Finishing a scene

I'm up to the top of page 133 after an hour of writing. I am going to do more, but I want to go out and walk. Then I have to shave and cook up a bunch of protein for the week. I have fish made on some Honduran fish ranch. By that time, I might have to go to work.

I have these dental tools that I use to clean my teeth further than a brush could. My lower teeth are crowded and crooked and a brush does not clean them thoroughly.

About two weeks ago, I accidentally punctured my tongue with one of these. Now I dip them in Cepacol before use, so I should not come down with a bad infection. But for the last week, the damn thing has been very painful. I have taken to washing it off, and I even put (very little) Neosporin on it along with a prescription anti-inflammatory gel. This has put it back under control, but for a few days there it was as painful as a toothache.

Despite my telling myself that I could not forget that I poked my tongue and watch it for infection or swelling, I forgot about it anyway. I could not remember what had caused it. I thought it was nutrition related.

The new year is tomorrow and I have a few challenges. The novel is one. Another is the possibility of either having to move or to afford a mortgage on the condo. A third is the current fact that the price of my prescriptions are also set to go up greatly. My only choice is either charity or the public dole.

I hope they reform this hunk of shit medical system. It is a good possibility under the current Congress, but it has to be willing to shut down United Healthcare, Blue Shield and Kaiser out of business. No medical plan should include them as they are most of the problem. That will take balls like no other politician has had for a long time. For this to happen, it takes a totally politically mobilized population who are undaunted by industry propaganda, for which there will be a lot.

For the mortgage: I've always been excellent about rent. I have never missed a month in all my years, even when I went bankrupt. I know what's important for survival. A home, food and a car. Exercise is necessary but free. A good walk is just laying around for the taking.

Another challenge is-- I'm lonely. I miss the trysters I used to see. Before I can do that again, I must meet some real financial goals.

That entails a new career. The novel is the new career. I should be writing now. It is what I have worked for and it is my future if I am going to have one.

Some success at writing.

I'm now up to the middle of page 132. Not much today. Tomorrow will be better.

Busy and drowsey.

I found out my Skype telephone service was not taking calls. There was nothing on their website to tell you how to add Skypein to a reserved number. I could not find a way of doing it; there were no instructions on how to do it. It was once very obvious, but it definitely is not now. I wrote them for help and to complain, that was two nights ago.

There is one thing about the computer/internet age, and that is that the simplest problems could turn into hours or days of labor. This is what happened. I wrote Skype and I am still waiting to hear from them.

I now work for 9 days straight and need to throw away and give away some of the clutter, and basically arrange things. I have to be prepared if I cannot buy the place and have to move.

I call the financing man on Tuesday.

An unlucky draw here.

My apartment is being taken condo. Either I could buy it (very unlikely) or I have to move.

If I can do it, buying might be the best option, but it will be the hardest by far. Otherwise, the move is going to be a bitch physically and in the short term, financially. I'm starting to throw away clutter now.

Either way, I have just had a drastic cut in time and money.

Letting Myself Lag

I realized that I have been making a terrible mistake for getting my novel done.  I tried to get up and start going on it asap.  My sleep schedule changed on me to late at night.  It happens to me sometimes.  I should have just adapted and started to work on it at night, but instead, I would get up late with a million things to do before work, after having wasted the night waiting to go to sleep. 

 

I will work on it tonight.  Tomorrow, I would go out grocery shopping, but the till is empty.  I have to do laundry though, and cook up my protein meals for the week.  I could never do chores like my laundry till it becomes an embarrassment. 

Katie Rees, You Should be Arrested for Obcene Apologies.

Apologies you have given are demeaning for adults, insulting to women and corrupting to youth. Is there no morality left in the world?

You speak the obvious when you say it is an isolated incident; I am certain it was isolated in that it was unusual. If you partied like that all the time without then embracing the adult industry, your life would have been ruined. Even then, you probably have been ruined by excess anyway. Nobody could say from pictures that you were like this all the time. Ordinarily women cannot afford to be.

Your pictures are very beautiful. The sexuality that they express is inspiring for women and a gift to everyone. Think of the pleasure that they have brought; only self-loathing would keep you from not considering that. You don't have to be a dirty old man to enjoy them. We need more of this not less. The world needs simple, free pleasure.

Also, teenagers are paying attention to you now. You have humanized yourself to them. As Ms. Nevada, you were a distant princess in a fantasy land. The images make you real to them. Now would have been the time to be a role model. Many women live in shame forever at what they did during an isolated incident or many incidents during their youth. They needed a way back, and you were in a position to show them that direction. You wasted it.

Instead, you are begging Father Donald for another chance. How humiliating! Getting on your knees for Trump the Chump (figuratively speaking) who is probably jacking off to your pictures in private. How obscene! Why should you ask an alpha male for another chance? You now have fame that a Miss Nevada title could never have given you.

After your year of playing Miss Nevada, what would you have retired to? You do not realize that this does not have to ruin you. This was an opportunity. It would have been more liberating to women everywhere to tell Trump to stick his title up his dirty, pompous power-hole.

What's is this second chance you are asking Father Trump for anyway? What you did before any association with Trump should not be a subject of second chances. How many other pageant winners had something in their past before the internet? Only now it is being discovered. They were beautiful women who had open invitations into the social groups similar to yours. Look at that crowd! You were a 10 hanging out with other 10s. Guys were offering you free drinks and drugs all the time. How completely straight, clean and sober could you have stayed all the time? You were likely much more restrained than other beautiful young women in the same position, if not perfectly. If you would have been completely reserved, you would have been a deviant and never someone with which the majority of women could identify. Plus, the most beautiful youthful women need a hero as much as any anyone.

Moreover your guilt is so phony, and teenagers will perceive it that way and recoil. You advise young ladies to avoid pictures, not for the morality of it, but because they could get ruined later. Think about this: it does not speak to right and wrong, it speaks to opportunism that appeals to somebody like Trump. Like most ladies showing off for cameras now, you knew these pictures might end up on the internet. In my opinion, you just do not like the timing; you thought if they did not get posted right away then they would never be. Other women already know the risk and will still flaunt their bodies. Why? Because it is thrilling and brazen, it says "Look, I'm beautiful. I desire. I dare you to let everyone know." It is an eternal "Yea!" Hell, it is so basic to do want to do this sometime that it is practically biological. What keeps many from doing it is fear of rejection.

Your life turned out very well. Retroactively, I can't think of anybody you should apologize to. Except maybe your Dad, who was probably on the edge of a heart attack during your youth; this probably brings back the trauma, but that is a private matter. The State of Nevada? Please! That's worse than apologizing to Donald Trump.

The teenagers you let down? Why? Be assured they hardly knew you existed. Miss Nevada is at best a delusion of men like Trump.

Instead, you give these apologies, not just to Trump, but to no one else in particular. You are a beautiful woman. Everybody paid attention to you, and as these pictures show, it went to your head sometimes. And what did you do then-- you flaunted your beauty for everyone's benefit. No harm. No shame. No apologies please.

The internet is causing "shame adjustment" anyway, as people learn about how people really behave sexually. You should have went to the front of the curve, rather than being dragged behind.

Happy Worthday!

Being an atheist, I will not say Merry Christmas. Being an inceptivist, I won't say Happy Solstice. For the latter, what a dull thing to say. zzzzzzzzzzzzz Bears hibernate at the sound of it. For people, our eyes just glaze over.

World Birthday. Worthday? Might as well. So many gods were given December 25th as their birthday, Jesus being only the latest.

Calenders by themselves are very dull instruments, so we hang significant memories on them. It seems like recovery from the darkest day of the year should be significant. Of course, in ancient times they could not detect the days getting longer till 3-4 days after the fact. It was the closest they could get to the accurate solstice.

We are dominated by seasons. A dictatorship of the sun and earth, but unlike gods of old, they cannot be reasoned with. A sacrifice won't do anything. For humankind, this has been an intolerable situation.

I'm talking nonsense. Really, as an atheist, a good principle of this season is: one should always take a day off with pay no matter what anybody wants to call it. Second principle: always use any excuse to celebrate, no matter how whimsical. Taking simple pleasures with others is not just for numbskulls.

The year

I hated to defer writing the novel, but the condition of this place was depressing and scary. Some aspects of real life had reasserted themselves, like paying bills. Like feeding myself decently, loneliness and sex.

I meant to write on the novel today, but it did not happen. I was glued-to-the-bed tired and I need a day off. Caffeine has been an irritant lately. I have been taking too much. The drops in between have been extreme, the ups have been edgy.

Instead of pot, I think caffeine is the real gateway drug to something harder like crack or meth. They spent so much time trying to "convict" marijuana that they haven't looked at some of the real drugs.

Bad Year

For me, this has been a miserable year. I started out in bankruptcy due to my spending binges, and I was just learning to live within my new means. My nephew committed suicide in January. From that, I had a nervous breakdown, could not work for 4 months and I came near dying twice.

Then, I adopted two "streetwise" waifs; "streetwise" meaning "on drugs." I evicted them and totally cut off the ungrateful bastards, and found that they and their friends damaged things and stole terribly from me. That was expensive, but it was part of my recovery process.

For the year, I've weaved from one financial calamity to another, but I've always met my rent on time, paid my utilities sometimes a month or two late, but I've done it.

I could not be happier to see 2006 become a relic, a file for the memory.
It was a miracle of medicine that I am still here-- and now I am the product of psychiatric drugs, which keep me from being really down in the holiday season.

I feel confidence that I will have a much better year, but my first challenge is that the price of my medications are going to jump radically to start the year. I definitely will not be able to afford them without some kind of aid.

Got some inside previews to a suspense thriller last night.

I went to Jack's place last night and saw previews of his movie: "Ghost Image" staring Elizabeth Rohm and Stacy Dash. I saw the trailer (this will get people in the theater) and the rough cut of the first 40 minutes. It doesn't look like an independent movie-- which it is. This film is going to knock people's socks off. My long-time friend is making something that is going to be a sleeper success the year it is released.

So far he has sold it on the strength of the script. The quality of the product will get promoters behind it. Finally, Jack has been making movies in obscurity for 31 years.

*************

Today I got up ill. Tired and with serious stomach cramps. That's my fault, I overate last night. Instead of doing some practical things, I have been posting to the internet, like this while my immediate surroundings go to waste. This apartment is a wreck and it is getting on my nerves. The more I ignore it the more it is going to bother me. Moreover, I have to do laundry.

Anyway, after a very good weekend off, I go to work later today. So, my time is limited, and getting more limited. No novel writing today.

***************************

Prostitution Decriminalization and Women's Rights.

An argument:

Feminist Talk: Serious and Thoughful
Posted by "Ms. xyz ," 12/17/2006 11:03:17 AM

In Inga Muscio's Cunt she says, "Until there is an established, respectable place for whores in this society, no woman will have an established, respected foundation of power."

what are your thoughts on this?


Do not agree
Posted by Mr. Greengenes , 12/18/2006 12:51:09 AM

Let's face it... while sex is powerful, it is not the ultimate element of control - money is, and as long as the good old boys control things, neither providers NOR most clients, will have any respected foundation of power.
That being said, shall we all move on and enjoy each others company while the idiots in control think of more ways to FU this world we live in?


I've been thinking about this thread all night...
Posted by mrking , 12/18/2006 5:01:42 AM

and I came to the same conclusion as sgandolfs.

Woman suffrage was supposed to bring women up to 100% parity with men politically, but it obviously didn't. I agree that legalization of all aspects of sexual commerce will be a plus, but that alone is not enough. Maybe society will evolve to the point that we no longer need to even ask these questions. What the cataclysms are that will get us there, I can only guess at.

Until that time, all we can do is to strive to make things fairer, which is not quite the same.


Why I agree with Inga Muscio:

Posted by zinaval, 12/18/2006 10:50:16 AM

Though I don't like her choice of terms. Think what you will of Orwell, I think it never works to try to promote an insult like "whore" to a level of respect. It works far better just to coin a new term. My own is "tryster."

Women's sexuality and sexuality in general has to be for there to be true regard for anyone's rights.

Why? We respect rights in a negative way: the government shall not stop free speech or citizen's petitions, it shall not confiscate arms... etc. What is missing is that "pursuit of happiness" part, and how does one pursue happiness without taking pleasure? Without a positive regard, the notion of rights turns cynical. Sex is the most direct and natural way to pleasure that there is.

While Mr. Fischer and sgandolfs make a good point, suppressing prostitution largely cripples women from gaining financial power. The financial disparities would be redressed if prostitution were decriminalized. Remember it's through legalization of gambling that the Indian Tribes have finally gained money, power and dignity.

One may not like this proposition and say that equal treatment in the conventional workplace should redress the disparity. I give two counter-arguments. The first one is that higher financial power will gain them respect enough to demand higher pay when they go into the conventional workforce. The second it will lower the supply where they be able to take advantage of the demand.

As Jenna Jameson said, the one who has the power in a relationship is the one who needs the relationship the least. This is true of financial relationships, too.

Lastly, men's power to limit women to either monogamy or "free" polygamy has a detrimental effect on mature women psychologically. It also has a bad effect on them as providers for having to hide it or live in fear about it.

