Archive for freedom

Yo Soy Yo Mismo

Posted in Ethics & Morals, Poems, Poems, Rhymes, Riddles, relationships, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 3, 2019 by Drogo

Yo soy yo mismo – I am myself

I am married to Freedom, and she knows me for who i am. We were married when i became an adult, and our wedding vows were made with each heart break. I am loyal to my friends, and mostly to the best of them, but no one owns or controls me. Those who live with each other are part of each other’s lives, and no promises or betrayals are needed for patterns of behavior to be known. To love Freedom is a game of release, without cheating because there are no jealous hateful rules for others to enforce.

Freedom to Vote 3rd Party

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 21, 2017 by Drogo

In America, Land of the Brave and Free, we have a right to vote our conscience.

Sanders & Stein did NOT get Trump elected, the electoral college decided Clinton’s popular win wasn’t worth shit, and many voted for Trump because they hated Clinton. Some of us are not buying corporate-crony talking points anymore, and that means we vote for candidates that do not appear as corrupted, and some are not likely to vote at all if only given a choice between two-evils that clearly don’t care about the masses. Next time someone tries to blame progressives for voting for who they want, tell them there are serious reasons why millions of voters feel disenfranchised.

Also, the far Left is not militant or violent because their main beliefs revolve around Peace and Love, and harmony with the World, and anyone that acts violently against others is acting as a militant (which is a Right-wing behavior based on their beliefs) or just simply a criminal against humanity. Left-wing regimes who use ruthless militaries always contradicted their Liberal convictions; which is a failure to serve the people, and why true Left-wing Liberals always seek more Peaceful means to sustain democratic government.

The Left wants more real democracy, the Right wants elites to represent you; this is why corporate Democrats are really not true Liberals when they support authoritarian business deals over citizens rights. The DNC has been responsible for the New Red Scare, candidates who say that ‘nukes are always on the table’, and fund endless war. The GOP meanwhile has started a New Cold War, as well as all the rest.

If everyone that agreed with the utopian ideals of Sanders or Stein had voted for them, instead of voting for the lesser of 2 evils, we would have not have Trump as a ‘representative’ leader. 12% of Bernie voters voted for Trump because they hated Hillary. Many voters did not vote (half the country) because they hate the 2-party system.

see also: Electoral College and Ranked Choice Voting = Real Democracy

French Revolution

Posted in Critical Commentary of Civilization, Economics, History, Politics, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , on February 24, 2017 by Drogo


By 1780 French commoners were angry with their ruler, King Louis XVI; and the way nobles ran their country. Although the government economy was suffering, nobles still lived in luxury and paid no taxes. Meanwhile the peasants and workers had to pay high taxes, relative to what they made, and there was not enough work or income for them all because the upper classes were keeping all the money. By 1789 the economy was broken, and the nobles called a meeting with the middle class. The middle class demanded that nobles pay taxes at least, but the nobles refused. This made the French masses of commoners furious. A crowd of poor people helped by soldiers, attacked and captured a large prison called the Bastille. After the storming of the Bastille, many other lower classes rebelled in other areas, the middle class took control, and most of the nobles were executed in a period known as the ‘Reign of Terror’. The military rage needed for the revolution, led to years of war campaigns and promoted war mongers like Napoleon, as greed and power was transferred and allowed to remain unchecked by humanitarian ethical philosophies. This is why revolution is never enough, if the natural tendencies of abuse and neglect are not addressed.





STEWARDSHIP: Freedom and Responsibility

Posted in Critical Commentary of Civilization, Sustainability with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 1, 2013 by Drogo

Part 1: Freedom

One can never truly be free.

As Gerry Spense says, “True freedom is nothingness”. To be free of loneliness, people confine themselves to a relationship of some sort. To be free of their current lives, people drive away in a car to be alone on the highway, but then they are confined to the driver’s seat and their own minds, not to mention the laws of physics. Then people blast off in a rocket-ship to outer-space, and are restrained by life support systems, and their own human minds once again.

