I have been afflicted of late by people discussing the Eagle verses Bear War. Something has broken under Heaven, something wicked, something that prevented nearly all of us to see reality. I think it is the sun. In any case, the three greatest powers of the Earth are now, more than ever, behaving according to their assigned metaphor:
The Eagle always spies prey from afar, swooping outward from its inaccessible nest to engage the stationary powers, rarely attacking a stronger opponent and always from the advantage of heaven.
The Dragon coils, plotting, in its lair, too afflicted with maintaining its hoard, too oriented towards its den to be a consistent external threat, but rather abides, connives and every other age and again emerges in some fury.
The Bear is less prone to adventure than the Eagle, furious when provoked, prone both to seasonal gluttony and inactivity.
Currently, in pop media culture, The Bear is the madman, the bad guy, who takes every ill-advised action, does nothing for a sound reason, and is a pure sadistic aggressor.
95% of Mind Cattle in the Feedlot of American Souls believe this. The other 5% believe that The Bear is the Good Guy and the Eagle is the Bad Guy and that the Eagle is misbehaving under heaven for no good reason. But, the fact that these mythic powers are now acting openly according to type, gives the tiny fraction of a percent of us able to consider such things the ability to see through the lie, to rend that veil and use the lies as a prism to discern what is not real.
This polarity rests upon our insane, cartoon image of a Good-Bad polarity, with one side of a war all-good and the other all-bad. This also relies upon our belief that all war is all-bad, that it is a mistake and ruins everything.
The Bear was born in war against the Mongol Hordes, breaking from an age of bondage.
The Eagle was born in war, breaking from Britannic bondage.
Both of these earthly powers are the titanic children of war.
These two powers have become first and distant second of their kind through defeating the very same pint-sized enemies in 1945, one Аrуаn, one Asian.
It is impossible for us to see that conflict between the great powers might serve them both and instead ruin the minor proxy powers at the center of the various fronts in the conflict:
-Military
-Energy
-Agricultural
-Political
How can we be so brain washed?
I note that the few news broadcasts I see and hear have dramatic movie music, [0] are slickly produced and focus exclusively on a single enemy, Doctor Evil. This person is supposed to be, according to fantasy:
1. a unilateral dictator,
2. acting against the interests of his henchmen,
3. and is insane.
But in reality:
1. he is not a dictator but the front man for a criminal oligarchy
2. under his rule the life expectancy and the economic well being of his people have gone up, while drug addiction has gone down.
3. he, like his enemies - the criminal oligarchy opposed to him, is acting rationally to a scrupulous degree.
The Nation State is the child of War. Ancient nations were brought into being by tribal wars.
The Modern Nation State was specifically the child of The Thirty Years War, with a birth date of 1648 at The Peace of Westphalia Delivery Room.
Where does this idea that war does not serve the state come from?
In one sense, the fantastical idea that the state serves the citizen, who is in fact a subject of the state, sets the stage for the delusion that war does not serve the state. For war sucks for the subject called into combat.
However, the belief that every war has an evil bad guy and a sterling good guy, has a recent pedigree. Of old, war was “the sport of kings.” Now, wars are morality dramas. Modern audio-visual media, specifically the arts of consumer advertising and of movie making, created the trust and the narrative construct necessary for almost every American to look at reality and see fantasy, specifically a prefabricated fantasy sold to them by advertising and entertainment productions.
The American is unable to look at the situation the Bear finds himself in and say: “Oh, if the Bear had backed a coup in Canada, and the new Canadian government was executing American resident aliens and was joining a nuclear alliance against us, we’d invade Canada.”
The inability to see reality, in the American mind, began with the beginning of American history: 1941, a date that shall live in infamy.
Even though the Eagle was attacked by the Rising Sun, we believe that that entire war, a war which most of the major combatant nations thirsted for, and diligently prepared for, was caused by one man, one maniac, one madman!
This narrative has been reflected in Movies, TV and Comic Books since American pre-history, being the 1930s. Before 1941 everything was myth. After 1941, everything was good versus evil.
The classic western, whether the bad guy was a gun slinger, cattle baron, bandit chief or Indian chief, or Custer in Little Big Man, always worked to satisfy his own mania and ego, and always did so at the expense of his henchmen, always. The bad guy also, always looses—always, the bad guy can never win.
