Memory Hole

"Who controls the past," ran the Party slogan, "controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. "Reality control," they called it: in Newspeak, "doublethink." 1984, George Orwell.

“The thug is aware that loudness convinces sixty persons where reasoning convinces but one.” Mark Twain.


I never noticed before now that ‘memory hole’ is another example of doublespeak. Like the Ministry of Truth, A memory hole is a place to remove memories, not store them. Orwell’s treatment was overkill. Today, it is no longer necessary to remove old memories, they are just marginalized and overgrown by a layer of new lies with time. Time heals all memories.

I notice that the propaganda machine keeps the dialog going a certain way and doesn’t bother with the past at all. Real memory management is self-governing. Orwell should just have said, “The past will disappear by itself. There’s no need to dispense with it. No one will even notice!”

This is called “temporal discounting.” That is where future rewards for today’s actions are considered as less important than immediate rewards, even if the future rewards are greater. Things like combatting climate change fall into this category. If we sacrifice our standard of living now, we will have a livable standard of living in the future. But that means we have to sacrifice now. I don’t like that. So the future benefit is worth less than the current gain.

I suggest that temporal discounting applies to the past we well. We temporally discount things in the past like we temporally discount rewards in the future. We consider things in the past as less important, less real, and less true. Less applicable to today. The past can’t be changed, of course. But the past can be a warning of what we can expect from our own future. But the past is not important, not pertinent. It has no value today.

People don’t learn lessons from history. That’s history’s greatest lesson. And who learns that lesson? Very few. And the very much in power. Or those who despair.

Think of when our parents were told that Stalin’s Soviet Union was the enemy. They were going to infect the world with global communism. Red scare. Russia Bad! Whole countries harvested with the hammer and sickle! Then Stalin was our ally in WWII. Memory control! Russia Good! The past invalidated!

They negotiated with us at Sochi and Bretton Woods. The world was divided up into spheres of influence, as it always is. The Soviets got one third and the US got two thirds. The dollar was recognized as the world’s reserve currency at Bretton Woods, replacing the pound Sterling. Stalin, unlike Trotsky, was not interested in world communist domination. He was content to be a local tyrant. Russia Indifferent! The past invalidated!

Then, when the war was over, we needed a boogie man again. We got the cold war! Red scare again! The Iron Curtain! More memory control! That justified Senator McCarthy’s witch hunt on communists and the 1950’s ‘duck and cover’ hysteria. Korea! Viet Nam! Domino theory! Russia bad! The past invalidated!

But we managed to negotiate with the Soviets through the Cuban missile crisis, several nuclear nonproliferation treaties, and finally the mutual ending of the Cold War and the breakup of the Soviet Union. Time for memory control! Russia Good! The past invalidated!

But now there’s modern Russia, which is not the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union ended in 1990. Russia now is a new country with a democratic republic, a parliament, a prime minister, a president, and a judicial system. Its president currently has a greater that 80% approval rating from the citizens. Yet it is once again treated like the old, failed Soviet system. Change your memory, do-si-do! Russia Bad! The past invalidated!

Each change of history greedily accepted. Each morsel of history scornfully discarded. The past is past. Why pay any attention to it? The past is always invalidated.

And more recently. Bashar al-Assad used poison gas on his citizens. That was supposed to discredit Assad and ignite another Middle Eastern war!

Only he didn’t. And it didn’t. The gassing wasn’t even done by the Assad government. No matter. People don’t really care about facts, present or past, anymore.

Then we were informed that ISIS in Syria are head chopping, Sharia Law forcing, raping Jihadists. That was supposed to support us invading Syria.

Only it didn’t. Yes. ISIS is horrible. Just like Saudi Arabia. We need to fight…one of them. No matter. People don’t really care about facts, present or past, anymore.

Then we were told that ISIS somehow morphed into moderate rebels who are only trying to bring Jeffersonian democracy to Syria and that anti-democratic Syria and Russia keep bombing the last hospital in Aleppo, even though both Russia and Syria are very popular democracies. No matter. People don’t really care about facts, present or past, anymore.