Life is about constantly trading one freedom for another. While existing in this universe, we are confined to laws, whether natural or man-made. Physically there is no escaping this reality, but the mind has the potential for freedom, during certain transcendental moments or states. As Immanuel Kant alluded to in his writings; with a rational approach we can determine our terms of reality and freedom, and respond to them respectively.

To live in a society there are obligations to maintain living standards and order. If we respect the lives of others, then we might expect the same in return. If we do not respect the lives of others, then we should not expect respect in return. Perhaps freedom is not just self-determination in choices me make, but also our ability to free our minds from suffering, so that we can enjoy our lives. If freedom is transcendental, then we as a culture can shift our paradigm so that environmental and social stewardship is less of a burden, and more of a freedom.

Part 2: Ethical Responsibility

Respecting the lives of animals is a necessary part of our existence. To maintain and respect what we have achieved as humans, it is the least we can do to maintain and respect the natural environment of which we are all a part. To defend animals from our aggression, we must assign them legal rights, to protect the ecosystem which is our food-chain if nothing else.

As humans we must decide ethical issues in order to be responsible stewards of the Earth, as our population increases. Hunting is natural, but it disregards rights to life. We need to analyze certain natural occurrences, and adjust our living situations according to our conclusions.

It can be said by literal semantics, that when we create something, we are responsible for creating it. For example when asked the question “Are you responsible for creating that?”, and we say yes, then then we are the ones responsible for the action of creating it. This is true biologically as much as technologically; and yet we act like irresponsible ignorant idiots by producing massive amounts of toxic waste, garbage, and other pollutions. As creatures with the ability to reason, perhaps it is time to take more responsibility for our actions. Life is a learning process, and so is evolution; we must be open-minded to different ways of thinking in a New Age.

I think, therefore I am.

Regarding human over-population, I believe that the problem is solvable, but we must be open to redefining our ambitions and reducing our numbers. We have become needlessly dependent on machines created to simplify our lives, but often these devices are not more convenient when the time spent earning the money needed to buy, repair, and replace them is added up. Using the same human ingenuity it took to invent all the contraptions, we can expand our architectural realms and enlighten our ways of living with nature; only then can we progress into space, and work on Universal goals.

The purpose of technology is to secure a good living environment, not to destroy the environment. Technology serves us, so maybe we can put computer intelligence to good use by dealing with our population problem. As humans we must remember our compassion, and never let technology blindly guide us towards a sharp spike, and then a dead-end flat-line.

Responsible human beings should decide for themselves what their own guidelines are for life. We should not have to rely on machines. There are many humans with reasoning disabilities, but society can help them. It is fortunate that groups like Green Peace exists to battle the irresponsible ignorance committed by irresponsible humans. We must strive for responsible stewardship, despite ignorance. The battle between ignorant irresponsibility and wise responsibility is on-going, but it if there is no battle then the lazy selfish ignorant masses will have their way, and the human race will exist as demons and zombies. As we peal away one layer of ignorance, we find another, so it will take a long time. We need to be shepherds of ourselves, and stewards of our domains.

Wisdom through awareness of ignorance.



Self, Family, & Culture

RWU Dec. 8, 1995


Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on November 26, 2012 by Drogo

Art as an Avatar for My Life

Posted in Critical Commentary of Civilization, Military, Pagan with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 5, 2011 by Drogo

Reflections on the Film Avatar by a Veteran of the War on Terror

Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, Last Samurai, Fern Gully, or whatever you want to compare Avatar with, its all good shit. Avatar had some great new special effects. It moved science fiction to the next technological level.

Now for my personal thoughts. I didnt need to see it right away, at least when it came out, since the plot and the fantastic alien imagery is pretty much what goes on inside my head since i can remember. heh when it came out, i was too depressed by my real-life military vs pagan conflict, and was afraid the re-enforcing energy i would have gotten from the film would depress-anger me further into something drastic. As it is, i barely made it out without Hulking out totally. If i had been free at the time, i would have gone to see it with friends, hell i would have organized it. i was too drained… feeling better now though 🙂

‎5 years of tolerating military intolerance was a huge sacrifice for me, my ways were “wrong” and the more i expressed myself the harder it was. The ideas defended in Avatar were in direct opposition to the War on Terror and martial laws that i had to learn and practice. Now that i have my citizen liberties back, i can enjoy my life more through these movies that i like; art and life as one. I may have had more direct influence on the military from within, but i have a wider range of influence with citizen liberties fully restored. For example, James Cameron could not have made that film if he was in the US Military. Enough said.

As one friend put it “It’s really good, as long as you don’t think too much about it. :)” That recommendation works for the complex experience of Avatar. It works in part for me, because I DO THINK about things too much, often. As I found myself inevitably analyzing Avatar (as i knew i would), understanding the story and relating it to my own feelings; I realized just like in real life, I am most at peace and happy when i can just relax and enjoy the experience. As soon as i find myself not coming to satisfactory conclusions about certain points, its time to shift. Sometimes the only satisfactory conclusions on issues are the satisfaction that there is not much I can do about anything except to share my thoughts with anyone that will listen, in their own time. So I can just leave things out there, to share with others.

I think comparisons are ok, but i feel like while we get the messages about multi-cultural acceptance, there are perhaps not enough movies like it to counter the amount of population that loves to hate other cultures and praise military action above all else as though it was just a sports game. That is why i am not usually harsh on fiction that has some lessons, regardless of how ‘cool’ it is. I hate to say it, but for many people no amount of lessons about cultural sharing will be enough to stop Wars. I dont blame films for that. Films like Avatar may change the minds of some, perhaps, and for that they may help to avoid real life suffering, especially if the values get passed on. Entertainment has effects on culture, for better or for worse.

If I take stories too seriously, I blame Joseph Campbell. The fact is I like stories, and love powerful fiction stories very much because we can talk about serious real issues that we can relate to, without the trauma risk that makes non-fiction too personal for debate. So I will go into the issue progressive people have with the “White Male Hero”.

What Avatar has in common with Dances with Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, and Last Samurai; one “White Male Hero” is the catalyst embracing the underdog culture. It may be silly but that is the tool to engage traditional white viewers that would not be able to bridge the cultural gaps any other way. Sad, but true.

We progressives of course would be able to see a film where the aliens win, without having a saviour that is ‘one of ours’. In reality it often happens that negotiators and important figures can relate to both sides… being of mixed blood or simply mixed cultures. I do feel the “White Guy” character was over-used when Last Samurai came out years ago. An important detail to note about the “Last” movies, is that the last of the Mohicans and Samurai had figures from those cultures that actually were the “Lasts”; its just that they were the secondary characters. So it could be argued in those films that the white actors were not really the “lasts” and their importance in the plot was overblown for the sake of engaging a white audience.

There was a line about “this isnt some pagan voodoo” that bothered me, because it seemed to be negating the point of the film in relation to reality; in other words explaining that things we have dismissed as “magic” or “supernatural” can be scientifically or psychologically explained as having functions; so i would have preferred Weaver to say “This isnt pagan voodoo in the WAY YOU THINK OK IT”, so to me it was either bad writing or it was written as though she just responded off the top of her head, in either case it didnt support translation to real world morality or comprehension regarding different cultures as much as i would have liked.

Another problem is about the “leg challenged”, and Avatar seemed to ignore the fact that we can be heroes without legs or virtual reality avatars. Unfortunately Avatar does not take that problem on. So a miss there.

I guess im saying the “White Guy Hero” issue and other problems are like dirty bath water, and the other strong issues about the environment, ecosystem, nature, science, communications, non-violent conflict resolution, etc are the Baby. So we don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water, do we?

So yes we should have more films with indigenous heroes. It was just impossible to go from the old school “We the Cowboys good, they the Indians bad” movies to “We the Cowboys bad, They the Indians good”, at least for a population made to say the National Anthem since they were kids, members of the military, or politicians etc. The message we want probably is NOT suicide. Right?

So of course we need to find a middle road in the real world, between Good and Bad, where 2 cultures can coexist without War. Ongoing War across the Globe is one of the great challenges we face, and minds must be opened to peaceful options with peaceful tools like film entertainment, video games, and other modern engaging forms of stories. More direct political or religious approaches often seem to have less effect on War than ART. We should not give up on Peace, and we must use all of these thought-provoking tools, despite the fact that the most important messages may be lost on many.

If you can make a better film than Avatar, do it. Or if you have something already that meets the most important moral messages for our time, name it. So we progress to the next level of evolution through cosmic awareness, let’s get it on!

– Drogo

Exposing the Vietnam War Conspiracy

Posted in Events / Celebrations, Military with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 26, 2010 by Drogo

Daniel Ellsberg and his Pentagon Papers

Daniel Ellsberg was a United States military analyst.

While Ellsberg was employed by the RAND Corporation in 1971, he released the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret Pentagon study of US government decision-making about the Vietnam War, to The New York Times and other newspapers.

He attended Harvard University on a scholarship, graduating with B.S. in economics in 1952 (summa cum laude). He then studied at Cambridge University on a Woodrow Wilson Fellowship. A year later he returned to Harvard for graduate school. In 1954, he left Harvard for the U.S. Marine Corps. He graduated first in a class in Quantico, Virginia. He served two years as a platoon leader, and was discharged from the Corps as a first lieutenant in 1957. He resumed graduate studies at Harvard, but after two years he interrupted his academic studies again, to work at RAND, where he concentrated on nuclear strategy. He earned a Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard in 1962. His dissertation introduced a paradox in decision theory now known as the Ellsberg paradox.

Ellsberg served in the Pentagon from August 1964 under Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara (and, in fact, was on duty on the evening of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, reporting the incident to McNamara). He then served for two years in Vietnam working for General Edward Lansdale as a civilian in the State Department.

After his tour of duty in Vietnam, Ellsberg resumed working at RAND. In 1967, he contributed to a top-secret study of classified documents regarding the conduct of the Vietnam War that had been commissioned by Defense Secretary McNamara. These documents, completed in 1968, later became known collectively as the Pentagon Papers. Because he held an extremely high-level security clearance, Ellsberg was one of very few individuals who had access to the complete set of documents.

By 1969 Ellsberg began attending anti-war events while still remaining in his position at RAND. He experienced an epiphany attending a War Resisters League conference at Haverford College in August 1969, listening to a speech given by a draft resister named Randy Kehler, who said he was “very excited” that he would soon be able to join his friends in prison. Ellsberg described his reaction:

“…It was the example he was setting with his life. How his words in general showed that he was a stellar American, and that he was going to jail as a very deliberate choice — because he thought it was the right thing to do. There was no question in my mind that my government was involved in an unjust war that was going to continue and get larger. Thousands of young men were dying each year. I left the auditorium and found a deserted men’s room. I sat on the floor and cried for over an hour, just sobbing. The only time in my life I’ve reacted to something like that. Randy Kehler never thought his going to prison would end the war. If I hadn’t met Randy Kehler it wouldn’t have occurred to me to copy and release the Pentagon Papers.”

These documents “demonstrated, among other things, that the Johnson Administration had systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress, about a subject of transcendent national interest and significance”. They revealed that the government had knowledge from the beginning of the War, that the War would not likely be won, and that continuing would lead to more casualties than was ever admitted publicly. Further, the papers showed a deep cynicism towards the public and a disregard for safety of soldiers and civilians.

Throughout 1970, Ellsberg covertly attempted to persuade a few sympathetic U.S. Senators (among them J. William Fulbright, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and George McGovern, a leading opponent of the war) to release the papers on the Senate floor, because a Senator could not be prosecuted for anything he said on-the-record before the Senate. Ellsberg told U.S. Senators that they should be prepared to go to jail in order to end the Vietnam War.

On June 29, 1971, U.S. Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska entered 4,100 pages of the Papers into the record of his Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds, which he had received from Ellsberg via Ben Bagdikian— then an editor at the Washington Post. These portions of the Papers were subsequently published by Beacon Press.

John Mitchell, Nixon’s Attorney General, almost immediately issued a telegram to the Times ordering that it halt publication. The Times refused, and the government brought suit against it.

