Occupy Everything

I think the idea of occupying foreclosed houses is great. I even have a bit of advice. If a house in the East Bay has a lock box for a house key on it and it is vacant, look to see what kind of box it is. If it is a number combination box with a 4 number code try 0953. I dont know if this is still the case, but when I was out taking photos of foreclosed houses for realtors, one out of four times the combo to get the key was 0953. And I went into over 200 houses. I hope this information can be of service to somebody who wants to get back into their house without having to break a window.

On Rhetoric

Rhetoric today is at the same time feared and resisted, and making a huge resurgence. The idea that people can be persuaded was something that medieval societies to the post modern leaders of today have been concerned about. It is much easier to say that anything can be deemed right or wrong, good or bad,  and people will generally  obey the laws based on this premise. To a certain extent this works, with rulers using rhetoric to convince people that their reign is noble and righteous, while keeping the valuable and useful skill of persuasion to themselves and denying its importance. You can see this in the dictatorial regimes of Asia and Africa, the Arab Spring being a fresh crack in the facade. "Yes dictatorships are not ideal, but without me our nation will lose its independence to Western economic powers. You need me to keep blank from becoming a slave to America." And it is a persuasive argument, but one that is paid for in blood. At the same time, what is happening in the world of rhetoric is that with all the information sharing and technological advances of the privileged, more and more people are understanding the idea of rhetoric as a skill and a tool. They may not call it by name any more, but people all over know that they need to try and read through the lines. Advertising bombards us constantly, and people learn to read what is important information and what is just somebody trying to sell us something. We know that certain advertisers and corporations support specific political interests and ideologies. We know that Rupert Murdock is the owner of Fox and that he is a major political asset for the right. So more and more we see through rhetorical displays that used to have a bigger influence on the public. This understanding of the power of persuasion has influenced people to express themselves through new outlets like this blog. Most recently we have seen powerful employers of rhetoric such as Moammar Gadhafi and Hosni Mubarak fall from command. Too many people were dissenting. People were being persuaded by convincing arguments that these regimes were not the only alternative to chaos and fundamentalism, and that democracy was worth dieing for. Now we hope that this new rhetoric of structural possibilities can be realized by the many.

911

     So as we approach the anniversary of 9/11, I have to make a comment. I do not think that George Bush had specific knowledge that it was going to happen. From what I understand of his administration, it would seem that his advisers and the people who were in control of what information got to him would not want to trouble him with warnings of an attack coming soon. He was already dealing with the controversy of the election that got him into office, and I get the feeling his people would avoid delivering bad news to him at all costs. Anyway there had not been any foreign terrorist attacks on American soil for a long time. And then there was the fact that neo-cons needed a new "Pearl Harbor" in order to convince the public to allow certain ideological changes in foreign and domestic policy. This official opinion is well documented, and I believe it lead to the Patriot Act as well as other laws that allowed the U.S government to get around certain Constitutional rights guaranteed to the American people. I also believe that it allowed for the already militaristic approach to foreign policy to increase tenfold. Just look at the several wars that we are currently involved in. So it is not unreasonable to think that there were people in positions of power who would not want to stop a terror plot that might enable them to gain even more concentrated power over the population. They would at least want to allow it to proceed to a point where the public would take notice. Like shooting down a plane headed towards the White House in an open field before it could make contact. It is unlikely that the general public will ever get any "proof" that American officials were intent on allowing an attack to succeed. This is a very hard thing to prove, and even if anyone came forward, like in a death bed admission, it is likely that the government and the  mainstream media would dismiss it or even cover it up. At this point it can only be speculated on and researched by people and journalists who are not under the spell of the western mainstream media.
     Bush was probably totally in the dark, and based on his facial expressions upon hearing the news of a plane hitting the World Trade Center, I got a sense of despair and a little fear. Its hard to say, I think he may have been thinking about the people he knew, and what they might have know about this. He is perceived by the public as not being that bright, but in Family of Secrets by Russ Baker we see that W is in fact cunning and slick. So from this perspective I am guessing that he was thinking," I wonder what my friends knew about this that they did not tell me." He was not thinking this in an angry way, as if he were betrayed, but rather in a quietly inquisitive manner. He is smart enough not to betray his automatic thoughts, but nobody can truly cover them up. He had a thought, and the video shows that he was not comfortable. People of power like that think about their own positions at times of emergency, and he was likely thinking about who was going to use this event and for what purpose.
     Dick Cheney recently confirmed on NBC's Nightline that he had no reaction while watching the plane crashing into the WTC as all the other people in the room gasped. He explained that as a seasoned government official, he went straight into action mode. He had no time to be shocked; he had to protect the country now. I am sure that the public easily accepted this, for the narrative on Cheney is that he is a heartless jerk, but an experienced public servant who's credentials cannot be denied. In fact Cheney reveals a lot about his true intentions through his calculated attempts to keep this narrative alive. He is happy to have people up in arms about his controversial stance on torture. This keeps his critics focused on this one aspect of him, and draws attention away from his truly imperialistic and aristocratic views. To be sure, Cheney is not that good at dealing with the public. He betrays himself, but he knows that he does, and his real intentions are to make sure that he does not say too much. My feelings on his lack of a reaction have more to do with fact that he was ready for something of this nature to happen. He may have even expected this to happen, but it would be unwise for a highly important figure such as himself to have knowledge of specifics of a terrorist attack against his own country. If he had any hand in or knowledge of the 9/11 plan, it would have had to been compartmentalized to a degree that would be almost impossible to trace back to him. It would be wise for journalists to look for any kind of behavior he might have exhibited that would suggest he was creating an alibi. Baker in his book shows how Poppy Bush seemed to be creating an alibi in regards to the JFK assassination by calling the FBI and implicating somebody that he knew. Baker shows how this idea of creating alibis around important crimes is an important skill that intelligence operatives use, even if they are not connected to the event.
     All of this is speculation, but my opinions are informed from what I consider to be important facts. I hope that some day a writer or journalist will adapt the methods of investigation that Russ Baker used in looking into the Bush family and the JFK assassination, in order to get deeper into the real motivations and perpetrators of 9/11. So far the official line is crap, and just like in the official explanation of JFK's assassination, people are making more and more noise about what really happened on 9/11.

