingdoms, legacies, and monuments of wealth and ego. They call it stimulus or unemployment benefits today granted or rescinded by their determination of what is best for you that secures their best interest, not relieve your suffering.

The factory known as workers who toil in the mud and straw is unknown and irrelevant in these astounding building accomplishments for the glory of Pharaoh, which seems like the one percent trickle-up economics sort of, doesn’t it? Flow from the bottom up on the backs of the little people, much like under Ramses II, whose thirst for power and wealth by any means necessary would risk self-destruction to destroy the Kingdom and lose everything to hold onto power.

Regarding the former Presidency, the old adage, if I can’t have you America, nobody can seem to apply. Just like in the Ten Commandments, the question can be asked, are you a master builder or a master butcher by ideology who doesn’t realize that blood makes poor mortar and blind ambition knows no father? Remember, all the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put Pharaoh back together again, meaning Moses may be desperately needed now to lead the people out of political, psychological, and economic bondage.

This may not come as some surprise but, Cleopatra, whom it is said had a face that could launch a thousand battleships, and Hatshepsut, who dressed like a man, was the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. They had prosperous reigns then and could probably at least be Vice-Pharaohs today in the 2020 election. We can only hope that Moses can once again lead us to the promised land despite Pharaoh’s objections.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Lack of knowledge

The price of not knowing.

I wholeheartedly believe that the greatest gift someone can give you is knowledge. The more quality and comprehensive the knowledge, the more valuable to be utilized, pursued, or possessed. Knowledge is the game-changer that launches better opportunities in life and the expectation that some specific comprehensions and reasonings are valued to accomplish more in life using that knowledge.

First, let us examine the primary stated definition and purpose for education to better frame what we have been conditionally exposed to with the currently accepted educational system and criteria of academic standards. What is the substance, and what determines the ideology or method of educational delivery but not knowledge? How do we determine what is really taught along with how and why?

According to Wikipedia definition, education facilitates learning or acquiring knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Horace Mann, the former Massachusetts Secretary of Education, is primarily regarded as the father of education in the United States. He initiated a system of professional teachers to teach an organized curriculum of basic content.

A basic level of literacy and inculcation of common public ideas and beliefs deemed standard was the goal. In other words, to develop the mind with a specific intent to meet the standards set forth and standardization of conformity. Education originally was for boys, along with bible study to tame their spirits.

Etymology is the study of words as they have changed over time with a primary focus on their roots or origin as they were derived from words that conveyed their true initial meaning. For example, the etymology of education is “Educare,” which can be translated to bring up or raise as well as in animals it refers to training them.

The etymology of inculcation can further be broken down but essentially means to “force upon, insist, stamp in, impress, tread down, trample on, tread on, or heel.” Inculcation is achieved by using persistent and repeated information to implant, instill, or even admonish or punish if needed. This enforces any ideas, theories, or behavior for indoctrination for acceptance of it.

To further this intent, homework was initially given as a punishment to break resistance to enhance adherence and not enhance learning. Next, to assist in assessing or “grading” to measure your predictability to assimilate to norms and meet expected standards.

Consider the source words and stated intent compared to the stated definition of brainwash which is defined as to make someone adopt radically different beliefs by using systematic and often forcible pressure. It is the human mind being altered or controlled by specific psychological techniques. Let us not forget that corporal punishment in the form of paddling or swats was encouraged for compliance as well.

The use of developmental psychology at the earliest ages increases the efficiency and acceptance of this intent and influence. It would be fair to say that this initiation takes place at the earliest age for maximum impact and efficiency, for example, preschool and kindergarten. This method of educational conditioning is passed down from generation to generation, influencing the surrendered blank slate (the child) for inscription according to the prevailing thoughts and conditions at the time chosen to be tolerated and conformed to.

It becomes traditionally accepted control and training to bend someone’s independence to a desired group’s agenda, determination, and many times personal opinions which are being imposed. Hence, a good percentage of a youth’s time is spent not under the direct line of supervision or teachings of their parents but being entrusted to a societal design that appoints a surrogate who is directly or indirectly forming a child’s reality and capabilities under the trust that you invested in the surrogate, the teacher.

This trust is then by virtue transferred to the child and reinforced by siblings, peers, status, and society. To further that educational goal, social norms as cultural learnings are taught through structural socialization and allegiances. An ideology of a perceived consensus that is not self-determined but assigned primarily through opportunities presented or opportunities denied.

The reasoning and judgment associated with this thought pattern create a root default behavior creating the assigned programed perspective of achievement or limitations. Well, maybe your limitations are greatly influenced outside yourself and predetermined by these outer influences by design. Accordingly, the thought must be put on the table for consideration and probability.

You become what you hear repeatedly and sometimes the loudest from the earliest ages while you are highly impressionable before thoughts really form. That is why it is better to place it there instead of removing thoughts initially embedded. Instead of replacing it with theirs, just putting theirs there first is the objective.

Education began as a social experiment and, on some not so coincidental levels, the belief that education is meant to be a regimen. The age of initiation gets younger as time passes and starts from daycare, preschool, and kindergarten. Nevertheless, the focused processes implant the expectations of an established social standard by specific conformity.

Excelling at achieving distinguished personal absorption of that social standard is the calibration within the educational and social structure on which achievement and personal accumulation are based. Standardized testing was not designed to include but to discourage and exclude in theory and practice. Training or conditioning people for continuity of compliance enforcing the core acceptance in their mind.

That creates conditioning tradition seemingly forever adhered to and defended instead of serious re-examination, adaptation, or overhaul periodically. Standardizing establishes the standard that restricts you from consideration or participation for the less knowledgeable and most disadvantaged. This assures the efficiency of the social structure and the manual or menial task labor force supply and demand.

The swindle of opportunities missed is unknown, but if standardized testing is the tide that raises all boats, then certainly the criteria and historical accuracy of educational teachings should yield the benefits that reflect this. But, unfortunately, the academic teachings often contradict historical accuracy at worst and are suspect at best.

The focus on these inaccuracies is a distraction from the much-needed practical exposure to the knowledge needed for post-schooling preparedness. Acquisition of this knowledge should not be secondary. Instead, the criteria should reflect preparedness for decisions regarding things that are generally learned later in life after making some of the mistakes of not knowing.

Teach the tools that sustain you in life, such as investments, financial literacy, entrepreneurship, etc., to reflect their importance in life more closely. For example, suppose you have 12 years of seven or eight hours a day, eight months a year. In that case, the time available and resources devoted should reflect a more knowledgeable labor force according to the claims of what the educational system represents itself to be.

So, you see, knowledge apparently is not the priority but conformity to even undesirable standards and enough “educational” training to create a functional labor force but not a knowledgeable labor force. Hence, the poverty of opportunity is assured with your consent to lack of knowledge but “educational” breeding. Schooling plants the seeds to become a producer or a consumer, a laborer or a manager always cognizant that it takes more laborers than managers.

The resolution to diminishing returns lies in the overall structure, content, and criteria analyzed and modernized. An educational pause and shift have occurred where the unheard of has happened. Now would be an opportune time to weigh the balances of sticking with the current education system after evaluating the observations of its effectiveness and results.

The harsh reality is there for all to see by how the lowest-paid worker just so happens to be the most essential, especially at this heightened time of danger. Powerless against decisions made that affect you and put you in jeopardy of being penalized for any resistance. Underemployment and economic exploitation is the whip that drives this mule, as evidenced by some politicians deciding to remove unemployment payments to force you back into the system. They remain on the public draw while determining that you must return to being exploited for their special interest enrichment.

The current situation exposes many societal acceptances that cannot be hidden behind the commonly accepted purposes and intent given, extending to collegiate education and college athletics. Thus, those needed for labor are conditioned to offer no resistance, are often knowledge deficient, and without influence, power, or support.

Often rewarded by some conditional incentive or dependency-filled void is what the educational system is structured to produce to promote societal perspectives that invite exploitation and automatic compliance.

Knowledge and education are not interchangeable and are with entirely different meanings and implications. Knowledge expands your known possibilities and wisdom, while education measures your level of absorption and compliance. The freedom of choice and randomness of fate is many times an illusion when the options and opportunities that have already been chosen for you to select from are made available. The choices are limited and controlled while usually being survival-driven.

So now we can rethink our educational system based on real purpose aware of the deceptions or step right up, next in line. Expecting a different outcome may be unrealistic unless we maximize our knowledge to increase our ability to recognize, create, or benefit from the opportunity.

Opportunity depends on awareness, awareness is based on knowledge, and accumulated knowledge is wisdom. Basically, you pay for what you don’t know and find yourself at the mercy of predators, and that is the price of not knowing. Many things may attempt to stop you, but do not let the lack of knowledge of not learning to be one of them.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Elephant restrained by a peg

 Unparalleled Strength.

