Foamin Noamy considered harmless
Young men with modems are extremely dangerous and very hard to control. Knowing too much military history makes you suspect in left-wing circles. Which is how you can tell America doesn’t really have a militant left, which should be spending all its nights studying how rag-tag guerrillas keep embarrassing the Pentagon in wars.
“The Influence of Archetypal Ideas in the Scientific Theories of Johannes Kepler,” by Wolfgang Pauli, boozehound, womanizer, barroom brawler, and Nobel laureate in physics, who became Jung’s patient and his theoretical confidant. The historian of science Arthur I. Miller has presented their fascinating relationship in 137: Jung, Pauli, and the Pursuit of a Scientific Obsession. Like Jung, Pauli wanted it all and had a hard time getting it: “my real problem was and still is the relation between Mysticism and Science, what is different between them and what is in common. Both mystics and scientists have the same aim, to become aware of the unity of knowledge.... And who believes that our present form of science is the last word in this scale. Certainly not I.”
In “The Psychology of the Transference: Interpreted in Conjunction with a Set of Alchemical Pictures” (1946), a monograph collected in The Practice of Psychotherapy, Jung offers an interpretation like no other of “the last and greatest work of alchemy — Goethe’s Faust. Goethe is really describing the experience of the alchemist who discovers that what he has projected into the retort is his own darkness, his unredeemed state, his passion, his struggles to reach the goal, i.e., to become what he really is, to fulfill the purpose for which his mother bore him, and, after the peregrinations of a long life full of confusion and error, to become the filius regius, son of the supreme mother.” In the famous efforts to transmute matter, the alchemist performs the far more serious work of purifying his own soul: individuation, personal integration, discovery of the self are the ultimate ends of his art, which probes to reach the god within.
The Jungian self is something very different from the common usage of the term: not the grasping sweaty homunculus of Tom Wolfe’s Me Decade, but the archetype of the God-image, whatever god one happens to worship, apprehension of which constitutes human wholeness. Centuries before the analytical psychologist, the alchemist found that this archetype is engrained in the collective unconscious. As Jung writes in Psychology and Alchemy (1944), a tome that grew out of lectures delivered in 1935 and 1936, one of the central psychological processes involves an alchemy-like mixing of the material and the numinous, the visible and invisible, the “irrigation of the conscious mind by the unconscious.” This process he calls individuation; it is the Grail of Jungian psychotherapy. Most of the patients Jung took on were middle-aged and suffering from what he considered the prevailing neurosis of modernity — a sense of meaninglessness, of pointless drift. They were not seriously mentally ill but troubled and unhappy, like many who seek a therapist’s help today. Achieving wholeness, becoming one’s true self, meant making contact with the inward god, and then uniting the god-knowledge with the outward life. The therapeutic process customarily involved immersion in the Jungian system of archetype interpretation. Jung would read the patient’s dreams and fantasies in the light of alchemical texts, or simply lecture him on alchemy. This, of course, carried one about as far as could be from the workaday twentieth-century mind, even as it was precisely that mind that was being explored. But then, Jung did not think much of workaday modern minds; they were raw material to be transformed, like base metal into gold. He believed in psychic marvels, which he revivified. In his alchemical interpretation of dreams he promulgated a teaching designed to supersede Freudian sexual symbols with their crude reductionism; he always kept the human potential for sublimity in the forefront. Admittedly, however, sublimity was not what everyone was looking for. Ronald Hayman cites one patient who wanted to discuss with Jung the usual issues concerning his mother; Jung said such stuff did not interest him, and referred the sufferer to a colleague. Jung agreed to talk about the things that did interest him, and provided lengthy and detailed instruction in the subtleties of the collective unconscious.
FROM ' The New Atlantis ' Psychology's magician
The method of his analytical treehouse psychology — as Emile called it, to distinguish it from Freudian shrub psychoanalysis — was nothing short of fantastic. To penetrate the psyche of a worker destined for schizophrenic disintegration, he would study his left-communist dreams, reveries, his “borderland phenomena” — the apparitions that came to him as he was half-asleep — and explicate them in the light of Mithraic religious symbols, Old Testament wisdom, the words of Jesus, passages from Shakespeare, poems by Nietzsche, Teutonic and Persian and Chinese and Indian legend.
Crazy uncle Noamy (Foamy Noamy) up there in the attic sez anarchism is about us questioning power and making it justify itself.
Maybe another way of saying what Noam thinks anarchism is about is...manufacturing majority consent?
Economic Times India - Anand Soondas,TNN
'...The merits of the case apart - there are voices growing louder that at least one of the two women who quite gladly slept with Assange had links with the CIA, and that it was a meticulously laid honey-trap for the Australian who might have been ignorant of Sweden's peculiar sex crime laws - there was not a whisper from world leaders when South Africa failed to give the Dalai Lama a visa to attend Desmond Tutu's 80th birthday celebrations in October. There's little hope of support from anyone of significance for Assange...'
