Aardvark News

Did you ever notice how human beings have a penchant for relating their life in stories? Will Durant, for instance, did, and as a consequence he named his grand historical opus, “The Story of Civilization,” and a little while later added “The Story of Philosophy.”

What is perhaps most interesting about our various stories is that we use them, both consciously and subconsciously, to help us relate to our lives and to the lives (or stories) of those around us. In fact, most of us are only psychologically comprehensible through our particular life’s story. Take away our story and we would dissemble and fall apart. Within our stories is the clue to almost every single one of our behaviors, as well as the clue to what troubles we have either surmounted or are still struggling along with. Threaten the life’s story of any character, and you are likely to have a fight on your hands, even though the proposed amendment to the story may be far healthier than the original status quo story.

For instance, and just by way of illustration, supposing that we have a female by the name of Jane, and that she has met and married, when they were both young (early 20s), a young man with whom she proceeded to have three children. As the years went by the young man worked very hard and diligently at earning a sufficient living for the five of them, but that once home in his domicile he tended to slack off and not trouble himself much with the day to day operations of raising the three children. Jane, however, who for much of the time also worked at a succession of both full and part time jobs, was nevertheless required (by the situation) to fulfill the role, or story, of mother twenty four hours a day. As she saw it, she was never off duty or “not at work.”

As luck and modern circumstance would have it, Jane and her husband eventually grew apart and separated leaving her with the primary responsibility for caring for the three children. For the next 20 plus years Jane worked, and worried, and hustled, and contended against life in order to raise her brood, keep a roof over their heads, and see to it that the three kids got at least some sort of a shot at living a half way decent existence. All of this, of course, became a part of Jane’s story: how she had to raise the kids; how it required of her everything she was able to give; how the husband had escaped the 24 hour a day routine and the responsibilities that went with it; and how it was that circumstance which had prohibited her from achieving in the other areas of life in which she might have otherwise shone.

Now, during all those years when Jane was struggling along with the kids, she at times had to rely upon welfare and food stamps and other government grants and programs in order to survive. There were also those who would look down upon Jane, or disrespect her for having to live with government help. Jane’s story, in consequence, hardened in response to the criticisms, and Jane became very good at telling her story so as to satisfy those who might otherwise speak in opposition.

Numerous friends and acquaintances of Jane also found themselves in similar financial straights, and, like Jane, concocted stories that both explained and rationalized their particular predicaments. Before too long, the stories had been interspersed with the sort of humor that sometimes accompanies the telling of such stories, and the stories themselves improved almost every time they were told. They became pat answers to all the pat questions and objections Jane and her friends were likely to encounter. They also embodied the way these women looked upon themselves, and upon the way the men in their lives had responded (or not) to their needs. Most of the stories agreed that the men could have participated a great deal more, and could certainly have helped out with the child raising over the years.

As for Jane’s existence, it became a rather dreary repetition of child raising and earning and contending for survival amongst others whose fortunes were far greater, and whose families were still together and often even privileged. Jane was philosophically, if not physically, alone much of the time, and would find it necessary to repeat her story to herself in order to understand, comprehend and deal with the (what to her seemed negative) vicissitudes of life. While others seemed far happier than she, Jane nevertheless kept at it with her children and taught them and raised them well while denying to herself all those little accoutrements of modern existence that sometimes makes life worthwhile - like a new car, or a nice house to live in. By the time Jane’s kids were for the most part grown, Jane herself was pretty much worn out, and ready for a few years of recuperative relaxation.

Jane soon ran into a problem though. While her story had been perfect for fighting her way through the jungle of raising kids without a husband or a father, it lacked some of those elements that would allow some man to satisfy Jane’s needs. Jane had learned paranoia about and distrust of males, and her personality was so wrapped up in the types of scenarios in which males acted in such selfish fashion, that any other scenario was potentially threatening to Jane, and to her psychological stability. Jane, for instance, couldn’t really handle any sort of romantic success because her story about herself, her self-image, had been formulated with the idea that all men are assholes. To change that now, and to allow herself to enjoy a more positive relationship with a male, was something Jane wasn’t either used to, or ready for. A positive male in her life was quite literally life threatening because it required an entirely new story, and to formulate such a new story would leave Jane vulnerable to all those sorts of things which had originally brought her down, and left her with the nightmare that her life had thus far been.