The elephant is majestic and revered across many lands, cultures, and over time. The elephant is the largest land mammal globally, with species that grow up to 13,000 pounds in weight. It symbolizes wisdom, loyalty, reliability, power, and good luck with an incredible memory and observable traits and behavior that contradicts its colossal size and raw strength.

The elephant knows no bounds in the wild, but it is taught limitations that ensure its control and ignorance of self in captivity. It is controlled by the only means capable, itself, by being subjected to psychological conditioning to ensure its own psychological bondage. That is why a small cord or twine can tether a fully grown 13,000-pound elephant to a small peg knocked only inches into the ground.

It is imprisoned not by physical force but by confinement of its mind. It is manipulated into complicity by limiting the processes of the mind that would enable it to recognize and use its great strength against the bondage of a feeble restraint. It is conditioned to remain restricted and accept a power other than itself, believing it is hopelessly outside its grasp to attempt resistance.

The initiation is started much like kindergarten, where this must be embedded before a level of confident resistance can be exhibited; it must be extinguished early. The elephant must be trained at an early age to accept tethering calmly. This is done by tying one front leg to a peg and then the opposite diagonal rear leg to a different peg, thereby restraining the “baby beast.

This technique alone cannot restrain a baby elephant, so the deterrent or restraint must be stronger than the elephant’s young strength at that time to reinforce that there is no escape or resistance against the force that binds it against its will. Chains will do just fine for this. It will continuously and repeatedly test the chains imposed upon it until it learns that its size and strength are futile against the constraints that hold it physically.

No matter how hard or how long its effort to resist is, it becomes useless. Once its determination is broken, and the elephant “realizes” this uselessness, it gives up any further or future attempts believing that it is powerless against that which controls it for its entire life. The physical chains then become the psychological chains that bind the beast even into adulthood.

Confinement of the mind once achieved will be self-imposed in most instances, with only minimal reminders needed. The elephant’s determination is then replaced by calm compliance. It becomes no longer necessary for strong restraints that surpass the elephant’s young strength or its two legs to be restrained because now it is adequately conditioned. Sounds familiar?

The limitations of the mind work on all animals (even human animals too) when once conditioned and with the supporting reminders as constant behavioral reinforcement to maintain a reality that is believed by most to really be your actual limitations. It is a clever and sinister trick long used before Pavlov Theory.

Using the opposite of Pavlov, a penalty can be avoided by compliance. The absence of stimulus to elicit a response instead of anticipating a reward. The old go along to get along or else is still in full effect.

Even with elephants, peer pressure is used as a continuous reminder of how to behave, like crabs in a barrel to keep you confined with them. However, older conditioned elephants demonstrate their compliance instilling a level of acceptance that soothes the young elephants into accepting that’s just how it is, no questions about it.

The use of that which is most impressionable to someone is a highly effective tool of implementing behavior and beliefs because it comes from a trusted and relied upon source. So once the “baby beast” becomes fully grown and the chains and diagonal leg restraints are no match for their tremendous strength, they are still chained psychologically to their old circumstances.

The old circumstances were when much younger their resistance was useless had in reality long ago changed, but their mind had not changed, making it indeed their current reality with no longer a good reason why. Their size and strength had long ago multiplied to overcome their constraints, but their desire and mentality remained confined conditioned by a small rope and a faulty belief.

The young elephant knew no different but was taught this with no examples or allowances to suggest otherwise. Captivity of a generational herd mentality naïve of self and the unquestioned acceptance that clings to a vastly different fate from the reality of its true power and destiny. This is the taming of spirit and dousing of determination where no right to do so existed. Justified by the need and ability to do so but to no benefit to the elephant, only its exploitation.

Let’s change the subject name from elephants to people, human beings, not races. The name changes, but the game stays the same if you choose to stare at the truth and not flinch. Maybe you have been made into the very thing you despise the most by being trusting and naïve. Unaware of the reality thrust upon you that is not at all what you believe it to be, much like the elephant.

What peg restrains and controls your mind? Regrettably, you got it the same way the elephant did, unknowingly and without an understanding of your strength or how. As the elephant grew, it still held onto outdated beliefs embedded early on when it could have easily freed itself from captivity. If only it realized that it had the power not only to resist its restraints but to overpower it and choose its fate.

The will is what sustains you when the road gets tough but only when you prevent it from being compromised and allow it to expand untethered by the limitations of others regulating influences. Those who poorly regulate themselves would seek to regulate others by their word but not by their deed, indicating if you are clever, what is good for the goose may not be so good for the gander.

By what right is this recognized as being above your sovereignty, only for the comfort and amusement of another? Consider another’s gain you contribute to without fair compensation? Is it a reflection of your true importance to their elevation and accumulation? This power is not negotiated but given away and, in many cases, squandered or, much worst, not recognized or exercised.

Absent of lies and deceptions, power over oneself is the only authority a person has that does not involve consent and cooperation. If you want to lead, then be an example and possess that which others would be willing to follow that does not demand a subordination of them to your will against their good.

Time brings about a change one way or another, so everything must change and will change constantly, but the idea for change is the catalyst. We see as the captive elephant’s circumstances changed over time, he remained stagnant. As time passes, we should evolve to not invade others’ personal boundaries and human rights to conform to foreign beliefs that are not of their choosing or benefit. Persuasion is the proper tool, not suppression. Mutual benefit, not exploitation.

The techniques used to control the masses are driven down in your mind like a peg tethered by faulty socialization, now using more advanced processes than physical abuse. This may be shocking, but it is just not the “undesirables” of color that are the victims.

Like piranhas, the elite feeding frenzy has turned on their very own as if cannibals to ensure their elite survival. The middle class is eaten along with the lower class regardless of color. Fear, scarcity, and divisiveness are frequently employed to generate the ignorance of crash dummies to camouflage how you, too, have been programmed with lies and social engineering. They then conceal their influence and have you turn on each other in a futile attempt chasing your tails while they prosper.

Like Pavlov’s theory, when the bell rings, you salivate on cue without substance, having been socially conditioned but never realizing the basis for your slobbering. Petty distractions abound, motivations fabricated, and conditioning regulated by design to keep us preoccupied against each other instead of the pegs that bind us.

The elite has always tipped the scales for themselves since antiquity. Advancing the lies and flat-out misrepresentation of facts and history in America about America. It has created a narrative to bolster the image and perception of the accomplishments of a colonial populist Anglo-Saxon protestant society. It has concealed the degenerate deeds and wealth heist greater than the war criminals of ill repute held in the highest contempt.

This cannot persist as an elitist entitled privilege in this day and age where knowledge cannot be hidden so easily. For example, the likes of a homicidal genocidal Christopher Columbus are widely celebrated with a holiday.

Likewise, a scientific fraud and racist such as Charles Darwin is not exposed for his detrimental impact on society, honoring his absurd debunked biases of sexism and eugenics. These are two of many things that tether the masses to traditional nonsense.

This is not to expose matters of racism that are obviously practiced today due to this nonsense but the tethering of minds on both sides of the equation, whether beneficial or detrimental to your existence.

This goes on around the world where an endless number of people and circumstances can be substituted or exposed for the propaganda of nonsense presented to tether, condition, and control their people against the people’s greater good while exploiting this brand of social engineering for their own gain.

The general public or we the people have always been subject to exploitation going back to the beginning of time. Now worldwide, the realization and the awakening of oppressed people everywhere are challenging the status quo. Power only exists when recognized as such, but fear and cajolery can only control the masses for so long.

I almost forgot, the tethered elephant routinely breaks its binds when suddenly aroused by fear or agitation despite its psychological conditioning displaying the power to uproot large trees or remove obstructions.

Fear evoking action and resistance. A child has the strength to rip one piece of paper, but enough paper bound together even a strong man cannot tear apart. The strength of unity is a strength not to be disputed or squandered.

Limitations are, on average, learned and reinforced behaviors systematically imposed for the good of a hierarchy. Mental control is the most effective manner of control when it is voluntary. You think and feel it is your choice or, even worst, that you have no choice. You always have a choice but are you willing to pay the price for that choice. The conditioning kicks in as fear of reprisal instead of the satisfaction of a reward, contrary to Pavlov.

This was engineered in you to feel better about yourself if you can hold someone else down beneath you. So, instead of restricting someone, release yourself from this mindset of tethering whether it is others or yourself. Square yourself away first from the social programming that you believe to be a reality, and that will make at least one less purveyor of ignorance in the world based on these deceptions.

Supersede your constraints and promote honesty, knowledge, and compassion to strive for the vastness of your possibilities while recognizing and enhancing the radius of your understanding. Escaping the psychological bondage, we the people individually and collectively untethered expanding beyond limitations and conflict. That is why there is a need for tethering deceptions and division as a peg to control our minds. The size and strength of the elephant are unparalleled but the mind of a person is without bounds. Free your mind from the voluntary bondage that confines and restricts it as only you can.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz