ARGUING MANKIND'S CASE BEFORE GOD

Michael C. Ruppert


I don't know about anybody else on this election eve, but I am on pins and needles. So much will be revealed by tomorrow; and the hopes and dreams of most of the planet are wagered in one way or another. All eyes will watch. I don't need to explain why the likelihood of Bush/Cheney leaving office means so much to me. In a ham and eggs breakfast, the chicken is involved but the pig is committed... Oink. Oink.

So... I'm bouncing around today -- doing a little research -- and not in a good place. The energy, economic and politcal "dots" that come in are not good. There's no need to post it. I start a dialogue in my head becasue that's how I think, feel, and untuit my way through things. I finally distill it down to this: The worst case happens and we stumblefuck our way into oblivion. It's just about time to go extinct for any of a half dozen reasons, and we have one last chance to argue before God -- for the one miracle that will save us. We must convince God that we deserve it. What are the best things about homo sapiens? I don't want to lead here. I want to follow. I want to listen to you.Any takers?


WHY MANKIND SHOULD BE PULLED BACK FROM THE BRINK: LET US COUNT THE REASONS

Jenna Orkin


Not an argument to present to God, who is quite capable of making up His own mind, but a distraction to while away the hours on the eve of Change of one sort or another.

Somewhere there's a law of human behavior, corresponding to Newtonian physics, which says that for every selfish, destructive action there's an altruistic, creative one. Well, maybe the proportions aren't exactly equal, and certainly the first kind dominates in the world but we're definitely not all bad. Think Anne Frank. Even cooped up in that attic for two years she saw redeeming features in her enemies. Of course we never learned what she thought once she got to Bergen-Belsen. But that's beside the point. She herself was the argument for salvation.

For every m-f- there's a victim, likely more than one, bearing the unbearable and managing to dig themselves towards the light, however clumsily. Even the m-f- is not all bad, or else there would be no possibility of redemption and no argument against the death penalty.

I have a friend who was raised by schizophrenics; another, by a sadist; others who were raped. All have managed to carve out decent, even wonderful lives for themselves. You will never read of them, (apart from the previous two sentences) and their stories, while unique, are also far more common than one can imagine.

What else? Beethoven, Obidos (a town in Portugal,) Cirque du Soleil, Dog Show (a Christopher Guest movie) cappuccino...

And then there are the simple things. F- ups that we are, what do most of us really want? To be loved by a few, appreciated by a few more and left alone by everyone else.

This gets back to the argument of whom to blame for the current mess.

When Eve listens to the snake, whom should we blame - the woman or the snake? Isn't knowledge useful? Isn't challenging authority sometimes honorable? Isn't blind obedience sometimes dangerous?

When Pinocchio follows the fox who offers him candy and Disneyland and the other good things in life, whom should we blame - the fox or the wooden boy?

When ads, carefully crafted from millions of dollarsworth of market research, beckon with promises of wealth, fun and beautiful women, whom should we blame? Advertiser or buyer?

You of all people know that the question to ask is, "Who benefits?"

Both, but to vastly different degrees.

Morals are mores; ethics, in the ether. The resonance of the words is no accident; the former in each pair derives from the latter. Few have a moral or intellectual compass that is independent of their surroundings, the equivalent of perfect pitch. But it can be learned. And that is the evolution that will be necessary to keep us from perishing.