A new self-image, then, as the result of a new story, whether good or bad, was threatening to Jane and to what and who she was. She would have to learn all over again how to behave and to relate in the universe and in the surrounding culture, and that is something your subconscious must needs help you with or else every attempt at breaking the old mold, or at throwing away the old story, will end in social and personally disaster. It is extremely difficult to recast yourself in a new story, with a new image to portray. Most, in fact, fail miserably at it. Including, for instance, Jackson Pollack, the renowned abstract impressionist painter, who, unable to handle almost overnight success, committed suicide by running into a tree. Life’s stories, you see, cannot be so easily changed about.

One reason for that might be that as individuals we would seem to have a lot vested in our life stories. Jane, for instance, whose entire adult history is mired in the story of men being and acting like assholes, dares not change that concept or else her own life story would have to change with it. All of the men in her life would have to be looked at again, and perhaps different (slightly different or vastly different) scenarios could be spun from her experiences. It would open her up to scrutiny again, and risk her carefully formulated life story. Barring the potential for significant gain why would anyone wish to recapitulate their life story in order to fit with an emerging reality? Most likely they wouldn’t and neither would their unconscious selves easily allow for something like that to happen – it’s just too much of a risk.

As a nation, also, we have our life story and changing that story might risk our self-image. For instance, once we discovered that Christopher Columbus wasn’t the sweet nice man we previously thought perhaps he was, and when we learned that both his behavior and the European diseases he and his men brought with them to the New World managed to wipe out untold millions of indigenous peoples and cultures, then our particular role in the Americas, and our contributions have to be looked at again, and in balance with those new, emerging realities. It hasn’t been easy for the United States to face up to the emerging realities and somehow reformulate our story of entering the American continent.

Perhaps, too, we are currently performing another re-evaluation of our foreign policies, and writing a new, less flattering story to account for our activities.

I began my conscious political life during the Eisenhower years. I couldn’t quite vote back then, but I could (or was beginning to be able to) think politically, and Ike seemed a reasonable choice – particularly as my family were long term Republicans – and the middle classes, along with the lower classes, were being paid close attention to. In other words, once elected, the chief executive, along with the entire administrative branch of government, was interested in bettering the lives of all Americans, regardless of party affiliations.

More recently, the Democrats at least, during the Clinton administration, were similarly interested in raising the standard of living, along with the embedded societal values, of all classes and ethnic derivations of American citizens.

Such days are over, however, and now, whether Democrat or Republican, the only thing our elected individuals seem interested in doing is in ensuring the continued domination, and associated prosperity, of the oligarchical class of America, and to hell with the rest of us rabble out here in the trenches. It’s a rich get richer situation, and a highly unfair and decidedly un-democratic way of governing – has more in common with autocracy than with democracy.

What America truly will need - before fairness, humanitarian and enlightenment values return to our shores - is a new political party dedicated to the majority of Americans and interested in all peoples once again, rather than strictly in the privileges currently being afforded a very small, and very selective (albeit myopically focused) elite.

Do not for a second start to feel as either John McCain or Hillary Clinton (two choices certain to be in the running) offer anything to the little guy. It’s a ruse calculated to appease only temporarily, and insecurely, the majority of America’s working class individuals. Our government needs an entire house cleaning, a political purgative, guaranteed to flush the bowels empty. Nothing less will suffice nor refresh our putrid air.

All of you youngsters better get cracking, then, either on moving aboard, or on reformulating our two party system – neither extant party really gives a s - - - about your average Joe, or extraordinary Sally.

The other day, while reading an e-mail from an e-friend on TruthOut, I was struck so hard by something she’d written that for a moment I hardly knew what to do. What she had written was that while walking with her children, in France where she lives, she’d noticed a new movie that was opening entitled: “America: From Freedom to Fascism."

My God, what an evolution...revolution...devolution of a Nation I had once thought of as the world’s beacon of democracy, and for which I’d fought, and loved, and taught. It was too nauseating to contemplate at first blush, and so I stuck the e-mail away where I wasn’t bothered by it, at least for that moment. But it wouldn’t go away.

I’d been raised in Europe as a child and as a young man, and I had a certain sense for how they thought over there, and the thought that these people now conceived of my homeland as a fascist camp was horrifying in the extreme...and so very, very sad. How far we had fallen from the giddy days of post-war Europe, when we’d just saved the world from fascist oblivion. It was, and remains, ugly, ugly, ugly.

Okay, I’ll admit that all nations at war are, almost by definition, fascist states. But this war isn’t real in any meaningful sense, and you have to wonder if George Dubya Bush has a clue about just how devastating turning America into a fascist camp really is. I don’t believe he knows, really and truly knows and understands just what his silly ass megalomania has wrought in the world, and how sad that is, and why. Does he really know what ruining the last, best hope for humankind augurs for the world, and for its future? I can’t believe he has even the remotest clue what he has done, and how terrible that fact truly is. What a bitch of a development, and how devastating!

Where are the informed elder statesmen, with their collective wisdom and knowledge? Where are those willing, even eager, to risk their own comfort for the good of democratic values, and for the future of this planet? Why the f - - - aren’t they out here leading the charge...somehow...anyhow! Why hasn’t this overgrown, juvenile, certifiable moron been stopped and stopped cold. How have we simply stood by complaining while he has led us into our Imperial grave? How have we allowed this most despicable of administrations, for the most despicable of reasons (greed, arrogance, hubris), to lead us blithely into our historic demise?

Please, someone pinch me and stop this nightmare, and this terrible sadness.

It is most likely the mystic in me, but my sense of the metaphysical tells me that something unusual is occurring in America. It is not necessarily good or bad, but can be either depending upon perspective – it mostly just is.

The signs of this something are everywhere, but are most particularly prevalent in our sense of aesthetics. Recently I painted my room, and did so with the colors tangerine, and a certain sort of fuchsia (which sounds gross until you see it.). I also bought a couple of rugs with all fall colors: oranges, browns, Reds, yellows. etc. In fact, if you look closely you will find that fall colors, the colors of the falling leaves and decaying vegetable matter, are everywhere to be seen. It looks like fall, or autumn.

Okay, suppose at some deep, collective unconscious nexus buried within our minds that each of us recognizes that the autumn of the American dream is here, and our color choices and mindsets are reflecting that (metaphorical truth) subconsciously, if not consciously. We recognize the death and decay of what was, and are now simply biding our time until some sort of rebirth commences…which is likely to be decades from now, if then, and more than likely centuries from now instead. For all intents and purposes, we are no longer the world’s leading anything, save perhaps military bully, and what little remains of our used-to-be glory is fading faster than the blush on the cheeks of a mail-order bride.

We’re in our autumn, and our institutions are all reflective of that thought-to-be reality, much to most of our chagrins. But it need not be so.

Certain things are good about autumn. For one thing, it can be beautiful, almost surrealistic. For another, it’s an opportunity to drop some of our most costly flowery displays, and return to a simpler, gentler pattern or lifestyle. We can consolidate our strength, scale back on our lavishness, and not work overtime maintaining the huge floral arrangements. We can, in other words, slow down a little bit, catch up here and there, and think things through far more deeply than we have done in the last several centuries.

In short, while we rediscover ourselves and our nation and our politics and our government, we can also hand over responsibility for the entire globe to some other organization, hopefully more fully qualified to run a large scale, interconnected world than we are. Lately, we have been making a mess out of things. Time for us to forget about world domination and concentrate instead upon reforming ourselves. There can be beauty in that, and a remembrance of love and affection and humanity, that once graced our shores and our towns and villages and even our metropolitan areas.

So let us accept our new position in the world, as a senior state, fully qualified for a senior discount, and leave all the hubbub and killing and torturing and imprisoning and what-have-you to some other, more energetic, more idealistic, younger state only just now approaching its 21^st century maturity. In the meanwhile, we’ll be at the river fishing, reminiscing about a couple centuries under the big top.

Just this morning I have sent the following to my Representative and Senators. You should do the same to your Congresspeople.


Why cannot more than 100 million constituents, 535 members of Congress, and an entire international community rid themselves expeditiously of one terrible, lost, confused and certifiable man? Why must the world and every American citizen have to put up with George Dubya Bush, and his never-ending string of absolute idiocies. The man is hardly capable of being a dog-catcher and was never capable - even when bought-and-paid- for, for him - of running a profitable business. He is a goon who deserves perhaps his wife’s sympathies, but little else. Get him the heck out of the White House before he blows us all to smithereens.

The fact that the Constitution makes no provision for removing a congenital idiot from office does not augur well for the world if we cannot remove this man pronto. While the founders may perhaps be forgiven for failing to see this far ahead - to the day when idiots and morons were elected to high office, and grew ever more dangerous in their stupidity and cupidity - we cannot so similarly be forgiven for not taking the immediate and necessary steps to remove Dubya from all vestiges of his disastrously given power.

Write your Representatives and your Senators and demand that a way be found to get rid of George Dubya Bush!!

Now that the post moron era is about upon us - maximum couple of years yet - it is perhaps time for Americans (as citizens of the world and not so much as Americans - per se) to begin formulating ideas, ideals and plans for a reconstruction of our nation, and for the world as well (to begin acting in concert, for instance, for everyone’s benefit).

The details for such a reconstruction are various, complicated, tiresome and altogether flexible, and can all be worked out later on. What is needed at the moment is the development of a general consensus, by the majority of working stiffs everywhere, about human rights, social and economic contracts, and the morality and ethics necessary to a post-moron world.

In those areas, I have lately read two books which certainly raise significant questions about human kind’s future. The first is The Singularity is Near, by Ray Kurzweil, and the second is, The World is Flat, by Thomas L. Friedman. The first proposes a non-biological evolutionary path-way for human beings, and the second looks at some of the ramifications associated with the interconnectedness of this - essentially - new and ever emerging globe. Both present significant questions as to what future societies may look and behave like, and challenge us everyday Joes and Sallys to get involved, plug in our brains, and begin working politically, socially, economically, etc., towards the formulation of organizations capable of effectively and productively (even though an emphasis upon pure production must perhaps cease) offering our two cents worth, and getting what we need (single payer universal health care, for instance) in the bargain - i.e. yes, a human fairness doctrine of sorts.

Perhaps the best place to begin would be with a discussion of the idea of human fairness.

“No one ever promised you the world was fair.” How many times have you had that little gem shoved into your ears?

“No, that’s true...but somebody aught-a.” That’s my sentiment and advice.

An unfair world is fine in primitive situations where resources and capabilities are limited and short, but in the post-moron world - where abundance (in almost all things and concepts) is our problem rather than scarcity, and where there exists plenty of resources to spoil, around the multinational globe, an oligarchical class hell bent on domination, lugubrious consumption, and unimaginable hubris - unfairness should no longer be tolerated. Nor should it any longer have to be.

Why should the majority of human beings, most of whom work and slave to create the world we live in, have to accept anything less than full and adequate food, clothing, shelter and medical care? If you can offer me just one explanation why anyone should be denied such things, then I will concede (or more likely situationally modify) the point. What we should organize to obtain is a social contract that guarantees to all a certain minimum state of dignity, wherein neither our economic viability nor a given modicum of health for everyone is threatened. The world today can very well afford it.

The following came to me via e-mail, but is so perfect that I've reprinted it here. The formatting is my own, so blame that on me. As for who wrote it, that attribution can be found at the end of the article.

America at large is starting to realize - finally - that President Bush is exactly as stupid as he looks, sounds and acts.

How extraordinary. Something is happening here that has never happened in America's history. A consensus is sweeping the nation. Not that the war in Iraq is wrong, or that oil companies are screwing us blue, or that the climate is going to hell, or that good-paying jobs are being replaced by low-paying jobs, or that our national health care system is a disgrace, or that the rich are getting a lot richer while the middle class gets poorer.

While all that's true, and more and more folks are getting it, that's not the consensus of which I speak. Nope. This one is bigger, enormous, huge!

Here it is: The president of the United States is a moron.

Yes, stupid, dumb as common road gravel. And not figuratively, but literally. George W. Bush, president of the world's last remaining superpower, is a moron. Forrest Gump's evil twin.

I broached this possibility one year ago in a post entitled, "Bush: The Worst President Ever?" I was a bit early with that one. But what a difference a year makes! The cover story of this week's Rolling Stone Magazine reads, "The Worst President in History?"

So the jury is in: Bush is a moron. If stupid is as stupid does, he's stupid. A botched war on terror, exploding debt, his "what me worry" response to Katrina -- and the ongoing mismanagement of the recovery, North Korea has the bomb and Iran is on its way to its own nuke. Think about that for a second because it is definitive proof Bush is a moron. First he identifies three nations as his "Axis of Evil" in the world: North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Then he has a chance to whack one of the three, and he picks the only one that had no WMD. The only way he could look worse is if it were only two countries - a coin flip - and he still got it wrong.

Yes, Virginia, the current occupant of the Oval Office is no longer a crook or an adulterer. He's a moron.

As if that were not bad enough, we still face two and half years with this man at the controls. NFR reader Philip Bourgeois suggested an intervention launched by former Presidents Clinton, Bush Sr. and Carter. Not a bad idea, Phil.

Poppa Bush must be beside himself watching his kid screw up decades of diplomacy in just five short years. He could take sonny into that Oval Office alcove where Monica used to dispense her favors and administer a few long overdue dope slaps.

Bill Clinton could sit the moron down and give him a short course on how to balance a checkbook, teach him the difference between capital investment and undisciplined spending, and the virtues of saving for a rainy day.

Jimmy Carter could teach Junior the actual meaning of the word “compassionate," and how to walk that walk. Carter could reveal to him that giving the already comfortably rich even more money is not compassion. Giving more money to the growing number of those who work 60 hours a week or more, and still can't get by, is "compassion." And he could figure out how to cover the nearly 50 million Americans who cannot afford health insurance.

But none of that is likely to happen. One of the trademarks of a moron is contempt for facts that challenge the simple but comfortable fictions that rule their daily routines. You can drag a moron to a library, but you can't force him to learn. In fact morons get downright testy when someone challenges what they think they know.

We saw this trait earlier this week when Bush was asked if he thought Don Rumsfeld should resign. The moron lashed out at the questioner, dashed into his imaginary phone booth and emerged as The Decider. "I'm the decider," he pronounced, with Mussolini-like swagger. You see, scratch a moron and beneath that smirking, ignorance-is-bliss exterior, you discover a fundamental truth: Beauty may be only skin deep, but moron goes right to the bone.

I'm staying close to home until this guy is gone. Keeping my head down, my nose clean, and watching what I say in emails for friends.

And I have a piece of advice for the Iranians too: this guy really is crazy enough to "decide" that bombing the shit out you is a good idea. Yes, Bush is exactly as stupid as he looks, sounds and acts.

Doubt that at your peril. Fifty-one percent of American voters doubted it. And now we're screwed.


Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books,
including "Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans," which was
nominated for a Pulitzer.