RHEL 6 for the Clueless: Prepare to Install

Posted on January 6, 2011 by ehurst

Take your time.

RHEL 6 will install on most computers. Perform due diligence and research your hardware against Linux. Major computer brands can be checked by model name with the word “linux” in your favorite search engine. Look for indications there are particular problems, and decide if there’s any hope you can overcome them. Especially look for a specific blog post reviewing how Linux installs on that or a similar computer. There will also be forum discussions, mailing list threads, or something similar regarding your computer. If you built it yourself, check the individual hardware components the same way. Chances are things will work.

Create at least two strong passwords, one for the administrator account (root) and for your primary user alias. You should never simply run Linux as root for anything but administrative tasks. Linux applications are typically far better organized to work without admin credentials compared to what you may have experienced with Windows. You always run from a user account, and bump up the credentials only when you need them for a specific task. For quite some time now, it has been known the best passwords are made from any phrase or song title you might tend to remember and associate with your login procedure. The old favorite example comes from an Elvis fan: “Ladies and Gentlemen, Elvis has left the building” — heard after his live concerts. Taking the first letter of each word and the punctuation as it appears, we get this: L&G,Ehltb. Notice it is case sensitive. The word “and” is replaced with an ampersand. You can also replace other words or initial letters with symbols and numbers, or abbreviations. You should strive to have at least one punctuation/symbol and one numerical digit. Seven characters is the absolute minimum, and eight or nine is better. Keep in mind: The whole point is it has to make sense to you, and be memorable, yet very unguessable.

I highly recommend you dedicate the machine in question solely to the job of running Linux. Adding the task of formatting for dual-booting is not exactly simple on RHEL, and complicates the job greatly. I won’t be covering that in this series. I also recommend you don’t use a laptop until you’ve had plenty of time getting used to Linux in general. It’s probably better you run some other Linux distribution, such as Ubuntu, on laptops.

You also need to prepare your mind. Persistence is more than just being hard-headed. It includes realizing the first time you read something you may not get it, but if you come back to it and read it again, it usually gets better. Sometime you simply need to get help, perhaps join one of those forums or a mailing list. (You could pay enough to Red Hat for phone support, if you like.) This is probably the best way to stay sane once you get involved in Linux. It would be impossible for me to recommend any one community simply because there are so many, catering to different collections of Linux distributions, and widely varying standards and personalities. The whole idea is to eventually put some help back into the community which helps you. If Linux is worth it in the first place, it’s worth getting involved as it exists, which means discarding your dreams and fantasies about how it should be.

Finally, never forget the heart of your Linux system is the commandline. This is how Linux began, and it remains a major element in how Linux users think and operate. You will need to become comfortable with the idea of opening a commandline window, typically called a “terminal window” or similar names. A large number of tasks are simply not available with a GUI front-end. Those which are often lose options and flexibility. You may never learn to like it as much as some folks — I love it — but you must make up your mind now you can’t escape it.

As a related concept, the Linux GUI is not simply one thing. By default, RHEL uses what is called GNOME. It’s fairly simple to use, comes with a wide array of appearance options, and includes a big set of integrated tools. It reminds a lot of folks more of the Mac interface. There is another major contender called KDE. You may like it better, but you’ll have to add it later. At one time it was more like the Windows interface, but this is not so readily apparent any more. There are a couple of other lighter interface projects (LXDE, XFCE, etc.) which also integrate lots of tools, but fewer of them. They are lighter in the sense of using less computer power to run, but also offering fewer options for personalizing. Then there is a whole class of projects called “window managers.” There are too many to count, all doing even less integration, and are yet faster and lighter, performing only the most basic functions of organizing how windows are displayed on the desktop, and so forth. The heart of Linux is the commandline, and the GUI is simply an add-on.

We will stick with the default GNOME interface along with using the commandline in this series of articles. If you want something else, you’ll be on your own.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on RHEL 6 for the Clueless: Prepare to Install

RHEL/CentOS 6 for the Clueless: Overview

Posted on January 5, 2011 by ehurst

Reader note: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 is currently available but not exactly free. In a month or so we can expect the free version, CentOS 6 to be released. The difference is purely cosmetic, because CentOS simply removes the Red Hat branding. You can also try Scientific Linux, but it’s not as widely known and its focus is different, with a different way of handling the project. In terms of user experience, the difference is negligible. For the most part, what I say about RHEL here applies to the other two.

Your motives matter. The reason why you choose one distribution (“brand”) of Linux over another is to match your needs, your reason for switching from Windows to Linux. I want control, security, and long term support. I don’t want bloat, but I’m as lazy as anyone else about wanting the system to do all the work for me; automation usually means bloat. I want something which works the way I do, which solves the problems I don’t want to face. I’ll be willing to work a little for the rest of it.

In the past few years I’ve surveyed a wide variety of Open Source and commercial operating systems. They all stink. The question is not getting perfection, but the best balance, the least irritation over the inevitable imperfections. Since first playing with Linux over a decade ago, there have been very few which really came close, which is why I keep playing with it.

I really liked the old Redhat 6.2 and 7.3, SuSE 8.2, Debian 4, and a few others, but those are now ancient history, obsolete and increasingly unable to deliver security of usability. More recently I found RHEL/CentOS 5 really good, and it’s still supported and quite valid for aging hardware.

We can still recommend Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (“Lucid Lynx”) for folks who aren’t as interested in asserting their individual character. It is so easy to use. Lucid supportwill continue for a few more years, and it is very reliable, working with a very wide variety of hardware. It’s particularly good on laptops; I use it on mine (Dell Inspiron 1525). The Ubuntu developers go the extra mile providing specialty drivers which the Open Source purists don’t like because of licensing restrictions. With the huge collection of software packages built for it, it’s hard to imagine anything you can’t do with it, among the things possible on Linux. But I do not recommend using Ubuntu as a server unless you’ve had some time getting used to Linux, because the server edition is entirely commandline oriented. This is a hard jump to make for Linux newbies.

My ministry requires I know a good bit about running a server, while also offering the accommodations of a desktop. Many distributions of Linux can match Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as a server, but few are better for my needs. Meanwhile, RHEL also offers the desktop usability which is just enough within reach, and will be supported with fixes and security updates far longer than just about any other distribution. I don’t like frequent changes which come with rolling release or punctuated release schedules where longevity and stability just don’t matter. Most computer users are like that, but in the Linux world, most developers don’t care or simply don’t have a clue. Red Hat gets it, offering a minimum of seven years support.

This particular release of RHEL is one of those “wow” Linux products for me. It’s visually very quick and responsive, and I’m hardly the only one to notice. What Red Hat developers don’t provide by default is easily available by third party projects or you can build it yourself. Indeed, it is hard for me to imagine you won’t need something extra. It’s possible the default is everything you need, but that would make you a tiny minority of the computer users in the world. The default assumption of this series is you’ll need to learn how to build software the generic Linux way, along with the unique Red Hat way.

If you care to join me in this exploration, please fasten your seatbelts. You’ll be learning fast and furious at first, and it can be rough. You could read the Installation Guide and Deployment Guide (user guide) yourself, but that would leave out too many important parts essential for Linux newbies, and at the same time covers a wide array of confusing options which simply aren’t likely to apply to you. I’ll do my best to bridge the gap and get you where you need to go. You’ll be in a position to call yourself a “Linux geek” and take charge of your computer without so much hand holding.

Central Oklahoma Computer Ministry — helping you to need less help.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on RHEL/CentOS 6 for the Clueless: Overview

Migrating from Windows to Linux: Security Considerations

Posted on January 4, 2011 by ehurst

First, we have to establish the context. The Internet itself is insecure, and it cannot be made secure. Even if you made your computer or your information cryptologically secure, you cannot prevent physical access to your computer or your person. Should the powers that be (government, corporate or criminal) determine to have your data, they will get it, or take your life instead. Quite often they will settle for simply gaining some measure of control over your system even as you have your hands on the keyboard. This is something easier to prevent.

There are things which can mitigate the risk. Those same powers that be are limited. They are limited in manpower and talent. Precious few are the truly talented computer experts they can hire, not only because there is a limited supply, but a great many of them are unwilling to work for those three entities. The simplest reason is those tend to be run by psychopaths, and psychopaths require a type and degree of control which the most talented of people seldom can tolerate. So there are a very large number of lesser talented people they hire, ranging all the way down to useless-but-loyal. The threat is mitigated by overwhelming size of the victim pool against a tiny pool of talented attackers.

In other words, the likelihood of you provoking sufficient interest from them that they would actively attack you, is tiny. They rely on automation, which has distinct limits. It relies on the vulnerability of the victim computers on the virtual level. This requires a high degree of expertise by them in crafting attacks which can’t be resisted, or which human behavior patterns indicate won’t be resisted. The latter is simpler and cheaper by far in terms of return on investment.

So the greatest threat to your computer security is the profit motive. Not all profit is measured in terms of currency, but each of those three primary threats are seeking profit in some way at your expense. They seek control over your computer and the data on it. You are seeking to raise the barrier against low-level threats requiring little effort from them, yet staying below the radar of more serious threats from a directly targeted attack. Your greatest weakness is ignorance.

For most Windows users, you are simply not permitted to know too much about securing your system. Thus, even if you have plenty of money to invest in computer security, and an honest supplier, it’s only as good as the underlying system itself. Windows is inherently less secure than any other system, because the fundamental design philosophy is aimed at something else. Microsoft feels compelled to play nice with corporate partners and governments, and against the common user. The user is not the primary customer. Criminals invariably find the same hidden entrances to your computer reserved for corporations and governments. The playing field is tilted against you. It’s not impossible to have good security, but with Windows the gap between default settings and high security is very wide, and often quite expensive to bridge in terms of third-party protection measures.

The path to greater security is highly obscured, actively hidden by Microsoft beyond a certain minimal level. You have to be a member of the club, pay the high fees for access to the official source of information, and agree not to divulge it under very heavy financial threat. The inner workings are very tightly guarded from you also by a significant wall of commercial advertising. The average user is constantly assured by the governments, corporations and criminals, too: This is as good as it gets. Those corporations include the ones which dominate the public information franchises. Breaking out of this matrix requires breaking strong taboos in the global merchant culture. It requires a significant bad experience, along with a general public sense of malfeasance in the entire ecosystem, for people to being seeking change.

The real issue is not superior technology, but different technology, a different approach to the basic questions of what computers should do. The Open Source approach is different from what everyone else expects. It is a matter of human cultural factors broad and subtle. Computer security is more about humans than their computers, but it’s a complex matrix of the humans involved on all sides of the virtual world — the users, the developers, the big players who have a hand in the final result. There are fewer commercial big players in the Linux world, and it’s almost off the radar of the average consumer.

In Linux generally, the default security is much higher from the start. Naturally, this means Linux is a also a bit more difficult to use at first; the learning curve is steep. It’s all the more steep because the majority of humans who have used computers have used Windows first, and Linux is quite different in many ways. Plenty of people make the transition easily enough, but frankly the candidates for migration are self-selecting — the sort of people who tend to be dissatisfied with Windows, looking for something different. That something different, at least with Open Source, costs less in terms of wealth, and more in terms of effort. It is also generally more secure, though we could argue all day why and how. The primary difference which no one can dispute is the lack of catering to governments, corporations and criminals. It’s also not user-centric, but developer-centric, and Open Source developers are almost uniformly paranoid about computer security.

On top of this, I’ve noted already in yesterday’s post how using Linux compels the user to learn more, to take more responsibility, thus, changing the security habits. Again, it is the user’s ignorance which is his worst enemy, and Linux as an environment strengthens that weakest link. The broader community of Linux users seldom operate from the profit motive, at least not directly. Since the software itself is an open product, the money has to come from service and support. The primary reason this makes so much money is because there is a huge market of folks who want the security they perceive Linux offers without the learning. The primary big money in Linux is service and support, followed by books and education courses. But if you are willing to learn, you don’t have to pay, because the same information is already freely available, to any depth you wish to explore.

Posted in computers | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Migrating from Windows to Linux: User Considerations (revised)

Posted on January 3, 2011 by ehurst

Everyone has biases; wiser people are aware and admit them. All operating systems stink. You have to select the issues which your virtual nose can tolerate. My single strongest reason for using Linux instead of Windows is control. I find the lack of control I have in the Windows environment revolting.

You do not own your copy of Windows. If you examine the license, you will see Microsoft maintains ownership of the software; you merely have a license to use it. It is a limited permit, tightly restricted, and by running it, you give Microsoft permission to do anything they please with the copy of their software running on your computer. The operating system itself is wide open to their remote manipulation, with access built into the very design of it. Furthermore, you have absolutely no legal grounds for suing them if you don’t like how that turns out.

Nobody owns Linux. Once you have it on your computer, you are on your own, but there are neither legal grounds, nor technical design which forfeits control to any outside agency. That’s not to say it can’t be done, but it’s a whole lot harder.

There are different kinds of control and different things people want to control. In my case the issue is not so much a concrete list of items to control, but the overall sense of control I have as a user. On the one hand, I’m not a coder who can write drivers or any other part of the operating system. But the link I have to those who do write them in the Open Source community is much stronger, and much more open, than it would be for Windows. In Windows land, closure and unresponsiveness is the rule. In Linux, while unresponsiveness remains an issue, it is not nearly so bad, but openness is the rule.

A poor response to the user varies from project to project in Open Source. The field is developer-centric, and the primary audience is the fanboy crowd and other developers. However, the code is open, and among the users are a higher concentration of those capable of making intelligent discussion of why something didn’t work for them. These discussions, while not always open to public participation, are invariably open to public inspection. Read enough of this banter and you begin to get a feel for why things are the way they are, and possible solutions are easier to find. Try that with a for-profit corporation; rarely do they care a whit what the actual user experience is once the product is sold. And don’t you dare ask to examine the code.

The whole question of open versus closed source code access is a reflection of much more substantial differences in the user experience. Rare is the Open Source developer who will slip into their code anything that takes control from the user. Even when it is absolutely necessary for something in the system to “phone home,” it typically connects with services which are designed by people who would be the last humans on earth to compromise your privacy and the security of your system. Those systems themselves will be open to public inspection, so you can verify the claims for protecting your interests. Almost every commercial entity lies about it, if they bother addressing it at all.

Only a fool will believe I’m offering absolutes here. The issue is not whether bad things happen, but the likelihood. In the Windows environment, bad things of this sort always happen; in Open Source, it’s quite rare. In Windows Land, you are the product sold to advertisers and government snoops. Failures are denied, hidden, or require you to spend lots of money. In Open Source Land, the software is the product, and its failures are honest. Some of the best software for Windows is also Open Source. If the flaws in Windows don’t bother you, then you aren’t likely to read stuff like this in the first place.

The second, and related bias I have against Windows is the user environment itself. This is much harder to quantify. It boils down to Linux in particular, and Open Source in general, is more likely to meet my peculiar needs. Again, all software sucks, but the combination of factors in the way I experience Linux as a user makes it superior to Windows. I like the commandline, and Linux excels here above every other OS I’ve tested. It’s not just better; it’s opulent. The options for how it is displayed onscreen alone are worth the change, but the whole atmosphere, even the user guides available, are incomparably better. The Open source environment will encourage you to become a much smarter user, taking a greater responsibility for your user experience.

I like the variations possible, and that I can recompile just about any software package to suit me. Very early in the game I learned about the highly scripted build process, and how to toggle various options to suit my tastes. One size does not fit all, and Open Source developers know it instinctively. It simply is not that hard to do, and I’ve often recommended to newbies they try it, walking them through it. It’s a very empowering experience for them. When the build process fails, most of the time I can find a solution because of all the open discussions about such things scattered around the Net.

That’s the whole point about Open Source: openness. For those of us who sense a need to control some elements of how our computer works, when clicking options on the interface are not enough, whatever is possible is wide open to our inspection. A path of action is possible without learning to write the code ourselves. Best of all, this translates into a sense of security about the nasty miscreants out there seeking to prey on the rest of the world. As much privacy, security and control as is possible is easier to obtain with Open Source. The underlying cultural philosophy says the computer belongs to you, and what you run on it shouldn’t be loaded with secrets which work against you. Even when you need an expensive solution with all the bells, whistles and chrome, you’d be surprised how often someone makes that for Linux, too. While the Open Source purists complain of pollution with closed source drivers and software running on your Linux box, it remains possible because they can’t close out the commercial vendors when the source itself remains open.

So while the Open Source developer may not be your friend, he is most certainly not your enemy. The commercial closed source company is almost certainly not your friend, and my encounters indicate they are the single greatest threat to the computer owner and user. They are the ones who won’t bother asking you, but will simply leave you vulnerable every time it improves their profits. They are the ones holding the gate open for those who most want to prey on you.

When control is an issue of any significance for you, the path is much less difficult with Linux versus Windows.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

The Meat of the Issue (Updated)

Posted on January 2, 2011 by ehurst

I don’t make New Years’ resolutions. I consider the Western calendar artificial, and the placement of the year’s end is arbitrary, not matching the natural rhythm of human existence. It’s just another day. Time itself is arbitrary, a fundamental element in what traps us in this Vale of Sorrow.

I questions the orthodoxy of everything, largely because of my cynicism about fallen mankind. Without being paranoid, I think it’s utterly sensible to fear the motives and plans of anyone with more political power or wealth than me. I highly recommend you do the same. Not cowering in fear, but a sane caution, an open-eyed skepticism regarding everything you encounter. Reality itself is quite dubious.

Don’t let that stop you from going about the business of living out whatever you find truthful. The most important thing you can do is learn to despise your own suffering and sorrows. You can’t trust your own body to truthfully communicate what is good and bad, because it is wedded to this prison plane of existence. When your consciousness on the higher plane demands something, be fully aware of the likely consequences and drive through them.

A critical element of that truth from a higher plane is recognizing logic and reason are not useless, simply limited. They belong in their own sphere, and are subject to the imperatives outside the sphere. We do what seems most reasonable to us until that higher moral imperative makes a call. Human flesh serves one purpose: Flesh is the vehicle in which we defy the falseness of this prison existence, even as flesh is bound by it. We adhere to the higher imperatives as much as our reasoning mind can discern how to implement. We will inevitably fail because that is the nature of flesh. It’s the paradox of knowing our commitment to truth cannot ever be fully realized, but we know truth is not bounded by our failures.

In seeking to embrace the truth of things regarding the flesh itself, I have to be careful not to swallow orthodoxy. No two of us can go about it the same, and each of us must find a balance between too cavalier about the care and feeding of the flesh, and too obsessed with it. For me, the crux of the issue is maintaining sufficient physical health to make maximum use of this fleshly tool until my sojourn is finished. Just as I am deeply cynical about the information authorities try to feed my mind, I’m deeply cynical about the food this worldly system wants to put in my body.

There are no absolutes in truth, not as we think of them in the West. The truth for me is I can no longer trust the vast majority of food sources. But in particular, I find the threat from commercially provided meat in the US is too high to risk eating much of it. If I can’t get it from trustworthy sources, I’ll do without, thank you.

So it’s not a New Years’ resolution, despite the timing. I’m going almost meatless because I believe the threat of toxins in my food environment is high enough to hinder my pursuit of truth. Nor is this some doctrinaire vegetarian or vegan thing. I believe God gave us canine teeth for a reason, and the Covenant of Noah specifically grants animal flesh as a divine provision for our welfare, but the circumstances make it unwise.

Update: Not sure why folks keep reading this ancient history, but it seems necessary for the sake of honesty to update. As of summer 2012, local grocers have begun offering grass-fed beef, bison products and even grass-fed hogs. Anything unstained by the CAFO environment is probably pretty good: no GMO corn, no antibiotics or hormones, room to roam and natural foods. While it’s still more expensive than the standard meat counter stuff, safe meat is now available and I’m eating it.

Posted in health | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Reprise: Question Is the Answer

Posted on January 1, 2011 by ehurst

It was hardly original of me to say questioning is itself the answer, but I have made it a recurring theme here. It remains a fundamental element in commitment to truth, one of my three pillars of mysticism. Because some things can’t be described in clinical language, but are absorbed by pattern and symbolism, it bears repeating that paradox on a regular basis. To the degree you fail to question what is presented to you, truth is not your commitment.

For example, today I bumped into an article on Immanuel Velikovsky. I was too young to care when his book first hit the public notice, and I admit I’ve not read any of his stuff since then. But his name and his ideas aren’t hard to find, since he is almost universally excoriated by authorities. That’s the whole point, as the linked article notes. Don’t buy his authority any more than anyone else’s authority. Just so, I’d be the last person to insist you have to take my word for anything.

Were I to give it a name, the one thing which I believe drives me hardest from the very core of my convictions is a burning desire to set everyone free from bondage. If you consider your fetters jewelry, then by all means, wear them and be happy. If you simply don’t know where to start, I can make some useful suggestions, I believe. Learn about mind control, become a sweet-tempered cynic and skeptic, and only embrace what you cannot escape from within your own character.

I’ll be glad to explain what I can about my own convictions, but only as an example for you in exploring yours. What I consider the bedrock of my existence may be useless clutter for you. It’s not a question of who is right between us, but something far less easy to declare. Again, that would be a part of the whole point — it can’t be packaged, so don’t expect me to hand you a package which fits you.

I have a friend who loves to talk to me. I admit I don’t like talking to him; it’s very frustrating. He clings to things I would never accept, but he keeps coming back and asking more questions. So I keep trying to serve his personal growth because my commitment to his freedom is much stronger than my annoyance at his weaknesses. My very broken human self would rather shut him out, but my spiritual side realizes it won’t much matter what we discuss because that’s not what draws him. What draws him is my spirit breathes on him a taste of something beyond what either of our minds can grasp. I can stifle the simple repulsion of my mind in order to let him experience the power of mysticism, even as he questions the very assertions I make about it.

What really frightens me is someone who fawns over my every word, treating me like some demigod. That’s utterly repulsive. I’ve run into it often enough to fear it. It’s got a clinical name — cathexis — and is the single greatest source of sorrow among humans. It’s a part of the human tendency to grab hold of any one thing as your sole source of authority, a short cut to the path of refusing to think and evaluate on your own. It amounts to denying your responsibilities, passing the buck. I’m not going to accept your bucks. I’m not trying to avoid human intimacy, that desperate need we all have for connectedness, but I’m not willing to take control of your choices, when I don’t particularly trust myself.

The greatest crime of humanity is seeking to take authority over anyone else. No one worthy of following desires to lead, and anyone seeking to rule is morally disqualified by seeking it. As a Christian Mystic who is quite evangelistic, I know the single best way to offer you Christ is to show you how to reject Him. That is, I will be first in line to offer advice on bypassing religious traditions and teachings, because if you are going to come to Christ, it will be a miracle which defies all logic and human power. I’m the atheist’s best ally, as I am with anyone else who questions my Christian faith on any grounds you like. Not only can I not justify faith on human grounds, but it’s the worst betrayal I could offer my Savior.

If you are going to come up with any answers worth having, they won’t come from any authority structure rooted on this earth.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

No Predictions for New Year

Posted on December 31, 2010 by ehurst

It is a good day to die.

My dearly departed friend, Marion Brooks, and I shared that greeting often. After some 80 years, he was not yet finished with his life plans, and he considered his fatal condition a temporary hindrance. But he always knew his fuse was short. He had survived miraculously too many times to recount. I am aware of a dozen moments when I should have been snuffed, but against all odds, it didn’t happen. Until it does, I’ve got plenty to do. But it’s always a good day to die.

Mr. Brooks will not see the hideous disaster just now beginning the Gulf of Mexico. He never heard about the BP oil disaster when it was first reported, because he was already gone. He’ll have to miss out on the festivities as they continue turning a vast chunk of the earth into yet another toxic swamp.

He’ll miss the loss of much of the Gulf Stream, and the coming Ice Age. Granted, we have had here in Oklahoma some unseasonably warm weather. I went out yesterday in shorts and a t-shirt and it was pretty warm at 8AM for a walk in the woods. But our weather is volatile, and tonight we’ll probably hit around 18°F. Still, in our island of moderate winter overall this year, it is likely to fade into fond memories in the coming years. I could be wrong, as well as the large number of scientists who believe it’s quite likely, but it won’t matter. Mr. Brooks will miss it either way.

He did reckon he was lucky we didn’t have food riots yet, because he knew our economy was going to tank. He was a keen observer of the stock markets, having played them a bit in his younger years. He had lots of silver, some gold, and lots of guns and booze. His kids have it all now; it’s their problem. They don’t much believe what he knew about these things, so I imagine they’ll be caught off guard.

He’ll miss out on a lot of excitement. He knew it was curse to wish someone could live in exciting times. He wasn’t looking forward to it, but he knew he had things to do. Now his work is stopped. Echoes of his life still resound here and there, but as with all men, this too shall pass. He wasn’t afraid of dying. I have reason to believe he’s in Heaven right now, so he’s in a lot better shape than the rest of us.

Mr. Brooks, you lucky dog.

I won’t wish you a happy New Year. It won’t do any good. I wish you the serenity of knowing none of it really matters, but we have to go through it, any way. That’s because what really matters is how we go through it.

Posted in personal | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Leaderless Pacifism and Resistance

Posted on December 30, 2010 by ehurst

Let’s start with the foundation: The only legitimate government among humans is the one related to you by blood or covenant. The modern nation state is an abomination before God. We are not anarchists; we are anti-state. I could easily chase down a hundred threads regarding crime and punishment, but the basic premise is a strong family culture would produce, by far, the superior socialization of all possible systems. The reason I give covenants a higher priority than blood ties is because they are rooted in the Spirit Realm, which always trumps everything on this plane of existence.

This principle is woven into the very fabric of Creation. The whole universe is bound by it. If you embrace it, reality will support you. That’s not an absolute get-out-of-jail-free card; only a fool thinks in terms of absolutes. Rather, unseen and immeasurable forces from that higher realm will always back you in your struggle to do what’s right, that which Creation itself longs to experience from you and every other human who yet breathes.

Because our world is currently so deeply perverted, twisted away from the universal moral ideals which hold matter together right this moment, we have to work around the failures. That is, if we cannot have familial leadership, we don’t accept any at all. If you can find a covenant community which embraces the ineffable principles of universal morality, then you should accept the leadership which naturally arises from everyone trusting someone particularly talented at self-sacrifice. The only person morally fit to lead is the one who tries their hardest not to lead, but seeks the welfare of others by giving them maximum freedom, empowering their choices, weeping over their weakness and failures, binding their wounds even when they result from stupidity. Right now, that’s pretty rare, so we use leaderless tactics as a path to get us going in that direction.

At this point, you see written within all this the divine principle of pacifism. Being a peacemaker is not forcing peace, but offering it. We make peace by demonstrating peace, which is just another name for compassion, mercy, justice, and all those other nice words we use to describe the nature of God Almighty born into human flesh.

Resistance is nothing more than the very act of living out that divine nature. That’s because the system inherent in this plane of existence militates against the divine nature. It wants the goodies without paying the price. By asserting our commitment to this other-worldly focus, we commit a passive assault on the lies and liars. They’ll take it personally, even as they deny doing so.

You’ll have to decide where your path runs. Bloom where you are planted. My path leads me to a somewhat isolate existence, in that I reside in a quiet mobile home park out in a rural area. While there are housing developments springing up around us, we sit in a strange bubble of unincorporated land belonging only to the county, and none of the jurisdictions can touch it. I am not aware of the political shenanigans involved, but I’m told none of the cities want it. Because of the complications from this, there will be no developments on the remaining wild land. Thus, a barrier consisting mostly of woodland and scrub insulates this place. It was a miracle which brought us here, and it will require another to move us out.

If you live closer, or in, the urban gloom, you’ll have to shape your own response to things. The last thing I want to do is advise anyone how to resist falsehood in a setting I can’t experience. I will tell you I think you can present a strong physical defense even while making peace. Paradox is a critical element in divine logic. For example, I practice self-defense techniques and tactics which focus most on escape and avoidance. I’ve tried to study a couple of systems, but none were right for me. I have to find my own way, and so do you. Never, ever buy anyone else’s system, or you are lying to yourself. Take from their offering what you can use, but stay on your own path.

If it’s in you, it will work. Not in the sense of any human measure of success, but in the sense you will simply know it’s right. But you’ll also see glimpses of truth as nature itself starts working with you. You’ll be at peace with what happens; nothing will surprise you.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Leaderless Pacifism and Resistance

A Pacifist Answer to Martial Law

Posted on December 29, 2010 by ehurst

Given my decision to consider myself, here in the US, under Martial Law, yet having renounced the underground patriot resistance approach, I suppose I might outline for my readers just what it is I will be doing differently.

Not much.

As a non-activist peacemaker, I’m not interested in conducting any sort of armed resistance. Indeed, any sort of violence is highly unlikely, though I admit not impossible. Martial Law does not change that. Rather, I am bringing to the forefront of my consciousness, and even in my everyday language, that we are ruled by psychopathic government. While that’s been true for quite some time, the difference is in the goals of power. Previously, we would have regarded power as the means to an end, particularly the end of enriching the powerful. Now it’s power for its own sake.

Those who rule us are altogether delighted by our suffering. We have to grasp that. The psychopaths at the top have infected the vast horde of government servants with their sickness. Now the whole thing is reduced solely to the issue of power itself. Government agencies shall have their prerogatives, and nothing else matters. And for those consciously involved in directing this madness, it’s simply their desire to have and use power.

We have to understand: These are not normal people we are dealing with. Bernie Madoff? No remorse, no shame, no apology. Janet Napolitano? If she isn’t one herself, she is a puppet for a psychopath. She doesn’t care how wrong her policies are; and I have to wonder if she is not secretly delighted how it makes everyone squirm. We have this odd tendency to figure there must be some reason we don’t understand, some secret information government dare not divulge because it would mess up their work. Well, yes, there is — it’s that government is run by psychopaths. The only logic behind such policies, as with the unconscionable bilking of investors, is because they want to do it, and you can’t stop them. About the only sense it makes is their convenience at any price.

So this sickness is quite likely to pop up in almost every encounter with any representative of any government agency. Not always, not everywhere, but always likely, and increasingly so. This means I’ll be on guard — not to fight back, but simply so I’m not caught off guard. We make better decisions when we calmly expect trouble.

I don’t think I’m going to back off what I write here, though I suspect I’m about to get busy with the Red Hat server stuff, so it may seem I’m trying to tone it down. Not so. I’ll continue to expose the deep sickness of Western Civilization in all its forms. I’m not sure where the threshold is, but I realize at some point it could get enough attention from government thugs as justification for giving me some sorrow. It might as well be that as something else. I’m not intentionally provoking, but I won’t be shy about the truth.

On the other hand, I’m watching for signs of unrest which could complicate my life from the other direction. At some point, I’m sure things will go too far for too many, and there will be some ugly scenes, with blood in the streets, as it were. That’s a bigger threat to me than the government itself, right now. Somewhere, somehow, I suspect a critical mass will realize there is no such thing as seeking redress from the government. Then, once that gets rolling, it will be followed quickly by the psychopathic blowback to crush dissent, at which point nobody is safe.

Because of where I live and the shared assumptions of our Heartland subculture, I suspect most of this will bypass us. That is, our unrest and troubles will first come — has already come — in the form of increased property crime. There are a class of low-level predators who believe the world owes them a living, and they won’t easily surrender whatever level of comfort they’ve been living. Any day now I expect to see some serious vigilante response, some of which is currently legal here. We aren’t at the point where the whole thing is epidemic, and it’s a matter of sensitivity whether any observer thinks is really bad. It could muddle along quite some years around here, simply adjusting to a new reality, so to speak.

What’s different is I actually expect some significant increase in these things has already begun, but is not yet apparent from the way the local media report them. Copper theft is really a major item right now, but there are other indicators in stories they tend to spike. But we don’t have strong unions, and our legislature has plenty of states’ rights fanatics. Who can say how that will work out? I do note an increase in unusually violent actions by police, but still far behind the curve in the rest of the US. It would take a really major change before the local population decided the cops were not really a part of society, because so far the policemen tend to get disciplined for excesses. They most certainly do not face equal penalties with the rest of us, but the difference is not yet painfully obvious. Most people here still think cops are human.

The difference for me will be in the mental precautions. That is, everything I do daily takes on a different flavor. I’m just a bit more watchful, and take an extra measure here and there calculated to protect from surprises. We’ll focus a great deal on growing food and harvesting wild food, storing all we can get, adding considerably to previous years’ efforts. We’ll keep a running mental calculus of how we might handle things like power failure, or rates too high, and similar hassles. I keep a mental picture of several levels of bug-out planning: What would I take if we had to suddenly remove from this house? What would I take if I had to carry it in my hands, or in my vehicle, or if I could make more than one trip, etc? The sort of things which require evacuation have become more likely, now.

It boils down to: What really matters? As a Christian Mystic, I would obviously answer that differently than people who are not. I’m not worried about liberty, law & order, maintaining my dignity, or even my life. I’m worried about how I’ll carry on with my calling for as long as I live, and how I can continue giving life to my three pillars of Christian Mysticism, and what it takes to be ready for showing mercy to others, particularly those who are still mentally trapped in this prison plane of existence.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Gramscian Martial Law

Posted on December 28, 2010 by ehurst

Gramsci: more than just a communist, but a political theorist. TPTB are fans of his theories.

Antonio Gramsci was a transformational Marxist… what Gramsci advocated was the transformation of a society to the communist state via gradualism — the gradual erosion of old ideals, replacing them with the new. As opposed to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini, Gramsci advocated the quiet revolution.

I have to agree with those who say Martial Law is here. Save yourself some time and heart rending consideration; tell yourself you live under Martial Law and get over it.

You probably could have pegged it yourself at several significant moments during this year now ending. It really depends on how you define it, but Martial Law is here, by and large.

Have you noticed how there is no longer any responsiveness from government? “We the People” are no longer any part of the government; our voice does not count. Voting has been a fraud for over a century, but we now have a situation where at least one bureaucrat has said there could be no circumstances to change her mind about the policies she implements. You and I have no say.

Now the Congress is actively planning for prison camps for the highly likely protests, riots and massive uprising when the sheeple suddenly realize they’ve been had. I can’t predict what will awaken them to that fact, but it’s quite likely to come soon.

I’m sorry if you were expecting a single event to bring it about, but TPTB aren’t that stupid. This is the standard Gramscian incremental oppression we all should have been expecting. It was never going to be the same in all places at the same time, so in many parts of the US, it’s almost unnoticeable. Nonetheless, most elements of what you would expect under Martial Law are already in force, or are planned and announced. Whatever it is you were planning to do when the balloon went up, you should be doing it now.

They aren’t calling it that officially, of course, but you’d be a fool for not recognizing it. It’s certainly worse in other parts of the world, maybe even where you live, dear reader. Remember, a barrel of sewage by any other name still stinks.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged , , | 1 Comment