That was supposed to-

Oops! Too late. The battle for Aleppo is nearly over, the city liberated, and its civilian population finally evacuated to shelter and health care. Clean up at the memory discount isle! Russia, um. Bad? The past-what?

Notice how Aleppo has suddenly dropped into the memory hole? We no longer hear about Russians bombing kittens?

Now all the rage is about fake news! Talk about the pot and the kettle.

Under the Soviet Union everyone knew that the government was lying to them. Nobody believed a word they heard from official channels. Now we’ve got ‘Pravda on the Potomac,’ The Washington Post. Yet Americans tend to believe what they read and hear. It’s current. It’s scary. It’s unconsciously affirming of temporal discounts, both past and future, no matter how contradictory they may be. And it appeals to us viscerally.

One wonders if the New York Times would publish the Pentagon Papers today. Would Ellsberg have to petition for asylum in Russia like Snowdon? Or would he end up in a military prison like Manning?

News is now a morality tale: An urban legend which we accept immediately without proof because it connects with some latent emotion that is stronger than logic. It tells a story of good guys, bad guys, daring and dastardly deeds, how bad they are, how right we are, and how wronged we are. To use the current jargon: News is fake.

The old Soviet propaganda was about how great the state was. And how many traitors were executed and how many tractors and communities were exceeding their quotas and how they were bringing the Soviet Socialist paradise to other worlds. What BS! Everyone knew it was propaganda. Everyone knew how poor they were and how inept the State was. A no brainer. No-one believed a bit of it. But everyone still had to live, regardless of what the State was doing.

Now, US propaganda uses a different psychology. By tying propaganda to psychology, propaganda becomes programming. A whirlwind rehearsal. The world hates you! And they hate you because of what great gifts you have! The gifts of freedom, which you bought with sacrifice and hard labor because of your exceptional spirit! Just watch a John Wayne movie! American Exceptionalism! And the rest of the world envies and hates you for it. And we never notice how our freedoms are evaporating while we celebrate them.

We, here in Washington, are your vanguards of freedom, protecting you from the (fill-in-the-blank) hordes: (Mexican, Muslim, Russian, Communist, Chinese, Hippy, Black, Cheese doodles. You choose.) Pick a topic and turn it into a morality tale. It becomes a fantasy story. A personal quest for spiritual realization and deliverance. The hero’s quest. It’s a freedom app!

Julian Assange? He’s a rapist! Rape is terrible. I hate rape. Rapists are monsters. Assange must be creepy. Just look at him! He looks like a rapist. And he’s confined to one building. What’s he afraid of if he’s innocent? He was framed, you say? That’s just blaming the victim! You’re defending him! What about the women he raped? You’re no better than him! And more proof that he is a smarmy guy and obviously guilty!

Never mind that the correct term is ‘alleged rapist’ and that the man deserves due process of law and a fair trial and is innocent until proven guilty. He must certainly be tried before a fair court. And, if convicted, deserves punishment. And, if found not guilty, deserves to regain his place in society without prejudice. Yet in the court of public opinion, he has already been found guilty, no trial necessary. Off with his rights!

And now, Vladimir Putin has hacked our election process and single handedly ensured that Donald Trump has become the 45^th president of the United States. Since no evidence has been provided, isn’t this another conspiracy theory? Or is a conspiracy theory, by definition, something which disagrees with our Government’s sanctioned narrative? How convenient.

Hey, out there! All you guys and gals that shout that everything you disagree with is a conspiracy theory! Here’s a ‘theory’ that says ‘Vladimir Putin’ entered into a ‘conspiracy’ with ‘other people’ to ‘overturn the democratic processes of the United States!’ And there’s ‘no proof!’ Isn’t this a ‘conspiracy theory?’ Bring in the Memory Hole!

And, of course, the world’s governments are in on the party, too. Ours, as well. Take the CIA. That same organization that's been overthrowing foreign governments since the 1953 overthrow of the democracy in Iran to be replaced by a medieval Shah?

The same guys who smuggled cocaine into Los Angeles and made secret deals to sell weapons to 1980's Iran?

The same happy boys who made several hundred assassination attempts against Fidel Castro and suggested to President Kennedy that they kill American citizens and blame Cuba to justify an invasion?

The same group that uses the NSA's huge data processing centers and spying devices to mess with other governments' business, including hacking Angela Merkel's cell phone, our ally? Now they are giving us 'secret' proof that Russia hacked our elections and we're supposed to be outraged? We’re supposed to believe them? Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Memory control! The past invalidated! And also, several security experts who work with data like these say the DNC’s emails were leaked, not hacked. Also here.

The criminal activity on the part of our (sic) country does not justify the criminal activity of others. I am not suggesting that. Nor am I saying that other countries are innocent of subterfuge, propaganda, and manipulation. Of course they are. Remember Jonathan Pollard? The violation of a sovereign country is wrong and against international law, whoever commits it. But let’s be clear. Every nation does it and the CIA has done worse than just influence other governments. They’ve overthrown governments and advocated killing US citizens to justify wars. Let’s not express mock horror at a paper cut from others while we are dying of a self-inflicted, sucking chest wound.

If that’s not enough, editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Udo Ulfkotte, asserts that he and other journalists were coerced or bribed into writing pro-western, anti-Russian propaganda by the CIA.

Do we reject these claims? Do we label them ‘conspiracy theories’ and just let them fall into the memory hole? Or do we ‘Question More’ as the motto of Russia Today tells us to do?

So as far is this scandal is concerned, the rigging of American elections, why don't we just go back to paper ballots? It's kind of hard to hack them. And as far as political entities influencing the electorate, hell, anybody can say anything they want any time they want. That’s not against any law. Think for yourselves, people. We have only ourselves to blame for whom we elect.

Every assertion should be responded to the same way: Prove it! Every secret report should be met with scrutiny: Where’s the evidence? Every charge of propaganda should be charged back: What about your propaganda? Every script compared to history to see if there are patterns or contradictions: Has this happened before? Every knee jerk reaction to news flavored urban legends treated with suspicion: What’s your agenda? Every response from ourselves should be brutally interrogated: What is my bias? I am my greatest critic.

Propaganda has many tools: The Big Lie, Including the Reaction as Part of the Story, Asserting Allegations as Facts, Sensationalism, Cherry Picking, Marginalizing Opposition, among others. All under the rubric of Misinformation. She was my high school civics teacher, bless her black heart.

I’d like to focus on just one paragon of propaganda for now: The Tyranny of the Adjective. They say that Justice is blind. Well, she should be hearing impaired, as well. I’ve seen democratically elected presidents referred to as the ‘Autocrat Headchopper Badguy.’ His title is ‘President Headchopper Badguy,’ if you please. ‘Autocrat’ is a judgement, not a title. Putting it in just plants in our minds what I call a Precon: A predigested conclusion. We are subtly being conditioned into accepting the adjective as conclusion. The eagle vomits up predigested food into our mouths. Swallow? Those can be scattered all through articles.

Or ‘America hating So-and-so.’ America hating? Another judgement presented with no examples. Another Precon. Another piece of force fed fish. If they want us to believe that so-in-so is America hating, present evidence. Let us decide if it is noteworthy or not. But they feed it to us as part of the narrative, instead. A subtext. A carrier wave of subconscious information. A way into our thoughts through a narrow passage between the rest of the text. Like a tunnel under the walls of a castle. While the army assaults the walls and turrets, the invisible enemy worms its way under our defenses. We have no defenses against it.

Wherever we see a derogatory adjective or descriptor, just remove it. Just look at the assertions and not the allegations. Seek evidence. Spit up the vomit. Then see how true the article rings.

By automatically accepting what someone says without questioning the language they use to say it, whether an anonymous blogger or a dubious mainstream news service, we open our minds to memory management far more sophisticated than Orwell ever imagined. Our thoughts become a wasteland of Precons.

Take this article. Have I employed any of the techniques I decry? Probably. Am I pushing biased propaganda? Undoubtedly. ‘Dubious mainstream news service’ falls under the Tyranny of the Adjective rubric. See how I slipped that it? I should let you decide whether any news service, mainstream or alternative, is dubious or reliable. It’s all too easy to fall into the trap of propagandizing. We do it to ourselves, we do it to each other. We are the propagandists. We all have a subtext of emotional context running beneath our intellectual strata. We all talk in Precons. We are the propagandists.

The first words we need to scrutinize are our own. Prove it! The more we tell lies, the more we believe lies.

Know Thyself.

The Lies of War

I am very concerned about the increasing demonizing of Russian president Vladimir Putin in the western world. That's what governments do when they are working people up to a war fever. The first casualty of war is the truth. Well, the second casualty is the reputation of your enemy. They're demons, not people like us! It's OK to kill them. Time for the two minutes of hate!

We were allies with Stalin in WWII, a known butcher. The Red Army was responsible for 80% of the destruction of the Wehrmacht. They lost over twenty million people, one million alone starved to death in the siege of Leningrad. Kennedy worked with Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crises to a peaceful resolution. Remember Khrushchev? The guy sitting at the table at the UN, banging his shoe and shouting, "We will bury you?" Ya, that guy. We even negotiated with him.

Every president from JFK to Reagan negotiated with the Kremlin. Both sides were afraid of MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction. Both sides cooperated to maintain the balance of power and to significantly reduce the threat. Nuclear stockpiles were reduced by over 90% from their all-time high during that time. Reagan worked with Gorbachev to end the Cold War. They built a new Russia. Obama has worked with Putin on several occasions on Iran, Ukraine, Syria, and another nuclear treaty, which Russia recently pulled out of as nuclear tensions have started escalating.

Before wars break there is a blitzkrieg of lies. Saddam Hussein's WMD. They lied to Colin Powell to get him to testify to the UN about nonexistent WMD's. And Bush 2 later admitted that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Syria didn't use Sarin gas on protestors. Libya. Gee, they didn't even tell lies about Libya. They just went in and destroyed the country. The Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened. Are we getting programmed for another regime change and scorched earth, this time in Russia? We may find the experience unlike those before. Russia was invaded in living memory. They may take our saber rattling seriously. All this for the people Bush 1 referred to as "the crazies in the basement?"

Trump wants to negotiate with the Kremlin. Works for me.

Unfortunately, mad is no longer an acronym. It is a description of the mood in Washington.

Vladimir Putin is the democratically elected president of the modern democracy of Russia, which is only 26 years old. He enjoys an 80+% approval rating from its citizens. He is not a dictator. He does not want to bring back the Stalinist USSR. He wants to integrate Russia with Europe, not conquer it. He is no threat to the Baltics. He did not invade the Ukraine-even Kissinger admitted this in an interview with der Spiegel. He only invaded Georgia after the Georgian military had besieged the Russian population of South Ossetia.  And once the threat was neutralized, he brought the army home when he could have annexed the whole country had he been serious about resurrecting the USSR. He personally oversaw the security of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. He didn't want a repeat of the 1972 Munich Olympic terrorist attack. Instead, he wanted to show the world that Russia was capable of hosting a modern Olympic games and could be relied on as a partner. Instead, he got a coup d'etat in Kiev.

He was formally asked to assist the Syrians fighting terrorists by the democratically elected president of Syria, Bashar Al-Assad, who also is popular with his people. Since Russia's intervention last year, the Islamic State terrorists have been significantly weakened and the civil war nearer a conclusion. But all we hear of is alleged war crimes? CNN reporters shedding crocodile tears over children in hospitals?  Has anyone looked at what US backed Saudis are doing in Yemen? And the Saudis are not big on Democracy, either. And do you remember Madeline Albright's, "500,000 dead Iraqi children are worth it?" Worth what!?

Is Putin perfect? Of course not. He's the president of the second most powerful country on earth which means he's not Mister Rogers. But he can be negotiated with just like all of those we negotiated with in the past. He's better than most, even. He may not be George Washington, but he certainly is not Joseph Stalin, either. He is above all a pragmatist.

Instead of listening to the war drums of Washington, why not listen to what the man himself says?

Then judge.

The Art of Propaganda

This text is from a parchment found in a dig in the Stur-Fri region of China. It was written by one of the dimmer bulb relatives of the brilliant strategist, Lao Tzu, during the Pork Dynasty in the turd century, BVD. It's hardly relevant today, but has a curious nostalgia about it... Submitted for your approval...

The Art of Propaganda
Jon Tzu

Have an enemy. If you don't have one, make one.
Divide. Conquer. Repeat.
Just as in real estate, in politics the rule is: Chaos. Chaos. Chaos.
Orwell was an amateur...
...and an optimist.
Blame the enemy for all your mistakes.
Make more mistakes.
Make more enemies.
If you don't have an enemy, what's wrong with you?
Look incompetent. Land your intention.
Make more mistakes.
Make more enemies.
And whatever else you do, stomp hard on dissenters. Politics has no room for reason. Reason always yields to politics. That's what boots are for.
'They' are always wrong. 'We' are always right.
Claim victory. Always.
Et cetera, ad infinitum. And then some.

And when you are finally found out, as you always will be, claim you were part of the opposition all along. Act enraged. Enact war crimes tribunals. Incite the masses. Invoke justice. Hang some people. Impale others. Shun pitch forks. And lamp posts.

And remember the lesson of history... People don't learn lessons from history.

Then begin again.

Pokemon for Politicians

Don't like your opponent in the town council race for dogcatcher? No problem. Listen on!

Having trouble gaining popular support for your presidential bid? Easy. Have I got a strategy for you!

Do you have well thought out responses to major issues that have long histories and complicated solutions that require compromise and cooperation between numerous, often conflicting parties that are willing to sit down and talk to each other? Pussy. I've got nothing for you.

I've got Putin Go!

Just add a Vladimir Putin icon next to your opponent's picture in a political ad or real life appearance. That last one can't be done but noone knows the difference. Just keep saying it. Soon people will think they can see "Putin Go" thingeys hovering around real candidates in the real world! Believe me, people are that stupid. You don't need an iPhone to be an idiot.

No answers? No problem! With Putin Go you can paint your opponent with the broad strokes of the Iron Curtain creepily reaching emaciated fingers over Europe. And an important country like America, too! Putin Go! Your ticket to Soviet era propaganda! Remember. They're the bad guys. Not us!

"Wow! I just caught 19 Putins hovering around Donald Trump!" "That's nothing. I just got a dozen hanging around Clinton's head and another ten around her butt! Thank God we don't have to listen to, like, debates or anything."

That's right, Buffy. You don't have to listen to, like, debates or anything.

Putin Go! Formerly Stalin Stupid, Brezhnev Bad, Khrushchev Klutzy, and Trotsky Terrible. Void where prohibited, which is nowhere. All's fair in love, war, and politics. Reference to actual issues and possible solutions strictly forbidden. Putin Go! A total subsidiary of GlobalMegaMergerCorp, where we make good things for ourselves. Fuck you.

American Serfdom

I was thinking about Mrs. Obama’s reference to waking up every day in a house that slaves built. Some people immediately brought up the old argument that the slaves were provided for in terms of food, lodging, and elderly care, etc. This is basically comparing the slave economy to the mediaeval serf economy. There is one significant difference, however. The barons didn’t hate their serfs.

Serfs were considered to be a part of the territory, along with the rivers, forests, and fields. In exchange for being allowed to live on the land, the serf provided taxes, occasional military service, and fealty to the baron. The baron, in turn, provided security and the rule of law. Serfs were allowed to work the commons and have regulated access to the King’s forests and rivers. Certain other organs of civilization, traders; soldiers; priests; etc., also factored into the mix. They always do.

A serf was not free nor was he exactly a slave. He was another integral part of the economy. Contrast this with the capitalist economy where the capitalist sheds all responsibilities while amassing as much capital as possible. His only obligation to the serf, now called a laborer, is a daily recompense: A wage. If the laborer does not work, he does not get paid. If he can’t afford food, he starves. If he grows too old to work, he dies. If the environment becomes too costly for the capitalist, he packs up, leaves town, and bears no responsibility to the abandoned laborers for anything, including environmental damage his venture may have caused to the King’s land. The capitalist has no obligations other than to make money. Period.

So the serf’s life was actually easier and more secure that today’s workers’, oddly. Check out Terry Jones’ ‘Midieval Lives’ on YouTube. Enjoyable and informative. This is peculiar seeing as we have more in the way of technology, medical advancements, sanitation, healthy food and clean water, and access to (temporary) fossil fuels which gives each and every one of us an estimated 150 fossil fuel ‘slaves.’ In other words, if we needed human laborers to provide everything we get from coal, oil, and natural gas, it would require 150 people for each and every one of us. Those are our carbon slaves.

But this essay is about comparing the serf economy with the slave economy, not serfdom vs. capitalism.

Slaves, like serfs, aren’t free. Even the Magna Carta originally only applied to the barons. Serfs had no rights. It took several hundred years for these rights to become universal and for there to be a House of Commons as well as a House of Lords (but that’s another story.) Slaves never have a House of Slaves. This was the only request of the politicos of the colonies: A seat in Parliament. Barring that, we weren’t English citizens. We were serfs. Had the King granted that one thing, there’d have been no Lexington, no Valley Forge, no Yorktown. We’d all be English now. We’d be Canada.

Also, slaves are property of the capitalist/baron instead of part of the land. So the slave economy is not like the serf economy. As much as I did not want to discuss capitalism, I have no choice since slave owners were capitalists. Slaves were treated as capital, which they aren’t. This means that the slave owner must discard ownership of his slaves as quickly as possible in order to be a true capitalist. Not owning the serf/laborer but instead just paying him a daily wage means that the capitalist doesn’t have to worry about accommodations (that’s his problem,) food (ditto,) old age (ditto,) child care (ditto,) health care (ditto,) or anything other than just providing a dollar a day.

And he gets to shunt off every other expense on the government (roads, security, law and order,) or the environment (depletion, pollution, landfill.) In turn, the serfs and the government get to give the capitalist lots of money for his goods and services. Quite a racket. They weren’t called Robber Barons for nothing. No wonder we are poorer than the serfs were.

Of course, laborers respond by using the only tool they have: Their labor. They organize, strike, and demand that the government enact laws in their favor. The capitalists react by employing union busting thugs, buying those same governments, repealing regulations which are ‘crippling business in America!’ or outsourcing work to countries where the serfs are cheaper. We are in the down cycle of that dance right now.

Most western countries had already outlawed slavery by the 1860’s. Brazil was the last country in the western hemisphere to outlaw it in 1888. Of course, slavery is slightly more cost effective in an agrarian economy, like the South, than in an industrial economy, like the North, but it was just a matter of time before they realized it was to their economic benefit to abolish slavery and then just hire them back at a dirt poor wage. The issue here is racism. The barons didn’t hate the serfs. They didn’t think of them much at all, any more than they thought of such and such a river or those pastures full of sheep over there. Oh, sure they thought they were better than the serfs, but doesn’t everybody?

American slaves were mostly African and the easiest way to identify an African is by the color of his skin, an insignificant marker controlled by a single gene out of tens of thousands. At other times in history slaves could be anybody. There was brief talk in ancient Rome about making slaves wear a certain mark so they could be recognized on the street. Once they realized how many more slaves there were walking around the streets of Rome than Roman citizens, they quietly dropped the idea. Good move, Brute.