what do we do about drug addiction today? pt.3

I have concluded that twelve step programs are not really going to help me. Statistics from several sources show that AA and NA have a success rate of about 30%. That might actually be generous for it is really hard to get accurate statistics on these programs. But lets just say that its around 30% successful in keeping people sober. My guess is that the 30% is comprised of people who are either religious, had some kind of religious background, or are just so desperate that they are willing to change their beliefs. According to Jerry Dorsman's book How to Quit Drugs for Good, People whose views on philosophy and religion differ greatly from those in the twelve step program will probably not be able to have success remaining clean and sober. This would not be a problem if there were alternatives to AA and NA, but as far as I know there are almost none.

Immigration

Ultimately we do not want borders. Nobody wants borders. Everybody wants a fence free society where borders are not an issue because they do not want the issues that come with it. That's why nobody cares about state borders (unless you count the fruit check). Law enforcement is allowed to cross borders to get serious offenders. The rules that go with it are so minimal that there is really no obstacle in moving between them freely.
But our national borders are a different thing all together. Legal citizens prefer not to think about them. Conservatives make illegal and immoral laws to seem like they are tough. Federal facilities hold thousands of illegals for years before they are ultimately deported. They live in tents in the Arizona deserts. Progressive political thinkers know that this flow of immigration could be lessened if there were economic opportunities for immigrant laborers in their own countries. This too is difficult to accomplish with the majority of our foreign policy personnel focusing on war and energy needs. Our involvement in Mexico takes on a militaristic posture in the form of the war on drugs.
Personally I want to leave this country, and I feel that in an age where travel to all corners of the world is possible that people should be able to go wherever they want. Travel is a privilege, but more and more people are able to do it as we become a more globalized community. Technology and globalization are moving faster than immigration policy can keep up. Places like the European union make travel between its borders much easier for its citizens.
Then there is Dubai, a place that imports workers from all over the world to build its mind blowing sky scrapers. It is documented that this is practically slave labor. But slave labor in a globalized world is different from slave labor in colonial times. They do get paid now, and there is the possibility of returning home again. At the same time, exploitation is happening on a massive scale to where whole villages are being sent to war zones in Iraq or Afghanistan without consent. Our war contractors use this Dubai style labor in order to maintain US standards of living on military bases. Then at least between being sitting ducks in the middle of the desert, American soldiers can get some KFC and go see Transformers in an air conditioned theater (with not subtitles).
Where I am going with this is that the global North can travel freely and without much incident within its  own borders. The Global South is also pretty free to travel within its borders, but its people have less means for travel and are more often forced to travel all over the world in order to make enough money for their families to survive. Neither groups of people feel totally comfortable mingling together. But they can. It is possible. I personally would like to live in the global South and try to contribute my labor and abilities to the people without imposing ideas and taking anyone's livelihood. I am going to try next year. It is not easy to do, but it is possible and I want to expand my outlook on life. It is what I need to do. And I support all the other people in the world who for whatever reason feel the need to migrate. It is a natural thing that human beings have always done and despite new global obstacles will always do.

