PREFACE

I believe that for a person to make up a theory of everything is a insult to our

history; and the idea suggests that we should dispose of our accumulated
information. I am not trying to pick sides or sell my point of view. I'm just trying to
start a fire without having to discount or burn any books. This is my preface, it is for
my point of view. It may seem like a theory of everything; but all it really is, is a
view from a person that is desperately in love with being a human being.
So what is this book about? Well it is about many ideas and actual
experienced activities in life. First the books theme is about what i like to call a "
macroscopic crisis", A crisis we can't afford to ignore. It will take the whole book for
you to understand what I mean by a macroscopic crisis. I have many examples to
illustrate my meaning about this crisis. To set the tone I will express the basics of
macroscopics.
In order to observe something microscopically [microscope] it has to be
brought into the perspective of the naked eye or the macroscopic eye. Furthermore
in order to telescopically [telescope] observe the universe it has to be brought into
perspective of the naked eye or the macroscopic eye. so there is the microscopic
and telescopic and in the middle the macroscopic. All things considered observation
needs to be viewed macroscopically.
So what is the macroscopic crisis you may ask? Well the second thing you
should notice is that we live in a macroscopic world. Racism for example is a
macroscopic problem. Religious presentation is a macroscopic problem. Sexual
promotion is a macroscopic problem. Driving safety is a macroscopic problem. To
illustrate a driver has to develop hand eye co-ordination. Another example is
drawing a specimen with your left hand while observing the magnification of the
specimen and focusing the magnification with your right hand. This may seem
complicated, but it could be as simple as learning to scrub dishes properly so they
are clean. The problem is not seeing the macroscopic world as important or
pertinent. I could write ad infinitum about the macroscopic world from political
agendas to the commercialization of a sexy new sports car or our national identity. I
have chosen some things to express on how this thinking can be used to peer
deeply into human issues. You will see this in the contents.
The third point to prepare you for the contents of this book. Is the result of
macroscopics to polarize and isolate an idea that is in form? An example of this is if
you take forest green and lime green both are green but not the same pole. The
need to just say green instead of forest green or lime green is a cause for
macroscopic dispute. The problem is that time isolates the hues of green into

generalizations of green. So instead of being patient and explaining the subtle

differences, we generalize and communicate a polarization of green or just being
green. The main problem macroscopically is patients with the details and taking
time to identify the details and differences. So time is tied into the polarizing effects
of our macroscopic crisis.
The last thing I'd like to say before I dive into the details. This book is social,
political and spiritual. So if some of the books content is weird; I'd like to point out
that human existence is weird. So my hope is to provide something original and
inspiring.

CONTENTS

#1 I have a dream also

#2 The medicine wheel and the beast
#3 Faith and security
#4 The three C's

I have a dream also

What would have happened to the indigenous people of Europe if Genghis

Kahn, Attila the Hun or the Romans had a gun? Would the nations of Europe have
met genocide? The important thing to notice is that the European nations were
polarized. There were Gauls, Celts, Goths, amongst others. There was a different
fashion and cultural identity for each group hence there was something to conserve.
But are the Europeans the only people to fight based on difference? History
shows that Asia was fighting amongst each other and so was the Middle East and
Africa. The important thing to consider is that even though race was involved;
peoples were fighting against their own people or race. It is difficult to talk about
race without focusing on variable polarizations. Who's to blame for the atrocities of
war in human history? For example if the Romans had a gun what would the world
be like today? Would there be a totalitarian reign over planet earth? The fight for
power and presentation of absolute rule has been a big part of human history and
still is a problem. Let's look at some more examples of polarization and how fashion
and fascism are a macroscopic issue historically.

In Mongolian history the constant conflict between tribes and khans was
numerous. I don't know the members of the clans in historical Mongolia, but they
were each different in appearance and tradition. The end result was that
totalitarianism was the end result in Mongolia. And when this power was established
there was a more focused polarization. The macroscopic image of the Mongolian
was presented to the world with a desire for absolute rule. This identity was the
merkit. The macroscopic polarization identity of Genghis Kahn became a forced and
in some ways a desired digestion and this became a macroscopic establishment. So
this history of the Mongols started over tradition and fashion and turned into a
polarized rule.

Another example of macroscopic complexity is ancient Greece. Without going

into detail not all Greeks wore white togas. There was provincial fighting between