That narrative, that the bad guy always loses and the good guy always wins, agrees with American history, in which America, was always the good guy and always won, that is, in anything called a war. [2] Where war was clothed in the sheep skin of the police action and victory was a secondary aim to preventing the victory of the proxy bad guy over our proxy good guy, a big bad guy was not generated by the media machine.
However, when the nation decided that it would crush a small nation, that leader was always made into a proxy bad guy of cartoonish evil, even though in most cases that leader had been an American stooge: Panama, Libya, Iraq.
Think about comic book bad guys and their reflections in TV and movies. Note how the bad guy has armies of henchmen who he never cares about at all, who come to a bad end before he does. The Batman franchise is perfect here.
Side-by-side with comic good guy bad guy narrative fiction were two other major forms in which the bad guy is totally evil.
The Western, the iconic movie myth machine always features a bad guy who loses to a good guy who is either an outsider fighting someone else’s fight for them, or he is a reluctant hero who may not settle down in the place he liberates from evil. The western was the perfect narrative vehicle for conditioning the most able American men—rural men—to accept the idea that they would give up their freedoms and liberties, and be sent across the world battling evil, for another people unable to protect themselves. The U.S. Navy adopted this “Force for Good” narrative as their flagship recruitment phrase for the postmodern period.
The James Bond franchise, composed by a man who worked in a western intelligence service, [1] always had a totally unredeemable bad guy of cartoon proportions, whose beautiful henchwomen and burly henchmen served against their own self interest and found a bad end in his service. Despite being a super genius, the Bond bad guy always loses.
These 70 year long narrative franchises, and the trust built by audio-visual advertising deception, set the stage for our current NewsLaw regime. Interestingly, police were bad guys in movies until 1941 and after 1945, police are only bad when they work against the heroic police officer. Police dramas have been the dominant TV narrative form, delivering the same messages as westerns and superhero comics, that when government operatives act as bad guys, it is a temporary aberration or a mistake, and good government is internally restored. [3]
The professor dispensing fantastical reports and opinions that are opposite of reality, is believed by almost all, and the tiny minority, believe an equally false inversion of the lie offered as dark gospel. The professor of NewsLaw may be a doctor, an actor, a news caster, or any kind of “expert” on the subject at hand.
For my money, the clearest indication that we are being comprehensively mislead, is that your racist, tobacco-chewing, gun-loving, conservative uncle from North Carolina, who “greased Hajis in The Stan,” agrees with your lesbian, rug-munching, fascist-hating, progressive cousin from Manhattan who hugs retards at the Special Olympics that some leader on the other side of the world is “A Madman,” who must be stopped.
The people that rule us are so much more intelligent than we are, that we deserve our lie-based bondage, just as the lamb deserves to be curried.
Notes
-0. News sound tracks for war remind me of Star Wars.
-1. Ironically Ian Flemming and George Orwell, both British Espionage operatives, placed the same message in their very different fiction. In Orwell’s 1984 the distant Asian War always distracted the hate filled news herd, while James Bond opposed a global menace, a specter that haunted the Free World.
-2. The dictum that the winner writes the history is supported as a deep psychological conditioning by all of our major narrative constructs.
-3. Modern super soldier franchises, [4] all police TV dramas, and more jingoistic fare such as the Jack Ryan, and Top Gun franchises support this notion of government agencies internally policing towards eventual perfection.
-4. The more cynical Bourne and Reacher franchises still posit, and indeed hinge upon, internal government policing of patently unrealistic levels, with entire corrupt agencies correcting to a just operation in what amounts to a week of narrative frame.
the gold i dug out form above
"For my money, the clearest indication that we are being comprehensively mislead, is that your racist, tobacco-chewing, gun-loving, conservative uncle from North Carolina, who “greased Hajis in The Stan,” agrees with your lesbian, rug-munching, fascist-hating, progressive cousin from Manhattan who hugs retards at the Special Olympics that some leader on the other side of the world is “A Madman,” who must be stopped."
AND
"The people that rule us are so much more intelligent than we are, that we deserve our lie-based bondage, just as the lamb deserves to be curried."
Bravo Mr La Fond!