Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Kill Yourself 17
ÛÛÛ Û ÛÛÛ ÛÛÛ ÛÛÛ
Û Û Û Û Û
ÛÛ Û Û Û
Û Û Û Û Û
Û Û Û ÛÛÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛ
Issue Number 17 ÜÜÜ ÜÜ Ü ÜÜ
ÛÜÛ ÛßÛ Û Û ÛßÛ ÛÜÜ ÛÜ Û ÛÜ
Û ÛÜÛ ÛÜÛ ÛßÜ ÜÜÛ ÛÜ ÛÜ Û
http://hops.cs.jhu.edu/~mbk/killyourself.html
IAMHOLTZ@oak.grove.iup.edu / BEAN@cpcn.com
148 Jackson St. / Indiana, PA / 15701
McCroskey's Corner: Lamont McCroskey
Editor: Dave Holtz
ÕÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ͸
³A 'zine that explores everything that's wrong.³
³This includes: Earth, America, labels, stupid ³
³people, illiteracy, incompitance, mainstream, ³
³ignorance, religion,annoying people,education,³
³and whatever else we can think of that's wrong³
ÔÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ;
January 1996
DIY
FREE
ANTI-(c)
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
"Here's a solution to the deficit problem...TAX...THE...FUCKIN'...CHURCH!!!"
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
IN THIS ISSUE WE EXPLORE...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û Why Libertarianism Can Work?! Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û Opinion Puke Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û Abortion Revisited Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û Sock It To The Rich in '96 Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ORIGINAL WORKS INCLUDE...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "New Year's Resolution" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "A Sappy Boyhood Memory Poem" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
McCROSKEY'S CORNER EXPLORES...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "Relationships II" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ISSUES/PROBLEMS...
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWINS IS A REPLY TO LAST ISSUE'S "WHY LIBERTARIANISM CAN'T WORK"
THE FOLLOWING REPLY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
aaustin@frank.mtsu.edu
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 67766776 of 90000000000 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
This is not libertarianism. This is a tiny antitax antidemocratic outfit
that is cloaking their rightism in the language of libertarianism. I
always fear, but never assume, that people will assume that real
libertarians are somehow to be confused with these petty little antitax
protesters. This is not the case. They shame the name libertarian. They
are not in any form or shape libertarian. For real libertarian views
please read Bakunin, Kropotkin, Berkman, Goldman, Chomksy, etc..
Now, I want to look through this document and make a few specific points.
> Great. Well why not cut foreign aid? Is it so wrong that we exploited other
> countries for years in order to gain economic prominence? Is this truly
> justification for aiding them? I should hope so. We have dramatically
> decreased production in other countries to be on top I think we at the very
> least owe them something.
This is where you have let the appearence of liberalism snow you.
Actually the Democrats who push for foreign aid have no desire to help
these countries. 90% of all foreign aid goes directly into the hands of
giant corporations who are underdeveloping these nations. They are
subsidized so they can undercut domestic production thus enslaving the
people. The other 10% goes to the rightwing dictators that are put in
charge by the CIA (the principle security force for big capital). Let's
take AID (Agency for International Development) for example. They go down
to these nations with the pretense of helping to implement the funds
dutifully donated by the US taxpayer. Who goes with them? The CIA. And
what do they do? Well the CIA trains the deathsquads to kill all the
labor leaders. AID then shows the peasants how to grow strawberries.
Comes harvest and guess what? No market for strawberries. What happens to
the land? It was put up in loan. Who gets it? The big fruit companies.
What happens to the peasants now that their land is gone? They become
farm labor -- but only seasonally -- they have to work in the sweatshops
(if they are lucky) the rest of the time. The Indians and the mestizo small
farmers have seen all their land go this way, to the latifundios
(haciendas) or the big US capitalist. I am in a hurry so excuse the text,
you can read this in more detail in Roots of Rebellion: Land & Hunger in
Central America, by Tom Berry (1987); Inside Central America: Its People,
Politics, and History by Clifford Krauss (1991); Democracy in Latin
America: Patterns and Cycles, edited by Roderic Ai Camp (1996); I Saw a
City Invincible : Urban Portraits of Latin America, edited by Gilbert M.
Joshph and Mark D. zuchman (1996); The Demise of a Rural Economy: Fomr
Subsistance to Capitalism in a Latin American Village, by Stephen Gudeman
(1978); The Chiapa Rebellion, by Phillip L. Russell (1995); Power and
Profits: U.S. Policy in Central America, by Ronald W. Cox (1994).
I am not going to belabor an obvious point and go into the terrorism of
US action in Africa under the guise of foreign aid. I will tell you that
what we have done there is among the greatest atrocities in history.
Maybe I will post you again with some of the details. I would recommend
highly you get the book Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions
since the End of WWII, by William Blum (1995). Also I implore you ,
please, read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky and Ed Hermann, and
Inventing Reality by Michael Parenti. Anything by Noam Chomsky is
critical for you to get an understanding of the lies you labor under (and
I do not mean to insult you with this statement).
In another instance, how can this be a
> 'unified political organization' when reliance on everyone is required for
> any kind of research or technological advancement? Do you really think
> people will want to give up their well earned money to support something
> that doesn't
> effect them directly? Hell no. People's greed and personal gain won't
> dissappear by letting libertariansim lead their lives. Plus libertarian's
> want to see taxes dissappear. Well, that money is going to stay hidden in
> everyone's deep, deep pocket. Where is the common wealth? The working
> together
> to create solutions? How can you help everyone when everyone is still trying
> to blatantly play the game of greed? Money needs to be collected by the
> community to make change. Voluntary contribution will simply not work in
> such a capitalistic society and even if that changed, so few people will
> suddenly begin to care about the well being of everyone else. And if you
> think a majority of people actually do, heh, you need some serious education.
I think that all of this is nonsense. Complete nonsense. Most of it is
irrelevant to what I believe. It barely rises to the level of strawman
(which I do not believe you are intentionally trying to do). Other parts
of it show a real misunderstanding of basic social reality.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 67766776 of 90000000000 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
That you have been lied to is not your fault. It only becomes an act of
omission when you have access to truth but refuse to seek it out, or
refuse to acknowledge it when you have it in your hands. The truth about
US capitalism -- about international capital -- is horrifying. It is the
most frightening truth that real libertarians, anarchists, democrats,
democratic socialists, and communist have revealed. The system must be
changed. As it stands now it is against human freedom and dignity. The
stats concerning the oppression of the world-system are academic. If you
are interested in learning more about these numbers, or really anything
at all about radical democrac, I am always happy to talk
about it. I am in the battle for freedom and democracy. But it will be a
losing battle if we cannot even get the truth of the crimes of the ruling
class out.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
Sebekemsaf@aol.com
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 8899362 of 77630233 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
What the fuck is going on with the budget? I mean, can't those people on the
Hill get anything done. They are arguing back and forth about how best to
balance the budget, meanwhile the United States fucking goverment runs out of
money. Everyone looks bad then. They are just worried about thier image,
"You're the asshole, no you are the asshole, no you are the asshole". Simply
in goverment IMAGE=RELECTION=MORE MONEY and that is all.
The Bosnia situation is bad I admit, but what stake does the USA have in this
conflict. Maybe the President is sending troops because other NATO allies are
and if we don't then we look bad? You have to draw the line somewhere........
Abortion should stay legal. I have read that a form of abortion has just been
voted to be recriminalized......that's the first step towards reversing ROE
VS. WADE. Is abortion murder?...yes...and so what. Hopefully the President
will VETO this bill.
Fuck Gingrich. The man is a loser. He stands against everything that people
have fought for to help fellow Americans. I really would not mind if he just
disappeared off the face of the earth. He is evil...I'm telling ya. Hopefully
the House Ethics committee will nail his ass to the wall.
Is anyone out there caring about Whitewater? Anyone? Didn't think
so........I'm sure as hell not.
Those stupid motherfuckers from Fort Bragg, NC. should recieve the WORST
punishment. I really wish that blacks and whites could get along. I think
that allot of people feel that way. And it is ASSHOLES like these, who make
the gap between blacks and whites get bigger and bigger. Those three guys
that killed an innocent black couple out of racial hatred embarass me as a
white man. But what punishment is severe enough for thier crime? Being
stabbed to death with a thumb tack? Bamboo shoots under the toe nails, finger
nails, eyes, ears, and under the tougne?
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital got 1 million dollars from someone! At
least SOMETHING good is happening out there!
France wants out of NATO, now they want in NATO. What the fuck? The US can
not have a flip-flop ally. I say fuck'em, after all of that nuclear bomb
testing in the Pacific
The smoking industry is fucked. The goverment is closing in. You can't ban
smoking all together. I don't smoke, but I understand smoker's rights. You
can tax the fuck out of it. You can attempt to make 18 the age that people
can buy tobacco products. But you can not just ban smoking altoghter. People
should be allowed to do what they want within reasonable limits, and smoking
in public is reasonable.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 8899362 of 77630233 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Last but not least, you gotta love America when the Hemp Lady is running for
president. Enough said..............
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
klarson@mail.millikin.edu
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 782 of 6666 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
I recently read the article on abortion in your July 1995 issue. I do
agree that every woman has a choice to abort if she sees it to be
necessary.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 782 of 6666 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
However, there are other solutions. First of all, ABORTION
IS NOT A MEANS OF BIRTH CONTROL. If you don't think you are old enough
or mature enough to have a child then you should not be having sex.
Protected or not, there is always a chance. There is such a thing as
birth control pills, condoms for men and women, sponges, abstinence.
Take your pick. Second, let's consider adoption. There are plently of
people in the world who would love to have a child but simple cannot.
Before you kill an innocent child, think about all the childless
couples out there who would love and adore the child you don't want.
Many people I love dearly would not be here if their mother's had
decided on abortion instead of adoption; one in particular is my best
friend that I have known for 18 years. Abortion is death, it is the
mass murder of innocent children. Pregnancy due to rape is always a
hot topic. Kill the unborn because someone raped you. I can see where
a woman would want to erase all memory of such a terrible experience.
But for just a moment think about this: Was it the child's fault that
you were raped? Should you kill the child because someone else is a
heartless bastard? I don't think that's the way to go. Just because
someone raped you does not mean that the child will grow up to be a
rapist. Not everything is genetic...remember that environment plays a
role as well. Before a woman decides to go kill an innocent child she
should know what the doctor does to the child in order to kill it. I
call it cruel and unusual punnishment. There is the vacuum method,
sucking out the child while it is being torn apart. What about using a
saline solution to "pickle" the child? And there is always the method
of going in and cutting the child to pieces. The unborn are not
unaware of what is happening to them. In fact, they actually try to
hide in the mother's womb. Consider what I have said before rushing
out to kill the unborn.
THE FOLLOWING REPLY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
BEAN@cpcn.com
Abortion due to rape IS a hot topic and one I don't think you have analyzed
correctly. I agree that the child has nothing to do with the rape. It is
certainly not the child's fault. However, the raped woman is now pregnant,
against her own will, because some horny bastard needed to get off in the
most disgusting way he could imagine. Why should she have to live through
pregnancy when she didn't want it in the first place? Give the woman a
choice as to whether she wants to keep it or not. I feel bad for the couples
who can't have children but should someone have to go through all that pain
just to make another couple happy, especially when she has the choice NOT to?
I have never heard the argument that "a child will become a rapist because
you got raped." I don't think this is why people get abortions. I don't think
this is true, either. I agree that this sort of thing has to do with your
environment and not necessarily genetics.
So, why take this freedom away? This life inside you has been created without
your consent. No one should have to live through this.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
fins@access.digex.net
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 3725 of 777777777 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
=========================================================
PAY THE PUBLIC DEBT MADE BY A "POLITICS OF RICH AND POOR"
---------------------------------------------------------
PAY THE PUBLIC DEBT MADE BY A FRAUDULENT "ROSY SCENARIO"
---------------------------------------------------------
PAY THE PUBLIC DEBT MADE BY A FRAUDULENT S&L DEREGULATION
---------------------------------------------------------
PAY THE PUBLIC DEBT MADE BY A FRAUDULENT DEFENSE BUILDUP
---------------------------------------------------------
PAY THE PUBLIC DEBT MADE BY A FRAUDULENT INFO TECHNOLOGY
---------------------------------------------------------
SOCK IT TO THE RICH IN 1996 * SOCK IT TO THE RICH IN 1996
=========================================================
These awful schemes started with the administration of Ronald Reagan
and his "politics of rich and poor." They have continued ever after.
First there was David Stockman, head of the Office of Management and
Budget, and his supply-side cabal. He painted a fraudulent "Rosy
Scenario" to support a massive tax-cut benefitting the rich. This
was recognized by the insiders at the time as "voodoo economics." The
policy was, nevertheles, enacted into law by the US Congress and
dramatically reduced the revenue base of the United States, contrary
to the Nation's and their own best interests, leading to a continuing
fiscal crisis.
Then came the fraudulent degregulation of the Saving and Loan
Institutions, establishing an open invitation to pillage the
resources held by these institution. This required a bail-out by
future generations costing hundreds of billions of dollars.
Then came the fraudument defense buildup that cost the nation $2.3
trillion dollars. The need for massive increases in defense
spending--portrayed by the Pentagon with color charts and great
fanfare--was purportedly to counter the Soviet Union's plan "to gain
military superiority over the West." But the claim that the USSR was
unrivaled in its commitment of resource to military production was
based, as Noam Chomsky and others disclosed in the early 1980s,
largely on CIA analysis which estimated the dollar equivalent of the
USSR military effort. The question asked was what would it cost the
United States, in dollars, to duplicate the military deployed by the
USSR. But these calculation had a built-in bias. The Soviet
military force was labor-intensive, in contrast to the military
system in the West with its superior technological level and higher
cost of labor relative to capital. It would have been highly
inefficient, and extremely costly for the United States to duplicate
a technologically less advanced Soviet military machine that relied
heavily on manpower. Hence calculations of dollar equivalents
considerably exaggerated Russian power.
For the United States to duplicate the Russian agricultural system,
with its intensive use of human labor power and low level of
technology, would also be extremely expensive. But we do not
therefore conclude that the Russians are outmatching us in the field
of agricultural productions. For similar reason, calculations of
dollar equivalents gave a highly misleading picture of relative
military strength that the Pentagon attempted to exploit as a tool of
militarism. Noam Chomsky assailed the "absurdity of the calculations
... used to frighten the population of the West so that they would be
induced to support the militarism of their societies."
The mass media press withheld this information from the people, at
the time, and fully supported the "politics of rich and poor." It
was not until the buildup was over that they quietly told the story.
Then came the "information revolution" with $300 billion dollars in subsidies
to the computer-information industries for Federal information technology,
since 1980, which the US Senate has disclosed was "thrown away" for lack of
any benefit to the Government. The subsidy was, instead, used by industry to
engage in runaway "downsizing" "restructuring" "clean engineering," which has
dumped millions of workers in the street, and made the United States the most
inequitable nation in the world among leading industrial countries. As a
result, the top 20 percent of American families grabed all the increases in
income and wealth since 1980, with most going to those in the top 1 percent,
while those on the bottom 80 percent were just given the shaft.
Now, the colossal sea of red ink used to float those obscene public policies
upon, must be repaid. And now they are trying to sock it to the people with
the politics of destruction, demanding payment upon the backs of the poor
and destitute, while the rich go free.
We're mad as hell and we won't take it any more.
The thievery by the mega-industries and their paid puppets in the US Congress
must stop. The stolen public treasure must be returned. The politics of
destruction loosed upon the poor and destitute must end.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 3725 of 777777777 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
So let's tell this story every day in every way until the debt is
paid: Sock it to the rich in 1996!
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
SHORT STORIES/POETRY...
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
BEAN@cpcn.com
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ "New Year's Resolution" ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Another year of murderous speeches
Another year of freedom sucking leeches
Another year to wallow in the hate
Another year to say 'boy this is great'
Another year to witness rape
Another year, a year too late
Another year of children dying
Another year of greedy liars
Another year to make a change
Another year that'll stay the same
Another year to push ahead
Another year to wind up dead
Another year, another death
Another year, take your last breath
Another year, leave it be
Another year, wait and see...
Maybe this time Nostradamus will be right
Maybe the world will finally end tonight
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
robert.howington@chrysalis.org
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ "A Sappy Boyhood Memory Porm" ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
> I'm a 35-year-old government worker who hopes to win the <
> Texas Lotto so that I don't ever have to work at a shitty <
> job ever again. In my spare time, I publish DRIVE-BY BOOKS <
> and BROADSIDES. There are eight of each and all the <
> books, except #8 which is $3, are $2 cash/m.o./trade and $1 <
> gets you all the b'sides. I've published many underground <
> legends, including Charles Bukowski, Lyn Lifshin, Todd <
> Moore, Steve Richmond, Kurt Nimmo, Bill Shields, Cheryl A. <
> Townsend, Paul Weinman, ron androla, Gerald Locklin, William <
> Packard (editor of THE NEW YORK QUARTERLY) and many, many <
> more fantastic poets and writers who're all ignored by the <
> mainstream publishers. My wife, Crista C. Williams, <
> publishes the notorious underground litmag HAPPY KITTY. A <
> sample copy of it can be had for $2 cash/m.o. We can both be <
> reached at 4405 Bellaire Drive South #220, Fort Worth, TX <
> 76109-5103, USA, <
After a stroke, my 65-year old grandfather
couldn't move very well so he relegated
himself to his favorite chair in the living
room of his house on Country Club Circle.
He left his front door unlocked so people,
like his maid, delivery boys, friends and
relatives, could come in without him having
to get to the front door and opening it.
For his own safety, Grandpa Tom kept a
four-inch barrel .38 Special on a stand
next to his chair in case a stranger or
robber happened in through the front door.
One time I walked into his home unannounced
and came face-to-face with his gun.
"Grandpa Tom! Don't shoot! It's me!" I yelled.
He put down the gun and said, "God damn, son,
you know you should call first and let me
know you're coming. I may not be able to fuck
or fart or shit or piss worth a damn anymore,
but I can sure as hell shoot a man's head off."
I never forgot to call after that.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING IS A REPLY FROM LAST ISSUE'S McCROSKEY'S CORNER-RELATIONSHIPS
THE FOLLOWING REPLY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
jhewitt@beothuk.swgc.mun.ca
Okay. So this response is probably going to be even drier and less
humorous than the article that spawned it. So shoot me.
Anyway, I think that the answer a person will give or accept for this
question will depend heavily upon their ideas about human nature.
To an existentialist, entering a relationship would be an act of free
will; whether one's reason for it is emotion, or sex, or boredness is
unimportant and, it would be argued, could not be expected to be the
same between different people. A behaviorist like B.F. Skinner or an
ethologist for Lorenz would look at people forming romantic relationships
in terms of that activity's survival value for the entire species.
Although they would probably specify different generative mechanisms,
the end result would still be the creation of offspring in a controlled
way.
Behavioral psychologists have had a lot to say about relationships.
You may or may not find their work interesting since behaviorists
tend to ignore any internal forces, such as emotions or thoughts. It's
been pointed out that we live in a basically heterosexual society.
People will theoretically be rewarded for taking part in heterosexual
activities, so these behaviors will be reinforced. The process of
finding and keeping a boyfriend/girlfriend/etc may therefore be seen
as a result of socialization. A learned behavior that people are
conditioned to perform.
I find your desire for a definition of emotion sort of confusing...
What sort of definition would be acceptable? On the one hand, you
seem to want a rigorous defn. On the other, you want this defn to be
about the subjective experience of emotion, not the biological/psychological
roots therof. A formal theory that encompasses both of these concerns is the
James-Lange Model of Emotion, which postulates that cognition of an emotion
follows from the interpretation of bodily stimuli. That is, your heart starts
pounding, and it's up to you to decide whether you're angry or afraid or
whatever. It is this emotional label that determines how you will react to
the situation.
To end this horrible academic rambling, I'll leave you with a model
of why people get into relationships by some psychologists I can't
remember. Their idea was that there are three factors that determine
how a realtionship will form/develop: emotional, social, and physical.
The physical aspect is sex, and although this factor is present to
varying degrees it is theoretically always present. A person will form
friendships with people of either gender, but only relationships with
their preferred gender. You just never hear someone say "I'd really
like to date you, but your naughty bits don't do a thing for me".
The emotional aspect includes loneliness, the need to confide in another
person, et cetera, as well as the excitement that can be felt in the
early stages of dating. The social aspect includes both the societial
pressure to find a mate and the interactions that form between the
people in the relationship. Ideally, the two people should be able
to get along together without wanting to rip one another's eyebrows
off, that sort of thing.
Well, that's my diatribe on the subject. I hope, at the very least,
that you get at least one more interesting letter on the subject...
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ McCROSKEY'S CORNER ³
ÃÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ´
³ Realtionships II ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Please send all responses to lamont@CPCN.COM
I'd like to start off by thanking you for responding to my corner,
Not many people respond to the corner so I appreciate you taking the time
to do so. I would also like to thank you for providing an intellectual
response directed towards my ideas instead of resorting to name-calling like
so many people do. Though a person may feel like they've ripped me apart
with their words, my ideas stand untouched.
You said that the reason for a relationship is unimportant, and I
tend to agree with this, but I question it all the same. I feel that this
is a very important question if a person values their relationship. I
wouldn't expect eveyryone's reason for embarking upon a relationship to be
the same. But if one person is looking for a deep, meaningful relationship,
they probably won't be with someone that set out in search of a sexual
escapade for a very long. I think it's safe to say that two people should be
thinking along the same paths, even if their brainwaves aren't identical.
Now, about that part where you mention the survival of the species...
How many people do you know have set in search of a relationship so that
they can do their part to keep the population going? I have yet to meet
anyone who wants a relationship so that they can create offspring. Plus,
knowing what we can do with today's technology dealing with artificial
processes and genetics, I see even less reason to have a relationship for
the reason of continuing the species.
And yes, I do find behavioral psychology interesting. I find all
branches of psychology interesting since I am constantly asking myself
questions as to why people do things. If I had ignored "internal forces such
as emotions or thoughts," I wouldn't have considered those things (which I
did) in my last article.
You also mentioned that we live in what is basically a heterosexual
society which, believe it or not, I have already realized. I fail to see
the rewards, theoretical or not, that you spoke of as a result of entering
ANY relationship- heterosexual or otherwise.
I agree with your point on people entering relationships due
to lonliness to a point. Humans are social animals and need other humans
to interact with. But where's the difference between a good friend, and
a boyfriend/girlfriend? The only thing different is that boyfriends and
girlfriends do all of the wonderful physical stuff, while most friends do
not. And I don't agree with the part about experiencing some kind of
excitement in the early stages of dating. There are people that experience
much more excitement from other things. Personally, nothing gets my heart
pumping like a Kawasaki ZX-7R, and I know that there are many others like
that out there.
You talked about societal pressures as a part of why people get into
relationships. I know this to be true since I can't get through a single
day anymore without these pressures. But you also brought up the point that
people get into relationships on their own free will. I don't think free
will is being pressured to the point that you just give in and do something
to get people off of your back. If it was truely free will, then there
would be no pressure upon a person to have a relationship. Ultimately, one
must make the decision for themself though. They have the choice to either
deal with the pressure, or give in to it.
I don't ask for much as far as a definition is concerned though. I
would just like to know what people think of their emotions? I would also
like people to stop and think about what goes on inside their head too. I
understand that there are forces at work within the human body that you
can't help but notice. There are many neuro-physiological things to take
into consideration that involve chemicals in one's brain. These induce a
feeling of desire or whatever it is they're feeling at the time. But I
believe that these things can be controlled if a person puts their mind
to it.
Most people don't see any reason to control these things though.
And why should they? Relationships (I hear) are just sooooo much fun. But
until I see a real reason to be involved with one, I think I'll remain a
spectator. The way I see it, everything in life is impermanent, including
life. Knowing this, I choose not to build a strong emotional tie (if I'm
even capable of doing so) with someone I know I'm going to lose anyways,
especially since there is nothing to gain from it.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³IN CLOSING:³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
"Shut up" is a great phrase. So is "fuck you." It proves to everyone that you
have clearly lost your argument. It is a powerful statement that can only
make you look foolish. So what if your argument is ludicrous to them. Stand
by it whether your best friend agrees with it or not. It can be as outrageous
as possible, but hey it makes sense, right? It doesn't matter if it's right
or wrong. Right and wrong are only decided by the status quo. Don't get
flustered. Back yourself up, read up on it. If not, you can't help defend
the other 100,000 people that feel the same way. Don't step down from the
podium, get up, stand up, or kill yourself and say "shut up."
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³DISTRIBUTION IS AS FOLLOWS:³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
E-MAIL:
* IAMHOLTZ@oak.grove.iup.edu
* BEAN@cpcn.com
FTP:
* ftp.eng.ufl.edu/incoming
* etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Zines/KillYourself
* ftp.etext.org/pub/Zines/KillYourself
* locust.cic.net/pub/Zines/KillYourself
GOPHER:
* gopher://gopher.etext.org/11/Zines
HTML:
* http://hops.cs.jhu.edu/~mbk/killyourself.html (homepage)
* http://www.etext.org/Zines/KillYourself
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