the provinces of Greece. All the provinces had a tradition and a fashion statement
on how the Greek would be viewed and ruled. Greek differences of philosophy and
national identity were a constant dispute. An example of a macroscopic crisis was
the appearance of Socrates and the aesthetic values and desires of Greece.
Socrates was not an attractive man but had a very attractive to self-examination
and the pursuit of virtue. This was attractive to the youth possibly because they
may have wanted freedom from the aesthetic conditioning of Greece and feels a
sense of freedom from the macroscopically dominated world. So instead of being
controlled by demonstrated propaganda on how someone should be; Socrates
opened a door to the inner world. Isn't that what racism is; an inside computation of
what is macroscopically observed and interacted with. So the aesthetic condition of
Greece was part of its rise and fall. Eventuality there would be a vanity and national
pride with a controlled distribution of grace, represented by Alexander the great and
his macroscopic desires for Greece to become united nation and conquer the known
world. It is by no mistake That Alexander is depicted as beautiful and virtuous. What
would the world be like if Socrates was macroscopically appealing with the same
Philosophical depth; would people have followed his beauty rather than whom he
was on the inside? Is that not what racism is; but an inside insecurity as to what is
macroscopically and aesthetically presented? I hope that you the reader make the
connection from the chapter title; that what Im leading to a view of what racism is.
Here a historical situation that can validate my point on there being a
continued macroscopic crisis in to todays society. The North American indigenous
people or as I like to say North American Indians, have peoples from the Cherokee
to the Arapaho all the way to the Blackfoot with a noticeable difference in fashion,
culture and traditional expressions of identity. I am not a scholar on the history of
the American Indians, Greeks and Mongolians. I'm just using them to express my
dream. Historically there may have been a hunting trail that crises crossed between
the Comanche and the Cherokee. If actual contact was made and it probably did,
there may have been dispute over the hunting territory. It could be assumed that an
agreement was reached over territorial boundaries. And if the boundaries were
breached each group may have had protocol on how to approach the situation. The
point that needs to be observed is that there is a polarization of difference here.
There may have been bargaining for goods or an agreement on sharing the land. If
it came down to conflict and with conflict established, the conflict may have become
so bad that a treaty was agreed upon for each groups survival. I'm not saying that
these two nations fought, I'm just saying that there is a polarization of fashion,
culture and tradition which could cause any group to want to conserve their
polarization. Conservatism is a way of making and keeping secure an established
security or way of life. You will have to excuse me but I don't feel comfortable
writing much about what I know about the North American Indians because I believe
it to be negative in trying to preserve the myths and philosophies of the North
American Indians. So before I get into my dream I think it is important I write a little
on myth and how myth shouldnt die or be swept under the rug even if they may

not be true.
Wisps, dwarves, fairies, wizards and of course banshees. This history and
social development was arrested; by whom it does not matter. If the gun was
developed 2000 years ago we probably would not have wizards on the big screen
from Hollywood. Asian and Greek myth is a big part of our moral society. The myths
allow us to shape and mold how we are individually and socially seen. For example
is the saying All for one and one for all" a mythological dream? Or is it a much
desired reality? The myths are how we shape ourselves. Here is another example; in
the movie Avatar the aliens represented something of myth and reality when it
comes to the North American Indians. This much is obvious, but does that give us
permission to avoid the reality of what happened to the North American Indians
because the myth has been acknowledge through cinema art. Are we going to
polarize into forgetting reality and just go with the fantasy of what has been socially
arrested? Whoever arrests the myths, arrests the realities. Are we going to pretend
that history didnt happen? This could cause a polarizing alienation of people or
peoples who feel that they can't contribute to society because they don't exist in a
conserved polarized identity. So the question is should myths be conserved should
we become conservative over North American Indian myth and reality. If there is
such a strong desire to save than there is a desire to conserve and not forget.
So before I write about my dream; I have to confirm with you the basic platform
of my thinking. Forest green is green so is lime green. Crimson red is red and so is
pink. There are just different hues to the variety of colors that polarize. Considering
that a color is a color how come people have different reactions towards the
varieties of color hues? It is because each color has a distinct name, ask any artist
about the catalogue of color. Here are some present polarizations of color that may
be present in your daily life. The Republicans favor red and the Democrats use blue
both groups use these colors to polarize. The Bloods favor red and the Crips use
blue to polarize. Here in Canada the NDP uses orange and the Liberals use red and
the Progressive Conservatives use blue and red. This is a common thing to use color
to represent an ism or a group of self-serving people. So how does this relate to my
dream?
I would like to write about the North American Indian medicine wheel. The wheel
represents all the colors of racial groups [emphasis on groups meaning varieties of
peoples]. There is serious complexity though when it comes to the many groups of
peoples involved in each section or quadrant. Here is a simple illustration of the
medicine wheel.

First Nation
European
RED
White

Asian
African
Yellow
Blue or black

Now I will present another medicine wheel to show the varieties of nations
connected to the racial colors.

First Nation

Arapaho

Chinese
Asian

Blackfoot

Korean

Cree

Vietnamese

Mikmaq etc.

East Indian
etc.

Irish

Ethiopian

French

African
American

Scottish
German etc.

Jamaican
Sudanese

European

African

If I look at a white person and say he is white that would mean he is polarized into
the color white. If I look at a black person and think he is black and only think that;
there may be a problem. In these situations what is seen? Should this be a place to
show unrest or indifference because there is a macroscopic polarization of a color or
hue hence the human? So what is the problem with looking different? Does it cause
grouping or polarizing? How have we coped historically with being different to the
naked eye? It is important to realize that in order to deal with racism we need to
accept all history when it comes to the different hues.

