The mortal enemy of the Americans is Washington, District of Columbia~a depraved bordello where everything and everybody is for sale~a city now laid naked for all to see~in which the way the people’s business is egregiously and ubiquitously miss~conducted~must be radically upended if America is to survive~the good news is that a revolution is coming~and it cannot be stopped~as the girls in the bordello have pushed their hubris far too far~far too long~

The enemy of the Americans is Washington, District of Columbia~a depraved bordello where everything and everybody is for sale~a city now laid naked for all to see~in which the way the people’s business is egregiously and ubiquitously miss~conducted~must be radically upended if America is to survive~the good news is that a revolution is coming~and it cannot be stopped~as the girls in the bordello have pushed their hubris far too far~far too long~

“Ultimately though, and this is the key everybody is missing, we have arrived at this point because the leadership of the party has fundraised off its opposition to Obamacare in two campaign cycles, but has never aggressively sought to oppose it legislatively.

There will be hell to pay because of it.”

Thanks to Eric and Red State for this~~spot on~~ observation~~and the hell to pay is coming~~very, very, soon~~

AS~~indubitably~~the unavoidable conclusion is~~that~~

 
 The enemy of the Americans is Washington, District of Columbia~a depraved bordello where everything and everybody is for sale~a city now laid naked for all to see~in which the way the people’s business is egregiously and ubiquitously miss~conducted~must be radically upended if America is to survive~the good news is that a revolution is coming~and it cannot be stopped~as the girls in the bordello have pushed their hubris far too far~far too long~

 It’s funny you know~~we are having a war in my Party over Political Royalism at Washington~~yet the opposition Party of the working man doesn’t seem to mind Political Royalism at all~~isn’t that strange?~~~

7aomtpv

The exercise of free speech~~at Washington~~

18th century cartoons, 18th century cartoon, funny, 18th century picture, 18th century pictures, 18th century image, 18th century images, 18th century illustration, 18th century illustrations

”Life, liberty, and the pursuit of the almighty dollar’ is too long. Let’s change it to ‘happiness.”

Boss_Tweed,_Thomas_Nast

firm_color

The Law Firms of Washington~~

Tweed  Nast  Twas Him - smaller

That clinky~clanky sound~~$$$$$

prostitution cartoons, prostitution cartoon, funny, prostitution picture, prostitution pictures, prostitution image, prostitution images, prostitution illustration, prostitution illustrations

US ‘Secret’ Service.

grads

The Cum Laude Kid~~Congratulations~~thing is kid~~it’s a good idea to stay in outer space because there ain’t any jobs in America~~they all floated over seas~~

Corrupt? In a scathing report, the Church of England argues that banking employees with high moral values are being encouraged to leave them at the office doorCorrupt? In a scathing report, the Church of England argues that banking employees with high moral values are being encouraged to leave them at the office door~~but~~of course~~it’s different over here in America, kiddo~~

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207470/Banks-corrupt-people-work-Church-England-submits-scathing-report-life-City.html#ixzz2iUV9laqi 

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

prostitution cartoons, prostitution cartoon, funny, prostitution picture, prostitution pictures, prostitution image, prostitution images, prostitution illustration, prostitution illustrations

Workin’ girls can’t catch a break at Washington~~the Royals are too busy~~stealing money~~

cartoon-unions-poliiticians

Workin’ it ~~for~the workin’ man~~

 It’s funny you know~~we are having a war in my Party over Political Royalism at Washington~~yet the opposition Party of the working man doesn’t seem to mind Political Royalism at all~~isn’t that strange?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

image002 (20)
I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~~praise Jesus~~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~~I am a Catholic Royalist~~in a practical sense~~I am a Classical Liberal~~a Gaullist~~a Rockefeller Republican~~in either sense~~my head is soon for the chopping block~~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~~

clip_image002MA9982782-0001


~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~


Rejoice and Glad!!


Amen~~


clip_image002MA9982782-0001


EX LIBRIS


~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


At


Washington, District of Columbia


United States

Tuesday, 22nd Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

John Daniel Begg


At


Washington DC


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


PRESIDENT


john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting


4853 Sedgwick Street

North West

Washington, DC 20016-2323533

USA

Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro


http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs


http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

Tweets: @jtdbegg


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

 
"Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
French actor~~Alain Delon



CONCEPT OF THE CATHOLIC AND ROYAL ARMY OF AMERICA (CRAA)
 

Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

 It’s funny you know~~we are having a war in my Party over Political Royalism at Washington~~yet the opposition Party of the working man doesn’t seem to mind Political Royalism at all~~isn’t that strange?

prostitution cartoons, prostitution cartoon, funny, prostitution picture, prostitution pictures, prostitution image, prostitution images, prostitution illustration, prostitution illustrations

The enemy of the Americans is Washington, District of Columbia~a depraved bordello where everything and everybody is for sale~a city now laid naked for all to see~in which the way the people’s business is egregiously and ubiquitously miss~conducted~must be radically upended if America is to survive~the good news is that a revolution is coming~and it cannot be stopped~as the girls in the bordello have pushed their hubris far too far~far too long~

Prostitutes campaign outside the White House: ‘Buy American!’

The Romanians were but very recently suffering under the tedious, suffocating, murderous, yoke of Mr Marx’s dialectic~~happy to hear they now have a pretty little thing called Alexandra Stan~~who sings cute little pop ballads for the Americans~~including one called Lollipop and another called Lemonade~~both very much recommended here~~the message is that there is hope for all captive peoples~~perhaps even~~pray God~~cross fingers~~the Americans themselves~~who today labor under the oppressively suffocating yoke of Washington Royalism~

This is a very enterprising little girl~~Alexandra Stan~~Romanian, I think~~yes that’s it~~a Romanian girl~~I like that~~Romanian enterprise~~they were Communists not long ago you know~~poor dears~~now they make lemonade for us~~so there is a certain amount of hope for all of us~~isn’t there?~~Well~~isn’t there?

http://t.co/wrbUnxz4DvLemonade
spoti.fi
Lemonade, a song by Alexandra Stan on Spotify.
Lemonade
t.co
Lemonade, a song by Alexandra Stan on Spotify.

Biography

Alexandra Stan was born on June 10, 1989 in Constanta. She studied at the Traian Highschool and now she is a student at the Faculty of Management „Andrei Saguna“. She participated in various music-related contests winning a lot of awards. Alexandra became known world wide with her first single „Lollipop“, and now, with „Mr. Saxobeat“, she made everybody trust her musical talent. You can check out all Alexandra’s accomplishment on her website http://www.alexandrastan.ro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
She just loves her lollipop~♫ Lollipop (Param Pam Pam) – Alexandra Stanhttp://t.co/XdMvR6F5MO #NowPlayingSee More
Lollipop (Param Pam Pam)
t.co
Lollipop (Param Pam Pam), a song by Alexandra Stan on Spotify.
“Lollipop (Param Pam Pam)”
Hmm, I like the candy
I like the chocolate
The ice-cream is very good
But… I just love my lollipop

Because I’m delicious
When I lick, I lick my lollipop
I’m delicious when I drop
Drop it like it’s hot
When I walk in the club
Baby what you gonna do
Cuz’ all the boys they want me
All the girls they want me too

Cuz’ I’m delicious,
I’m hot, hot – I’m so delicious,
Just like my lolli-lollipop
I’m delicious.
You know I’m hot – I’m so delicious
Just like my lolli-lollipop
Cuz’ I’m delicious

Cuz’ I’m delicious
Cuz’ I’m delicious

I’m delicious
When I lick, I lick my lollipop
I’m delicious when I drop
Drop it like it’s hot
When I walk in the club
Baby what you gonna do
Cuz’ all the boys they want me
All the girls they want me too

Cuz’ I’m delicious,
I’m hot, hot – I’m so delicious,
Just like my lolli-lollipop
I’m delicious.
You know I’m hot – I’m so delicious
Just like my lolli-lollipop
Cuz’ I’m delicious

If you wanna see my
Pam pam param pampam
If you wanna feel my
Pam pam param pampam
If you wanna touch my
Pam pam param pampam
You just gotta lick my lolli-lolli-lollipop

If you wanna see my
Pam pam param pampam
If you wanna feel my
Pam pam param pampam
If you wanna touch my
Pam pam param pampam
You just gotta lick my lolli-lollipop

Pam pam param pampam [x8]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Romanians were but very recently suffering under the tedious, suffocating, murderous, yoke of Mr Marx’s dialectic~~happy to hear they now have a pretty little thing called Alexandra Stan~~who sings cute little pop ballads for the Americans~~including ones called Lollipop and another called Lemonade~~both very much recommended here~~the message is that there is hope for all captive peoples~~perhaps even~~pray God~~cross fingers~~the Americans themselves~~who today labor under the oppressively suffocating yoke of Washington Royalism~~but~~there’s a way out dears~~Alexandra Stan found one~~let’s try to find our own~~

 

Photoshooting 1

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

image002 (20)
I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~~praise Jesus~~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~~I am a Catholic Royalist~~in a practical sense~~I am a Classical Liberal~~a Gaullist~~a Rockefeller Republican~~in either sense~~my head is soon for the chopping block~~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~~

clip_image002MA9982782-0001


~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~


Rejoice and Glad!!


Amen~~


clip_image002MA9982782-0001


EX LIBRIS


~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


At


Washington, District of Columbia


United States

Tuesday, 22nd Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

John Daniel Begg


At


Washington DC


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


PRESIDENT


john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting


4853 Sedgwick Street

North West

Washington, DC 20016-2323533

USA

Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro


http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs


http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

Tweets: @jtdbegg


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

 
"Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
French actor~~Alain Delon



CONCEPT OF THE CATHOLIC AND ROYAL ARMY OF AMERICA (CRAA)
 

Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

This is a very enterprising little girl~~Alexandra Stan~~Romanian, I think~~yes that’s it~~a Romanian girl~~I like that~~Romanian enterprise~~they were Communists not long ago you know~~poor dears~~now they make lemonade for us~~so there is a certain amount of hope for all of us~~isn’t there?~~Well~~isn’t there?

Last night, I had occasion to meet a little university girl who~while in deep need of a new seamstress and barber~was nonetheless~strangely pretty~in a way I’ve trouble properly relating to you~with just my pen and no pictures~turns out she was a Democrat~how could I have missed all the road signs~and only wanted to talk to me to find out why “Capitalists such as yourself, Mr. Begg~so detest and mock Democrats and our icon, Mr. Karl Marx~when we are all just trying in our own little ways to help the poor people.” I put the girl in a cab~on my dime~I thought that best~but not before her extracting a promise that I would go home and “read up on our Mr. Marx~who knows~you might just like him and become a Democrat yourself, Mr. Begg”~I think I’ll give next Friday night out a miss~

41rp4fJoHgL._SY344_PJlook-inside-v2,TopRight,1,0_SH20_BO1,204,203,200_

Look inside indeed~~and pay Amazon.com~~some of your~~Capital~~to read all about the man who so wanted to destroy Capital~~The Democrats own~~Mr Marx~~I recommend the well~~used edition~~

Das Kapital, Gateway Edition (Skeptical Reader Series)Paperback – Abridged

by Karl Marx  (Author) , Friedrich Engels (Editor) , Serge L. Levitsky (Introduction)

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Someone once asked me if I’d ever read Das Kapital~~I lament I had~~its author~~Mr. Karl Marx~~~icon of the Democrats~~had a remarkably broad~~altogether undue~~influence on the sad recent history of mankind~~all for worse~~none the better~~an influence which is the more remarkable~given its genesis in the turgid work of such a homely, indolent and boring creature as the Democrat’s Mr. Karl Marx~~today we have a look at the claim that Marx coined the term Capitalism~~as a pejorative~~

Origins of the Word Capitalism: Thackeray not Marx?

Robert Lawson writes:Recently I was explaining to a friend why I generally refrain from using the word “Capitalism”:”My reasoning is mostly tactical. The word was first coined by Marx and continues to be used as a pejorative by the left. ‘Capitalism’ as a term implies to me that capital is special and that the owners of capital, the capitalists, are therefore the special beneficiaries of the system. This of course was Marx’s view. Even today, to many people capitalist = fat cat. But the fact is that ‘capital’ as a factor of production plays no more of a special role in a market economy than any other factor. You and I would argue that the real beneficiaries of the system are consumers and laborers. It would in my book be more accurate to say “laborism” than “capitalism”.Comment
I am not sure that Karl Marx invented the word ‘capitalism’; he certainly began using early, particularly in volume 1 of ‘Capital’, or at least his editors of the Moscow edition sprinkle his text liberally with it (from memory).

The Oxford English Dictionary, considered an authority on the English language, credits William Makepeace Thackerayfor the first published use of the word ‘capitalism’ in his novel, The Newcomes (1853-55), though it is clear from its context that this refers to finance capital, rather than as a ‘system’. Financiers in 19th century novels tend to get a bad press; see Trollope’s ‘The Way We Live Now’.

The origin of the word ‘capitalist’ is of much earlier vintage: in French, A. R. J. Turgot (1727-1781) used ‘capitaliste’ in his essay, ‘Reflection on the Formation and Distribution of Wealth’ (1769-1770), and WilliamGodwin used its English version, ‘capitalist’, in his Political Justice (1794).

I take Robert Lawson’s point about the word capitalist over emphasizing its importance as the main factor of production, though I am not so sure that ‘laborism’ is a better alternative because it is another factor. I would have thought that ‘consumer’ is better than ‘capitalist’ and ‘labourer’ (two factors) bearing in mind that Adam Smith considered the consumer was the sole purpose of production (perhaps ‘consumerism’?).

Still, Smith called his fourth age of man, ‘commerce’ (after Hunting, Shepherding and Farming), and I have long preferred to name it as he did, despite the differences between the elements that he considered were important in the commercial economy and the mass consumer societies that have followed. Just a thought.

[Read the ‘Division of Labour’ Blog, to which Robert Lawsonis a regular contributor, at: http://www.divisionoflabour.com/%5D

Image
Mr. Karl Marx wrote an excruciatingly boring little book that somehow managed to do so much evil and damage to the world once it was adopted as the modern Bible by the Democrats~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An incredibly long, lugubrious and awkward book~~accompanied by an equally endless and  inane analysis~~from one of Mr. Karl Marx’s Democratic admirers~~
das-kapital-bank
Commence~~libcom.org~~Pic and attending commentary credits~~

Marx’s book on capital, like Plato’s book on the state, like Machiavelli’s Prince and Rousseau’s Social Contract: owes its tremendous and enduring impact to the fact that it grasps and articulates, at a turning point of history, the full implications of the new force breaking in upon the old forms of life.

All the economic, political, and social questions, upon which the analysis in Marx’s Capital theoretically devolves, are today world-shaking practical issues, over which the real-life struggle between great social forces, between states and classes, rages in every corner of the earth. Karl Marx proved himself to posterity to be the great forward-looking thinker of his age, in as much as he comprehended early on how decisive these questions would be for the approaching world-historical crisis. But even as great a thinker as Marx could not have grasped these questions theoretically and incorporated them in his work, had they not already been posed, in some form or another, as actual problems in the real life of his own epoch.

Fate treated this German veteran of ’48 in a peculiar way. He was banished, by both republican and absolutist governments, from the original context of his practical activity, and thus removed in good time from the narrow, backward conditions of Germany, and projected into the historical mainstream which was to be the setting for his real achievements. By the age of 30 Karl Marx had achieved, through his study of Hegel’s thought, a profound and comprehensive, albeit philosophical, grasp of life. But now, precisely in consequence of the forcible transposition of his gelds of operations, before and after the failed revolution of 1848, he was able, during his successive periods of exile, firstly in Belgium and France, and later in England, to come into immediate theoretical and practical contact with the most progressive developments in the real life of that time.

On the one hand there were the French socialist and communist movements, advancing beyond the achievements of the great jacobin- bourgeois revolution towards new, proletarian objectives; and on the other hand the fully developed structure of modern capitalist production, with its corresponding relations of production and distribution, which had emerged in England from the Industrial Revolution of 1770-1830. These elements of Marx’s vision – French political history, English economic development, the modern labour movement – all ‘transcended’ the contemporary scene in Germany, and Marx devoted decades of thought and research to the incorporation of these elements into his scientific work, especially into his,magnum opus, Capital. It was this combination of sustained energy and wide-ranging vision that lent to Capital the extraordinary vitality by virtue of which it remains entirely Qtopical’ in the present day. One might even say that in many respects it is only now beginning to come into its own. ‘The ultimate objective of this work’ is, in the words of the author, ‘to reveal the economic laws of motion of modern society.’ This statement already implies that Capital is not meant to be simply a contribution to the traditional academic study of economics. It is true, of course, that the book did play an important part in the development of economic theory, and has left its imprint on the tech- nical literature of the subject right up to the present day. But Capital is also, as its subtitle declares, a ‘critique of Political economy’, and this rubric signifies much more than the adoption of a critical attitude towards the individual doctrines advanced by this or that economic theorist; in Marx’s terms it signifies a critique of political economy as such. Looked at from the standpoint of Marx’s historical-materialist approach, political economy is, after all, not just a theoretical system involving true or false propositions. It embodies in itself an aspect of historical reality – or, to be more precise, it is one aspect of the ‘modern bourgeois mode of production’ and of the social formation that is built on it, one aspect, that is, of the particular historical reality which is critically analysed in Capital from its inception through its development and demise to its eventual transition to new and higher forms of production and society. lf we think in terms of the academic categories we are used to today, then Marx’s Capital appears to be more an historical and sociological, rather than an economic theory.

But even this revised definition of Marx’s work, and the series of similar qualifications we might add, do not succeed in characterising the full range and depth of the Marxian scientific method and its subject matter. Capital does not belong to any one discipline, but neither is it a kind of philosophical allsorts, for it deals with ‘a quite definite object from a quite particular standpoint, In this respect Marx’s work may be compared with the famous book by Darwin on the Origin of Species. Just as Darwin discovered the laws of development of organic nature, so Marx revealed the laws governing the course of human history. Marx approached these laws in two ways : on the one hand he outlined the general historical law of development, which is called ‘historical materialism’, and on the other he propounded the particular law of motion of the modern capitalist mode of production and the bourgeois society it gives rise to. The comparison of Marx with Darwin is not based simply on the pure coincidence of historical dates (though it is true that the Origin of Species and the first part of Marx’s work on capitalism, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, both appeared in 1859). As Marx himself Suggested, and as Engels made clear in his speech at Marx’s graveside, the comparison expresses a much deeper connection than this. In one of those profound and exquisite, though often seemingly digressive footnotes with which Marx almost overloads Capital, he relates how Darwin first drew his attention to the ‘history of natural technology’ that is, to the ‘formation of plant and animal organisms as installments for the sustenance of plant and animal life’. And he poses the question

‘Does not the history of the productive organs of social man, of organs that are the material basis of all social organization, deserve equal attention? And would not such a history be easier to compile, since, as Vico says, human history differs from natural history in this, that we have made the former but not the latter?’

These remarks express perfectly the relation between Darwin and Marx, stressing not only what they have in common, but also the distinction between them. Darwin’s study deals with natural history in the narrower sense, whereas Marx deals with a practical socio- historical developments which man not only experiences, but also shapes. Marx, however, unlike some of the modern obscurantists and demi-theologians of the so-called ‘humanities’, did not draw the conclusion that the description and study of man’s social life permits a lesser degree of intellectual and empirical rigour and a higher ratio of subjectivity than the natural sciences themselves. Marx was inclined to work from the opposite position, and explicitly set himself the task of outlining the economic development of society as a ‘natural-historical’ process.

We are not yet in a position to judge whether, or to what extent, Marx carried out this imposing project in Capital. That could only be decided in some future age, when, as Marx anticipated, his theory would no longer He subjected to the ‘prejudices of so-called public opinion’, but would be assessed on the basis of a truly ‘scientific criticism’. As things stand at present, however, this is still a long- term prospect.

While it might be impertinent to attempt such a definitive judgement at the present time, it is appropriate to provide this edition of Marx’s Capital with an indication at least of the rather peculiar relationship atween the realized and the unrealized portions of the work.

Marx’s work on economics presents itself to us today as a gigantic torso – and this aspect is not likely to be substantially altered by the appearance of the hitherto unpublished material still extant. Let us leave out of account for now the very broad outlines of Marx’s earlier drafts, in which the critique of political economy is not yet isolated from the critique of law and government, from ideological farms in general, is not yet distinguished as an autonomous and primary object of investigation – even then there remains an enormous gap between what Marx planned and what he actually carried out in his work.

In 1850 Marx settled in London where ‘The enormous material on the history of political economy which is accumulated in the British Museum; the favourable view which London offers for the observation of bourgeois society; finally the new stage of development which the latter seemed to have entered with the discovery of gold in California and Australia’ decided him to begin his political-economic studies again ‘from the very beginning’. In the period after his arrival in London Marx commented twice on the overall plan of the political- economic work he had in mind, firstly in the manuscript of the ‘General Introduction’, written down in 1857, but subsequently ‘suppressed’ until Kautsky published it in the Neue Zeit in 19039 and secondly in the ‘preface’ to the Critique of Political Economy, which made its appearance in 1859. Here is the first of these two comments : ‘The order of treatment must manifestly be as follows : first, the general abstract definitions which are more or less applicable to all forms of society. . . . Second, the categories which go to make up the inner organization of bourgeois society and constitute the founda- tions of the principal classes; capital, wage-labour, landed property; their mutual relations; city and country; the three great social classes, the exchange between them; circulation, credit (private). Third, the organization of bourgeois society in the form of a state, considered in relation to itself ; the ‘unproductive’ classes; taxes; public debts; public credit; population; colonies; emigration. Fourth, the inter- national organization of production; international division of labour; international exchange; import and export; rate of exchange. Fifth, the world market and crises’.

Two years later Marx published ‘the first two chapters of the first section of the first book on capital’ as a separate part (some 200 pages long ) entitled A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. He began the Preface to this work with these words : ‘I consider the system of bourgeois economy in the following order : capital, landed property, wage-labour; state, foreign trade, world market. Under the first three heads I examine the conditions of the existence of the three great classes which make up modern bourgeois society; the connection of the three remaining heads is self-evident.’ Only a fragment of the first half of these comprehensive plans is realized in the work on capital that was actually completed, partly by Marx himself, and partly by others. At the end of 1862, when he had already decided that the ‘continuation’ of the Critique of Political Economy should be published by itself under the title Capital, he wrote to Kugelmann that this new book (by which he meant not only Volume I of Capital as we know it today, but all the other parts too ! ) ‘really only deals with those matters which should form the third chapter if the first section, namely capital in general’. For a variety of reasoner some internal to the work and others extraneous, Marx decided at about this time to cut down appreciably on the overall plan which he had maintained virtually unaltered up until then. He decided that he would present the whole of the material in three or four books, the first of which would deal with the ‘productive Process of Capital’, the second with the ‘process of Circulation’, the third with the ‘structure of the Overall Process’ and the fourth with the ‘History of the Theory’.

Marx himself only completed one of these four books of Capital. It appeared as Volume I of Capital in 1867 and a second edition followed in 1872. After Marx’s death his friend and literary collaborator Friedrich Engels pieced together the second and third woks on the basis of the available manuscripts. They were published as Volumes 2 and 3 of Capital in 1885 and 1894. There are also the three volumes entitled Theories of Surplus Value, which were published by Kautsky between 1905 and 1910, again on the basis of Marx’s manuscripts, and which may. be thought in a sense to stand for the fourth book of Capital. Strictly speaking, however, they are not a continuation of Capitals but an incomplete version of an older manuscript which Marx wrote as early as August 1861-June 1863. This was not intended to be a part of Capital but forms the continuation of the Critique oj Political Economy of 1859. Engels himself planned to publish the critical part of this manuscript as Volume I v of Capital after excising the numerous passages he had already used to build out Volumes 2 and 3. But what Marx does in Volume I runs counter to this intention. Not even that part of the manuscript that had already been published in A Contribution to the Critique of Political economy is taken over unaltered, but is rather submitted to a thorough revision in the first three chapters of the new work. One of the most important tasks of future editors of Marx will be to pro- vide a complete and unabridged version of the manuscript of the Contribution to a Critique of Political Economic for this is the earliest central exposition of Marx’s system of thought, and indeed the only one that he ever completed himself . Although there is an enormous gap between the project that was contemplated and the work that was completed, Marx’s Capital, even the first volume on its own, impresses us both in form and content, as a finished and rounded whole. We should not imagine that while Marx was at work on Volulme 1 he saw the other volumes completed in his mind’s eye, and deployed in the first book a strictly apportioned one-quarter of all his thoughts on the subject. This conception is discredited by something that Rosa Luxemburg emphasized 30 years ago in an excellent study of Capital. She wrote that decades before the appearance at last of the third volume in 1894, ‘Marx’s doctrine as a whole had been popularized and accepted’ in Germany and in other countries ‘on the basis of the first volume’, . which revealed ‘not a trace of theoretical incompleteness’.

There is little sense in trying to solve this apparent contradiction atween the content and the reception of Capital by saying that this first volume already gives a complete picture of the relation between the two great classes in modern bourgeois society, the capitalist class and the working class, as well as describing the overall tendency of present-day capitalist development towards socialization of the means of production, while the questions that are dealt with in the subsequent volumes, the circulation of capital and the distribution of the whole surplus value between the different forms of capitalists’ income (such as profit, interest, ground-rent, and trading proft), are of less theoretical and practical relevance for the working class. Quite apart from the fact that Marx’s theory in Capital states that there are three and not two basic classes in bourgeois society (capitalists, wage-labourers and landowners), it would be an unthinkable over-simplification of the theory to say that it derives the laws of motion and development of modern society solely from the sphere of production and the convicts and contradictions arising in this sphere, and that it does not take account in this connection of the process of circulation too, and of the structural integration of both aspects in the overall process.

The real answer to the problem is that the investigation Marx undertakes in the first volume is only formally limited to the productive process of capitalism. In actual fact, in his treatment of this aspect, Marx grasps and portrays the totality of the capitalist mode of production, and the bourgeois society that emerges from it. He describes and connects all its economic features, together with its legal, political, religious, artistic, and philosophical – in shorty ideological – manifestations. This comprehensiveness is a necessary consequence of the dialectical mode of description, an Hegelian legacy which Marx appropriates formally intact, despite his materialistic ‘reversal’ of its philosophical-idealist content. The dialectic may be compared with the modern ‘axiomatic ‘method of the mathematical sciences, in so far as this method uses an apparently logical-constructve procedure to deduce from certain simple principles the results already arrived at through detailed research.

This is not the place to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of applying the dialectical method to political economy. Suffice it to say that this method is used, with consumate skill, in Capital, and that its employment for an examination of the process of production implies the necessity of including in this investigation the whole of the capitalist mode of production and the bourgeois society based upon it. Now there are a slumber of difficulties which arise for the uninitiated reader precisely out of the peculiar ‘simplicity’ of the conceptual development of the first few chapters of Capital. These difficulties are bound up with the dialectical mode of description, and I shall deal with them later on.

This, then, is the most important reason why the first volume of Capital shows ‘no trace of theoretical incompleteness’, why this, the only part of the work finished of by Marx himself, gives, despite the author’s explicit and oft-reiterated limitation of its formal purview to the ‘productive process of capitalism’, a much greater impression of unity than does the complete work formed by the addition of the subsequent volumes. But there is another reason too, and that is the artistic form which Volume 1 achieves as a whole, in spite of a style that often seems stiff and unnecessarily constrained. Marx once wrote a placatory letter to Engels in response to his friend’s good humoured complaints about the protracted delay in producing this Work; the words of this letter are applicable not only to Capital, but also to some of Marx’s historical works, especially The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte :

‘Whatever shortcomings they may have, the merit of my writings is that they are an artistic whole, and that can only be attained by my method of never having them printed until they lie before me as a whole. This is impossible with the Jacob Grimm method, which is in general more suited to works not diametrically constructed.’ (Marx : Letter to Engels, 31st July, 1865)

Capital presents itself to us then, as an fantastic whole’ or a ‘scientifc work of art’ : it has a strong and compelling attraction for any reader who comes to it free from prejudice, and this esthetic attraction will help the beginner to overcome both the alleged and the genuine difficulties of the wok. Now there is something rather peculiar about these difficulties. With one qualification, which will be elaborated in due course, we can safely say that Capital contains, for the kind of audience Marx had in mind (‘I assumme of course they will be readers who want to learn something new, who will be prepared to think while they are reading’), fewer difficulties than any of the more-or-less widely read manuals on economics. The reader who is at all capable of thinking for himself if hardly likely to meet serious difficulties, even with terminology. Some sections, such as chapters 10 and 13-15, on (The Working Day’, ‘co-operation’, ‘Division of Labour’, and ‘Machinery and Modern Industry’, and Part 8 on ‘Primitive Accumulation’, all of which Marx assured Kugelmann would be ‘immediately comprehensible’ to his wife, are indeed so predominantly descriptive and narrative – and the description is so vivid, the narration so gripping – that they can be immediately understood by anyone; and these chapters together constitute more than two-fifths of the whole book.

There are a number of other chapters, however, which do not belong to this descriptive type, and yet are virtually as easy to read, besides having the additional merit that they lead us directly to the heart of Capital. That is why I want to recommend to the beginner an approach that diverges somewhat from Marx’s advice on a suitable start for the ladies (wherein we may sense a certain deference to the prejudices of his own time ! ). I hope that the approach I recommend will enable the reader to attain a full understanding of Capital just as readily, or even more readily than if he were to begin with the difficult opening chapters.

It is best, I think, to begin with a thorough perusal of Chapter 7 on ‘The Labour Process and the Process of Producing Surplus-value’. There are, it is true, a number of preliminary difficulties to be overcome, but these are all internal to the matter in hand, and not due. as are many difficulties in the preceding chapters, to a really rather unnecessary artificiality in the presentation. What is said here refers directly and immediately to palpable realities, and in the first instance to the palpable reality of the human work process. We encounter straightaway a clear and stark presentation of an insight essential for the proper understanding of Capital – the insight that this real-life work process represents, under the present regime of the capitalist mode of production, not only the production of use-values for human eventually through the difficult parts as well as the simpler passages of the book should save this part up until he really does come to the end of Part 7, for Part 8 was intended by Marx as a final crowning touch to his work.

There are a number of reasons why this is advisable. In the first place the preceding chapters of Part 7 may also be classed by and large with the less arduous portions of the book, and so present no special hinderance. Furthermore, the beginner who comes to the chapter on ‘primitive accumulation’ too soon may well be misled into thinking, along with Franz Oppenheimer and many others, that the Marxian theory of primitive accumulation is the theory of Capital, or at best its essential basis, whereas in fact it is merely one component of the theory, indispensable but not predominant within it. It seems advisable therefore to read Parts 7 and 8 in the order in which they stand, and then, having achieved a provisional grasp of the general shape of the whole work, to proceed with a closer study of its detail.

There are two points above all which must be elucidated if we are to gain a deeper understanding of Capital. We have already touched upon the first point if mentioning that mistaken estimate of the significance of Part 8 in the overall theoretical framework of the book – a misjudgement that has wide currency both within and outside the Marxist camp. It is not just a question of this part however, but also of a number of other sections scattered throughout the book, and not developed into chapters in their own right. Among these passages are the fourth section of Chapter 1, on the ‘Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret thereof’, the third section of Chapter 9, on ‘senior’s ‘last Hour” ‘ the sixth section of Chapter 15 on ‘The Theory of Compensation’, and, perhaps most intimately connected with 8on ‘primitive Accumulation’, the two sections of Chapter 24 on the ‘Erroneous Conception by Political Economy of Reproduction on a Progressively Increasing Scale’ and ‘The So-called Labour Fund’. All these discussions, and a large number of other similar passages too, have this in common, that they represent a critique of political economy – in a more specific sense than that in which the whole work purports to be, as its subtitle declares, ‘A Critique of Political Economy’. The critical intention of these passages is immediately obvious from the kind of language they use, from their explicit reference to the ‘misconceptions’ of individual economists (like Senior) or of political economy as such, and from their description of the matter in hand as a ‘secret’ or as something ‘so-called’, masking something really quite different.

We may call these passages ‘critical’ then, in the narrower sense of the word, but on closer consideration we and that they in turn divide into two different types of rather unequal importance. The first type is that of ordinary academic criticism, where Marx, from his superior theoretical position, entertains himself and his readers with gleeful devastation of the aberrant quasi-scientfic theories of post- classical bourgeois economists, To this category belong such passages as the brilliant demolition in Chapter 9 of the ‘theory’ of the well- known Oxford Professor Nassau Senior, on the importance of ‘the last hour’s work’, and the refutation of another ‘theory’ discovered by the same ‘earnest scholar’ and still surviving today in bourgeois economics, the ‘theory’ of the so-called ‘abstinence’ of capital. These parts of Marx’s economic critique are among the most enjoyable passages in the book, and usually conceal beneath their satirical-polemical exterior a considerable fund of pertinent and significant insights, conveyed to the reader in what we might call a ‘playful’ manner. Strictly speaking however, these passages do not belong to the essential content of Capital : they might appropriately have been incorporated in the fourth book Marx projected, on the ‘history of the theory’, of which he wrote to Engels (31st July, 1865) that it was to have a more ‘historical-literary’ character in comparison with the theoretical parts (ie, the first three books), and that it would be the easiest part for him to write, since Tall the problems are solved in the first three books, and this last one is therefore more of a recapitulation in historical form’. The second category of specifically ‘critical’ arguments in Capital are of a quite different kind. There are a considerable clamber of passages here which are less bulky but extremely important as regards their content. There is, for example, the delineation of that convict over the limits of the working day, a convict that cannot be resolved by reference to the laws of commodity exchange. Most important of all there is the final section of Chapter 1 on the ‘Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret thereof’, and the anal part of the whole work on ‘The So-called Primitive Accumulation’ and the ‘secret’ it contains. The Marxian ‘critique of Political Economy’ begins, as an economic theory, with the conceptual clarification of the real economic laws of motion and development of modern bourgeois-capitalist society.

This critique maintains the most scrupulous scientific consistency in order to follow through to their logical conclusion all the propositions advanced on this topic by the great economic theoreticians of the classical, ie revolutionary, period of bourgeois development, and con- cludes by exploding the very framework of these economic theories. Although in the section on the process of production and again, in the section on reproduction and accumulation, everything which can be said in economic terms about the origin of capital through surplus- value or unpaid labour is already stated, there still remains after all an unsolved problem to be elucidated, which proves in the last analysis, to be non-economic in character.

This problematic residue may be expressed in the following question : what was the origin, before all capitalist production began, of the first capital, and of the first relationship between the exploiting capitalist and the exploited wage-labourer? Already in the course of the economic analysis itself Marx had repeatedly pursued his line of enquiry almost to the point of posing this question – only to break of there each time; but now, in the final part of his work, he returns to this problem. First of all his critique destroys with merciless thoroughness the answer given to this ‘ultimate question’ of bourgeois economics not only by the straightforward champions of capitalist class-interests (Marx calls them the ‘vulgar economists’), but also by such ‘classical economists’ as Adam Smith.’ Marx shoFs that theirs was not an (economic’ answer at all, but simply purported to be historical, and was in fact nothing more than legendary. Finally he addresses himself, wità the same merciless and methodical realism to this ‘economically’ unsolved and still open-ended question. He too proposes not an economic, but an historical answer – although in the last analysis his solution is not a theoretical one at all, but rather a practical one that infers from past and present history a developmental tendency projecting into the future. It is only when we appreciate clearly the way in which Marx deals with the question of ‘primitive Accumulation’ that we can understand the proper relation of this final part to the foregoing parts of his book, and also the position within Part 8 of the penultimate chapter, which concludes the historical examination of the origin and development of the acculturation of capital with a treatment of the ‘Historical Tendency of Capitalist Accumulation’. These considerations also make clear the compelling methodological reasons why ‘The So- Called Primitive Accumulation’ belongs at the end, and not at the beginning or in the middle of Capital. It was for these reasons that Marx positioned it there, and, for the same reasons, the reader too should save it up until the end.

The other point which has still to be elucidated, concerns not tie connection between the individual sections and chapters, but the way in which the thoughts and concepts themselves are developed. It also concerns the few really grave difficulties raised by certain parts of Marx’s work which we have not discussed yet – difficulties experi- enced not only by the untutored, but also by those who are at home in the subject, but are not philosophically trained. It is these difficulties that are chiefly responsible for the oft-reiterated complaint about the ‘obscurity of Capital’. The passages in question are, above all, the third section of the first chapter on the ‘Form of Value’, which we have already mentioned briefy, and one or two passages closely con- nected with it in Chapter 3, dealing with ‘Money’. Then there are a few other, rather less difficult parts, among them Chapters 9, 11 and 12, which we have also mentioned before, considered now in their proper relation to Chapters 16 to 18 on ‘Absolute and Relative Surplus Value’, which are often regarded superficially as a simple recapitula- tion of Chapters 9, 11, and 12. Al1 these difficulties are integrally bound up with what is called the ‘dialectical method’.

The explanation Marx himself gave (in the Afterword to the second German Edition’) of the importance of this method for ‘the structure and exposition of Capital, has often been misconstrued – whether honestly or not – to mean simply that in the formulation of his work, and in particular of the chapter on the theory of value, Marx flirted here and there’ with the peculiar mode of expression of the Hegelian dialectic. When we look closer however, we recognise that even the explanation given by Marx himself goes much further than that. It implies in fact that he fully espoused the rational kernel (if not the mystical shell) of the dialectical method. For all the empirical stringency which Marx, as a scientific investigator brought to his observation of the concrete reality of socio-economic and historical facts, the reader who lacks a strict philosophical training will still find the very simple concepts of commodity, value, and form of value, rather schematic, abstract, and unreal at first sight. Yet these concepts are supposed to anticipate entirely, to contain within themselves, like a germ as yet undeveloped, the concrete reality of the whole process of being and becoming, genesis, development, and decline of the present- day mode of production and social order – and the concepts do indeed anticipate these realities. It is only that the connection is obscure or even invisible to the common eye. But the one who is aware of the connection, the author himself, the ‘demiurge’ who has re-created reality in the form of these concepts, refuses to betray the secret of his knowledge at the outset. This is true above all of the concept of lvalue’. It is well known that Marx invented neither the idea nor the expression, but took it ready-made from classical bourgeois economics, especially from Ricardo and Smith. But he treated the concept critically, and applied it, with a realism quite untypical of the classical political economists, to the actually given and changing reality around him. For Marx, in contrast with even Ricardo, the socio-historical reality of the relations expressed in this concept, is an indubitable and palpable fact.

‘The unfortunate fellow does not see,’ wrote Marx in 1868, about a critic of his concept of value, ‘that, even if there were no chapter on ‘value’ in my book, the analysis of the real relationships which I give would contain the proof and demonstration of the real value relation. The nonsense about the necessity of proving the concept of value arises from complete ignorance both of the subject dealt with and of the method of science. Every child knows that a country which ceased to work, i will not say for a year, but for a few weeks, would die. Every child knows, too, that the mass of products corresponding to the different needs require different and quantitatively determined masses of the total labour of society. That this necessity of distributing social labour in definite proportions cannot be done away with by the particular joint of social production, but can only change the form it assumes is self-evident. No natural laws can be done away with. What can change, in changing historical circumstances, is the form in which these laws operate. And the forms in which this proportional division of labour operates, in a state of society where the interconnection of social labour is manifested in the private exchange of the individual products of labour, is precisely the exchange-value of these products.’

Compare this passage, however, with the first few pages of Capital, and consider what immediate impression these pages make on the reader who knows nothing as yet of the realistic (background’ to the author’s arguments. Initially, it is true, there are a slumber of concepts introduced here which are taken from the ‘phenomenal’ realm, from the experience of certain facts about capitalist production. Among these concepts is the one that expresses the quantitative relationship of various kinds of ‘use-values’ being exchanged for one another, the idea, that is, of ‘exchange-value’. This empirically-coloured notion of the contingent exchange relations of use-values promptly gives way however, to something quite new, arrived at by abstraction from the use- values of the commodities, something which only appears in the ‘ex- change relationship’ of commodities, or in their exchange-value. It is this ‘immanent’ or inner ‘value’, arrived at by disregarding the phenomenon, which forms the conceptual starting point for all the subsequent deductions in Capital. The progress of our investigation,’ declares Marx explicitly, ‘will show that exchange-value is the only form in which the value of commodities can manifest itself or is expressed. For the present, however, we have to consider the nature of value independently of this, its form.’

Even when this progression is followed through we are not returned to anything like an empirical, immediately given phenomenon. We move instead, through an absolute masterpiece of dialectical conceptual development unsurpassed even by Hegel, from the ‘Form of Value’ to the ‘Money Form’, and then proceed to the brilliant, and, for the uninitiated, correspondingly difficult, section on the ‘Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret thereof’. Only here do we learn that ‘value’ itself, unlike the corporeal commodities and the corporeal owners of commodities, is not something physically real, nor does it express, like the term ‘use-value’, a simple relationship between an available or manufactured object and a human need. ‘Value’ reveals itself instead as an ‘inter-personal relationship concealed beneath a reified exterior’, a kind of relationship integral to a definite historical mode of production and form of society. It was unknown, in this obscured and reified form, to all previous historical epochs, modes of production, and forms of society, and it will be just as superfluous in the future to societies and modes of production no longer based on producing commodities.

This example illustrates the structure of Marx’s descriptions of things. Not only has that structure the intellectual and esthetic advantage of an overwhelming force and insistence; it is also eminently suited to a science that does not submerge the preservation and further development of the present-day capitalist economic and social orders but is aimed instead at its subversion in the course of struggle and its revolutionary overthrow. The reader of Capital is not given a single moment for the restful contemplation of immediately given realities and connections; everywhere the Marxian mode of presentation points to the immanent unrest in all existing things. This method, in short,demonstrates its decisive superiority over all other approaches to the understanding of history and society in that it includes in its compre- hension and affirmative recognition of the existing state of things, at the same time also, the recognition of the negation of that state, of its inevitable breaking up; it regards every historically developed form as in fluid movement, and therefore takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary existence; it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and revolutionary’.

Anyone who wants to derive from his reading of Capital not just a few glimpses of the workings and development of modern society, but the whole of the theory contained in the book will have to come to terms with this essential characteristic of Marx’s mode of presentation. We should be deceiving ourselves if we were to think we could find a less strenuous access to capital by reading it, so to speak, ‘back- wards’ rather than from beginning to end. Not that it would be impossible to read it like that. If we did, we should certainly be spared, for example, the trouble of coming to grips in Chapter 11 with a number of laws concerning the relation between ‘Rate and Mass of Surplus-value’, all of which are valid only if we disregard the possibility of ‘Relative Surplus-value’ – which is not even raised until the next chapter. We should be spared the discovery in Chapter 16 alter working through a similarly ‘abstracted’ treatment of the laws of relative surplus-value in the preceding chapters, that ‘from one standpoint any distinction between absolute and relative surplus-value appears illusory’ inasmuch as it transpires that ‘relative surplus-value is absolute, and absolute surplus-value is relative’; and the discovery then that both categories in fact merely represent abstract elements of real, concrete surplus-value, – which reveals itself in turn,as nothing more than one, highly abstract factor in the overall descriptive development leading up towards the actual phenomena of the economic reality around us.

All this we could avoid. But it is precisely upon this stringent method that the formal superiority of the Marxian analysis depends. It is a method which leaves nothing out of account, but which refuses to accept things uncritically on the strength of a superficial common- or-garden empiricism soaked in prejudice, If we cancel out this feature of Capital we are left in fact with the quite unscientific perspective of the vulgar economics Marx so bitterly derided. Vulgar economics ‘theorises’ by consistently invoking appearances against the laws that underlie them, and seems in practice only to defend the interests of that class whose power is ensconced in the immediately given reality of the present moment.: It seems not to know, or not to want to know, that beneath the surface of this immediate reality there lies a profounder dimension, more difficult to grasp, but just as real; a dimension that embraces not only the given reality itself, but also its continual alteration, its origins, development and demise, its transition to new forms of life in the future, and the laws governing all these changes and developments. It may well be advisable all the same, even for the reader who is prepared in principle to submit to the dialectical progression of the argument in Capital, to scan a few pages of Chapter 16 before reading Chapter 11. This will reveal in advance something of the tendency of the argument in Chapter 11, a tendency we find on closer inspection to have begun much earlier even than this.

We have adduced a number of examples to illustrate the ‘dialectical’ relationship between an initially rather abstract treatment of a given object or nexus, and the subsequent, increasingly concrete, treatment of the self-same phenomenon. This mode of development, which characterizes the whole structure of Marx’s Capital, seems to reverse, or to ‘stand on its head’ the order in which given realities are ‘naturally’ regarded by the non-scientific observer. There is, as Marx declares repeatedly, no concept of wages in his analysis before the nineteenth chapter; there is only the concept of the value (and sometimes the price) of the ‘commodity labour-power’. Not until Chapter 19 is the new concept of ‘wages’, which ‘appears on the surface of bourgeois society as the price of labour’, ‘deduced’ from the preparatory concept.

‘This dialectical mode of presentation is also connected with something else which the diametrically uninitiated (in other words the vast majority of present-day readers, whatever their academic qualifcation) find difficult to understand at first. This is Marx’s use, throughout Capital and in his other works too, of the concept and principle of ‘contradiction’, especially the contradiction between what is called ‘essence’ and what is called ‘appearance’. ‘Al1 science,’ said Marx, ‘would be superfluous if the outward appearance of things coincided exactly with their essence,’ The reader will have to get used to this basic principle of Marxian science. He will have to get used to the sort of comment that is often made in Capital, to the elect that this or that ‘contradiction’ shown to be present in some concept, or law, or principle (in, for example, the concept of ‘variable capital’), does not invalidate the use of the concept, but merely ‘expresses a contradiction inherent in capitalist production’. In many such cases a closer inspec- tion reveals that the alleged ‘contradiction’ is not really a contradiction at all, but is made to seem so by a symbolically abbreviated, or other- wise misleading, mode of expression; in the case we have just men- tioned of ‘variable capital’ this is pointed out by Marx himself . It is not always possible, however, to resolve the contradictions so simply. Where the contradiction endures, and the anti-dialectician persists in his objection to it, even as function of a Strictly Systematic logical- deductive treatment of concepts, then this opponent will have to be placated with Goethe’s remark on metaphorical usage, which Mehring refers to in his interesting study of Marx’s style :

‘Do not forbid me use of metaphor; I could not else express my thoughts at all’

Marx employs the ‘dialectical’ device at many crucial junctures in his work , highlighting, in this way, the real-life conflicts between social classes, or the contrast between the realities of social existence and the consciousness of men in society, or the contrast between a deep-going historical tendency and the more superficial, countervailing tendencies which compensate, or even over-compensate for it in the short-run. These tensions are all pictured as ‘contradictions’, and this can be thought of as a sophisticated kind of metaphorical usage, illuminating the profounder connections and inter-relation between things. Exactly the same could be said of that other dialectical concept of the ‘con- version’ of an idea, an object, or a relationship into its (dialectical) opposite, the conversion, for instance, of quantity into quality. This is not used so often as the concept of contradictions but it occurs at a number of decisively important points.

A number of appendices are provided to assist the practical use of this edition of Capital. These include notes on English coins, weights and measures etc mentioned in the book. But in addition to these we have also included an appendix of great theoretical importance. This con-tains Marx’s famous recapitulation of his political and economic studies and the general conclusions to which they had given rise, which appeared as the Preface to the Critique of Political Economy in 1859. This resumé provides a penetrating insight into Marx’s development as a student of society and economics, and into the essential features of his materialist conception of history. This was the conception he had worked through to in the mid-forties, leaving behind both Hegelian philosophical idealism and revolutionary-democratic political idealism. From 1845 he worked with Engels towards the completely matured version of this theory which received provisional formulation in the Preface of 1859.

Here Marx explicitly condems what is obvious anyway from the pages of Capital, that he did not remotely intend to turn his new disciple into a general philosophical theory of history that would be imposed from the outside upon the actual pattern of historical events. The same can be said of Marx’s conception of history as he himself said of his theory of value; that it was not meant to be a dogmatic principle but merely an original and more useful approach to the real, sensuous, practical world that presents itself to the active and reflective subject. Fifty years ago Marx parried certain mistaken conceptions about the method of Capital, entertained by the Russian sociologist and idealist Michailovsky, by explaining that Capital, and in particular the conclusions arrived at in Part 8 on Primitive Accumulation, was not intended as anything more than an historical outline of the origins and development of capitalism in Western Europe. The theories propounded in Capital may be Said to possess a more general validity only in the sense that any searching, empirical analysis of a given natural or social structure has a relevance transcending its particular subject matter. This is the only conception of truth compatible with the principles of a strictly empirical science. The present development of European and of a few non-European countries already demonstrates to some extent that Capital may justly claim to possess such validity. The future will confirm the rest.

das-kapital-bank

End libcom.org~~Pic and commentary credits~~

An incredibly long, lugubrious and awkward book~~accompanied by an equally endless and  inane analysis~~from one of Mr. Karl Marx’s Democratic admirers~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~Lord Jesus~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

image002 (20)
John Daniel Begg~~Catholic Royalist Tool~~

I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~~praise Jesus~~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~~I am a Catholic Royalist~~in a practical sense~~I am a Classical Liberal~~a Gaullist~~a Rockefeller Republican~~in either sense~~my head is soon for the chopping block~~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~~

clip_image002MA9982782-0001


~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~


Rejoice and Glad!!


Amen~~


clip_image002MA9982782-0001


EX LIBRIS


~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


At


Washington, District of Columbia


United States

Saturday, 19th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

John Daniel Begg


At


Washington DC


JOHN DANIEL BEGG


PRESIDENT


john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting


4853 Sedgwick Street

North West

Washington, DC 20016-2323533

USA

Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro


http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs


http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

Tweets: @jtdbegg


http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

 
"Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
French actor~~Alain Delon
 

Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

 

 das-kapital-bank

~~You could hold open a very big door with this scintillating Blockbuster~~

Last night, I had occasion to meet a little university girl who~while in deep need of a new seamstress and barber~was nonetheless~strangely pretty~in a way I’ve trouble properly relating to you with just my pen and no pictures~turns out she was a Democrat~how could I have missed all the road signs~and only wanted to talk to me to find out why “Capitalists such as yourself, Mr. Begg~so detest and mock Democrats and our icon, Mr. Karl Marx~when we are all just trying in our own little ways to help the poor people.”  I put the girl in a cab~on my dime~I thought that best~but not before her extracting a  promise that I would go home and “read up on our Mr. Marx~who knows~you might just like him and become a Democrat yourself, Mr. Begg”~I think I’ll give next Friday night out a miss~

Yes~Just~Why do intellectuals hate democracy? Let’s have a think~

Septem Artes Liberales, by Herrad of Landsberg (1180 AD).

 The classical liberal arts are seven in number and were the basic skills believed necessary for success in philosophical and theological studies. We can examine them using the 12th century monastery painting above. 

 PHILOSOPHY

 In the center of the painting above, we find lady Philosophy, to whom all the arts give service.  She sits as queen of the arts, with the philosophers Socrates and Plato under her feet.  In the upper right corner, we read,

“Seven fountains of wisdom flow from Philosophy which are called the seven liberal arts.  The Holy Spirit is the inventor of the seven liberal arts, which are: Grammar, Rhetoric, Dialectic, Music, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy.”

It is important to note that the seven liberal arts were held to be invented by the Holy Spirit.  It seems unlikely that the Holy Spirit would invent an educational system that was inferior to that invented by modern “expert”.  The changes in education that took place in the early 20th century were errors, not improvements.  Until we restore true education, we will not cease to reproduce the results.  We will consider the seven liberal arts surrounding philosophy beginning at the top.

 GRAMMAR

 Grammar was called by the ancients the Janua Artium, the “gateway of the arts”.  Grammar holds a book and a rod (scopae) probably for punishing young students.  Above Grammar, we read,

 Per me quivis discit, vox, littera, syllaba quid est..

By me does anyone learn what is the voice, the letter and the syllable.

 RHETORIC

 Moving clockwise from Grammar, we find Rhetoric, holding a tablet and stilus.  Rhetoric is the art of finding the means of persuading an audience.  Above her we read,

 Causarum vires per me, rhetor alme, requires.

By me, kind Rhetorician, you will seek the force of motives/cases.

 St. Augustine addressed the importance of Rhetoric best:

“Who will dare to say that truth is to take its stand unarmed against falsehood.  Since the faculty of eloquence is available for both sides…why do not good men study to engage it on the side of truth?”      

                                         -On Christian Doctrine, book IV

DIALECTIC

 Next we find Dialectic, or Logic holding a dog’s head.  Some believe the dog to be used in opposition to the wolf typically associated with heresy.  Above Dialectic it is written

 Argumenta sino concurrere more canino.

I allow arguments to battle in the manner of a dog.

 MUSIC

 Fourth is Music, playing the cithara, lyre and organistrum.  Above her, we read,

 Musica sum late doctrix artis variatae.

I am Music far and wide the teacher of the arts of variation.

 ARITHMETIC

 Fourth is Arithmetic, the art of counting objects at rest.  Here she is seen counting beads on a rope.  Her banner reads,

 Ex numeris consto, quorum discrimina monstro.

From the numbers I exist, of which I teach the differences.

 GEOMETRY

 Sixth is Geometry, the art of measuring objects at rest rightly.  Geometry is seen measuring the earth with a compass.  Over Geometry we read,

 Terrae mensuras per multas dirigo curas.

By many pains, I direct the measurements of the earth.

 ASTRONOMY

 Last is Astronomy, holding a bushel basket and numbering the stars.  The art of astronomy considers the relation between numbers and the laws of motion.  Above Astronomy we read,

 Ex astris nomen traho, per quae discitur omen.

I draw my name from the stars, by which the omen is learned.

 Lastly, what makes the classical liberal arts Christian is the spirit in which St. Augustine advised that they be pursued:

“It is well to warn studious and able young men, who fear God and are seeking for happiness in life, not to venture heedlessly upon the branches of learning beyond the pale of the Church of Christ as if these could secure for them the happiness they seek.”

I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Gaullist~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Beast~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans~Gaullists~or my most dear~Catholic Royalists~~

comme ca~~

The Politics of Literature: An interview with Nobel laureate Mario Vargas Llosa

by  Oct 10, 2013 7:21 AM EDT

Why do intellectuals hate democracy? Was Borges a fascist? The contentious 2010 Nobel Laureate Mario Vargas Llosa talks to Michael Moynihan about the big questions in literature and and politics.

      Vargas Llosa, the Peruvian novelist and winner of the 2010 Nobel Prize for Literature, is considered a political novelist because his politics aren’t the politics of most novelists. In the pantheon of modern Spanish-language fiction you’ll find a surplus of writers informed by radical thought—think Jose Saramago, Roberto Bolaño, Eduardo Galeano, Carlos Fuentes, and Gabriel Garcia Marquez. But Vargas Llosa is an outlier, an apostate from radicalism turned habitué of the classical liberal world, a former supporter of the Cuban Revolution transformed into an evangelist for free markets and free trade. And in a literary milieu charged by ideology, this

    means 

      something.

    70050820
    David Levenson/Getty

    It is difficult to separate Vargas Llosa’s politics from his fiction writing—the attentive reader will divine much about his worldview from his novels. But one needn’t read tea leaves because he is an unapologetically political figure. In 1990, Vargas Llosa embarked on a brief, ambitious, and ill-fated political career, running for president of Peru, an election he lost to the corrupt and thuggish Alberto Fujimori. These day he engages the political world with tub-thumping opinion columns in the Spanish daily El Pais.

    Back in May, I sat down with Vargas Llosa at Oslo’s Grand Hotel after he delivered a coruscating speech to the Oslo Freedom Forum on “literature, freedom, and power.” He speaks in heavily-accented English, but fluidly and lyrically, with both force and deliberation. He is thoughtful on topical political matters (“The idea of Europe is a great idea; it deserves to succeed…a counterpoint to the monsters; the United States and now China”) but expansive and polemical when discussing the intersection of politics and literature.

    The following is an edited and slightly condensed transcript of our conversation.

    You said in your Oslo Freedom Forum lecture that “good literature is always subversive.” It reminded me of Orwell’s essay “The Prevention of Literature,” where he attacked those writers in thrall to Soviet communism.

    You don’t perceive the subversiveness of literature when you live in a free society. When you live in a free society you have the feeling that literature is just entertainment. But when democracy disappears, when a totalitarian regime replaces democracy, you feel immediately how literature becomes a very important vehicle to say what you cannot say otherwise. And it’s an instrument to resist what you are facing. Authors are sometimes not aware of what they are accomplishing in an authoritarian society. Literature is a living demonstration that things are not going well in an authoritarian society.

    But this isn’t an advocation of didactic fiction.

    No, not at all. You can make experimental literature and have this subversive effect. And that is the reason why all dictatorships are so suspicious of literature. Otherwise, they would let literature flourish. No, they are always very worried; they want to control it, they establish censorship. On this, there is no exception. Fascist or communist, it is exactly the same. Control literature because there is some kind of danger there. And I think there is some kind of danger, even if it is not immediately identifiable. 

    What about the middle way between authoritarianism and dictatorship? I know you have written about Hugo Chavez, for instance, and one can get Mario Vargas Llosa’s books in Caracas.

    Oh, but with great difficulty. It is because in Caracas you still have a margin of freedom. But in Cuba—ask that Cuban journalist that is here [at the Oslo Freedom Forum]. He was telling me the way in which I am read in Cuba. It’s fantastic, you know? There are lists of people who want to read a certain book. Some times they are rented, sometimes it’s like a library, from individuals. [Dissident writer] Yoani Sanchez told me that she met her husband because she discovered that he had a novel of mine, The War of the End of the World. So she called him and said, “Is it true that you have a novel by Vargas Llosa?” He said, “Yes, but there is a list. But we can meet.” And they got married. I saw her recently and I said, “Is this story true?” She said, “Of course it is true. Thats why I am interested in what you are writing now. My sentimental future depends on it.”

    In open societies you have the impression that you are just enjoying literature, that it won’t have any affect on your life. But literature always has an affect on life, even if it’s not so visible. But when you have a dictatorship, this is so immediately visible. Literature becomes an instrument to resist, to communicate things. And this is so in right-wing dictatorships and in left-wing dictatorships. It becomes a non-conformist activity, reading becomes a risk. It’s very, very important to keep alive this thing that can’t be controlled, because literature can never be totally controlled. Television can. Cinema can.

