Criminal In Perpetuity

/ Institutions … Kleptocracy …

Institutional Hubris

Every experienced liar knows (and we’re all experienced liars) that the trouble with lies is that you have to try to remember who you told which lie to. It snowballs: soon you go catatonic, juggling, failing-to-juggle a (near) infinity of lies.

What’s true of individuals goes triple for groups, and goes ten-tuple for institutions. The next thing you know everyone has pawned his soul to pass the blame: till every scapegoat bears more shit on his head than Atlas holding up the world.

thanx hezabelle

Our Jesus, our Christ, of the Bible, is much Hellenized:
Cheez, here’s an Atlas (/ Herakles, Hercules) who looks like Jesus!
(Cheez, we even see his pubes!)

Thus, groups out-lie the liars, and institutions institutionalize the group-lies. Everyone is holding up a Rube Goldberg gerrymander of ancient-to-current deceits.

Rube Goldberg
thanx wikispaces

In my youth Rube Goldberg machines found me, a willing recipient;
this day I had to go looking for examples (then found lots, easily).


The most grotesque political gerrymander is a paean to innocence,
a monument to purity and simplicity, compared to
the mapping we each maintain of our own imaginary innocence.

Try an image search on “gerrymander” (as I did):
delicate bigger, detailed.

Last night Jan and I astonished ourselves at the beauty, grace, and appositeness of Ang Lee’s film (DVD form) of Life of Pi. I was floored by the genius of that novel when I stumbled upon it in jail, FDC Miami, 2006, the library contents mostly (left-behind) donations from former prisoners (how many of them actually guilty of anything compared to the rest of us impossible to tell (in a society built of a gerrymander of already gerrymandered lies)).

The protagonist, Pi, tells of his youth when he tried to believe in a dozen world religions simultaneously: talk about juggling!

I invite you to notice how much of religion blends not only our hopes, but our deceits, our protestations, the mix bursting into meta-dimensions as myth: combining contradiction, paradox, oxymora … virgin birth, forgiveness for sins-we-daily-escalate-the-committing-of …

Jesus, the shit we lay on Jesus.

I’ll add at my pleasure.

Speaking of movies, Jan and I are also about to watch the DVD series of the 1950s filming of War and Peace. In the 1960s NY’s WBAI dedicated a week to reading Tolstay, framed with lots of Russian music, allowing listeners, co-readers an hour or two of sleep per night that week. The week climaxed with the Elgin Theater giving a midnight performance (ending 8 or 9 the following AM) of the Russian 1966 version. How that theater howled with enthusiasm.
Anyway, I remember a detail of that supreme novel from my own reading of the early 1960s: I read much of it while in the army. A detail reminds me of the above:
Pierre’s wife is Helene. She doesn’t like Pierre much. (We don’t like her much, we come to love Pierre: love, love, love.) At parties she lays her foundation for divorce by asking people who they think she should marry! Lady, you’re already married: supposed to mean something in Christian society. Pierre doesn’t stop her, they go separate ways, then he falls in love, finds a much better partner: Natasha, still somehow a virgin after Prince Andrew dies.
So: Helene talking about a future mate while mated reminds me of Americans talking about the nobility of their founding a republic in the 1770s. Uh, on other people’s land? With other people’s ideas? Land held by force, “won” by false-dealing? Ideas brainwashed by compulsory schooling?

Before Jews tell the world that God chose them to take Canaanite land, shouldn’t the Jews let God tell the Canaanites? Shouldn’t the Jews sit back and wait for the Canaanites to deliver it?
Before Christians tell the world that God loves them (the Christians) and hates the Jews, shouldn’t the Christians sit back and let God do the telling?

All these claims of what God said: shouldn’t we hear them from God?
Well, if we first-thing, quick, string up, everyone bearing a message from God, how do we know what God said?

Take me for example. My writing carries messages from God. Have you read any of my writing? Is it an accident that you haven’t? I mean my stories, dialogues, novels. I mean my FLEX publications: my 1970 Saint Illich-derived offer of an internet, cybernetic data bases, not state-regulated?
A dozen people have read them, a half-a-dozen people have understood at least 20% of them: how much of them do you know? understand?

So how can we pretend to know about God? or what God said? to whom, through whom?
We haven’t listened to God, we haven’t listened to God’s messengers either: and we imagine that Judgment will be whatever is convenience and flattering to us!

If Jesus was thirty-three when we murdered him, what would he have told us of God when he was thirty-four? Or seventy-seven?

No, no. Expect at Judgment facts we’ve never even heard of, all our certainties drowned by truth.

Institutions Sentience & Semiotics Kleptocracy

About pk

Seems to me that some modicum of honesty is requisite to intelligence. If we look in the mirror and see not kleptocrats but Christians, we’re still in the same old trouble.
This entry was posted in institutions, kleptocracy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s