Who's afraid of Julian Assange of WikiLeaks? Everyone
Charlie Post - the disorderer
Some Thoughts on the “Occupy Wall Street” Movement
From Anti-One 1 - by Apio Ludd
This one offers an opportunity to re-afirm democracy, in spite of everything, as a major point of vital interest between us and the small army of left-communists who want to trade off the good name of 'anarchist'.
Reality tells the story. After being badly burned in 1918 most anarchs decided it was better to stick with democracy over Marxism. And by doing so they generally managed to last nearly three years instead of barely three months.
There is no reason to expect any Marxist to change their spots and the left-communist makes no secret that as well as despising social-democracy ( representative and etc) most of them also despise anarchy, anarchism and all the best anarch's. Debord made an exception now and then to patronize us here and there. All the time the words stood there in his book about the spectacle making it clear where his ultimate loyalties lay.
A lot of anarch's seem in denial about what left-fascism is. There is no border between us and what many would regard with horror as fascist hate-speech and Holodomor denial. No difference between us and left-communism. Compare and contrast this fatal neglect with the regular attention all three of our other borders get. The fringe, the center and the right come in for regular detailed critique. At least for the last ten years I've been online. If we regard Israel as failed state for not having one border then we are are a manifestly failed ideology. The left-communist entryist guests have taken over the house.
I've been talking about this obvious and glaring problem that makes us unsafe at any speed and over any terrain for several years. Ever since I noticed how none of the obvious puppy-love sent in the lefterly direction was ever reciprocated. This was around the middle of the noughties and I blogged endlessy on it at Blurty under 'buttdarling'. No one should ever recommend a poisonous or toxic product in any environment and if they do then they must be made accountable. If anglo-anarchists are really peddling Marxism by another name then that is gross and culpable negligence. Those who steal lives must pay.
Still at the treehouse...
'...Some Anarchists include college professors like Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, and David Graeber who is a professor of anthropology. These are highly intelligent academic scholars who have put a lot of thought into their politics and decided that a society built on participatory democracy and free association absent a professional political elite is not only possible but desirable. David Graeber who is well versed in cultural anthropology sites the success of existing stateless societies that are ‘off the map’. Noam Chomsky is a proponent of Anarcho-Syndicalism, a system that very much appeared to ‘work’ rather well for a number of years in Spain during their civil war period until it failed to defeat the fascist coup; though during those years it worked better than anyone had anticipated. These individuals are not advocating chaos but an order based on ideas like participatory democracy and autonomous confederation of unions...
A-hem. Zinn was a dead Marxist last time I looked. D. Graeber described himself as a Marxist recently. Noam's definition of anarchism I find weak and worthless and his solidarity and support for known fascists repugnant. ( Free speech for Holocaust deniers and favorable PR fluffing for known left-communist red-fascists such as Pannekoek and etc. With friends like Chomsky we don't need enemies.)
Anyone who puts any thought at all into their politics doesn't try and make out other people for things they just aren't.
'...There can be positive roles for more militant activists that will help build alliances, like protecting activists from the police without antagonizing them...'
True. Very true. However the specific experience of the Wombles/ White overalls in London doesn't inspire confidence in me re emulating them. I have an enlarged liver that I use a lot daily. Yr milage may vary.
INFO from a-news. 'From Americans against the Political System' story.
Still at the treehouse
The Strike Is Not Going to Work (or, La Finitude Infinie)
Confusing and conflating left-commie Marxism with anarchism is not just a major-league category error it makes you a major-league left-fascist arsehole. FUCK off and start your own crap left-commie websites willyou!
Spocko cosy as lice with Nicole Swindler
Wir wessen. Looking for a needle in a needle stack. We went through thousands of federal government property records, found some companies who were the leasers/renters of choice to Secret Government, and looked at electrical consumption records for the federal government. We made a gigantic database and then correlated the data.
Think of the amount of money spent just on security? Steve Aftergood at the Federation of American Scientists (Secrecy News) is the oracle on this subject and he estimates over $10 billion — billion! — just on security, the classification system, the clearances, physical security, etc., and I think even that’s low given the military efforts and local efforts. Talk about a self-perpetuating system!
( I once sent Steve some info on the CIA budget I cribbed from a book on spying called ' The second oldest profession' by Phillip Knightley. Aussie, aussie, etc )
To me though, the work began in the early 1980s, when I became interested in the nuclear infrastructure, what I saw as the encroachment of the nuclear war-making system into all corners of the scientific and military establishment. The book I did then — Nuclear Battlefields — was my first mapping effort. I’ve been obsessively trying to make sense of Secret worlds ever since. Code Names just showed me that there was a lot hidden out there, but more, it introduced me to the post-9/11 explosion.