I've observed that women need to feel that they are in control of their sexuality and that their control is completely respected. If that is taken from them, I think they lose the ability to enjoy most of their rights. The rest of their rights have little value to them.

Lastly, prostitution should also be decriminalized (with an eye toward eventual legalization) because it is **the right thing to do.**

Too Caffeinated, but That's a Good Thing.

Stimulated with caffeine too late at night, I at least got some good writing done. In an hour and fifteen minutes, I am now up to the middle of page 131. The page total is going to contract as I cut things earlier in the work.

This is really the second start to it. I realized after the first start that the first chapter had to be totally rewritten. It wasn't going to work. Because I change that, I had to change subsequent things, and in fact restructure it, in which whole chapters were either cut or re-stacked in a different order. As I'm writing, I'm going back and I'm making it more seamless. In fact, I probably got 2 1/2 pages done.

Since I am going very consistently at one page an hour, I believe I could have this draft done in 220 hours of work at most.

That is 8 1/2 weeks full time work. That is if I do not get writers' block. I do not think I will, but then again, that is something like what people thought about the housing bubble.

********

I saw "An Inconvenient Truth" tonight, and in the process, I got to meet a few neighbors, Clark and Barbara. Some old-timers living in town. They remember when this place was farm-land and forest. It is good to know somebody besides my next door neighbor "Lisa" and her young son, and the apartment manager.

It is too bad some people have been made to discount it, because this movie and its argument about Global Warming are blockbusters. For people who think there is another side to this argument, it is quite conclusive. There is actually no scientific controversy here. Of a sample of 938 articles surveyed on the subject, zero opposed the proposition that Human made Global Warming is occurring. Zero. This is pretty conclusive, and the changes taking place are in the climate are very radical and worrisome.

I have to spend the rest of my slight waking time looking up more things about this.

Tension with my Collaberator was Unfounded.

Very embarrassing. Apparently the emails were rejected due to a technical problem. I'm much happier now. I really let it bother me till it actually depressed me on Friday. Right when I was supposed to see Janise.

I have essentially been fucking off today. I'm finally eating "breakfast." I've been ignoring the basics, like exercise, cooking and the basics of household cleaning, while I write not just the novel but postings. All of that could depress me.

Tonight, I am going to go out and see "An Inconvenient Truth" at a neighbor's home. I've never met them. This at least gives me some time out of the house to meet people. Something I really need. After that, I am going write some on the novel. Tomorrow I go to see my niece sing at the Symphony. Then, I'll go and see the trailer of Jack's movie. My expectations about both are very high. Jack is the best film-maker in the whole midwest, and my niece sings like an angel.

Communications companies that can't communicate.

On the novel today, I got exactly one sentence done.

Otherwise, I've been on the phone discussing my cable and phone bills. The phone bill was easy, they were overcharging me. All I wanted was basic and they were charging me for metro. I'm getting a big credit and this will immediately save me some great financial grief.

The cable company was something else. I called customer service, and a woman with a sweet oriental accent answered. I asked her why my bill had jumped from $39 a month to $66 a month. She brought up my account and proceeded to read me a month by month list of the services I had. This was as boring as somebody reading you a phone book. After listening to this for 5 minutes, I reiterated the question. She did the same thing. I said, look, I didn't change my service, why am I paying 70 percent more. The same thing. I finally told her, I don't think you understand my question at all. I am canceling my service. She offered to let me speak to somebody in sales (I'm picture then the woman in Thailand transferring me to a guy in Bangladesh) and I said, no, I'm canceling my service.

Isn't outsourcing a gift?

This isn't the only communication trouble I've had with this company. It has always been a different comedy bit, all centered around the fact that either I can't communicate with the company, or most often, the company can't communicate with itself. Such as looking up the number in the local phone book, and finding after a half-hour wait that the number was to a different regional office that could not access my account.

I don't have time to list all the foibles.

Anyway, those were some of the essential phone calls I had to make.

A creepy, concordant, confluent moment between friends.

Before I go on, I'll mention I'm now in the middle of page 129 and I've finished a chapter.

I did a little grocery shopping tonight, picking up the essentials, meat, vegetables, fruit and some Fosters Lager. When I arrived home and brought the groceries in, I suddenly thought of my friend, Elaine in Chicago who I had not talked to in too long. When I came in, I opened the beer, dialed the phone, and a split second before the first ring, a message from her saying "Hi" comes right up on Yahoo. I had not talked to her in over a month, what were the odds that we would both think to contact each other simultaneously?

There have been a couple of these uncanny moments with her. One unexpected message from her just days after I got to know her literally saved my life one night. I will have to save that story for later, though.

Since I do not believe in spiritual forces, I do not think such things mean anything, but I live for the surprises the universe gives me. Elaine might be a strikingly beautiful woman, but I will not drive myself mad wondering about this.

It was so good to hear from her. Like most internet friendships though, I have not met her yet. I have talked to her, I have seen her on her web cam, we had cybersex (on that life-saving night, in fact). At most other times in my life, I could have driven up to Chicago on whim, but now I am poor. I mean to where driving to Chicago would empty my sad measly bank account.

I am at the end of two days off. I now work two days and have a rare weekend off. Then I work for at least six days in a row. That will be good medicine for my poor ailing bank account.

For the novel: I have two more chapters to close out the first section. I also have some cutting to do, and I am reading it from the beginning for cutting right now. So the page numbers will rise and fall.

Then there comes new territory: the second section.

Exhaustion is hitting me, though. I have to get in bed.

Accelerated progress.

After two hours and fifteen minutes of work, the book is up to the middle of page 128. That is surprising to me. It seemed like I did more than that.

Now I have to turn to the practical things of the day. Paying the bills. Getting a new phone company and ISP. At least now the day is already a success.

My Dad called and invited me to go see my niece sing in the symphony choir on Sunday. Of course I said yes. I do not want to miss her best moments, and besides, I just need to get out more.

Slightly less the hermit.

The book is now up to the top third of page 125. I could have made this a much better day. Hell, that was 3 1/2 pages in 4 hours of writing! If I could get in a few eight hour writing days, the project would jump 10 percent.

I did do more writing, actually. I am a writer given to temptations of the flesh-- and worse, temptations of the mind and politics. Just one reason why my collaborator (who supplied the plot) wants to give me the Moe Howard evil eye-gouge.

What I am not tempted by: gaming or TV. I would like to take some time for gaming, but only when I have one job that pays, and not two jobs where only one pays. I have loads of games in my place, but none of them tempt me.

I have the persistence now, the skills, and the confidence, what I don't have yet is the immersion. I'll stand on my head in the project if I have to.

At least for part of tomorrow I have to do a few practical things, pay bills for one. I think a coalition of collection agencies are going to show up at my doorstep with pitchforks. The phone company and the cable company have both ripped me off. I lowered my phone service to basic, and when I wasn't looking, they raised it back up to metro plus. All I wanted the landline for, really, was the emergency service and for something I could call out on if the internet or computer failed. For that, I would have a calling card.

The cable company (I don't have a TV, the only benefit I get is the internet) suddenly raised my rates 80 percent. This isn't the only irritation I've had from them. I think I'm going to shop around and buy a package elsewhere.

However, I actually took some time to walk today. Also, I might have eaten in, but I decided to go to a local restaurant just for a little more human contact. I'm still very isolated, but it is by necessity right now. The only constant companion I have is my cat, Sid, and I'm pushing him away most the time.

More about things I've posted later. I have to take my meds and sleep.

Another day another page.

I'm now up to the beginning of page 122. That is more than a page in an hour's writing.

I went to my doctor and got stuck last week because I've been feeling a little dazed. Not tired. Dazed. It might be the lack of exercise. It might be blood sugar (though I'm not diabetic, the tests will see if a further test is necessary.) It might be one of my "innovative" treatments for my ailments going wrong. That is to say I'm using some medicines not as directed for physical problems. Maybe I should re-evaluate that, especially if the tests come back normal.

I did get up badly, too late and too slow. Writing the novel came first. Exhaustion is taking over, making me so glad I have a day off tomorrow and another Wednesday.

Too short a day.

I work this weekend. As the work-week goes on, I get tired. Less gets done other than work at work.

I stayed in bed too long today. I didn't get up till noon. Subtract breakfast, then lunch, showering & shaving and I have about no time.

The novel is neglected for the day. I can't have too many more days like this.

There's reason to count my blessings, though. This is the first winter I could remember since childhood where I wasn't sinking into depression. Strange how a simple thing like slowly extending darkness can effect you mentally. The meds are a miracle. I wish I could be assured of always getting them.

I heard from Janise today (that's the name I will give my lover). She missed a dose of hers a few days ago and feels sad and lonely today. I just sent her a message. I know she hasn't seen it yet.

That's 10 minutes on the blog. No heavy thoughts for today. I have to buy lunch and dinner.

Tonight I have to take my meds right before I'm off work so I could run home and get ready to sleep quick. I'm trying to get up earlier in the morning and get writing done before getting to work.

The Bad Book Syndrome as revealed by Dr. Zinaval

I got two pages done on the novel. It's now up to the middle of page 120.

I've been alone all day except for my cat, who has been attention starved and is suffering with cabin fever. In the days following the cold weather, he bit me on my cheek and left a welt big enough to look like I had a second nose. Like I was to blame!

He's a coward, too. He will never go anywhere in the daytime. After going one foot out on the porch back to get a good look at things, he ducked back in. Now he's curled up asleep in his box, the one on my desk that keeps him from getting in the way of my writing.

He was originally Chris's cat. An heirloom I have from my late nephew.

I'm very solitary, though. My lover (the fuck-buddy sort) visits me about once a week. It's the perfect life for a writer. Unfortunately, it can get to me sometimes, it's why I took in such terrible roommates.

I wanted to call my mother and call another friend today, but I'm out of time. There are a lot of other things I want to do, but I'm at the limits of my production.

I tell myself I love work now. That's because I'll be terminated if I'm late or if I miss a day again, at least up till April. So-- now I love my job. Not enough to overtime, but I love it otherwise.

Burrough's "Naked Lunch": I'm reading this book, and I'm not getting through it very well. Maybe it will all strike me at once how meaningful it is. I mean, I am still thinking about "The Fountain." Images and words stick with me, but so far, I have not thought of anything that could make that movie worthwhile.

For Burroughs, the descriptions are intriguing, both thick and sick. A bit like a tour through Dante's hell. However, there is no hell in this book. The hell lies in the mind of the author, right beneath the "story." I wish I could tell if it's a real story with a beginning, middle and end. It seems to be a book in which you have to be assigned to read it in a literature class. By the end, you so despondent at the total waste of time, that you have convinced yourself that it is the greatest thing you have ever read.

Usually that happens when you force yourself to read "Atlas Shrugged." It is a form of hazing used by Objectivists. By the end, you are initiated. It is the best book you have ever read in your life. Because if you did not think that after the wretched experience of reading it, you would slit your wrist. It is a matter of life and death that you claim it is incredible. Many other cults use this technique.

So, I am taking Burroughs in small painful doses. Exercising would probably less painful and a lot better for me.

I "warm up" in the morning by reading, and I "cool down" at night by reading. I switch from one book to the other really. More about that later, I am almost out of time on lunch. More about that later.

Today's posts

I have a question....
Posted by [ALT] 12/8/2006 9:48:21 AM

I've been doing alot of research about income tax...and wanted to know, can anyone tell me if there's a law that requires us to pay income taxes? If there is, will someone please show it to me?


[After some posts in which she quoted some fine tax-evasion authorities]:

You've been sold a bill of goods that you might pay for very dearly.
Posted by zinaval , 12/9/2006 8:14:45 AM

...by people who will comply with the tax codes themselves while they will make money putting you behind bars. It is a fraud, and very immoral one, take my word for it. As a provider, if you run afoul of paying taxes, you will find things reported to every other level of LE. They will take every liberty searching your premises for "other crimes." Don't do this!

There is not a government that has ever existed, anywhere period, that does depend on taxes, including this one. They are all dead serious about collecting them. This government is no exception. You make yourself a "conscientious objector" over this and guess what? It will go nowhere else. You don't hear any outcry for the release of Wesly Snipes. That's about as high level a materially interested conscientious objector as you could get.

The statutes are the law of the land. The IRS was established by Congress and is run by the executive taxes. No, people did not start paying taxes simply through inattention. The court rulings you could cite are for loopholes that were *later closed by Congress.*

I will last appeal to your morality: the government and everything it does cannot run without tax revenues. Think of a nation as a club. You pay *dues* to stay in this country and enjoy benefits for being here. If you don't like it, think of a way to run a government without taxes first. Nothing in life is free, including a country around you.

If you don't like how the nation spends money, come up with ways to save it, programs to cut, and agitate against those and call it to the attention of Congress.

Technically NO!! In practicality YES
Posted by [Mr 220], 12/9/2006 7:06:35 AM

The Constitution states that there shall be NO direct capitation.

The Income Tax was written to tax "income". Congress defined "income" as a gain or profit (IE:money made from money)
back.in1909 (4 years before the 13th amendment was ratified)
Wages were defined as a direct barter of time /labor for money and NOT a gain or profit.

