Abused By Illusions

This is an excellent article from mackwhite.com on the effects of television on the human mind. This will really give you something to think about before you switch on the boob tube.

C.I.

Sixty-four years ago this month, six million Americans became unwitting subjects in an experiment in psychological warfare.

It was the night before Halloween, 1938. At 8 p.m. CST, the Mercury Radio on the Air began broadcasting Orson Welles' radio adaptation of H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds. As is now well known, the story was presented as if it were breaking news, with bulletins so realistic that an estimated one million people believed the world was actually under attack by Martians. Of that number, thousands succumbed to outright panic, not waiting to hear Welles' explanation at the end of the program that it had all been a Halloween prank, but fleeing into the night to escape the alien invaders.

Later, psychologist Hadley Cantril conducted a study of the effects of the broadcast and published his findings in a book, The Invasion from Mars: A Study in the Psychology of Panic. This study explored the power of broadcast media, particularly as it relates to the suggestibility of human beings under the influence of fear. Cantril was affiliated with Princeton University's Radio Research Project, which was funded in 1937 by the Rockefeller Foundation. Also affiliated with the Project was Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) executive Frank Stanton, whose network had broadcast the program. Stanton would later go on to head the news division of CBS, and in time would become president of the network, as well as chairman of the board of the RAND Corporation, the influential think tank which has done groundbreaking research on, among other things, mass brainwashing.

Two years later, with Rockefeller Foundation money, Cantril established the Office of Public Opinion Research (OPOR), also at Princeton. Among the studies conducted by the OPOR was an analysis of the effectiveness of "psycho-political operations" (propaganda, in plain English) of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Then, during World War II, Cantril÷and Rockefeller money÷assisted CFR member and CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow in setting up the Princeton Listening Center, the purpose of which was to study Nazi radio propaganda with the object of applying Nazi techniques to OSS propaganda. Out of this project came a new government agency, the Foreign Broadcast Intelligence Service (FBIS). The FBIS eventually became the United States Information Agency (USIA), which is the propaganda arm of the National Security Council.

Thus, by the end of the 1940s, the basic research had been done and the propaganda apparatus of the national security state had been set up--just in time for the Dawn of Television ...


Experiments conducted by researcher Herbert Krugman reveal that, when a person watches television, brain activity switches from the left to the right hemisphere. The left hemisphere is the seat of logical thought. Here, information is broken down into its component parts and critically analyzed. The right brain, however, treats incoming data uncritically, processing information in wholes, leading to emotional, rather than logical, responses. The shift from left to right brain activity also causes the release of endorphins, the body's own natural opiates--thus, it is possible to become physically addicted to watching television, a hypothesis borne out by numerous studies which have shown that very few people are able to kick the television habit.

This numbing of the brain's cognitive function is compounded by another shift which occurs in the brain when we watch television. Activity in the higher brain regions (such as the neo-cortex) is diminished, while activity in the lower brain regions (such as the limbic system) increases. The latter, commonly referred to as the reptile brain, is associated with more primitive mental functions, such as the "fight or flight" response. The reptile brain is unable to distinguish between reality and the simulated reality of television. To the reptile brain, if it looks real, it is real. Thus, though we know on a conscious level it is "only a film," on a conscious level we do not--the heart beats faster, for instance, while we watch a suspenseful scene. Similarly, we know the commercial is trying to manipulate us, but on an unconscious level the commercial nonetheless succeeds in, say, making us feel inadequate until we buy whatever thing is being advertised--and the effect is all the more powerful because it is unconscious, operating on the deepest level of human response. The reptile brain makes it possible for us to survive as biological beings, but it also leaves us vulnerable to the manipulations of television programmers.

It is not just commercials that manipulate us. On television news as well, image and sound are as carefully selected and edited to influence human thought and behavior as in any commercial. The news anchors and reporters themselves are chosen for their physical attractiveness--a factor which, as numerous psychological studies have shown, contributes to our perception of a person's trustworthiness. Under these conditions, then, the viewer easily forgets--if, indeed, the viewer ever knew in the first place--that the worldview presented on the evening news is a contrivance of the network owners--owners such as General Electric (NBC) and Westinghouse (CBS), both major defense contractors. By molding our perception of the world, they mold our opinions. This distortion of reality is determined as much by what is left out of the evening news as what is included--as a glance at Project Censored's yearly list of top 25 censored news stories will reveal. If it's not on television, it never happened. Out of sight, out of mind.

Under the guise of journalistic objectivity, news programs subtly play on our emotions--chiefly fear. Network news divisions, for instance, frequently congratulate themselves on the great service they provide humanity by bringing such spectacles as the September 11 terror attacks into our living rooms. We have heard this falsehood so often, we have come to accept it as self-evident truth. However, the motivation for live coverage of traumatic news events is not altruistic, but rather to be found in the central focus of Cantril's War of the Worlds research--the manipulation of the public through fear.

There is another way in which we are manipulated by television news. Human beings are prone to model the behaviors they see around them, and avoid those which might invite ridicule or censure, and in the hypnotic state induced by television, this effect is particularly pronounced. For instance, a lift of the eyebrow from Peter Jennings tells us precisely what he is thinking--and by extension what we should think. In this way, opinions not sanctioned by the corporate media can be made to seem disreputable, while sanctioned opinions are made to seem the very essence of civilized thought. And should your thinking stray into unsanctioned territory despite the trusted anchor's example, a poll can be produced which shows that most persons do not think that way--and you don't want to be different do you? Thus, the mental wanderer is brought back into the fold.

Click here for the rest of the article.

ST. HELENS, Ore. - So far as she knows, Pufferbelly Toys owner Stephanie Cox hasn't been passing any state secrets to sinister foreign governments, or violating obscure clauses in the Patriot Act.



So she was taken aback by a mysterious phone call from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to her small store in this quiet Columbia River town just north of Portland.


"I was shaking in my shoes," Cox said of the September phone call. "My first thought was the government can shut your business down on a whim, in my opinion. If I'm closed even for a day that would cause undue stress."


When the two agents arrived at the store, the lead agent asked Cox whether she carried a toy called the Magic Cube, which he said was an illegal copy of the Rubik's Cube, one of the most popular toys of all time.


He told her to remove the Magic Cube from her shelves, and he watched to make sure she complied.


After the agents left, Cox called the manufacturer of the Magic Cube, the Toysmith Group, which is based in Auburn, Wash. A representative told her that Rubik's Cube patent had expired, and the Magic Cube did not infringe on the rival toy's trademark.

(more)

Six weeks after her brush with Homeland Security, Cox told The Oregonian she is still bewildered by the experience.


"Aren't there any terrorists out there?" she said.

This one caused me to fall out of my chair laughing! 

Thought this parody was right on target being that the election is between two Skull and Bones members! 

Papa Familias

Shaped to precision with a two-inch strap.

Filtered through innumerable sermons
constructed entirely of curse of words.

Tainted by the artist's own apprenticeship
to his unforgiving patriarchal architect.

Painted with a brush bristled with
an utter lack of parental patience.

Frescoed from salvaged pigments
plucked from scant and scattered smiles.

Sculpted from the insufficient clay
of too few laughs diluted with infinite tears.

Cut from outings that were almost bouquets
but ended up on the florist floor.

Composed of hard notes that turned what
should have been upbeat jazz to delta blues.

Thus stands this monument we jointly constructed
You and I together with our own blood, sweat, and tears.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

My Silent Friend

The snow falls gently as steam rises noiselessly
from deep within the open hole in the frozen Montana prairie.
I peek out of a fur-lined parka hood quietly contemplating
a similar scene unfolding deep within the Soviet Union.
Below me stands the most hushed of giant guardians.
It must never speak for even a whisper would mean failure.
The snow drifts around us absorb even the sound of my heart
and that of the nurturing life support system of this silent giant.
Unspoken secrets we share in under the winking of a star filled sky.
The motionless giant stands a symbol of tranquility in our seclusion.
I have long since crept home seeking my own solemn station.
But this silent giant remains standing guard there to this day.
I sometimes, on a quiet night, still fondly remember our
quiet lonely nights standing ever so still on the frozen prairie.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

Alienation

A homeless
man
A passing
girl
He can not
smile
She can not
wave
Trapped inside
roles
Both taught by
others
To fear each
other
Both someone’s
child
A prison
built
without any
walls
Except a
need
to each feel
safe

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

The Big Picture

The world is often like a bitter pill.
A glass of attitude is what we wash it down with.
In a lifetime we will take a million doses.
This is not bad medicine
but does explain the emperor’s lack of threads!

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

Statecraft

To hell with statecraft, to hell with Republicrats,
the same to Demicans!
Fleecing people that’s both their games.
Helping only in the Hegelian sense by
giving a thesis before offering
a free lunch of antithesis.
Isn’t it novel how the marks arrive at
just where the road to synthesis leads them.
Stuffed suits with deep pockets
practice fiscal magic
as the devil takes the body count.
The young pay the price
while the old count the dividends.
We all act surprised at how they
lied us into war.
But can you tell me, could you tell me
just what war they haven’t lied us into?
For that my kind hearted friend
is the very reason you hired them.
They nominate a snake
call him a good candidate
and marvel at his bite.
His bite though is your bite
just delegated.
For that my kind hearted friend
is the very nature of statecraft.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

The Old South

Bar-b-que at a
greasy spoon.
Oh, the smells and tastes-
tangy tart just enough vinegar
to remind me why I
love the south.
Checkered tablecloth
evokes a grandmother gone
who once spread one similar
after the big one
when papaw returned
from the Battle of the Bulge.
My mind wanders while listening
to the symphonic drawl
of my pregnant waitress who talks
about her reunion:
first cousins, second cousins, cousins
twice removed, cousins deceased, cousins
just married.
Frostbitten shine winks up from
a Dixie cup as it
chills my palm
bringing me back again sadly
to the NEW SOUTH!

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

The trouble with our society is that so much information is considered taboo. Taboo subjects are rarely if ever spoken of once they are labeled as such. So we spend our entire lives not talking about these matters of real importance. By virtue of this an artificial void of terms dealing with fundamental problems within society is created. Thus, those of us that for some reason are awakened to the evil that lurks in this silent void must first create adequate terms to describe what has for so long not been talked about. Once we have developed clear terms to describe these troubling elements we must then convey them to enough other people so that dialogue can begin.

I am convinced that this situation is not accidental or coincidental in anyway. It is done on purpose by groups within society who seek to maintain their largely bilateral status as wielders of political power. What must we do to overcome this shackling of thought? The first thing that we must do is begin to all think about why certain topics are taboo. Then we must question the status of these things as taboo and move to open dialogue among ourselves on these matters. Only when all ideas are open to public debate will we ever have intellectual freedom in our country and the world.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

Early on in life came a jeopardous decision, holding
copiously lived life aloft of conventional art. Early
cinema and tavern adventures with my father planted
ideas of life itself as the most hominal of living fresco.
Later I would translate my heart’s drawl onto austere parchment
and in language more palatable to feed an elegant audience.
I sat, this my final day, in a taxi somewhere in the city. My heart
you see was failing as a cab driver’s voice faded into that of
my fathers so many years ago. I was beckoned back to that
paradise from which I had been torn so many years ago on this
very day. A warm glow, “like the shining of a shell,” told
that I was finally arrived once more back to Highland Avenue.
My loving family, already lay on the quilt, just the way I
remembered from so many years ago. Their presence formed
loving arms enveloping me in the comfort I had for so long missed.
But alas in the real world I had known…”How far we all come. How
far we all come from ourselves…You can never go home again.”
Then I looked upon the corner of the porch and in the dimming
light saw my father’s postal hat. It seemed to say to me that indeed
I could now return to Knoxville: Summer, 1915


© C.I. Abramson, 2004

Well looky here!

"Fresh controversy has hit the war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic with a claim from a senior intelligence analyst that the Yugoslav leader is innocent of genocide.

Dr Cees Wiebes, a professor at Amsterdam University, now says there is no evidence linking Milosevic to the worst atrocity of the Bosnian war, the massacre of 7,000 Muslims at the town of Srebrenica.

Wiebes headed a team of intelligence specialists commissioned by the Dutch government to look into the massacre because its own forces were present in the town under the UN flag.

He had access to secret files, key diplomats and hundreds of witnesses to a massacre in which Muslim men and boys as young as 12 were butchered by Bosnian Serb forces. But while clearly implicating senior Serb field commanders, including General Ratko Mladic, the former Bosnian army chief still on the run, Wiebes says Milosevic played no part.

'In our report, which is about 7,000 pages long, we come to the conclusion that Milosevic had no foreknowledge of the subsequent massacres,' he says in a radio programme, The Real Slobodan Milosevic, to be broadcast by BBC Five Live tonight. 'What we did find, however, was evidence to the contrary. Milosevic was very upset when he learnt about the massacres.'"

And Here's the real kicker:

"Wiebes also says his team offered their evidence to the Hague tribunal chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, but were brushed off."

I can't put it any better than Mike Rivero from What Really Happened, who comments:

"What? The United States made up a bunch of lies about a leader so they can invade his country?!? The United State doesn't DO that sort of ... ummm... I mean .... ah ... Hey how about those Lakers!"

In his last post regarding John Lopez's comments on the "civil war" between the Mises and Cato institutes, my friend Mr. Abramson concludes by asking, "I just wonder if some sort of voluntary mutal aid agreement between invidualists might not be in order?"

For your consideration, I offer:

Mutual Defense by Andy Stedman

The various libertarian / anarchist plans to create a free state in space, on a boat, in a US State (The Free State Project), in Antarctica, or anywhere else are flawed in that they are still, to some extent, influenced by the statist concept of territoriality. The goal of freedom-lovers should not be the creation of a free state, but of free people.

There exist today private armies, which serve to rescue those at high risk of kidnapping from their kidnappers, should such an inopportune event befall them. Since anarchists consider wrongful jailing for victimless offenses as morally equivalent to kidnapping, I suggest this as a starting point. An existing company could be purchased or a new one formed, which could at first cater to well-heeled world travelers (as it would at first be somewhat expensive.) I suggest the name "Mutual Defense Company" and will use it though the rest of this article.

When a client is kidnapped (arrested) on drug, smuggling, prostitution, anti-trust, or other non-crime charges, Mutual Defense would issue a statement of intent to rescue said client to the local and national press. They would first attempt to negotiate terms of release, just as governments today might do (as when an American is arrested in Thailand and asks the embassy for help.) If negotiations failed, a rescue attempt might be made, which should have a good chance of success against what should be, in most cases, the local law enforcement of second- or third-world countries. This is exactly what Bush is intending to do in case of American GI's facing charges at the World Court. Of course, the chance of getting the client killed would have to be balanced against the punishment faced, and the client's wishes would have been discussed when the policy was signed.

I base Mutual Defense's high chance of success on the following analysis. I do not claim to be a military or law-enforcement expert of any kind, so a more thorough analysis would be welcomed. At any time, Mutual Defense would have multiple clients kidnapped by a particular state. Although the state would know of Mutual Defense's intent to rescue every one of those clients, they would never know which client would be rescued when. Therefore, if Mutual Defense possessed only a modest force on the order of 100-1000 soldiers, the state would have to have that many "protecting" each client at all times. Mutual Defense's soldiers would also be equipped and trained at a minimum to the level of US Special Forces, making them a very imposing force relative to the local law enforcement, or even third-world military they would be expected to face. Each operation would be carefully planned and only executed if the chance of success was acceptable according to the client's stated wishes. Other local clients could be paid to act as field operatives if they wanted to help out a fellow "citizen."

Read the rest at anti-state.com

Reprinted from www.zendik.org

Well, you've all come out of the woodwork—mad at Arol for telling you to rebel, deny, defy instead of voting—hey, if the only way you can rebel, deny, defy is by voting then do it, but don't bitch about the results. It's my opinion, right? and it's not politically correct, but then I've been a Zendik a long time and I want to change everything and a compromise Republicrat or Demican won't do it—cause he or she is working for the same people—they're owned by the same corporate heads, you know, the ones who set the prices on everything including our souls. So vote if that's all you can do and when the guy you vote for does the same thing as everyone else has done, don't blame him or her, blame the system, blame the philosophy, blame the roots of the problem and keep on bitching till maybe you'll start a revolution by changing everything including the corrupt beyond-belief-system.

One of you told me I should be ashamed of myself—people, and I'm sad to say women, have told me that all my life. But you see you should be ashamed for compromising, for settling for the little crumbs you've been thrown—your vote doesn't really mean that much does it? It really isn't representational democracy is it? It's not one vote one decision. The system has in place an electoral college, put there by people who don't trust us ("the people," as we're called), a system whereby when its clear the people want someone, they can't have it unless their "safeguard", the electoral system, agrees with them. Yeah, my friends start dismantling, call for referendums, call for changes in the constitution. We've got one that's amendable, we can change everything if we wouldn't compromise. Get together!

There's so many ways to cause a revolution if we would get together and truly decide to change the system—we can do it legally and peacefully. How can we get together?—We already do, through the worldwide web for example. There's lots of possible scenarios to do—we've got to get our imaginary caps on—our "What if" caps on.

Yeah, when the dust settles and you can blame people like me for not voting your man in—whoever he is—take a look around—who's setting the prices for our clothing, housing, entertainment, schools, who's dealing with our taxes—the people who control the system, the small number of super, super powerful who sit on the boards of major banks, insurance companies, entertainment companies, major military and industrial companies, etc. and they rule our politicians—including our presidents (not by direct orders—I'm not a conspiracy freak but just by the unspoken rule of better do what we want or you're out)—and it's international!

It really doesn't matter (as it stands now) who you vote for —they're always backed and ruled by the same people—lobbyists, the electoral college, professional politicians they all work for the people who own the system and that's the few in the world, not just this country, to repeat myself, who own the resources and whoever owns the resources owns what you call the democratic process.

How about causing a real democracy instead of settling for the mockery we have now. And, hey, you who are so mad at me—do you vote for your board of education, do you vote for your local commissioners, do you vote for your town or city council—do you vote at the local level for or against people you actually know or do you just come out for the big totally corrupt game in town—the presidential election!

Didn't the last election teach you that the system stinks? Again vote in this sham—if that's all you can do, but know it's not going to solve anything. We must step away from the system, not join it and compromise for it—we must begin a revolution and that means how you think, how you feel and where your bravery and firmness of conviction is.

I have a vision, I know we could have a beautiful world and I've dedicated my life to creating that vision into reality. How about you? Yeah, I compromise—I drive, I use electricity sent to me by those same masters—yes, Zendik has computers, computers, and more computers, video games and vans and trucks and phones and clothes and make-up and tattoos and sells it's art and ideas to survive and pay for everything—yes, I compromise every day just like you do when you vote, but I have very very long term ideals and dreams and knowledge of a better world and I never forget that and never settle in my mind for anything less and do whatever I can to change everything (I'm writing this piece—it's public!) and that's how I justify my existence.

How about you doing the same instead of attacking me for telling the truth. The attack on me is so you can go ahead and do your vote and blame me for not doing what you want me to do. No, my dears, let's fight together to change everything—your squabbling and trying to shame and coerce me won't do it. And again, I must say it! neither will your vote.

Love to you,
Arol

This is a reprint of Arol Zendik's Thoughts on why we shouldn't vote in the coming election. I'm gonna follow it with her response to the critics of this original post. Arol and the folks at Zendik arts have impressed me over and over again since I met one of their Road Warrior crews at last years Midtown Music Feastival last year. In fact I haven't been able to get them out of my mind since. If I wasn't such a broke down old man I think I would have joined in with them in their active quest long ago.

What impresses me so much about them is they are not all talk as most of what you read on the net is. I like to say sometimes when talking to friends that when something becomes "a movement" that for some reason all postive physical activity seems to cease. This is not the case with Zendik Arts these guys live their philosophy! If only more people would follow their example perhaps we might begin to escape the slavery and death that our current, to borrow a Zendik saying, Death Kulture offers. I highly recommend checking them out at their site. Zendik.org

Okay, here it is coming up on November 2004, a new president of my country is going to be elected and once again I'm thinking about the voting process. When I was young growing up in New York City, everyone knew politicians were crooked. It was not maybe, or might be, but a true fact. I don't know how George Washington and the Cherry Tree myth worked. Maybe we accepted that story cause he didn't live with us in New York, or maybe in the old days people were honest--I don't know. But we knew every politician in our city was crooked or he wouldn't be elected. That was my introduction to American or at least New York politics.

Later, as I studied history, I realized that nothing had changed since Grecian times, that nothing had been learned politically and reading Greek history, especially the "Peloponnesian War" by Thucydides was to me, a child of the "cold war", the same as reading about Russia and the USA, nothing had changed--so vote--no thank you, not I. I was not even interested and remained that way for many years.

My hope surfaced again when Castro won Cuba--I knew many Americans, especially artists and musicians who had gone to help him fight--I was mad for Castro and Guevara, even going to the Hotel Theresa in Harlem to meet them--I was 18 or so at the time. Then word came he was lining people up against the wall after imprisoning them and shooting them wholesale. Broken-hearted, I gave up on revolutionaries and their killing. They had been hunted & killed and then, when they won, did the same, learning nothing.

Then sometime when Clinton was running for presidential office, friends, college students, fans all wrote or called or when they saw me, urged me to vote for Clinton otherwise Bush Sr. would stay in. But the more I looked at Clinton and his wife the less I could, in good conscience, vote for him.

I didn't trust him so I didn't vote. Later I saw a photo of him in the newspapers coming out of church with his wife smiling and both hypocrites feeling good about themselves, you know, holy. Next to that picture was a story about his ordering the bombing of Iraq and a photo of a man crying over the casket of his baby son, killed by one of the "smart" bombs Mr. Clinton ordered that Sunday morning. I knew I was right not to vote for him. If voting meant anything to me, which it would if it was real, if there was someone to vote for, if it meant anything, I would cherish it and because I do believe in a pure democracy not the taxational fascism we have now, yes I would vote.

Well, anyway, back to now--same scenario: I'm being told my vote counts and that I must vote for anyone other than Bush. Ok, really, you want me to vote for anyone other than Bush? John Kerry you tell me, "we don't really want him but it's a vote against Bush." My response is, oh really? I don't trust Kerry any more than Bush. Yes, Bush is a moronic "bad boy"--can't do a damn thing, never worked a day in his life--we know who he is. Kerry? With that face? That closed liar face of a professional politician, which means he's never done anything real either. He brings to my mind the same N.Y.C. crooks of my youth. Watch out for him my friends--this guy is crafty enough and sneaky enough to start some such travesty as the draft. Watch out for him--you don't want him but you don't want Bush worse--that's not a cause to vote--that's a cause to rebel, defy, deny--to start a revolution before making that kind of deadly compromise. Bush and Cheney the old guard and Kerry and Edwards the old guard pretending to be new. Yeah, I'd vote for Nader if I thought it would do any good, not because I agree with everything Nader stands for, but at least I know the guy's sincere--of course I also know anybody sincere as president would either be shot, or the Congress will make sure he's totally impotent. That crowd of corrupt phonies in D.C. has to go away if we're ever to get anywhere--if we're ever to fulfill the promise of this country--the great generous spirit of Americans.

So, no, my friends, I ain't voting again. There's no one to vote for. Stay home, don't vote and be the cause of a revolution!

From Frederick Sweet writing for Intervention Magazine. Does this sound familiar? Click the title to read the full article.

Footnote: On July 31, 1932, Hitler’s Nazi party won 230 out of 608 seats in the Reichstag, making it the majority party, but he was not yet in power. It was several years before Hitler became the cosmically evil war criminal. On January 30, 1933, Hitler was finally sworn in as Chancellor. Historian Alan Bullock describes it: “Hitler came to office in 1933 as the result, not of any irresistible revolutionary or national movement sweeping him into power, nor even of a popular victory at the polls, but as part of a shoddy political deal with the ‘Old Gang’ whom he had been attacking for months.... Hitler did not seize power; he was jobbed into office by a backstairs intrigue.” At the time, most Germans couldn’t imagine that Hitler would last long because his bombastic and swaggering manner and his overly simplistic speeches about Germany’s social, economic, and political problems were a “joke.” Politically sophisticated Germans dismissed Hitler as an inept caricature, but he and his accomplices consolidated their power by passing national security legislation supported by a stacked court. During these critical times of concentrating power, der Schutzstaffein (SS) made sure that Hitler’s critics and opponents were kept far away and silenced so that it would appear as though he had complete national support and, indeed, a mandate. Thus peacefully began Nazi totalitarianism.

Rough-hewn granite and flame
form the cornerstone of allegory.

A man's memory laid in masonry
lit by the flame of collective dreams.

The plumb and rule of law restrained
the ethereal flash of the child of peace.

In the flame for a moment we discern
encroaching shadows dispelled by
fiery torch passed to a rare generation.

Eyes trace the winding mortar road
as it tells the twisting tale of liberty.

Societies preference for silent reminder
strikes the mind like the philosophers stone.

We must ponder where we'd have been if
up that hill of wisdom we had followed him.

Three white flowers haunt my thoughts of who he
could have been, who he was, and who he dreamt us to be.

The shadows he exorcised once more do rise and
both threaten and promise real and cathartic death.

Let us raise again his flame to illuminate the path
from the sepulcher of cynicism toward the door
which opens once more to the coming dawn.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

Eternal Flame 

AnArchy In ThE UsA

But what if your parents are more anti-establishment then you are?:)
Doesn't not doing what they say make you closer to the authorities?:)

To my son Todd on the occasion of my 36th Birthday

How Proud I am of You!

I don’t tell you enough but it’s true;
how you amaze me everyday.
How proud I am of you.


Relating this to you is long overdue,
love so often is hard to display.
I don’t tell you enough but it’s true.


You are the best lot I ever drew;
my greatest contribution some say.
How proud I am of you.

My son’s loving heart is so hard to eschew;
my sadness it can so easily wipe away.
I don’t tell you enough but it’s true


Its so wonderful to get into;
How I see my son grow each day.
How proud I am of you

Amazed by the man your growing into;
Awed by who you are everyday.
I don’t tell you enough but it’s true;
How proud I am of you.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004

When Love Flies Away
or
Goodbye

When a love flies away,
an allegory is built with tears
The sky is not always gray.

The heart becomes like broken clay;
all memories are tattered souvenirs,
when a love flies away.

Hopes now but symbols of decay;
sadness abounds as the dream disappears.
The sky is not always gray.

My life appears but a tragic play.
No control over this state of affairs,
when a love flies away.

My feelings you may see as cliché.
Perhaps it is but my own fantasy I prepare.
The sky is not always gray.

My heart today is in such disarray,
My hope only that time truly repairs.
When a love flies away,
The sky is not always gray.

© C.I. Abramson, 2004