So the American barons hated their serfs and treated them badly. You didn’t see English barons whipping serfs or working them to death. You didn’t see barons at all, except at major festivals. The serfs/slaves went about their own business and governed their own farms and communities according to Church and State. So it’s really impossible to compare slavery as it was practiced against Africans in the western hemisphere from the 16th to the 19th centuries and its resultant racism with any other kind of economic system, even former slave economies. This one was unique.

Pacifism

I am a pacifist. I admit it. I don't want to fight anybody. I embrace the world on the basic assumption that nobody wants to fight me. Why should I fight them? That's not always the case.

I remember during the space race. How the Soviets were putting a satelite in space: Sputnik. Then a man: Yuri Gagarin. And that was bad. We were the good guys. They were the evil Soviets. We had to win the space race. Put a man on the moon, and bring him back again. And do the other things. Within this decade. Because we are great we would stick it in their face. And I thought differently. Why don't we work together? I wrote an eighth grade essay where I suggested that astronauts and cosmonauts work together to explore space. Why not? We both want the same things, don't we? Wouldn't it make sense to work together? We could pool our green stamps! Buy a soldering iron or something.

I was the kid who was always bullied in school. Tall for my age. Gangly. Nerdy. Pubescent when I should be pre-pubescant. Attracted to girls when they weren't attracted to me. Then I didn't know what to do when they were. Awkward. Out of the ordinary. Out of sync with my childhood peers. One step ahead or behind. Couldn't care about sports. Liked to read. Liked to ask questions. Liked to have answers. Liked to like. Was fascinated by the space program. Liked math. Smelled like a chemistry set. Generally without a clue. Not ready for life. Still not.

Spit balls shot from the tough kids in the back of the room hit my head. Roughed up in the halls. My books stolen and dumped in the 'forbidden' elevator. Did you do that, Jonathan? Did you use the school's elevator? We found your books there. No. Even then I realized the question was ridiculous. Why ask me? Does the presence of one of my books in the elevator incriminate me? Do you really think I'd use the forbidden elevator and then leave incriminating evidence behind? Talk about clueless! The Intellegencia aren't!

All I wanted to do was do my lessons and learn from the teachers. Who were these cretins bothering me? And if I returned in kind? If I got my own pea shooter and shot back? They squealed to teacher. Look! He's shooting spit balls at us! He's a bully! That's how it always works. They shit in you. If you shit back, you're the toilet.

Once, while playing during recess in the school yard, a couple of bullies grabbed me and pulled me around the corner of the building. One held me with my arms behind my back and another hit me. I had enough. I hit the one holding me in the ribs with my elbow. Thump! Thump! Soft impacts between the harsh clutch of arms. Thump! I felt like I was striking the feet of the gods and they were clay. Thump!

He started to let go. He wasn't invincible after all!

Just then a teacher, who had noticed our fight, came along and broke it up.

You were doing good, he said. Stand up to them and fight for yourself! He was a tough guy and wanted me to be tough, too. I knew he thought I was a wimp. You have to stand up for yourself in this world and fight! You'd better learn that soon! What to do. Bullied by bullies and bullied by teachers who wanted me to fight back against the bullies, just like the bullies, by being a bully.

Fight! Fight? I don't like to fight. I don't want to fight. I don't believe fighting does anything. Not anything good. If I lost I would be nothing. A pulverised, beaten down scum of the big boys, forever trod under their feet. And if I won? Would I be right? Does anybody ever fight to be right? You either fight to gain or fight not to loose. Nothing more. Does a school house bully's might make him right? Do they even care what is right? Do I really want to live there? In their world? Do I want to be that?

And I stood in the school yard, by the building, around the corner from the playground, in the bully field, and asked myself: Can I fight the bullies to be right? Suppose I did?

And what would that make me?