Political Spectrum, The Concept

What is meant by the phrase, “political spectrum?” We, in U.S. of A., use the term freely and without hesitation. There is, I’m convinced, a problem with using the straight line as a representation (analogy?) for what’s “known” as the “political spectrum.”
There is a conflation out on the periphery on the ends of the linear, so-called “political spectrum.” (The astute reader will have noted that I implied that there may be a problem similar on the other side of the so-called spectrum.)
Recently, I had a MeWe-group comments-exchange on the subject of Europe’s all-too-readiness to place “far” as prefix to “right” with respect to whomever occupies that “end of the spectrum.” I place those last four words within quotes as the subject turned to–by my intent–the questionable employment of the line (straight) to represent one’s political identification: That one’s political identity is, by way of metaphor, placed and located on a line extending out, straight, left and right from the center. Also, note I’ve left generalized those occupying that end, The Right, by using, “whomever occupies,” also, with intent for the following.
My belief, currently, is that there are many problems generated by using the straight line to designate the range of political types. Let’s look at the word, “spectrum.” Here are the distinct types where a word appears before “spectrum:”
Absorption, Chemical, Chromatic, Continuous, Diffraction, Gaseous, Normal, Ocular, Prismatic, Solar, Thermal. (There is one entry in the list where a word appears after “spectrum:” “Spectrum analysis,” which is a type of chemical analysis.)
The source doesn’t include what we, in America, use without hesitation or forethought: “political spectrum.” Where do you fall on the political specrtrum?
What the bleep does that look like?
Probably, like the Uterus.
That’s my guess.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Whither The Sub-conscious? (The Freudian One)


Now, being 1/3 of the way into my second reading of Sigmund Freud’s “Civilization and its Discontents,” the second being inspired by this PJMedia: “The Freud Fraud Underlies Political Correctness”, the first reading preceding the current PJMedia by a couple years, that is, before I read the negative critical comments of the author (Goldman); And to him, I’ve yet to find anything being peddled or “sold,” as one would expect a “salesman.”

My only knowledge of negative sentiment about Freud is that it was, they were Liberals (Leftists) who decided to discredit anything Freudian, due to things like “hysteria” being blamed on the possession of a uterus and whatever else could be attributed, by whiff or concrete block, as anti-women and incompatible with any principle of Feminism.

Yet, some of us can remember walking around worrying about what our sub-consciouses were up to; and, without the Freudian “sub-conscious” to kick around or fret over, I ask, whither the subconscious? Are we in denial that it doesn’t matter or, even, that it doesn’t exist—it, the baby, being thrown out with the Freudian bathwater? (When I use “Freudian,” I refer to ONLY the scholarship, NOT any defects of character the man may, did or did not have.)

What we can agree is relevant is whether his version of the human’s stages of development are accurate; if partly, then how so? And so on. The same with respect to what’s called the Defense Mechanisms, though I don’t believe Freud coined that term for them as they are now known. Let’s not forget the rampant concept “denial,” is one of the so-called mechanisms in that list. The other, that Rush Limbaugh seems to have made more widely used, being “projection.” The concept I remember from College is more difficult to understand than the one being used a great deal in U.S. of A over the past decade. I first heard the term here within and among a well-known group about a decade before Rush had a radio show. How long it being used in that group prior to my entry?, is unknown to me.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Bjork/Newsom post Appreciation

[Tangent Alert]


She, Deneuve. is in a film in my top-ten film list: Dancer In The Dark. Not only did I love this movie from seeing it—I rented from a store—I loved that Bjork won the Cannes Film Festival award, female role this being her first acting project, one bleeping song being nominated for Best Orig.Song, or whatever it’s called, and she looses to who?, BLEEPING Bob Dillan!!!!!!!!!!! (I’ve never taken to Dillan, didn’t when I was young–[Led Zeppellin].) so I was thrice-cooked pissed off!!!

I followed Bjork for a while after the excitement, joining the “4UM” message board in which I saw Joanna Newsom mentioned, listened to her works, to date, and BAAM, I followed her brilliant, 100% American rise-to Super Stardom to be disabused of my fandom by a, quip onstage—I’ve never seen her live she being spitting-distance from me on the Y’s tour. (I’ve edited this post, discovered that I hadn’t completed it and now don’t know what the bleep is the quip that “disabused” me “of my fandom!”)

She said: I don’t the exact words….

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

An Emetic and Triptych

What is the first thing that came to mind when I saw this emetic?

Well, there is only one appropriate response to that picture: A picture or altarpiece in three compartments

Here the soil is barren
Here – nothing grows
But crosses
They – know not what they do
You – your forgiveness
Falls as dew
Nailed upon a wooden frame
Twisted yet unbroken
Open mounted a silent choir
Understood, unspoken
Never was there heard a sound
Until the heavens opened
Now the tide is turning
To other-wordly yearning
Through the sun’s eclipse seems final
Surely he will rise again

Roxy Music, Triptych, album Country Life

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

MATT LAUER TERMINATED!! (It’s Beggining To Look A Lot Like Christmas…)


I did an Irish jig and an Indian (American) celebration dance when I learned that Matt Lauer WAS FIRED from NBC–and I am 75% Italian (25% “Austrian Jew”, whatever that means).

I liked most the NBC characterization at the bottom of their screen: “Matt Lauer terminated.”


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

An Additional Error in the Term, “Islamophobia”

On what basis would I buy a book written by a guy who has an irrational fear of Islam OR Muslims OR, worse, both?

Does anyone understand the question?

Let’s be clear: not only is the term “islamophobia” being misused by all those who peddle the syndrome, as a widespread phenomenon, but the chosen name, ITSELF, the word, contains an error: ‘islam’ is a religious doctrine; ‘muslim’ is an actual, factual human and the ONLY one of the two that will, THAT CAN, strike fear, in a person, in the heart of an infidel.

Therefore: ‘musliphobia, ‘muhamaphobia’ are more appropriate POTENTIAL candidates for an accurate term to represent an irrational fear of a violent, Islamic, religious zealot.

Am I the only sane person on the planet?

I want, I may want, to read books by people who do NOT have an irrational fear of Muslims OR, worse, Islam OR, much more worse, both.


Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

The Non-existent Mean

From pages 5 – 6, The Undiscovered Self, by Carl G. Jung:
Any theory based on experience is necessarily statistical; it formulates an ideal average which abolishes all exceptions at either end of the scale and replaces them by an abstract mean. This mean is quite valid, though it need not necessarily occur in reality. Despite this it figures in the theory as an unassailable fundamental fact. The exceptions at either extreme, though equally factual, do not appear in the final result at all, since they cancel each other out. If, for instance, I determine the weight of each stone in a bed of pebbles and get an average weight of five ounces, this tells me very little about the real nature of the pebbles. Anyone who thought, on the basis of these findings, that he could pick up a pebble of five ounces at the first try would be in for a serious disappointment. Indeed, it might well happen that however long he searches he would not find a single pebble weighing exactly five ounces.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment