Too many ideas to handle.

It's those inside out people again.
Then there's the pointers to pointers for accessing information.  It's a conceptual thing.
If you could zoom out from time like you can zoom out in space what would it look like?
They are building the railways and the gas chambers in cyberspace.
As with Damien Hirst's "The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living" it is similarly true that "Arguing from within a double bind is self destructive".
And there is the possibility of being somewhere in time where you don't exist in space.
There is the issue of the DWP only paying your subsistence (they call it a benefit) if you agree to give them authority to withdraw funds from your account.
Try being cooperative in a bartering culture.
There are level crossings and railway gates which symbolise human brainlessness.

I am seriously disturbed by the culture in Britain.  It is not unique to Britain and in part it can be seen throughout human history and across the globe.  But it is not always there and it can appear in different dilutions in different times and places.  I am talking about the cruel oppressive culture.  People talk about slavery, wage slaves, abuse, oppression, power, control, subservience as if these things are aspects like leaves and bark on a tree.  You could think of 'green' and 'tall' as other kinds of 'aspects'.  There is also the case of illness being physical or psychological.  What is interesting is that these differentiations of qualities or aspects can too easily lead to thinking of them as separate entities.  But they are aspects, inherent in the whole.  Like time and space they do not exist in any way separately.  It took Albert Einstein to make some coherent sense of what otherwise looks like a piece of magic.  There is no such thing as time if there is no 'space'.  And what is space if there is no 'time' for it to 'be'.  Space-time is a more coherent perception of the reality in which we live.

The issue here is that human behaviour, and particularly I am talking about the rampant control culture that is escalating in Britain, is multifaceted and there has to be some holistic comprehension of the state of affairs for there to be any reasonable chance of getting out of this alive.  I am talking dramatically and literally on many levels including personally (or for any individual person) and collectively (for Britain, every other country and culture and humanity and even life itself).  Just as a thought for those sceptics who argue that pursuing research in science just for the sake of it is fruitless let me draw your attention to the (getting well worn) fact that satellite navigation doesn't work without General Relativity.  There is a lovely small article on Physics Central entitled "Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life" about this issue which is worth a read if you like that kind of thing.

Cultures have collapsed before and there are many theories which say something about the whys and wherefores of their demise but clearly there is no comprehensive satisfactory understanding otherwise we would not be doing it so consistently over and over again.  But I do have some theories which also have something to say about it.  It is the Inside-Outness that occurs.  In some sense it starts with Inside-Out people.  Inside-Out people as I describe them are people who build a map of the world in their head and then think the map is the real world.  We all build a map of sorts in our heads.  What happens is stuff happens and it affects us.  The effects cascades through our physical being causing changes in the balance of all our molecules ranging from muscles and hormones to blood and neurological connections.

The bit I am concerned with is the brain.  The behaviour of the brain, and therefore its actual physical form, changes.  Psychiatrists refer to neural pathways which are sets of connections that allow electrical impulses to flow through a particular route in the brain.  This arrangement of the brain reflects the experience of the person in the world.  Analogously we build a map.  Obviously the world we think we see is our map and so long as our interactions with the real world 'work' everything is fine.  When something doesn't work as expected this is the point at which we can 'learn' something new.  We can adjust our map based on our experience to more accurately fit the real world.  But Inside-Out people do it the other way round.  I am talking, at this point, mostly about their response to other people although it is a general theory.

It seems that as people get older they become less versatile.  It varies enormously in different people but we are at our most sensitive to learning when we are younger.  If people experience trauma which they cannot handle it affects their versatility and ability to learn.  Also if people are oppressed they are conditioned to repress certain emotional responses thereby limiting their ability to learn along that pathway.  Oppression is a form of applied trauma.  First the trauma is set up and then it is constantly threatened to control the individual.  Often parents are unaware that their disapproval of behaviour is a threat to not support the child and, of course, the child is dependent upon the parent for its survival.  Unbeknownst to most parents they are quite capable (even if inadvertently) of threatening the child's life.  But the child is unlikely to react as if it has been threatened it just learns how to behave in order to survive.  But that behaviour is likely to be compulsive and transparent to the child as they grow into adulthood.  The reason I mention all of this is because it seems the 'best fit' cause for the prevalence of Inside-Outness.

So, for Inside-Out people, if something doesn't work it is the world that is wrong not their map.  A simple example is, say, a Doctor sticking a needle into a child's arm.  When the child says "Ow" an Inside-Out Doctor's response is "It doesn't hurt".  Another classic "This is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you."  Inside-Outness appears very judgemental because it doesn't understand why the other person may be behaving the way they are.  The Freudian Oedipus complex is a bit Inside-Outish too because the focus of attention is on what is in the way of the goal as opposed to the goal.  In other words aspects of the real world need destroying in order make the external world fit the internal map.  They are trying to 'fix' the wrong thing.  Inside-Outness appears to be caused in part by an inability to deal with the real world.  It is caused when the individual feels threatened.  Due to the consequences of the socio-economic climate a large proportion of people in Britain feel threatened.  They are acting more and more Inside-Out.  The people at the top are coming up with totally Inside-Out solutions like taking money from the poor to protect the rich.

Then there is the theory of the benign oppressor and the closely related Stockholm syndrome.  The reason I mention these here alongside Inside-Outness is because they are all aspects of the rather perverse way that culturally we perceive the world.  These traits seem to cause certain aberrant thinking and actions.  Some years ago the government (of the UK) changed a small piece of legislation regarding the Children Services (a part of the Social Services - it is horribly complicated and they don't even quite understand who they are or even what they are called - but then obfuscation is desirable since they steal and abuse children - that is a matter of record and much as they apologise and even retire somebody when they get caught they still do it - and yes I have got a thing about them but not for here - check out the Children Services Abuse section if it interests you).  The law had been that the Children Services could not interview a child alone without the parent's permission.  They changed the law such that they had the power to take a child away from the parents against their wishes and interview the child.  Here is the problem: If the parents are abusive the child needs the opportunity to talk freely.  To talk freely requires that the interviewers are benign.  If the Children Services are in any way prejudiced or have some agenda of their own and the parents are benign and have the child's interests at heart then the danger becomes clear that the malevolent party now has the legal right to remove the child from the benign parents.  There are solutions to this but that is for another discussion.  The important issue is that the new law is clearly unsatisfactory and prone to, even encourages, abuse.  The reason it appears to be a good idea to the legislators is because they believe themselves to be above reproach and view the population as having bad elements that need weeding out.

If people fear the ruler they need to see the world through the oppressors eyes.  They take on the world view of the oppressor and have to interpret their experience through that paradigm in order to guarantee their safety.  They become Inside-Out by proxy.  (This neatly includes the reference to pointers to pointers at the beginning of this post.)

And then there is the issue of the DWP (Department for Work and Pensions - used to be the Department for Health and Social Security (DHSS) - funny that - and nobody notices the profound renaming of this department from our "Oh so benign" government 'oppressors'.) only paying people's subsistence (they call it a "benefit") if they agree to give them authority to withdraw funds from your account.  It was clear, as with the Children Services example above, that there is a fundamental philosophical flaw in this new rule.  Of course if you start with the premise that the authority is benign and the population contains bad eggs then it makes sense.  When unscrupulous individuals defraud the system the authority simply removes the "stolen" funds back from the person's bank account.  And, of course, with the horrible views of the likes of the Baroness Neville Jones, that the government will never do anything bad - it might make the occasional mistake, but not intentionally - there is no problem.  Except there is a problem.  It is clear that the government must respect the rights of the individual and if the transaction is fraudulent they must go through the proper channels, as any individual or business would have to, to get the law to redress the fraud.  That is how it works but the government have ridden rough shod over the rule of law.  This seems to be done largely on the basis of the ignorance of the population.  There is a most horrible assumption by the people of this country that the "authority" has the right to invent the law BECAUSE it is the government.  That constraint on the people claiming their insurance - their social insurance - the tax taken by the government for that purpose - is wrong, disgusting and worst of all it is very frightening.

One might worry that they will start stealing people's money.  But as the Right f'ing Baroness would say "Of course they wouldn't do that."  Well watch this - They have now introduced a new layer of complexity whereby the disability allowance can be stopped.  The claimant can appeal and this can be a lengthy process.  Enquiries were made about this and the official line was that you can claim Job Seekers Allowance in the interim.  Then when your appeal is successful they can claim your JSA was fraudulent because you were clearly NOT fit for work.  You might want to appeal against this but they will have the money out of your account anyway.  I could get very angry about this but I will leave it as an observation of the criminality of their thinking let alone their actions.  They are culling the population and it is working!

So now that we have WikiLeaks' Julian Assange trapped illegitimately in the Ecuadorian embassy in London because of the Americans belligerent and ruthless illegal pursuit of him ... and we have Edward Snowden trapped in the transit zone of Moscow's Sheremetyevo International Airport because of the American's belligerent and ruthless illegal pursuit of him ... and we have Barrett Brown, a journalist, imprisoned in the USA without bail, facing over 100 years of potential jail time, much of it for posting an http link to a public forum ... and we have Aaron Swartz, the founder of Demand Progress which launched the campaign against the Internet censorship bills (SOPA/PIPA), who was found mysteriously dead in January 2013 after facing 50 years of imprisonment and $1 million in fines ... and the list goes on.

We have the corrupt cookie laws which make the users responsible for the abuse of data instead of holding the owners of the web sites responsible for their own behaviour.  We have the NSA/GCHQ/PRISM scandal which is just the tip of the iceberg.  Given the governments' propensity for breaking the law and demanding information from mega internet moguls like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Microsoft and more it wouldn't even be necessary for them to be trawling the internet for their own illegitimate data but they are doing.  They are doing so with the same back to front logic as the DWP and the Children Services insofar as they say they are only interested in tracking terrorists.  But does no one see that if they have all the data and they happen to see you as a thorn in their side they have the wherewithal to search the data for anything they could construe as illegal?  And none of us are perfect.

But, of course, as per usual, there is something worse.  I have often wondered how the Germans actually built the industrial scale extermination machine of the Holocaust.  Didn't anybody realise what was going on?  Were they all stupid?  Were they burying their heads in the sand?  Didn't they see the dedicated railways being built?  Didn't they wonder what the giant ovens were for?  Well I happen to think that it would be nice if more people took personal responsibility for their lives (gratuitous remark coming up - instead of abdicating responsibility to some fictional delusion of a benign oppressor called God) and "Just said NO" to the authoritarian bigots but there is another factor contributing to their 'ignorance'.  Retrospectively we have the whole picture (NO - correction - the bigger picture) but at the time they probably didn't envisage what was to come.  Some did - they knew what they were doing - but most people were suffering the Stockholm syndrome of believing that escaping the Third Reich's terrors was equal to the Third Reich being 'good' to them and so they kind of trusted them.  After all you don't expect the people you talk to or see in suits in responsible positions, the people psychologically who fit into your 'parent', 'guardian' or 'teacher' paradigm to be inhuman.  Please go back and take a good look at the current political leaders - they are more like the Third Reich than you would like to think.  And why then can we not see the final solution being built on the internet.  Why are so many people so blind they cannot see that they are walking into the abattoir of the internet.  They are handing over all their rights, their bank accounts, their freedom to the megalomaniacs running the country and the electronic neural network.

IF WE ARE NOT CAREFUL WE WILL FIND OURSELVES TRAPPED INSIDE THE INSIDE-OUT ABATTOIR OF THE WEB.

I missed out the bit about the level crossings. - How stupid to change a failsafe design for a fail-prone alternative.  Gates, as illustrated in the picture, are closed to either the road or the railway or both but never to neither.  It is so simple really, but someone had to design barriers that go up and down instead. - WHY?

There was also the question "If you could zoom out from time like you can zoom out in space what would it look like?" but I will have to think on that one because it is just a question.  You may want to boggle your mind on it for a while.

And there was the Damien Hirst thing but I will have to leave that for another blog.

Love to all the good people (I know there aren't many of you but hey) and good night.