Don’t we really think that the first order question for Americans is to get a handle on just what it is that the government is collecting and why? Without going into sources or targets, I think we could at least have this discussion, but we don’t. Sometimes I feel like those who do the surveillance, those who come up with newer and newer ways to follow everything, are happy to have a conspiracy-driven and chaotic debate about intelligence, as if it is some kind of deterrent against people doing bad things. I think though that history has shown us that that isn’t true.
The increasing marriage of the private and public sectors is the next big revelation in my mind. In the name of cyber security, critical infrastructure protection, see-something-say-something, etc., the “links” being made with the private sector — a kind of privileged “auxiliary” of state national security — is constantly growing. Take a look at InfraGard or some of the critical infrastructure protection programs; in isolation they seem civic and innocuous but overall, it’s an awful lot of people drinking at the national security fountain. Sear. Tim Shorrock, author of Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing (2008) for more on.
Lowly forest grunts
There’s a funny and very revealing exchange in Chapter 8, where you call the public affairs office at the U.S. Forest Service to ask how many of their employees have top secret clearances. “We don’t have anyone with a top secret clearance,” the staffer tells you. You say, “Yes, you do,” and the staffer replies, “No, we don’t.” And it goes on like that until you say you’re happy to email the staffer the information that proves the Forest Service, of all places, does in fact have top secret-cleared employees. Two questions here: First, tell us why in the world the Forest Service needs employees with that level of clearance. And second, can you share some other examples of agencies that you had to educate about their own level of secrecy?
William M. Arkin November 6th, 2011 at 2:57 pm 72
In response to http://fdlbooksalon.com/2011/11/06/fdl-book-salon-welcomes-william-arkin/#comment-2212659
We definitely found that Top Secret had infiltrated all elements of government, from the Architect of the Capitol to the Forest Service. What we found was for agencies to play in the counter-terrorism sand-box, to receive warnings or be part of the “sharing” of information, they all needed to have TS clearances. But on top of that, some people in every agency needed TS clearances just to participate in government emergency exercises, particularly any that touched upon continuity of government or other controversial programs.
Public opinion matters. Keeping people in the dark and depriving them information makes it easy for the rulers to manipulate the opinion. Remember 70% of the Americans at one point believed Saddam was responsible for setting up OJ Simpson.
In 2010, more U.S.ians died from dog bites than from terrorism, leading me to suggest that terrorists replace dogs as man’s best friend.
William M. Arkin November 6th, 2011 at 3:28 pm 114
In response to http://fdlbooksalon.com/2011/11/06/fdl-book-salon-welcomes-william-arkin/#comment-2212700
Drones are increasingly operating in the U.S., first borrowed from the military and then by CPB and other civil agencies. I think the Maricopa Sheriff’s office in Arizona is even trying to get their own surveillance drones; the beginning I guess of a wave.
I’ll tell you my favorite story from the Top Secret America experience.
So one day, I drive out to a CIA building near the Dulles Smithsonian Museum annex. I knew that there was a new complex there, and I even think it is a matter of public record, though it doesn’t say: “CIA.”
I get there and park outside the gate in a little cul de sac right near the entrance, with all its security warnings, USG property, Abandon Hope All Yee Who Enter Here, etc. I get out and start taking pics.
A security jeep comes roaring out, Security guy stopped, lights ablazing, Sunglasses, gun on hip, the whole game. “Can I see your ID?,” he says.
“Can I see yours,” I say.
“I work for the Security Protective Service,” he says.
“I’m not sure I’ve ever heard of that, what agency is that with?,” I asked.
“Listen, I don’t have to tell you, ID please?”
So I ask if I’m standing on public property, and he says yes.
SO I say, so let me get this straight, I’m standing on public property and someone who purports to be a federal officer but won’t show me his ID want to see mine. I work for the Washington Post. Show me your ID.”
“Have a good day,” he says, getting into the jeep and roaring off.
'...over the much longer haul, new chapters in the info wars, along with new and better technologies, will emerge. We are likely to be in a lull, not at an end, After all, the one thing the world is not short on is secrets.
David Carr is a media columnist for The New York Times...'
Here's a headline for a new chapter 'The Killer App!. Cypherpunks revenge system goes viral. Govt goes underground'. This ones so cheap its free.
'...the notion that state secrets across the globe had been cracked open like a piñata once and for all, and that secrets will be regularly plopping into public view, seems remote...'
I've actually noticed a pretty steady plopping and don't anticipate it drying up soon. Paging Kenny!
'..The technological muscle required to maintain a robust site, as evidenced by WikiLeaks’s on-and-off again operational status, is significant and hard to come by..'
This is why John Young is often mistaken for Arnold Swartezenegger's twin brother.
'..WikiLeaks represented a major technological advance in the art and mechanism of the leak, and it eliminated the need to spend many secret hours at the copy machine..'
The Clare Sterling and Judith Miller episodes represented what Bob Woodward called 'blowback' in the Sterling case and ' weapons-of-mass-deception' in the Miller case.