The Income Tax taxes 'Dollars' There has not been any 'legal' US "Dollars" in circulation for decades.
ALL of our paper monies are promissory 'notes' and by strict definition of such no longer even constitute a legal "note"
There are no longer ANY legal coins in circulation containing the prescribed weight in either gold or silver as set forth by the coinage act of the late 1700s.

If your money is not derived from interest from bank accounts, stocks, bonds, etc or basic capital gain; by Congressional definition it is NOT taxable.

If you have not been paid in gold or silver dollars or fractions thereof, or in legal silver certificates “notes” redeemable in silver or gold Dollars you are by definition not liable for taxation.

The IRS code mandates all tax debts to be paid in “Legal US Dollars”. Since there are none in circulation NONE of us can legally pay the debt if we somehow incur it.

Our ever benevolent and always venal Federal government has however done an expert job of double talking and dumbing down the masses so that attempting to live and thrive outside of the duplicative system ratified and corrupted over the last 93 years has all but become impractical and marginalizing.


You are crazy.
Posted by, zinaval 12/9/2006 8:40:27 AM

First, the clause in the constitution you cite was changed by direct amendment. Here is the text of the 13th Amendment ratified by 3/4's of the states:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

So Congress has the right to impose income taxes, and it has, and the executive branch is obligated to collect them. It has through the IRS.

As for how Congress defines income: believe me, they re-defined again since 1909. You can't pick and choose. They've passed tens of thousands of laws since then. Find out the definition since.

The "definition of the dollar" is another false argument. The science of economics was in its infancy then. They thought the only way to have money was to base it on metal. Why? If you study it, you'll find that people first used metals as money because they were regarded as having magical powers. There is no good argument for basing money on metal. Period. Metal doesn't hold it's value; it's more volatile in the markets as the dollar.

We won the Revolutionary and Civil Wars by issuing paper money. So, it lead to the birth of the US. Efforts to go back to "real dollars" from paper money after the Civil War led to major economic depression.

Legal US dollars are US dollars made by statute of Congress. Period.

Thoughts about religion and inceptivism, continued.

So the conversation continued:

Re:Deep Deep complex concepts that I have to write about very fast.
Posted by BJ, 12/4/2006 2:57:08 PM

fascinating read.....

if you have a minute I would like you to expand on how you came to formulate the moral code you refered to in a previous post..


Defies giving a short answer.
Posted by zinaval , 12/5/2006 8:59:47 AM

I'd have to get into the trunk and dig up my "ancient writings" to tell because it was not a short process.

Basically: Since I presume there is no God and the soul is mortal, then that implies there is no reward or punishment after death. Moreover, there is no inherent meaning imposed on the universe. Don't look for one.

Then, consider your limitations, which are many. There is no God in the universe, and that means you too. This brings humility. Your powers are extremely limited, your consciousness is intermittent, and it doesn't even have complete control of your body. You are greatly limited by time, position and space, mental and physical capacity and by senses that only show you an infinitesimal sample of what's going on in your immediate vicinity. Your memory is flawed an glitchy. That is only some of your limitations.

So, you could either limp along without any meaning in your life, or you could take your limited tools and try to bring meaning to it, and bring it to the parts of the vastness that you could touch. Improve the tools that you have for this purpose.

With the medium I've described, create a work of art from your life. Something that's aesthetically pleasing on the canvass of the universe. Something that if you were awakened from death and had to experience again without changing, you would embrace it.

Re:Defies giving a short answer.
Posted by BJ , 12/6/2006 9:13:39 AM

"Defies giving a short answer."

Boy, if that isn't the truth. Like you, or I guess you could say, like most folks, my views realy are the sum of my experiences to date. As such, it would be beyond my limited capacity to convey to you in a manner I would feel satisfied with the answer to the same question.

"""""So, you could either limp along without any meaning in your life, or you could take your limited tools and try to bring meaning to it, and bring it to the parts of the vastness that you could touch. Improve the tools that you have for this purpose.

With the medium I've described, create a work of art from your life. Something that's aesthetically pleasing on the canvass of the universe. Something that if you were awakened from death and had to experience again without changing, you would embrace it.""""""""

It is interseting but I must say I find something somewhat spiritual in what you say here. I don't want to put words in your mouth but the manner in which you seem to place value on existence and make quality judgements about that life....IOW, there is something more to YOU than the earthsuit your soul wears. (I was suprised to see you acknowledge "a soul" as well)

anyways, interesting reading.


Deep complex concepts need more questions
Posted by [Generic Christian] , 12/4/2006 11:09:32 PM

I appreciate your answers; they are thoughtful, intelligent and interesting. You are correct, many monotheistic religions do not accept Jesus Christ as Son of God, for example the Jewish Faith, Krishna, Buddha. Ditto. Now we can go on different subjects but I am more interested in your analysis specifically in relation to God and how you derived at that conclusion.
______

Your suppositions that “Everything is either material or part of a material process” and “that no spiritual world and no spiritual processes” exist are similar in thinking to…

Philosopher David Hume’s sincere belief: “it is a most unreasonable fancy that there might be life after death”. Mr. Hume believed that that all human knowledge comes to us through our senses. He basically believed that our reality is made up of perceptions, which comes from the impressions from what we hear, or see, or feel. Hume's skepticism says that we cannot believe that a certain thing, such as “God, a soul or a self exists unless we can point to the impression from which the idea of the thing is derived”.

So my question to you Mr. Zinaval, is it your contention that since God cannot be (supposedly) empirical derived from deductive or inductive reasoning that he therefore not exists?


My senses are far too limited for empiricism to determin that.
Posted by zinaval , 12/5/2006 9:20:11 AM

Empiricism is only as good as the information you have to feed into it. There is no way I have the capacity to gather that information and give a definitive answer.

I could only go by my best judgment. I call myself an atheist because of that judgment.

I make that judgment due to a few things: 1) the concept of a supremo is self-contradictory; 2) like myself, no human being has ever been in a position to know if there is a god, despite claims to the contrary; 3) the universe that the God created turns out to be far different than the universe any human depicted God would have ever created; 4) if this universe were created, it would not be by something that "thought" in the human sense of the word; 5) In my everyday life, I've never seen anything that would lead me to believe that there is a God. I could go on and on, but I haven't the time.

If I'm now very dismissive of any human concept of God, that is not to say I'm no open to being surprised about it. I'm open even about the afterlife, but it would surprise me in the extreme.


Zin, wouldn't that make you an agnostic? eom
Posted by [GG] , 12/5/2006 10:37:56 PM

No, because I've 'placed my bet.'
Posted by zinaval, 12/6/2006 6:38:51 AM

I strongly believe that there is no God, that the universe cannot have been created by any mind. However, that is merely a belief not knowledge. From that belief, I live on the assumption that there is no God.

Also, this much I know: any God worshiped today is not even remotely viable as a creator of this universe. None of the Gods humankind have ever conceived would explain this as a "creation." So, next to all the religions today, I am an atheist.
Moreover, no God I could imagine myself would have created it.

God was possible when we had only a world around us to explain. Once we discovered the universe around it, I believe it is not possible.

In a sense, my decision does resemble agnosticism, but atheism has never existed as anything other than polemical against religion before, to my knowledge. The difference is that I don't attempt to deny belief as a legitimate mental process. That is part of why I call my view "inceptivism."

Other atheists would say you either know or you don't know, and belief itself is a myth. That is disproved in 10 seconds, yet they will still declare it. Human beings must always make decisions based on incomplete knowledge. That is judgment-- belief. It's distinct from knowledge, or thinking.

"To believe" BTW, is also a very distinct verb from "to believe in." This is what atheists do not understand.

Empiricism, 'a priori' knowledge and God
Posted by [Generic Christian] , 12/6/2006 10:48:38 PM

Philosopher David Hume stated that all knowledge begins with experience. Empiricism however as was you well stated Mr. Zinaval is not enough to understand all the substantive knowledge in our world. This is where Philosopher Kant came in and stated but it does not follow that all knowledge arises out of experience. Mr. Kant referred to this knowledge as 'a priori' knowledge. For example, the idea of time, mathematics, love, arise not from empirical impressions but from knowledge independent of experience.

Now what Hume and Kant are saying (to be succinct) is that different levels of understanding exist in the world. Agree. However these brilliant men of words did not quite fully understand. In the Old Testament we read that God said, “Let us make man in Our own image”. In the Gospel, Christ said, “I am in the Father, and Father in Me”.

These Holy words show us that man is made in God’s image: yet Essence of God is incomprehensible to the human mind, for the finite understanding cannot be applied to this infinite Mystery. God contains all, and cannot be contained. As brilliant as Hume and Kant were, they were men, human beings and imperfect. Imperfect because things which are understood by men cannot be outside their capacity for understanding, so that it is impossible for the heart of man to comprehend the nature of the Majesty of God. Our imagination is limited. Here is how:

The power of the understanding differs in degree in the various Kingdoms of God’s creation. The mineral, vegetable, and animal realms are incapable of understanding any creation beyond their own.

The rock (I am a Geological Engineer)cannot understand the growing movement of a tree. The tree in turn is incapable of understanding the prowess, the movement of an animal, their sense of smell, sight and hearing. It cannot understand what it does not possess.

The animal learns from its experiences, from their sense of smell, sight, taste, and hearing, are in essence, pure rational beings. The animal though in possession of these gifts cannot understand the intelligence of a human being. Tell the animal to add: 2 plus two, and it wouldn’t answer, it cannot answer because it cannot imagine anything in the abstract or as Kant referred to as 'a priori' knowledge. The animal only knows from its impressions of its animal senses.

Though man is God’s highest creation, the Reality of God; He, the Unknowable, the Unthinkable is far beyond the highest conception of man. To help us understand the Love of God well that is why he sent his Son. This Sun of Truth helps light our paths. The Lord Christ said: “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father”. …And that’s another topic.


I was afraid of that. Now the Bible tract comes out.
Posted by zinaval, 12/7/2006 12:01:23 AM

I thought you were going to be less viral, but I'm disappointed by a Christian again. I see you were just looking for an entry.

Quit quoting Hume and Kant cliff notes at me. I didn't mention them, remember? Read what I wrote instead. Don't use the authority of smart dead guys to puff up your argument. BTW, "different levels of understanding" is a very poorly thought out cut 'n' paste cliche of a phrase.

Your advice is corrupt. My belief is honest and based on what I know as far as I can possibly know. Instead, you're telling me to change my belief to save my soul. Doesn't your religion say something about bearing false witness? You are encouraging me to sin, by your own religion's definition. You are encouraging the deepest hypocrisy.

Also, if a god (no way the Biblical character exists, no way) forgives me for pretending I'm wrong, and by accident, I turn out to be wrong, bearing false witness all the way to the gate, isn't the god unsavory? He wants acknowledgment and attention above honesty?

"I am the Father and the Father in Me." What the fuck does that mean? This statement wasn't even relevant in context. Quotes like that are just Christmas Ornaments.

I might not be able to comprehend a god, but I could tell the work of God from the work of human beings. God is clearly a human work. Right down to his obsession with whether human beings believe in him. Have you ever had a problem with people not believing you exist? How many human beings have that existence problem? Yet, this is supposed to be the first requirement of the creator of this whole universe?

Only a fictional work could have that fixation. The reason why? So the people foisting the fraud can benefit the most.

Now, some thoughts about religion and inceptism

Inceptivism is a form of atheism that reconsiders the universe and human affairs without a God. Atheism has previously only existed as a polemical against religion. As the inventor of this "religion" I strive to form a complete philosophy and discipline and give atheists a direction that leads to something less sterile than opposition to religions.

You will find here nothing spiritual, no scriptures, no divine revelations. Just my thoughts reconsidering humankind in its relation to the universe.

It is all materialism or a function of the material, but not in the financial sense (though that has to be included.) You will also find a public journal of my life and my political opinions here.

I'll start this with an online conversation I've had recently:


Yes, I am a Christian, but not an evangelist... (at least not by modern standards)
Posted by [BD], 11/29/2006 11:56:20 AM

"Born-Again" is a whole topic onto it's self, I'll save that for a future post...

First, let me start with the "Yeshua ben Yosef" name, which of course isn't his name at all... His name would be "Yeshua ben YHWH" (pronounced "Yahweh") "Jesus - son of - God" for those who are already lost...

Yosef did have two sons, Yeshua was not his son, he was concieved of by the Holy Spirit of YHWH(God) to the virgin Mary before Yosef took her as his wife.

Jesus didn't spread his Holy seed on this earth and left no off-spring.

But the true understanding of the origin of this mythology come from understanding the history of the Gnostics...
It is a little-known fact, but the Gnostic occultish religion predates Christianity by over 300 years, and is was an religion of oral-tradition until at least 200 years post the Resurection. They are a patch-quilt of mistical beliefs which also include some pieces of Christianity, which merely filtered into their culture over time and added fodder to their mythical ramblings...

The common figure of a "lady with child" (Goddess Sophia) goes back to ancient Babylon, hence it's woven into the thread of many occultic/pagan beliefs. (including Catholicism! I imagine I made some more enemies with that statement! lol!)

The lady-with-child was already a familar figure of worship to the Gnostic pagans, so writing Jesus into the script was an easy thing for them to do during the time their traditions were passed orally, then 300+ years later, while under persicution by Orthodox Christians(partly decieved in their own right!) They scribed their Mythical beliefs and further mixed it with their Christian teachings and WROTE FROM SCRATCH the Gnostic Gospels, which are more ticklish to the ears of pagan cultures than the flee-from-sin-embrace-manogomy message of the Orthidox Church.
Thus the Pagan/occultic culture of ancient France which had a very sexually based system of beliefs was eager to blend these gospels into their worship of fertility and Eros, which is obviously still woven into French culture today!


As far as my thoughts on Da vinci... Just as with many savant-genius people throughout history, he was a pervert, a sexual deviant, and an internally tortured man, the trouble with IQs over 200 is that the extra "Illumination" that they bring often drives the person mad as well.....


Glad to meet you [BD]-- meet a total atheist.
Posted by zinaval , 12/3/2006 1:44:57 PM

Copied from the thread below that's about to be turned from page 1.

Sorry it took so long to get to this thread. For total contradiction: I believe Jesus never existed. He wasn't Jesus ben Yahweh neither was he Jesus ben Pandira or Jesus ben Joseph. The reason why I concluded he never existed (which I concluded last year after 12 years of atheism) was in reading about it, the details of his life got filled in 100-200 years after he purportedly died. There are *no* contemporary records of his having lived, Including by well-educated people living in Judea at the time. That includes Philo of Judea who wrote on every topic imaginable and was well connected to the priesthood. The charismatic Christ seems to seems to have passed without notice of people at the time.

Plus, early church fathers, such as Esebius and Clement are on record as writing that lying in the service of God was moral and, in fact, glorious. Forgeries from the first thru third centuries about Jesus abound.

Some secularists might believe that Jesus was a man who was promoted by legend to Godhood. I believe he was more like a God who became man.

For Jewish sources, the Rabbinical writings never mention the name Jesus. There are characters in them with names that have been taken to be pseudonyms for Jesus. These "comparisons" are easily debunked, and say more about the desperation of scholars to find something more or less contemporary about him.

Moreover, the Talmuds, of which there are two: one the Palestine Talmud written in the 3rd century CE does not mention Jesus at all. The Babylonian Talmud, written 500 years later, does have details about Jesus. Again, the further away in time and geography you go, the more details about Jesus's life are filled in.

Dr Gonzo's reference to Yeshu ben Yoseph comes from a source called the Toldoth Jeshu. It was a tract, or literary tradition that started much later. As the Jews were further and further oppressed by the Christians, they wrote some anti-Christian tracts. These came much later than the life of Christ and are now known to have any attachment to an historical Jesus.

The argument gets stronger if you read the books that did not make it into the Canon. You will say these are all gnostic, but it is surprising how much of it ended up in Christian tradition. There are some embarrassing contradictions and omissions in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They show that details of his life were a source of disagreement (simple things like how many disciples he really had and what their names were.)

More damning: the Apostle Paul, for all of his teachings about accepting Christ as one's savior and the Lamb of God **never quotes Christ's teachings even once.**

Perhaps the most damning evidence: in Mark, the earliest accepted Gospel, the name Jesus is written with "the" in front of it. Jesus was not used as a name there, but as a title. It means "the savior" from Greek, and was only later associated with the name Joshua. To me it shows that Jesus evolved from a mystic ideal, to a legend, to a pseudo-hisory.

This is an ironic name, BTW, and should have been the tip-off to everyone that he was some kind of Messiah.

I could go on. This is just some of it.

**************

I would like to answer your point about pagan culture: You forget to say how much even the Christian God as a concept, is pagan himself. The God, introduces himself to Abraham as El Shaddai. (Gen 17:1) El was really the father of a pantheon of pagan deities widely worshipped in what's now Palestine. El Shaddai was one of his sons. Elohim-- a plural name of all the Gods of the pantheon, occurs 1500 times in the first 15 books of the Bible-- in which there's only supposed to be one God. This has been a source of embarrassment for Jewish and Christian scholars.

BTW, besides Yahweh, God introduces himself as El Elyon (Most High God), El roi (God of Vision) El Sabaoth (God of Heavenly Host, with the heavenly hosts being the army of the other El gods.)... and there are plenty of other variants. Monotheism was only forced on the story later.

Lest you think it was the early stories that were rather confused about the identity of God: Psalm 82 shows God getting quite angry at his brothers and sisters at the council of El.

The word Israel itself might be a compound of the names of three Egyptian gods: Isis, Ra, and El.

**************

I have a few comments on what you wrote to Jack concerning having a moral code and failing or bending morality to fit your desire.

Bending morality to meet your behavior will usually lead to the same results as having a moral code and not following it. Usually the latter is is worse in terms of results, because you are holding and judging everyone else by the stricter morality than the letter you chose to live by. At least with the former, there's not as much danger of doing that.

Foremost, what you really mean by "having" a moral code is having adopted one pre-assembled by some other people, such as the ones who wrote the Bible. In doing so, you also get to "bend" moral law to fit your own life. I doubt that you follow the kosher laws. I doubt that you'd marry your brother's widow if he dies childless, or bathe yourself before you pray. You have, for all intents and purposes, have bent morality to your will. Rather, you've let other people bend it into a form in which you're willing to buy it.

I've developed my own moral code. In many ways, it parallels Judeo Christian morality, but there are some profound differences. One of them pertaining to sex. I don't feel I bend my morality to fit my behavior, but I think that any moral code that could be written can not explain it completely. It's more like aesthetics.

Re:Glad to meet you xxx-- meet a total atheist.
Posted by [generic christian], 12/3/2006 6:56:23 PM

Zinaval:

I am confused by your posting. Are you:

1) Advocating a position as an atheist?
2) Stating that Jesus Christ our savior does not exist?
3) Or both.


[Answer to Confusion]
Posted by zinaval , 12/3/2006 8:46:40 PM

I can't advocate atheism. You either think a supremo created and/or is in charge of this universe or you don't. Reasons for believing it might be good or bad, but God is at least a viable hypothesis.

However, atheism is also a viable hypothesis, and there is no doubt that consideration of it is given short shrift due to the monotheism that predominates in our society. I just tell people that the history of monotheism and its concoction would surprise them if they look into it, or even look at their own scriptures.

The existence of Jesus Christ is a different issue entirely. Till quite recently even as an atheist, I thought the Jesus the man must have existed. Looking into the scholarship closely has changed my mind. The hypothesis that he might not have existed is under-considered even by atheists.

Atheism doesn't recommend itself. It doesn't fulfill the role that religion has in peoples' lives. Unlike most atheists, I don't think people as a whole can do without religion.

But religion does not have to be monotheistic, or even theistic. One might develop a religion with atheism as its basis. I believe communism might serve as an example, but a failed one. Besides this exception, any possibility of an atheist religion has always been crushed very quickly.


I'm still confused??
Posted by [ generic Christian] , 12/3/2006 11:22:27 PM

help me understand, what do you mean monotheism and Jesus Christ are different issues? I'm curious and interested in your thought process. Atheism is a idea not in my realm of thinking. How do you explain the advancement of human civilization without the divine guidance of God? How do you explain love, the soul, the differences in species etc.

The idea that, "that religion does not have to be monotheistic or even theistic". Yes so, paganism, and voodoo are religions also? Finally, communism is a social and economic system not a religion.

Deep Deep complex concepts that I have to write about very fast.
Posted by zinaval, 12/4/2006 2:00:41 PM

To your first question about existence of Christ being separate from monotheism:

Not all monotheistic religions include Jesus Christ. This is why I think of it as a separate issue. In fact, Christ by himself is not even a complete deity. His presence as a God on earth s nonsensical without his relation to Yahweh the Father.

*****************

Before I answer other questions, there are a few concepts I have to describe to you.

First is belief irrelevance. In monotheisms, belief in God is central. Denying God will bring you closer to hell faster than anything.

I reject this. In my judgment, belief does not effect your destiny. It does not effect the outcome of anything unless it effects the way you behave, and that's the only direct effect it can have.

The second is anti-spiritualism. I believe there is no spiritual world and no spiritual processes. Everything is either material or part of a material process. The closest thing to a spiritual event would actually be psychological. Beside that, it could be a material event in which the material basis unknown. Fire and lightning were once considered quite spiritual. By my thinking though, this is the only definition of the spiritual that makes any sense.

Now, restricted with these two concepts, atheists have to reject monotheism, and they can logically believe in superior beings as long as they are material. They would also have to reject all dominant forms of paganism as well, for there's no spiritual process by which pagan gods could exist.

There is also no medium by which prayers could be heard.

*********************

Now I'll answer more of your questions, the next one being about the advancement of human civilization. To answer this, I first have to ask what you believe the necessary role in human advancement you think God played? I realize this is disappointing, but I must know this before I can answer.

**************

Next, I now answer your question regarding the existence of the soul. This has to be heavily re-defined just so atheists could minimally communicate with theists about it. I believe one does not have to reject the soul in atheism. It's really not a concept that depends on a God or spiritualism.

The first important difference is the soul is self-generated within the person, not something given by a super- or supreme being.

The soul is as mortal as the body. When the person dies, the soul is gone forever. Pretty much like a snuffed candle-flame.

The soul is part of consciousness, which itself is a generated function of the brain. It is the matured, developed, and humanized ego (the ego being something that all animals have). The soul is decision-maker-- the will of a person. It is distinct from the other functional units of consciousness: the mind, the memory, the emotions, the senses.

**************

I've originated these concepts, BTW, and I call my variant on atheism inceptivism: a reconsidering of concepts about people and the universe on the hypothesis of a godless universe.

*****************

Love: to quote Alexander Waugh (not an atheist himself) "Love is the vaguest of terms which can be used to encompass any number of indefinable feelings that living beings have toward other living beings or places or things." (God, pg.149)
I can't explain it better.

It does leave a loose end as to what emotions are. They are individual programs developed and rewritten through evolution. They run in our consciousness and act upon on it and cause us to act. Many times they do this quite against our wills.

**************

Now I'll answer your question about the difference of species. The short answer is it's explained through evolution.

The longer answer is something different. Observing life processes at every stage and manifestation, the once anticipated "hand of God" has never been present. You might not be able to detect it, but you can detect what it isn't. There's nothing in biology that would even suggest it. Such a "hand" must be inferred, or rather rescued as a concept, for the processes go on very well by themselves.

An argument is sometimes raised that these processes couldn't have developed without a mind behind it. My counterargument: without seeing the "Hand of God," you are more likely in a universe where unminded processes do major creation all the time. Perhaps it's the minds that depend on the unminded, and not the other way around. Every day life would actually suggest this (examples given upon request.) It certainly looks like our minds evolved.

A related question: so, in what universe would God's mind have evolved?

**********************

About communism: I should have been more specific about this. Bolshevism was a religion.

*********************

Other etc questions?

To be continued tomorrow. That's all I have time to cut n paste edit and re-font right now.

Restarting the Blog

What is an inceptivist? I coined the term. The curious may read the blog to find out what it is.

I am restarting the blog, editing the previous posts, changing the format. It took me a while to figure out just what direction I wanted to take it. I am removing many of the previous posts.

A comment about formatting: it seems that every blog I see on here chooses that white on black format, so I think it's overused. Also, it looks really cool, but it's damn hard to read. Even with the text blown up. The first formatting I used seemed different, but I got tired of it quick. It looked dull.

So, I've used the white on blue-- slightly different, but not different enough. I've kicked the text up a notch so people don't have to magnify. I don't know HTML, so further modification is not yet possible.

What I am busy with now:

I have to work at my job every day. Besides that, I'm writing a novel, a collaborative effort with a friend who writes scripts. I am striving to become a professional writer. I've had a long apprenticeship of about 22 years.

I chose not to turn pro right away because my skills were not where they needed to be to avoid starvation. Plus, too many writers remove themselves too far from the burden of "real work" and the people there, who labor in jobs they mostly dislike. This is not deliberate on the part of writers. By necessity writing is solitary. The writer's main relationship is with the page. It can be a very demanding partner.

Also, I knew I did not have it together enough psychologically to avoid self-destruction with writing. I spent decades making no career decisions and drifting from job to job. The need for food and shelter motivated me.

So, I start today with my script-writer/movie director friend, call him Jack, pissed at me for dragging my feet on the novel based on his script. Instead, I write things like this blog. I have been frustrating, I admit. This is a big chance for me now that he has made a Hollywood movie. Meanwhile, I have been working, or not working on it for maybe 8 years. However, he has no risk and the possibility of reward with my writing the book. For myself, it is my best chance to break into the field.

Other things, other issues distract me. Every day, though, I produce a good 5-7 pages of writing, but not on the novel. The world is just a complex place with too many issues. At the rate I am able to write, though, some concentration over 3 months and the draft will be done.

He has blocked email access. I figure talking out our "differences." It will not help. The only thing that will help our friendship is to get this thing done.

TODAY

Today I am feeling a little dazed. I got up congested, always a bad thing. I took a decongestant and an antihistamine, but I think the imodium I took last night has also left me drowsy. It was necessary due to gas that would otherwise wake me up all night. So, I got a good night's sleep, and I'm drowsy anyway.

I go to work at 4. My next day off is Tuesday next week.

No Christmas this year for me because I am dead broke. My bank account is in negative numbers. Worse, the price of everything is going up next year. I've got to get this writing career going. The clock is ticking now.