Although the Times eventually won the trial before the Supreme Court, an appellate court ordered that the Times temporarily halt further publication. This was the first successful attempt by the federal government to restrain the publication of a major newspaper since the presidency of Abraham Lincoln during the US Civil War. Ellsberg released the Pentagon Papers to 17 other newspapers in rapid succession. The right of the press to publish the papers was upheld in New York Times Co. v. United States.

As a response to the leaks, the Nixon administration began a campaign against further leaks and against Ellsberg personally. Aides Egil Krogh and David Young under John Ehrlichman’s supervision created the “White House Plumbers”, which would later lead to the Watergate burglaries.

The release of these papers was politically embarrassing to those involved in the Johnson, Kennedy, and Nixon administrations. Nixon’s Oval Office tape from June 14, 1972 shows H. R. Haldeman describing the situation to Nixon:

“Rumsfeld was making this point this morning. To the ordinary guy, all this is a bunch of gobbledygook. But out of the gobbledygook comes a very clear thing. … It shows that people do things the president wants to do even though it’s wrong, and the president can be wrong.”

In admitting to giving the documents to the press, Ellsberg said:

“I felt that as an American citizen, as a responsible citizen, I could no longer cooperate in concealing this information from the American public. I did this clearly at my own jeopardy and I am prepared to answer to all the consequences of this decision.”

He (and his partner Russo) faced charges under the Espionage Act of 1917 and other charges including theft and conspiracy, carrying a total maximum sentence of 115 years. Their trial commenced in 1973, but due to the gross governmental misconduct and illegal evidence gathering, and the defense by Leonard Boudin and Charles Nesson, Judge Byrne dismissed all charges against Ellsberg and Russo.

The Pentagon Papers paint a picture of governmental arrogance, miscalculation, lies and deception. Worse, the McNamara-commissioned study confirmed what many Americans were thinking at the time: They had not been told the truth about the war in Vietnam. Study researchers, reviewing top secret memos, learned that government officials had not fully disclosed the extent of U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia. Even more troubling, official files proved the US Government knew about (at least) the coup d’etat that resulted in the 1963 assassination of South Vietnam’s president, Ngo Dinh Diem, and his brother. The worst was that the incident that our President used to get us into the Vietnam War, the Gulf of Tonkin, was a false-flag non-event (fake). Admiral Stockdale recalled there was no attack the night of August 4, despite our President and reporters telling us there was. The year after Congress passed the Tonkin Resolution, President Johnson joked with reporters about what really happened: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.”

It was the Tonkin Resolution that gave the President powers and public support for any military action against other countries.


Ellsberg is the recipient of the Inaugural Ron Ridenhour Courage Prize, a prize established by The Nation Institute and The Fertel Foundation. In 1978 he accepted the Gandhi Peace Award from Promoting Enduring Peace. On September 28, 2006 he was awarded the Right Livelihood Award.

Ellsberg later claimed that after his trial ended, the Watergate prosecutor informed him of an aborted plot by Liddy and the “plumbers” to have 12 Cuban-Americans who had previously worked for the CIA to “totally incapacitate” Ellsberg as he appeared at a public rally, though it is unclear whether that meant to assassinate Ellsberg or merely to hospitalize him. In his autobiography, G. Gordon Liddy describes an “Ellsberg neutralization proposal” originating from Howard Hunt, which involved drugging Ellsberg with LSD, by dissolving it in his soup, at a fund-raising dinner in Washington in order to “have Ellsberg incoherent by the time he was to speak” and thus “make him appear a near burnt-out drug case” and “discredit him”. The plot involved waiters from the Miami Cuban community. According to Liddy, when the plan was finally approved, “there was no longer enough lead time to get the Cuban waiters up from their Miami hotels and into place in the Washington Hotel where the dinner was to take place” and the plan was “put into abeyance pending another opportunity”


“In revealing the workings of government that led to the Vietnam war, the newspapers nobly did precisely that which the Founders hoped and trusted they would do.”

~ Justice Hugo Black