Im sure that I have explained adequately enough the need to polarize color. Im
going to write a little about some simple scientific facts to isolate racism as an
empirical scientific problem rather than it strictly being a political science. It is a fact
that light is very fast but in the last century, thanks to Einstein it is assumed that
gravity bends light. So what is gravity exactly and how does it affect light? Gravity
even though it has not been substantially identified, has an influence on how we
think and pursue science. Rocket ships, cars, and airplanes have all come into
action through the influence of gravity on the human condition. With sports such a
hockey, football and baseball all play with the influence of gravity. It seems that
light bends to show a point of gravity. It is safe to say that anything that has mass
has gravity. So if I look at a human being of mass, light will show the macroscopic
appearance of that person. Light bends and warps to show the mass of the hue or
color of a person of mass. So is racism humanity dealing with the speed of light as it
bends and warps around the mass of the human body?
Ok the empirical science has been identified now lets look at the behavioral
science. It seems that racism is taught and also experienced as a polarization. There
is a harbor of words used to deal with what is racially seen in the light. So if there is
a particular race that is seen in the light and something negative is experienced.
Here are some words maybe used to identify and deal with the negativity. So if what
we see in the light represents a polarization of a hue or color. What are some of
those words used to identify that polarization? I will not put these words inside the
medicine wheel out of respect.
Wagon
burner
Spic
Negative
words

Chink
Slant eye
Negative words

First
Nation

Asian

Nigger
Redneck
Cracker

European

African

Coon
Negative words

Negative
words

We need to be patient to get to know where a person is from rather than

identifying a person with color only

These are some of the words used to deal with the speed of light as something is
experienced negatively. Some people attach history to a color sometimes good and
bad. The good thing is it helps us to receive truth about our history. The bad thing is
that some people may group and continue to use these words top polarize and
perpetuate racism. I believe we need to take these words out of use.
My hope with this chapter is to provide a scientifically empirical method for
teachers, parents, and society to have some way to explain racism. I believe society
can learn on this view and heal instead of abandoning our children to a harbor of
words that may cause a unhealthy polarization of colors and human hues.
To finish this chapter my dream is to prove that racism is humanity dealing with
the speed of light or that light is reflecting of a mass which is the human body. If we
continue to desert our children to a group of words that are negatively used to deal
with what we see in the light. We could possibly be turning our back on human
history. We could be missing a chance to heal historically. If this could be curriculum
and to have this way to teach; we could have a serious effect on social change.

Racism is humanity dealing with the speed of light; and the fact that ALL our
human history is not present and should be ignored is the corroding social illness
called racism

The medicine wheel and the beast

[Wisdom is needed here. Let one with understanding solve the meaning of the
number of the beast, for it is the number of man.*His number is 666*] Holy Bible
Revelation 13:18

When talking about the primary forces of consumption that vacuums most of the
earths natural resources. I must be gentle so as not to offend these conservatisms.
These people or affiliated followers of these religions deserve respect. Buddhists,
Muslims and Christians are the primary consumers of the planets natural resources.
Now Im not saying that these identities are evil and what is wrong with the world.
Im just trying to point out that their established securities and traditions may be
threatened by a simple human behavior and function. And that behavior is sexuality.

--Let me point out a simple symbol that may start us on why these religions are
having problems at a fundamental level.

Male
1

Female

6
1

The dot in the center represents

completion of the hexagram. This is
the seventh point and that point
represents cause and effect or
creation. This is a traditional

3
6

So how does this symbol relate to the traditional values of these religious life
living practices? How does this symbol disrupt the stability of the sexual behavior of
these religions?

Heres a platform.

+
2

When the male and female

reproductive organs come
together impregnation can
happen. This is the 7th point or
creation of a human being
=

1-testical

1 ovary

2-testcals

2 ovaries

1-penis head

1 vagina

The union between man and woman as a Moslem, Christian and Buddhists is
being torn apart by the advent of birth control. Im just pointing out that when a
man and woman come together and use birth control it eliminates the number 7 or
the cause and effect of a child being born. So there is only 6 points when genitals
are interlocked in sexuality. Just talking about this macroscopic issue causes
discomfort in some people.
Here is the result
The traditional values of how we have
sex are changing.

Christian=6

Buddhists=6

Muslim=6

The beast would be the birth control controlling the happen of impregnation and
allowing people to more safely pursue sexual encounters. So the Buddhist, Christian
and Moslem traditions on sexuality are being shaken. I have chosen these three
religions because they are the biggest and most influential consumers. It is not that
they are the beast, its the activity of sex and how it is affecting the structure of the
households of Christian, Buddhist and Moslem people.
Just wonder about the conservatism of a Muslim man whose daughter wants to
experiment with sexual activity without fear of impregnation. He may be disgruntled
by the beastly nature of human sexuality. Also the same with Buddhist and
Christians. So I believe that the beast of human sexuality is causing an emotional
problem with these three heavy weights of global influence.
It may or could be seen that more natural societies or pagans may have a more
natural approval to the beast which is the human being. Its important to realize
that these people had their development arrested and the traditions of how humans
had sex may have been more relaxed than the rigidness the three main consumers.
Did the sexual control of these big guys arrest the development of more natural
groups and how they pursued human sexuality? It is clear that sexuality is tied into
the emotions or there wouldnt have been such restraint of the activity. There is
great emotional restraint that comes with controlling sexuality amongst people. So
the emotional development and legacy of heterosexual relationships was
interrupted and was taught a different way to engage sexually; the proper way
supposedly.

What Im going to write now is a preparation and then a platform for us to

understand the current status of the beast globally. It seems to me that the
medicine wheel is a good place to start. The majority of social communication is
focused on mind, body, and spirit and the emotional part needs to be controlled by
these three quadrants of the medicine wheel. Here is an example of the core
medicine wheel applicable to the human condition.

MIND

EMOTION

BODY

SPIRIT

What happens when people ignore their emotions? They will probably act out like
animals or a more base primitive response. It can be agreed that Christian, Muslim
and Buddhist have a tradition of emotional restraint. For example celibacy can be a
very emotionally trying decision. So there may seem to be a more emotionally
examined disciplinary application to more established religions. So there is a more
emotionally established sense of well-being for the three heavyweights. What about
the people who have not had the chance to emotionally secure their development?
They have been emotionally separated from the development of their social
tradition and culture. So they are mind, body and spirit and there is a sparse
reminisces of who they are now and could have been. They didnt get a chance to
emotionally mature and socially develop. Now please consider that the three big
ones also in their maturity tried their best to control the animalistic beastly and
even pagan nature. Are they naturally in todays world going back to the primitive?
Here is a medicine wheel for the general mass of peoples globally.

RED, All groups

White
who have been
Christian
through
arrested
development.

Blue or black
Yellow
Muslim
Buddhists

This is the worlds currant medicine wheel. Please dont get me wrong there are
many peoples associated to black, yellow and white. Im just associating all people
who have been affected by these three colors to red; red is savage or what is taught
to be primitive and undeveloped and in need of intervention. This use of red could
be east Indians, South American tribes and also African tribes and even some
people from the deep south of the United States.
To further state my platform most people dont like publically expressing emotion
in the light and tend to identify mind, body and spirit to daylight. So because the
day is split into two, twelve hrs. of light and twelve hrs. of dark. The majority of
Christians, Buddhist and Muslims go about their daily activities and social restraints.
So with the big three they have a tendency to isolate emotions to night or while
at home. Here is an example how the twelve hours of day and twelve hours of night
Mind
Body
for the big three and the arrested developments. The emotional life is shut down for
daily activities such as work. And the nightly twelve are safe and secure and relaxed
not so much for the arrested developments.
Emotions
Daytime
Activity
3 Spirit

Nighttime
1 Mind

2 Body

Security

Spirit

The established emotional security of the big three is generally expressed at

home or on a religious day or holiday. So it is reasonable that if a pagan went home
from working under the big three there is only mind, body and spirit rather than
emotional pride and maturity. Therefore because the emotional side is absent, it is
because of arrested development. Ok now Im going to write a mathematical
platform to explain the beast as it presently exists in todays world.
The Beastly Life

1 testicle 2 testicles

1 ovary 2 ovaries

1 penis head 1,2,3

4
5

1 vagina 4, 5, 6

The 7th point represents human

reproductive organs coming
together to produce a child. This
can also be associated to mating
ceremonies or marriage.

7 th point

3
6

There can be only six points when

or while using birth control. Which
could cause sexuality to be more
beastly and less sanctified and the
chance of pregnancy is lessened.
So now the human being can play
with the nature of sexuality. This is
a good thing to me but not for
others.

Daytime: 3 divided into 12 equals 4

Mind
1
body spirit

Christian

Muslim

Buddhist

Pagan

People are not having sex in broad daylight. So it

is reasonable to think that tender emotions are at
home. There may be frustration while performing
the daily activities. So during the day the triangle
represents mind, body and spirit and emotional
restraint. It is also a symbol of progress. The
medicine wheel is utilized little here.

Nighttime: 4 divided into 12 equals 3

4 emotion

3 Spirit

1 mind

2 body

Christian 6

Muslim 6

Buddhist 6

Pagan

The pagans union of

the hexagram is not
as accepted globally
by the three big
religions.

Birth control causes traditional decay of the 3 primary religions. So they are dealing with
the human animal or beast. The traditional sex values are being lost and this may be causing
emotional distress amongst the 3 primaries. Im not trying to say birth control is not
necessary; Im just trying to point out that the freedom of safe sex may be a problem for the
3 primary religions. O ya sex usually happens at night. This is a daily life flux on earth that is
why time is involved with this platform.
There are many things going on with the number 666, but Im trying to start a
foundation to become an understood representation of todays macroscopic world. I
could go further in explaining 666 but I believe that the top three religions values
are seriously threatened by human sexuality. We need to conserve these isms that
are Buddhist, Christian and Muslim. We must protect these establishments and see
where we can be sexual without destroying what has brought planet earth security
and prosperous human advancement. We need to save religion itself instead of
letting it be devoured by our sexual desires. The human animal is the most sexual
being on the planet, but our sentient nature needs to override our sexual nature.
Please dont get me wrong Im not saying that the pagan is the beast or the cause
of sexual expression. We may need to return to a more earthly religion but first we
need to reason with the big three religions. Im just saying that though we may have
missed something about our male and female relation and most important healthy
balance of human sexuality. We are meant to be sexual and I believe that the issue
needs to be publically investigated through our historical communication of who we
are as a human race.

Faith and Security

It would seem that in this universe the most influential forces are light and gravity.
Yet even though light has gravity or mass and gravity most assuredly has ignitable
abilities. It seems to me obvious to observe that lights primary activity is to occupy
space. Here is an example when a person looks at the stars in the night sky, that
light occupies space. So it seems that light may have a force to occupy space and
light up empty space. Yet if you were to go to the stars point of origin there would
be a tremendous force of gravity causing the photons to occupy space. Is gravities
main function to have space occupied? This may sound complicated but what Im
trying to do is associate light and gravity to masculine and feminine universal
determinism. So man is light and wants to occupy space and woman is gravity and
wants to have space occupied.
Lets take a look at the universe and speculate the conditions. The universe has
two main conditions. #1 the function of occupying space which could be seen as
light. The question that needs to be asked is light substantially occupying space,
and what happens when it hits a substance with its substance? When we focus on a
star is there a substance we are looking at? When we see light do we see

substance? So if we do see substance why does it occupy so much space? Im just

saying that lights primary function is to occupy space. #2 the function of gravity is
to have space occupied. If gravity is mass or one mass drawn to another mass is
that because of an identity to have space occupied? Does gravity have a function
that suggests a deterministic function to have space occupied? A black hole if it
were to have a psychology. I figure that the main function would be to have a
spacial occupation. The center of a black hole is very materially dense and if
anything including light comes near it gets vacuumed and compressed. Is the black
holes function to have space occupied?
Im trying to figure out wither light and gravity have a deterministic influence on
the physical development of the human male and female. Is the human being male
and female substantially influenced by the cause and effect of gravity and light? For
instance is man deterministically identified with the function of light? That light
functions as determinism to occupy space. And that woman is deterministically
identified with the function of gravity. That gravity deterministically functions as to
have space occupied.
So now we can move on to regular language. Does man desire to occupy space
and woman desire to have space occupied? A woman probably desires to occupy
space or there wouldnt be an occupation of space. A man would also desire to have
space occupied he wouldnt learn and advance or even occupy space period.
If woman primarily has a desire to have space occupied. This shows that she has
a lot to learn and mans desire to occupy space shows that he will do so. Now it
could be easily assumed that because of the sexual organs form and function that
the penis is shaped to occupy the space of a womans womb. But there is so much
more to sex than the macroscopic physical pleasure of sexual intercourse. I would
like to talk about the microscopic behavior of human sexuality as it is associated to
the simple functions of light and gravity that carries mass. This could be applied to
our birth and development.
But first Im going to use a few stories to correlate my thinking with established
stories that teach us to this day. Jesus of Bethlehem shows light represented by the
star and the birth of Jesus came from Mother Mary. Mary got a message from an
angel that she would get pregnant as a virgin. But lets talk about the star, the star
seemed brighter and occupied space more than other stars. This star even occupied
the space of shepherds and wise mens minds. Jesus would go on with a message
that occupies space to this day and is influential on many levels of Christian
lifestyle. There is a problem though with the birth of Jesus and it was how Mary got
impregnated. Gathering what I have written about womans desire to have space
occupied. Was Marys womb nothingness or empty space or did she have an egg
cell? Was her space insubstantial or did her womb have a substantiated egg cell or
spacial occupation? Jesus was probably born with an umbilical cord so Mary
probably had a substantial contribution. So if we consider that the womans womb is

substantial, is the way of our thinking needed to be pointed to a more

anthropomorphic meaning or human related identity to gravity. What Im trying to
say is that do we need to look at woman substantially to substantially identify
gravity? Is the secret to identifying gravity as a substance a serious mind shift to
the substantial contribution of the female to the universe? Just maybe there are two
forces influencing the universe on a substantial level. It may be Light and gravity or
male and female.
Here is a second story to illustrate point of light and gravities influence. Before I
start let me say that I am a layman when it comes to religious stories; so bear with
me or even correct me. Buddhas mother Maya of Sakya was impregnated by a
white elephant which could be seen as the Hindu god Ganesh or lord of success.
From what I remember Buddhas mother agreed to Ganesh entering her side in her
dream and that she knowingly would have a child that would be great and become
a leader of a sort. It could be seen that Ganesh is light and Maya was fertile gravity.
Light needed to work in cooperation with gravity or Buddhas mother in order to
express great enlightenment. Buddhas mother was to die seven days after his
birth. Was her decision to be impregnated by the lord of success or Ganesh a
success? Is she a substantial influence on Buddha considering that half of Buddha
was his mother? Should she be considered a substantial influence on Buddhas
make up or be nothingness? She gave that pregnancy everything she had. Some
may view that Buddha was separate from his mother; I disagree. To me the story is
an important message that the woman is substantial and necessary when it comes
to light and the workings of gravity. The story clearly shows lights healthy
dependence on the substance unidentified scientifically known as gravity.
The third point Id like to express in viewing stories from history. I will use history
to validate the microscopic view I have of light and gravities union universally. God
said let there be light What does this mean? It would seem that light came from
god and it was made out of nothing; to create means to make out of nothing. So
light came from empty space. Was there a desire to have space occupied? If there is
no identity to nothing it would seem according to the info that the universe is
substantially patriarchal rather than sharing identity with substantial matriarchy or
substantial space. So god is all alone with no contributing companion and woman is
empty space or nothing. So woman is a being to be only identified with light. So if
woman is space to god or that god had no substantial material to work with. Maybe
the identity of woman is gods need to have space occupied because of his
expansive loneliness in a universe of empty space. An example of this is man being
made from earth. Maybe just maybe mans identity as light is dependent on a
substance known as mother earth. The substance occupies space so therefore
substantiated and possibly has a force that is substantial to the development of
man. So maybe in the beginning space was substantial at least it is today.
In considering that space has no substance is like saying that gravity is
insubstantial. So if gravity is insubstantial why does it play an influence on human

intelligence and social development? There are rockets, skateboards and

rollercoasters. Everywhere we look people are doing things that require an
interaction with gravity. So if space has no substantial communication; what is
gravity and how is the universe influenced by something that is void and empty? Is
the mass of light attracted to the mass of gravity? If god desires to occupy space is
that to deterministically pursue space that has substance or mass. So if the pursuit
of substantial space seems to be the determinism. Does man undermine woman
because she is thought of as insubstantial space and nothing but a hindrance
because of gods loneliness for compatibility.
Enough of that Ill save the rest for future camp fires. Here is a revisited
observation to validate my views on faith and security. The three wise men seen the
star and then acted on faith to secure an understanding of the stars occupation of
space. So Mary represents the security of information and the star represents mans
faith to explore and secure a point of information. So light occupies space to secure
a point of gravity or desire to have space occupied. So light is faith and gravity is
security. The vastness of this view will have to be broken down to simplicity to
express its immensity.
There is a room with one ceiling light and table and in the center of the table is a
red apple. The point of the apple is that light is showing the point of the apple. Light
is also showing the table the room and also the colors of the space. The idea is that
light is showing more than just the apple it is occupying and securing the
observation of the space of the room.
If you were to look at a tree and see it as a tree you have secured that image as a
macroscopic tree. Light is showing the tree as a tree, yet consider what light is
doing to the tree if you were to look more closely. You would notice the many leaves,
branches, bark and its unseen roots. Light is doing more than producing a
macroscopic tree. So now that you have secured the apple and the tree. What
happens to the rest of the light after gravity or mass has been macroscopically
identified?
Lets consider that thinking and associate it to male and female genders. The
sexual organs show a desire to occupy space and desire to be occupied. But what is
the point if the sperm cell represents light and the egg cell represents gravity. Well
the point is to produce a point of consciousness or a baby a light interactive gravity
working baby. It is almost like the light in the room showing the apple. The only
problem is the ejaculation of the male is the best that light or the sperm cell has to
offer the womb or room. Does the sperm cell just identify a point of gravity and the
best that the light or sperm cell has to offer may not be expressed because it is first
come first serve. You may be looking at the red lego instead of the red apple. So the
point of the sperm cell may be more chance than precision.
So when the baby comes out of the womb to make a lifetime of variable points.

The child may be acting on faith and securing points of gravity. The inexperience of
the faith inherent baby if not watched will secure an understanding of its
environment. That is why we need to watch babies because the faith of a child is
dangerous. A baby secures crawling with the purpose securing a destination. A
mother may be interested in the security of a baby walking and a father may be
interested in the faith of the child walking from chair to chair. This could be vice
versa.
There is one more example to illustrate faith and security or light and gravity. If I
were to teach a person how to fly a remote control airplane. I would have to teach
an occupation of the persons space or mind related to the remote airplane. Im
trying to make a point and in order to do that I have to occupy the rookies mind with
information about the remote airplane. The purpose of this is to secure a handling
or a point of understanding how to handle the plane. If the rookie is open to have
the space of his mind occupied he will secure a faithful occupation of space by
controlling the plane himself
The purpose of this chapter was to touch on a larger application of this way of
thinking and being. I believe that light is faith and gravity is security. To show this
stand on the edge of a skyscraper and see how your security is important. Some
people have so much faith they will not fear. A woman may scream at danger where
a man might be amazed by danger. Im not allotting light to man and gravity to
woman there is a partnership and sometimes in life these roles change. Consider a
Sargent coming back from a tour and has lost four men for the first time and has to
deal with the grieving wives. The next time he is on a dangerous tour he may be
stricter so as to not deal with such a tragic event. His faith is more focused and
secure as a result of trial and error. As you can see this thinking can be applied to
many things and situations. So have a little faith and continue reading you may
secure an understanding of this word salad.

The three Cs

This chapter is the political part of this book. It is a RANT so beware. When talking
or writing about politics a person has to realize the nature of consumption. You are
consuming this book right now. Also when you listen to someone your consuming
sounds, words, and their meaning. When you see a commercial on television you
are consuming the images sounds and patterns of information being presented. Your
eyes, ears, nose and mouth all consume. Even when you touch youre consuming
that occupation of space. Some people may have a specific diet or moral conduct
and think that their consumption is the proper way to consume. But things change
and evolve and innovation is necessary to the very nature of consumption. So I am
going to write about conservatism, capitalism, and communism. The three Cs as I
like to call them are all centered on the main C which is consumption.
Lets face it we dont live in a garden where everything is safe to eat. Human
beings have gone through a trial and error of consumption. We have gone through
what is edible and non-edible. People have died from eating the wrong berries or
mushrooms. Conserving information about the wrong berries to eat so as to protect
future generations is probably one of the beginnings of social conservatism. For
example the medicine person may have been socially developed to warn and
remedy people of the berries consumed. The chief may be a leader to press
forward or cause a person of insight to pursue the safety of the group. The very first
medicine to conserve a person or people may have been to take a life to survive so
others wont get sick. Life is multifaceted from breathing techniques to simply
drinking water to killing a buffalo. The main medicine that I see that contributed the
most to the development of people is fire. I heard that ancient Hebrews language
was developed from watching the flames of a fire. This importance of fire is
conservatism to me. If I assume that Christian values is what conservatism is than
the word conservatism has lost its meaning and has polarized into a platform of a
certain establishments view of consumption.
Here is an example of the nature of conservatism. First Nations people have been
exposed to a diet from their dietary historical consumptions. There are health
concerns. The Canadian government made a statement that First Nations people
should go back to their traditional diet. A statement as simple as that is that the
First Nations people should be conserved. The value is not backed up by the

government. There are many different diets hence Nations. Is the government going
to support the First Nations of Canada to return and help conserve the many diets?
That is almost like saying that all First Nation people are the same which is in my
opinion racist. If the government wants to conserve they have to consider many
nations throughout Canada.
Furthermore would preserving the conservatisms of First Nations in Canada mean
that a generation of troubled people just dies off? Right now there is a dispute on
withers or not the government is going to consult with the varying Nations on
education reform. Does that mean that a whole generation of people will have to
wait and die for a new more healthy and educated generation of First Nations? What
about the people who are sick but still have unwritten information on First Nation
culture. Is everything going to be swept under the rug? A whole generation of
people to be forgotten. To me conservatisms purpose is to protect people from
harm. Conserving means that medicine is what is needed in this situation not
forgetfulness and re-creation.
So I went on a little tangent about this topic. But what it is all about is the nature
of conservatism. Conservatism is about protecting and learning from our history. Its
not a polarization; its a logical definition of our survival as human beings. Now here
is a little about capitalism.
If there is a good thing, product, idea or diet why not capitalize on it? What does it
mean capitalism? Does it mean we move on without consciously being aware of the
future? Using popularity to mass produce may not always be healthy. Is capitalism
the need to explore and be occupied? Land and sea seem to be the main capitals
here on planet earth. Whoever moves on these resources gets to accumulate from
them. Keeping people occupied seems to be the main purpose. The utility of the
people and whoever leads that utility seems to decide on the social direction of
everyone. If it cant be capitalized on why bother. So what is good for the mass may
not be good for the whole. Being cool may not be so cool. Identifying an ism needs
to be discovered and possibly caped hence capitalism. Is the purpose of capitalism
the need to hoard so that the entire global village can consume diet, info and the
future together as a plant? I desperately hope so people.
Hoarding gold, food and land seem to be where the main conflicts of human
history have occurred. When it comes to these things old money and old political
influence rules the world. Innovation seems to be the main influence of these
capitals; whoever controls the gold, food and land controls the future of innovation.
The person or peoples that interfere is considered a dissident to the holding utility.
Many politics can be involved with interfering with the material majorities influence.
When the holding utility is confronted ethically with a human issue something
happens. It becomes a popular issue and then the identity of a leader is formed, and
then people vote to appoint to appoint a leader to deal with the issue or issues of
concern to the masses utility. This is all so healthy consumption can persist and

innovation occurs. Please keep in mind Im talking about capitalism not democracy.
The practice of democracy in Greece involved people voting using black and white
stones representing votes on issues not policies. The problem with capitalism is the
tendency to hoard and influence the vote based on consumption rather than
philosophy or an examined life. Choosing leadership based on misdirected
consumptions rather than the character of the leader has always been a main
problem of capitalistic societies. Character is important but consumption is what
character revolves around.
The desire to discover new things is human nature; yet if that nature forgets what
has enabled it to be innovative and adventuresome. There may be a result that
leads to social resentment which could lead to empowering a demagogue. This
person may mislead people because they are not conserving and are lost for
experience. Please ignore my generalizations, but consider how much bureaucratic
political papers you would have to read just to get a jest of what is going on
politically. Please consider the blame game and who is accountable for whatever
misleading original purpose of identity that may have been socially forgotten. Who
did this and who did that. If capitalism is focused on profit and expansion,
eventually the base will become bigger than its point. Hoarding and separation
mixed with profitable affiliation causes in its nature polarization and manipulation of
the have nots so the haves can continue having.
An important idea and activity to consider is the nature of sacrifice, when it
comes to the three Cs especially when it comes to the hoarding polarized actions of
capitalism. To consume and throw away is socially and mentally dangerous. The
reason why is because some people may be offended because they still make
offerings out of respect for what is gathered or taken from the earth. The profit
mentality of capitalism even makes these cultures a consumption. Does capitalism
cap whatever comes its way as a consumption meant to be digested? Does
capitalism sacrifice for the purpose of profit and consumption period? It is almost
like a wild fire and vacuum at the same time. Is private capitalism afraid of the base
or the people having the freedom to identify its direction?
Ok Im going to write something positive about capitalism. We need to nation
build. We will need many nations to pursue the universe. We need to capitalize on
the land and there is plenty of land to go around in the universe. So the business of
capitalism is in my opinion investing in future leadership. Who is going to lead the
pet psychologist who is going to lead the warehouse worker? How we are going to
represent our future is the most important capitalism. I cant say how all these fields
are going to be identified in the future of capitalism. So the thing we need between
the varied fields of the future is communion of information. The working man will
need leadership as well as the more academic skilled people.
Communing the isms that have been caped and identified and the isms that are
conserved is a big global digestion. The problem is forming and showing willingness

to digest and be informed on everything from science to what kind of shampoo to

use. Communism is the desire to remove the loathing of labor and ambitiously as a
people to innovate and work together. The problem here is leadership, partnership,
and a sense of direction. I dont care if you are communist, capitalist, or
conservative if there are children starving and growing up uneducated; you do
something. Does this mean we burn all the books and start from scratch? Hell no,
there has been much achieved through capitalism and conservatism. First we
conserve at isms than we cap at all isms then we commune at isms. Without
community all we have is distrust and private worlds of getting what is presented
and conserving what is desired. Many people from around the world come to
capitalistic societies to nurture nepotism and expand their family. It is a dream to
provide a future for your family and to prosper. The problem is lines get crossed and
alienation occurs.
You see I could talk about class struggle and that everybody does it from India,
Singapore to the United States. Should government be bigger to prevent class
struggle? Obama right now in his presidency is under fire not being in the know
about global surveillance. Im not going to get into it but it seems that privacy is an
issue for social health. Yet at the same time is it healthy to be so private that an
intervention is inappropriate and could potentially damage the community? Im not
saying we should read the same books wear the same clothes and have the same
diet. We have so many isms or established views to digest and excel at; why would
we want to destroy that diversity. We need to commune these isms and find out
what is good and re visit history if something shorts out in our digestion. We need
reference and passion for history. The problem with consumerism is lack of faith in
the future and repeating the same mistakes is a serious global fear. How many
times have we burned each other than polarized into a corner? Is communism about
hoarding or sharing for a common wealth or a healthy balance for what is needed?
Right now there are children and adults around the world with serious nutritional
needs. Does that mean we give them a bowl of oatmeal and a book and say figure it
out; and if things get bad I got a gun for you.
The need for community means we leave our house to socialize and glory in our
history and expand culturally. What is our cultural identity as beings; who owns
that? Us. Maybe our cultural identity is to terra form a damaged planet. I like being
entertained but I also like the feeling of being part of a struggle. Im not just a
vacuum waiting for the next stimulation. So the proletariat and the bourgeois have
something to figure out. How are we going to work together to culturally globalize?
Starting with food may be a good start. It would be hard not to come together while
working with food and talking about humanities future. We need to commune the
isms that have been caped and conserve the isms important to us. Communication
is one of my great joys. I dont like everything I hear but Im open to it. Just like I
dont like everything I eat, but if it is good for me Ill try to eat it.
So the three Cs is it about big government the working class or learning about

our history? A little bit of all. One thing I know is the world is still hungry and thirsty
and in an informational darkness. Where there is darkness may I bring light? We
must relish in the fact that we are here and we can finally identify what it means to
be human. A new tribe eats drinks and is merry; o ya and work cant forget about
work. I hope you enjoyed this book called word salad.

By John Chuckrey

WORD SALAD