    Why have so many novelists been swayed by dictatorship? From Gabriel Garcia Marquez to, say, the reaction of many French intellectuals to Solzhenitsyn.

    You remember what Camus wrote, that a very intelligent man in some areas can be stupid in others. In politics, intellectuals have been very stupid in many, many cases. They don’t like mediocrity. And democracy is an indication of mediocrity; democracy is to accept that perfection doesn’t exist in political reality. Everybody must make concessions in order to coexist peacefully and the result of this is mediocrity. But this mediocrity, history has demonstrated, is the most peaceful way to progress, prosperity, and to reduce violence. And intellectuals are much more prone to utopias.

    In politics, intellectuals have been very stupid in many, many cases. They don’t like mediocrity.

    After the collapse of communism, what is the utopian instinct amongst intellectuals and writers now?

    There is none. That is why they are so desperate and confused. You remember Foucault—who was one of the best thinkers of his generation—he supported Ayatollah Khomeini! He was so disappointed with communism that he decided that the Khomeini utopia was the right one! That gives you, I think, a very vivid example of the way in which some intellectuals detest democracy.

    In your case, I have seen more references to your politics—classical liberalism—than I have for many other novelists.

    But the reason is because I am an exception. There are so few writers and intellectuals who are classical liberals without any kind of shame [about their politics].

    Borges didn’t get the Nobel Prize because of his support for Pinochet. Were your politics an issue when you won the Literature Prize?

    Borges unfortunately did wrong things. He accepted the invitation to be decorated by Pinochet, which was a very big mistake. He did it not to make a kind of solidarity, a gesture for the dictatorship; he did it because he despised politics so much that he was prepared to….[trails off]. But I think it was a very, very bad mistake. He was very courageous during the Second World War when Argentina was in favor of fascism. He was a deep defender of the Allies.

    He detested Peronism in such a way that he became so infatuated with the military, which I think was also wrong. But he wasn’t a fascist. He was a conservative. But I don’t think his work is contaminated by these attitudes.

    Should it affect how we read his books, in the way it does with [Norwegian Nobel laureate and Nazi sympathizer] Knut Hamsun or Ezra Pound?

    Oh no, not at all. The literature of Borges is great literature that overcomes all types of political prejudices. He is one of the greatest writers of our times, one of the most original. And from the point of view of language, he has changed the Spanish literary language in the way that only writers like Cervantes have. It’s extraordinary because it’s a language in which emotions, sensations were much more important than ideas. For a long time, there was no writer in the Spanish-speaking world for whom ideas became as important as in Borges’s writing. He was an exception to a very strong tradition—precision, rationality. All this is new.

    What are you working on now?

    I finished a novel, El héroe discrete, that will be published in September in Spanish. It’s a novel set in contemporary Peru. It’s about the changes in Peru over the last ten years which are very, very important. A new middle class. All the new, successful entrepreneurs in Peru come from very poor, poor families—even peasant families. This is the background of the novel.

    Are you glad you didn’t win the Peruvian presidency?

    Now I am glad. I wasn’t when I lost. But I am very lucky. I wouldn’t have survived [had I won]. Certainly not. But it was a very interesting experience. It was pedagogical. I discovered how difficult it was to be honest and coherent in politics.

    Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

    Michael Moynihan is cultural news editor at The Daily Beast.

    For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

    I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Kos~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans or~my most dear~Catholic Royalists~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)
    I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~~praise Jesus~~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~~I am a Catholic Royalist~~in a practical sense~~I am a Classical Liberal~~a Gaullist~~a Rockefeller Republican~~in either sense~~my head is soon for the chopping block~~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~~

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    Friday, 18th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Gaullist~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Beast~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans~Gaullist~or my most dear~Catholic Royalists~


    Concept of the Catholic and Royal Army of America (CRAA)

    I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~I write night and day~yet~while impecunious~I am vastly overpaid~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~to my employer~in a fair system~under such circumstances~I should pay him~not he me~

     4 Monica BelluciHow can anyone possibly beGiorgia-Palmas-Top-of-the-Pops-4an atheist?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obx-8gn-ZW8

    Melissa_Satta_e_la_nuova_velina_Veridiana_003

    Breathtaking~~There have been likely more than 200 governments rise and fall in Italy since the War~~who the devil cares~~?

    NAT KING COLE LYRICS

    “Sweet Lorraine”

    (originally by Rudy Vallee)

    Just found joy
    I’m as happy as a baby boy, baby boy
    With another brand new choo-choo choy
    When I met my sweet Lorraine, Lorraine, Lorraine.

    A pair of eyes
    That are brighter than the summer sky
    When you see them, you’ll realize
    Why I love my sweet Lorraine.

    Now when it’s rainin’,8 Natalie Caldonazzo

    I don’t miss the sun
    Because it’s in my baby’s smile, whoa ho
    And to think that I’m the lucky one
    That will lead her down the aisle, whoa ho ho

    Each night I pray
    That no one will steal her heart away
    I can’t wait until that lucky day
    When I marry sweet Lorraine.

    Now when it’s rainin’
    I don’t miss the sun
    Because it’s in my baby’s smile, whoa ho
    And to think that I’m the lucky one
    That will lead her down the aisle, whoa ho ho

    Each night I pray
    That no one will steal her heart away
    I can’t wait until that lucky day
    When I marry sweet Lorraine.

    Monica-Belucci-Ima_2142136a

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Thank you, Nat~~

    3 Adriana Lima

    Enchanting~~I found her altogether indifferent to talk of government shutdowns~~either here at Washington~~or back home in Italia~~

    monica-beluci-171images (68)Monica-Bellucci-monica-bellucci-475896_1024_768

    “It doesn’t mean anything, beauty. I mean, if I see a beautiful man, maybe I am surprised for three seconds, but then if I speak with him and he’s completely stupid, I don’t see his beauty anymore.”
     
    – Monica Bellucci
     
    Washington, Aug 25 : Italian actress Monica Bellucci admits that she is tired of Hollywood’s glitz and glamour.

    The 44-year-old model insists that she’s tired of parties, and thus prefers to be at home with her four-year-old daughter and actor husband Vincent Cassel.

    “I am at a stage in my life where I if I don”t go out, I don”t feel I”m missing something. I get bored surrounded by people smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol,” Contactmusic quoted her as saying.

     Monica-Bellucci

    ~~ Monica Bellucci~~Always on Sunday~~

    Buona domenica a tutti!!

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Je suis~toujours pret~pour l’amour~The vainqueur, c’est l’impossibilité de gouverner~or so say the nice Italian girls I know here at Washington.  I know this~but~who cares if the city is governable~~I ask instead~~is Love, not government, possible~here among the ruins of the city of the dead ones? Just now, this early morning~I discovered that OH~~mais oui~c’est possible que..trouver l’amour~~Je ne sais pas comment ça s’est retrouvé là.~~nicole-minetti
    ibaVWD7azhVe4L-e1376517126924
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    image002 (20)
    I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    Thursday, 17th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    6 Anna Falchi

    ~~Good Morning~~Italia~~I so hate to watch you leave~~

    Je suis~~toujours pret~pour l’amour~~The vainqueur, c’est l’impossibilité de gouverner~~or so say the nice Italian girls I know here at Washington.  I know this~~but~~who cares if the city is ungovernable~~I ask instead~~is Love, not government, possible~~here among the ruins of the city of the dead ones? Just now, this early morning~~I discovered again that OH~~mais oui~~c’est possible que..trouver l’amour~~je ne sais pas comment ça s’est retrouvé là.

    ~~Good Morning~~Italia~~sweetest of dreams~~

    32 Angela Melillo

    I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~not he me~~

     

    Punt, Pass or Kick~Mitch McConnell and RG3~two Washington quarterbacks and their two, divergent, visions of the playing field~when pinned down in a deep swampland~facing enemy alligators~some boys run like the wind while~others choose to punt~the ball~away~***Memo to Mitchell~I am sure that RG3 can advise you that~when the other bench is applauding for you~you are playing a losing game***

    Robert Griffin III

    Robert Griffin III was willing to run against the Cowboys. (John McDonnell/The Washington Post)

    Griffin: Return to running ways was ‘what I had to do’

    By Mike Jones, Published: October 16 at 9:04 pmE-mail the writer

    This inclination on the part of RG3 to run~~as that is what he had to do~~is called by psychologists~~and other pinheaded types~~reverting to kind~~of which~~Mitch~~who~~in doing what he best does~~and had to do~~reverts to kind~~and tells us that is~~”called a punt.”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Mitch McConnell is pictured. | John Shinkle/POLITICO

    McConnell says his ability to cut a deal wasn’t hamstrung by his campaign. | John Shinkle/POLITICO

    Using a football analogy, McConnell said he got the ball on his own two-yard-line with a “shaky” offensive line and had to cut a last-ditch deal with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to end the crisis, no matter how unappealing to many in his party. Despite acting as a chief deal-maker in recent years during government crises, it was unclear the role McConnell would play until the final days of the bitter fight.

    “Given the card I was dealt at that point, what I had hoped to have achieved was to punt the ball to a better place on the field without raising taxes or busting the [spending] caps,” McConnell told POLITICO in a phone interview Thursday.

    “We got off track with a tactical error earlier starting in July and August that diverted our attention away from what was achievable,” McConnell said bluntly of the defund Obamacare push. “And so we’ll be back at it in January and February, which is why the best you can say is, ‘It’s a punt.’”

    Asked about Cruz’s contention Wednesday that had 46 Republican senators remained united they would have won the fight, McConnell said: “It’s pretty clear that 54 is more than 46 and the president of the United States thinks [Obamacare is] his greatest accomplishment.”

    “It was not a smart play. It had no chance of success,” McConnell said of the defund Obamacare push.