Bhutto's Pakistan

Pakistan needs our help now more than ever. Zardari is a good guy and a good leader who is capable of creating a modern welfare like state in one of the poorest countries in the world. I say this because he is a secular leader who is carrying on the legacy of the greatest political leader since her father. Benazir Bhutto is a martyr for democracy, and yet the possibly reluctant but charismatic replacement for her party position has managed to become the Prime Minister. Her husband Zardari has been accused of corruption and jailed for eleven years, but he has never been convicted of any of the thirty charges against him in court. At this point he is very weak. The US government and media is going after the entire Pakistani state without making a distinction between the military/ISI and the civilian government. The media portrayed the flood response of last year as a failure on his part, and it very well could have been. But that is what happens in war torn states with nuclear weapons, and weak civilian governments. At this point we have a chance to help Zardari's government and save Pakistan before it is too late. If we ignore it then the military will most likely seize power again. If Benazir Bhutto's dream of a democratic and independent Pakistan is ever going to be reached and sustained, then we need to take action now. Give civilian aid to the government and help them bring people out of extreme poverty. As the government gets stronger, slowly cut military spending. And make sure there is over site of how the money is spent. It would be a massive project, but it could turn what is possibly the most dangerous state in the world into a functioning society with no need for military control.

what do we do about drug addiction today? pt.2

As I stated in the previous segment there are many problems with the world of drug addiction treatment. But a lot of people out there would say that despite its deficiencies, these programs are making a difference. They are better than nothing in other words. The twelve step programs and rehab centers have helped unknown numbers of alcoholics and addicts (emphasis on unknown.) Ultimately there is no way to determine how effective these programs really are. A group of recovering addicts in a given institution will "graduate" from the program with however many days of sobriety the program lasts. Say its 48. Usually a group will graduate at the same time. Then it is up to each of them to continue some kind of program. There will be "aftercare" programs, but the support lessens the longer it is from graduation time. Usually a few will fall off right away, but a lot of counselors will base their success on the number of people who make it to a year of sobriety. This is a way to measure, for after a year, sobriety becomes easier according to the medical world. Still I have only really seen a fraction of addicts make it that long. More often then not a new patient to a program will have already been through one or more of them. From my experiences at MPI and CDRP, I would guess out of the group of 15 to 20 that graduated at or around the time I did, only two would make it to a year.

1 out of ten is probably being generous, but lets say that is it. This is not a good recovery rate. I started noticing how bad my odds were when I was nearing the end of my treatment program. It seemed to me at first that rehab was like a cure, and these people around me, strangers, have been so forthcoming with their deficiencies and worked so hard that most of them would stay sober for a long time. But as they left, fewer and fewer would come back for aftercare. I would ask about some and hear that nobody had heard from them since they left. Some had relapses and came back to admit it. That was a hard thing to do, but even for them the prospect of starting over, not to mention the costs of a place like MPI, are too much to deal with. Even a few came around secretly asking other patients if they knew where they could get drugs. It paints a pretty dismal picture.

Another issue people who like to think might have with drug rehab methods is that everybody, no matter what their substance of choice, is grouped together. And yet there are strange exceptions to the rule. For one, not a lot of facilities will disallow tobacco. The twelve step programs are abstinence based yet they never make mention of tobacco. Of course you cold say that I would rather have a pilot have 5 cigarettes before flying than to have five drinks. Sure, but we are not all pilots and we are not all facing the same standards. The truth is cigarettes are the most deadly and most addictive substance by far. But they are legal, and our society accepts that they need not be part of abstinence from substance use. So what is the actual criteria for being sober. The programs will include abstaining from cocaine, heroin, marijuana, meth amphetamine, prescription medications, alcohol (of course), and any other substance that gets you high besides caffeine and tobacco. Now alcohol is a good one to have on the list for in terms of health it is the worst. Second only to tobacco. The others have very different effects in terms of health and physical addiction. Heroin is very physically addicting and one will feel withdrawal symptoms if trying to quit after two weeks straight of usage. Cocaine though obviously affecting ones physiology does not have clear withdrawal symptoms and is usually not treated with medication like heroin is. Same goes for meth, but I cannot say much about that other than serious meth addicts have trouble staying awake in early recovery. Marijuana is the weakest link in this list of abstention. It is the least damaging to your health and though it is hard to quit, there is no list of symptoms associated with withdrawal. The voters of California along with many other states have decided that it is actually helpful in treating certain illnesses. There is much debate about the potency of "today's" weed, but even strong weed is relatively harmless to humans. Each of these types of substance users have different experiences and I would say different odds for success.

