reasons for optimism

[Guest guest]

Suzanne, all,

The Roy piece is a good summary. I'm optimistic that the imperial

executive will suffer -sooner rather than later- a spectacular

enantiodrioma. I don't see how it can avoid this fate.

The Democratic candidates are starting to get angry. They have to

remain so, they have to remain " on message " for long enough to get

the electorate used to the idea of punishing the plutocrats,

imperialists, and the anti-democratic leadership.

Again, simple psychology, albeit not Jungian-minded, suggests that

the shame implicit in, and also resultant of, destructive and

murderous policies is something that can be tapped into. This is

congruent with the psycho-historical* framework which suggests that

the equal and opposite reaction in the unconscious (Freud more than

Jung,) to what is done in our name will compress and pressurize and

look to find a way out. Up to now it has found one way out as it has

been projected on one other, but, the " other other " is right here,

and is a sitting duck.

Whether this reaction is couched in terms of introjection and

cathexis, or, the homeostatic dynamic of the psyche, it is due to be

activated in the other direction. It can't be contained indefinitely.

It will become literally unbearable and then the question of who is

to be either scapegoated unconsciously, or, held accountable

consciously, will also " will " out.

I can guarantee that this shame will find it's object where it is

obviously located. There's no way today Clinton or peace protesters

or college professors or liberal media or environmentalists or

liberals can be made the so-called part object the split off shame

will fuse to. Their impotency has been timely.

What I read day in and day out are the many reports that the

hegemonists and self-righteous corporate aristocrats and oligarchists

are quite gladly going about the unconscious process of burying

themselves.

Far from being dismayed about their over-reaching, in terms of the

phallic inevitability, *what goes up eventually comes down*.

I've attached Ashcroft's astonishingly regressive speech as an addendum.

regards,

in Clepheland

*the assumption of psychohistorians is that leaders will often

unconsciously stage their own betrayal to unload the negative

features which the leader incurs via projective identification upon

them by their followers. (It is axiomatic in psychohistory that all

collective currents play out the dysfunction of all families.) The

off-loading first demonizes and scapegoats some " other " in a ritual

sacrifice, but, over time, this often doesn't do the trick; the

emotional system remains unbalanced and loaded to one side. (With

Hussein disappeared the libido is hunting for some other object right

now.)

In other words, the more righteous the leader, the more one-sided the

loading becomes; as Jung suggested, " the brighter the light the

darker the dark.

Ashcroft's speech to religious broadcasters. Psychologically read it

is apparent here the father complex and immature religiosity of Mr.

Ashcroft presents a startling and obvious psychological case.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/speeches/2002/021902religiousbroadcasters.htm

( Ashcroft) Thank you. And congratulations on this, your 59th

annual convention. I want to thank and acknowledge each of you here

today for informing and enlightening a grateful nation. We are

grateful for the indispensable role religious broadcasters play in

connecting communities of faith to each other and to the issues of

the day.

Although it has been my honor and pleasure to address this

convention in the past, this year is unlike other years in that we

gather today having lost a great friend and a great American. Dr.

Brandt Gustavson died last May. Each morning I conduct a morning

devotional for those who wish to begin their day giving thanks and

praise to God. Dr. Gustavson attended this morning devotional on more

than one occasion. I join you and all religious broadcasters in

mourning Brandt Gustavson's death and praising his extraordinary life.

This year is also unlike other years because we come together in

a time of war. The war against terrorism is now the single,

over-arching priority of

justice and law enforcement -- not just the men and women of the

Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but of

the 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies as well.

This war is unlike any other war we have fought. The men and

women of justice and law enforcement are called to combat a terrorist

threat that is

both immediate and vast; a threat that resides here, at home, but

whose supporters, patrons and sympathizers form a multinational

network of evil.

The attacks of September 11 were acts of terrorism against

civilization orchestrated and carried out by individuals living

within our borders.

In response, we have launched a concerted campaign to defeat

terrorism. We have pledged to use every resource in the law against

terrorists -- every statute, however obscure; and every law

enforcement officer, whether he or she serves in the cities, the

states or in Washington, D.C.

Some have asked whether a civilized nation -- a nation of law and

not of men -- can use the law to defend itself from barbarians and

remain civilized.

Our answer, unequivocally, is " yes. " Yes, we will defend

civilization. And yes, we will preserve the rule of law because it is

that which makes us civilized.

But the call to defend civilization from terrorism resonates from

a deeper source than our legal or political institutions. Civilized

people --

Muslims, Christians and Jews -- all understand that the source of

freedom and human dignity is the Creator. Civilized people of all

religious faiths are called to the defense of His creation.

In the darkest hours of the Blitz in World War II, Winston

Churchill said that when great causes are on the move in the world

.... " we learn that we are

spirits, not animals, and that something is going on in space and

time, and beyond space and time, which, whether we like it or not,

spells duty. "

We are a nation called to defend freedom -- a freedom that is not

the grant of any government or document but is our endowment from God.

-- " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created

equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain

unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the

pursuit of happiness. "

As God's gift, our freedom is not license to behave in anyway we

choose. It is the ability to make choices with the understanding that

what we choose has real consequences. We may be free to choose to act

for good or for evil, but our's is not a freedom from consequence.

Our choices will have consequences for good or evil.

For those who embrace a biblical understanding of creation, the

difference between freedom and license echoes down the corridors of

time in

two voices, first heard in the Garden of Eden.

The first voice -- the voice of evil disguised as freedom --

whispers: just do it, it won't make a difference. The second voice,

the voice of God, states plainly: make your choices but make them

carefully because you make all the difference.

-- [Deuteronomy 30:19 " I call heaven and earth to record this day

against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and

cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and they seed may

live. " ]

The voice of evil, posing as freedom, tells us that we are free

to ignore the difference between life and death, and between blessing

and cursing. But when you are told that your choices are without

consequences you are not told that you are free, you are told that

you are meaningless.

It is this freedom that is at the basis of the rule of law in

America. Our system of government respects our freedom to make

choices, to accept the consequences and to maximize the potential

that God has placed within us. The purpose of our system of justice

is not to crush that freedom or to override that freedom but to

respect it, to nurture it and through it, to unleash the potential of

every human being.

Terrorists have a different understanding of choices. Because

they fear that people with freedom will reject their ideas,

terrorists seek to deny us

our freedom. They distrust personal choice because they have abandoned every

value except their own lust for power. In a universe of choices -- a

marketplace of ideas -- their way offers us nothing.

Our fight against terrorism, then, is a defense of our freedom in

the most profound sense: It is the defense of our right to make moral

choices --

to seek fellowship with God that is chosen, not commanded. This

freedom is respected and nurtured in our society of laws. It is

respected in our right

to choose how or if we worship God. It is nurtured in our fundamental

belief of equality before the law. By attacking us, terrorists attack

not just the

system of government that supports this freedom, but freedom itself.

The conflict that confronts us is not Christian versus Muslim, or

Muslim versus Jew. Even as we seek justice in Afghanistan for those

who attacked us on September 11, we extend our hands in aid and

comfort to a war-torn people. As we pursue justice, we respect life.

As we seek to reprimand the guilty, we also seek to give assistance

to the innocent.

This is not a conflict based in religion. It is a conflict

between those who believe that God grants us choice and those who

seek to impose their choices on us. It is a conflict between

inspiration and imposition; the way of peace and the way of

destruction and chaos. It is a conflict between good and evil. And as

President Bush has reminded us, we know that God is not neutral

between the two.

Nor is our system of government neutral between good and evil. We

are blessed to live in a nation that respects our freedom to live in

a context of

choice. The founders of our nation understood religion's role in

promoting the virtues necessary for self government.

Washington warned in his Farewell Address that our young

republic would not survive if Americans indulged in the " supposition

that morality can be maintained without religion. "

" Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political

prosperity, " said Washington, " religion and morality are indispensable

supports. "

Our Constitution does not call for the establishment of religion

in the public square. Just as important, it does not call for the

abolition of religion in the public square. It calls for the respect

of religion in its indispensable role in forming a just and moral

citizenry.

Today our freedom and this heritage is under assault from those

who fear its capacity to unleash the potential that God has placed in

each and every one of us. Our enemies hope that by portraying this as

a religious conflict, they can disguise their own betrayal of

religion. They hope that by calling America the aggressor, they can

conceal their own lust for power. They hope that by denying America's

tolerance and humanity, they can convince the world that they, not

we, are the tolerant and the humane.

We must call these things what they are: lies -- lies designed to

exploit differences among us. Lies designed to inspire hatred and to

deny choice. Lies meant to extinguish freedom.

True faith is not built on a foundation of lies, nor is it

supported by a framework of hatred. True faith unites us against

evil. It calls on us to put aside small differences to pursue great

virtues.

--[isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us reason together, " says the Lord.

" Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;

though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool. " ]

By striking at our heart, our enemies hope to destroy the virtues

we value and the freedom we cherish. But they underestimate our

strength and our national unity. We are strong, and we are united.

You can see our national unity in places that are unanticipated.

Today Americans are coming together, united against a common

enemy. For people of all faiths -- be they Christians, Jews or

Muslims -- it is impossible not to see the stark difference between

the way of God and the way of the terrorists. It is the difference

between a hero and a murderer, a fireman and a suicide bomber, a

culture of life and a culture of death. It is the difference between

those who would die to save the innocent and those who would die to

destroy the innocent.

In a nation united, there can be no doubting which path we will

choose. And in a world of freedom, there is no doubt which view will

prevail.

Thank you very much. God bless you and God bless America.