What do we do about drug addiction today?

It is my belief that drug and alcohol addiction (or drug usage as the Canadians would more accurately call it) is at a high point. It must be if the cartels in Mexico find the sales of drugs in the US and world wide worth going to war over. And of course we are still at war with drugs themselves, something that did not seem necessary until the eighties ( though there was a fair amount of build up.) So what is actually going on in America and around the world when it comes to drugs? Why is it such big business and why are so many people willing to risk breaking the law, jail time, and even death in order to get high?

The simple answer is that addiction is a disease. Once somebody becomes addicted to a substance they are unable to beat it without treatment. Will power alone cannot break an addiction and there is no cure but rather a path to "recovery". This path is best summed up as abstinence and it is achieved most of the time with help from God. I say most of the time because a person in recovery currently has a few choices however narrow they may be. There is a common sense of sorts concerning how the twelve step programs were formed. At the time Bill W. received a message from God, the country was still very Christian and more importantly the amount of secularism was just beginning to threaten the dominance of the church. Indeed Bill W and the doctor from Dayton made a program that was not attached to any particular religion and was open to anybody who wanted to stop drinking. But once the system of the "steps" was introduced, and I am not sure when that was but would love to find out, it solidified the importance of embracing and accepting God or as it is now termed a "higher power". So it fit that any religious person be they Christian, Buddhist, or Scientologist could find help for their drinking problem at AA. This structure has maintained and remains intact today. The anonimous aspect has allowed many drunks return to mainstream society without shame.

So it there it is. A system that works and can be applied world wide to the scurge of addiction. Forget geo-political issues or the fairness of laws, if you have a problem with drugs send it on up to the higher power and he will give you the solution. I hope at this point my sarcasm is being detected. I am not going to go over all the politics behind the drug war (right now), and I am not denouncing AA as a viable option. The twelve step programs have undoubtedly helped many intelligent people whom I know personally. What I have a problem with however, stems from the fact that since the inception of the twelve step program it has become the de-facto method for rehabilitating drug addicts. Every major insurance plan has substance abuse programs that more or less rely on the twelve step program as their model for recovery. No rehab would openly admit to it, and here in the bay area counselors will point to Life Ring, a "secular" recovery program as an alternative influence. As an agnostic I most certainly would take this program over AA. But Life Ring is essentially AA without God. And more problematic is the fact that there are very few meetings for this group and most recovering addicts find that AA and NA are just more convenient. A meeting is a meeting, and recovery programs stress the importance of outside meetings over anything else. I truly hope Life Ring grows and flourishes, but in our current state the God system rules. The problem with this in my mind is that along with its dominance in recovery, since the inception of AA drug use and probably alcohol use to have most certainly gone up. At the time of Bill W.'s miracle, columbia and mexico were at worst involved in smuggling marajuana over the border. It was in terms of the drug market, a simpler time.

The problems with how society deals with drug addiction today are too numerous to list. To start with, there is the fact that drug use is disproportionately affecting the poor worse than the rich. Rehab fascilites become more comfortable and better staffed the more a person is willing to pay. We all know about famous people going to the Betty Ford clinic. From there anybody with a good insurance plan, usually through work, can go to a decent rehab facility and expect a fairly cushy environment. (I d have to say that one evolved policy we do have is that an employer cannot fire an employee because they have a drug problem unless they get caught using on company property.) From there it just gets worse. There are detox house where if you check in you have to stay a mandatory 72 hours and cannot receive a medical detox ( unless it is life threatening.) There is also the Salvation army where as a patient you have to work unloading trucks of appliances for the stores. Both of these programs will put you up in a room of eight or more people as opposed to MPI, an expensive program if you don't have insurance, that at worst will make you share with one other person. Since the insured patients usually have jobs, they have not fallen as low as the people out on the street who get money for drugs doing any number of illegal or degrading activity. After treatment a lot of these people have no option but to live in highly priced sober living where again they share a room and in some cases have to work for the owner of the fascility. Some of these houses are fairly clean and descent, but others are run down and the rent is highly inflated. The alternative for many of these people is to go back to the drug infested place where they lived and try and tough it out. I remember a guy once testifying that the manger of his house would make the residents, who were all formerly homeless, eat oatmeal for diner while he ate a steak right in front of them. The residents were forced to work in his car wash for below minimum wage and almost all of their money went to rent. When the guy complained and asked the manager why he was torturing them like this, the manger replied," Because I have been sober a long time, and you need to get some time before you get to eat steak. I am just trying to show you what you can get when you remain sober." Obviously this is an extreme case, but it shows how vulnerable these newly sober people who have nothing are, and how predators will take advantage.