    In the interview, McConnell said his ability to cut a deal wasn’t hamstrung by his campaign; argued he would dig-in to ensure the next fiscal fight didn’t exceed the spending limits set forth in the 2011 Budget Control Act; and stated bluntly that shutting down the government won’t change Obamacare if Democrats continue to control the Senate and White House.

    As a leader of the party experiencing historic lows in the polls, with tea party activists unhappy with his deal and as he faces a potentially tough Democratic opponent in a state where he’s still unpopular, the shutdown fight could still haunt McConnell next year.

    But McConnell insisted any political pain for the GOP will be “short-term.” And he took a whack at his Democratic opponent, Alison Lundergan Grimes, saying there was “no chance” a freshman senator could craft the same kind of bargain the two leaders reached to bring an end to the shutdown and lifted the debt ceiling.

    McConnell’s handling of the fiscal crisis underscores the tricky political position he constantly found himself in throughout this fight: He couldn’t be seen as undercutting the conservatives in the House, even as he opposed their strategy of using the shutdown as leverage to defund Obamacare.

    Asked if the deal would hurt his chances in a primary against conservative businessman Matt Bevin, McConnell declined to comment on his primary. But he offered up a stinging analysis of his Democratic opponent, Grimes.

    “What happened yesterday completely steps on the whole rationale for her candidacy, which is that somehow I’m part of what she calls the dysfunction in Washington,” McConnell said. “Look, I demonstrated on four occasions — including yesterday the most recent occasion, yesterday — that when the country is in crisis and something needs to be done on a bipartisan basis, I can step forward and get an agreement.”

    Grimes, McConnell said, has had a “pretty bad 24 hours.”

    Grimes has tried to make the case that McConnell is too politically motivated to lead in Washington, instead only worried about his reelection at the expense of the country, saying he “hid in the shadows.”

    “Sen. McConnell is taking credit for one of the greatest embarrassments in our nation’s history,” said Grimes senior adviser Jonathan Hurst. “It is like an arsonist congratulating himself for putting out the fire he helped start.”

    Grimes declined several interview requests this week on McConnell.

    The final deal reached between McConnell and Reid includes virtually none of the demands that House Republicans made at the onset of the fight — and little for even Senate conservatives, 18 of whom voted against it. While it passed easily in both chambers Wednesday night, Democrats were united behind the deal, while the GOP was split.

    It only makes minor changes to Obamacare. It raises the debt ceiling until Feb. 7, and allows the Treasury Department to extend that deadline if it employs “extraordinary measures.” It doesn’t make large-scale budget cuts, instead calling on a House-Senate conference committee to try to reach such an elusive deal by Dec. 13. And it doesn’t lock-in lower $967-billion spending levels in 2014 called for by the 2011 Budget Control Act, instead punting that fight until Jan. 15, the next time government funding lapses.

    Some conservative groups are already accusing McConnell of surrendering, and he’s being attacked for seeking a carve-out for a Kentucky lock-and-dam project, though he vigorously defends that as a money-saving program that was sought by two other senators.

    Bevin said in a video released by his campaign Thursday that McConnell has “cut and run from yet another fight. Making deals with Washington Democrats like Harry Reid to raise the debt limit without consideration for defunding or even delaying Obamacare.”

    To his critics, McConnell seemed too worried about stepping into the fight until the very end, when the polls showed that his party was getting slammed for the shutdown. He didn’t offer sharp public rebukes on Cruz’s strategy until late September. He didn’t appear publicly with Boehner after a White House meeting with congressional leaders. And he didn’t talk to Reid until late in the process.

    McConnell argued it was natural for him to take a backseat role to Boehner, who controls a House majority, while he controls a Senate minority. But when Boehner couldn’t pass legislation, he had to step up to cut a deal.

    McConnell said it was a “false narrative” to suggest he was “hiding out.”

    “The reason why I ended up having to play the prominent role that I did was the same reason I had to in December 2010 and August 2011 and December of 2012 and again yesterday was the House could not send something over,” McConnell said. “It was between the speaker and the Democrats until the House couldn’t send anything.

    With McConnell’s emergence as a deal-cutter in this latest dispute, Democratic leaders, including Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), have been full of praise for McConnell in the last couple days. Durbin said McConnell is the lone Republican who Democrats can count on in high-stakes talks.

    “He has been a very positive force in these negotiations,” Durbin said.

    Burgess Everett contributed to this story.

    ***Memo to Mitchell~~I am sure that RG3 can advise you that~~when the other bench is applauding for you~~you are playing a losing game***

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/mitch-mcconnell-senate-deal-obamacare-government-shutdown-98496_Page2.html#ixzz2i1IqHh11

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Punt, Pass or Kick~~Mitch McConnell and RG3~~two Washington quarterbacks and their two~~divergent~~visions of the playing field~~when pinned down in a deep swampland~~facing enemy alligators~~some boys run like the wind while~others choose to punt~~the ball~~away~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)
    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    Thursday, 17th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    Mike Lee and Ted Cruz  (Photo: John Shinkle/POLITICO)

    Out of the huddle and on to the field~~some of Addison Mitchell “Mitch” McConnell, Jr.’s boys don’t seem to be too happy about punting from their own one yard line~~perhaps realizing that what advantage attends such plays respecting field position~~invariably favors the~~OTHER team~~not their own~~

    RG3 showcases his skills but the talented rookie still has plenty of work to do. (AP)
    RG3 showcases his skills but the talented rookie still has plenty of work to do. (AP)

    Meanwhile, RG3 doesn’t mind a little roughhouse~~or a little bruisin’~~to improve his field position~~

    Punt, Pass or Kick~~Mitch McConnell and RG3~two Washington quarterbacks and their two~~divergent~~visions of the playing field~~when pinned down in a deep swampland~~facing enemy alligators~~some boys run like the wind~~ while~~others choose to punt~~the ball~away~~

    ***Memo to Mitchell~~I am sure that RG3 can advise you that~~when the other bench is applauding for you~~you are playing a losing game***

    Smoke gets in our eyes~my dears~you are forgiven for not remembering just what was being discussed at Washington~but you can be assured that your interests were carefully attended to and be relived to know that the news girls say that~whatever it was that was being discussed has been most amicably resolved~all in your favor~

    Image

    Art credit: Chad Crowe~~

    Smoke gets in our eyes~~

    My dears~~you are forgiven for not remembering just what was being discussed at Washington~~but you can be assured that your interests were carefully attended to and be relived to know that the news girls say that~~whatever it was that was being discussed has been most amicably resolved~~all in your favor~~

    Still~~Smoke gets in our eyes~~

    The Republican Party’s conviction that it has the God-given right to legislate the morality of all Americans runs right back to Civil War. The GOP has never quite forgotten it was the party that God anointed with victory. Henry Wilson, the dedicated abolitionist who headed the important Senate committee on military affairs during the war and was later vice president under Grant, declared the Republican Party had been “created by no man or set of men but brought into being by almighty God himself … and endowed by the creator with all political power and every office under Heaven.”

    corrupt politicians cartoons, corrupt politicians cartoon, corrupt politicians picture, corrupt politicians pictures, corrupt politicians image, corrupt politicians images, corrupt politicians illustration, corrupt politicians illustrations
    Artist:
    Martirena, Alfredo

    Oh!!!~~Corrupt politicians~~

    corrupt politicians cartoons, corrupt politicians cartoon, corrupt politicians picture, corrupt politicians pictures, corrupt politicians image, corrupt politicians images, corrupt politicians illustration, corrupt politicians illustrations
    “This administration promises to get to the bottom of any inappropriate behaviour.” 

    OCTOBER  2013
    Its Always Fishing Season~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)
    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Wednesday, 17th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probablythe only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    Image

     One of the boys~~I’m just one of the boys~~I don’t talk much~~but I make a big noise~~

    Smoke gets in our eyes~~

    My dears~~you are forgiven for not remembering just what was being discussed at Washington~~but you can be assured that your interests were carefully attended to and be relived to know that the news girls say that~~whatever it was that was being discussed has been most amicably resolved~~all in your favor~~

    Still~~More~~Smoke gets in our eyes~~

    The Republican Party’s conviction that it has the God-given right to legislate the morality of all Americans runs right back to Civil War. The GOP has never quite forgotten it was the party that God anointed with victory. Henry Wilson, the dedicated abolitionist who headed the important Senate committee on military affairs during the war and was later vice president under Grant, declared the Republican Party had been “created by no man or set of men but brought into being by almighty God himself … and endowed by the creator with all political power and every office under Heaven.”

    When I was not yet old~I knew a young girl~Wendy~yes, that was it~Wendy~fair girl, Nordic, I think~quietly pretty, hard to get to know~who one day said to me~”your very words wear spats, John Begg”~I thought~”what a remarkably peculiar thing to say to a fella~I’m wondering~is this girl saying she likes me~or maybe that she doesn’t”~many years later, I wrote a little note~a little movie review really~to benefit a charity~and while I wrote~I thought of this young girl Wendy~and her comment about spats~

    Image

    A young sport in spatterdash leggings~~flashy footwear Wendy years ago called~~spats~~

    Funny how a good pair of shoes changes our attitude of life~~isn’t it~~funny?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    A Film Review Of~~

    “A Good Pair Of Shoes”

    By 

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    Special to The Volunteers Of America Gazette

    May, 1995

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    Begg/OK To Publish W/BEGG FINAL EDITS~~0/5.16.95

    “We are honored tonight by the presence of a gentleman”  In such a manner was Mr. Wilde’s lead character introduced by the proprietor to  the denizens of a down at the heels nightclub in Wilde’s cautionary novella~~The Picture of Dorian Gray.

     
    An unnecessary introduction.  One hundred years ago, any man who could afford evening clothes was rich by any and all comparative measure, if not a gentleman by any or all moral measure.
     
     

    You and I,  my dears, are asked to resolve these issues in our lives:
    What is timeless?
     
     
     
    What endures?
     
     
     
    Very little we soon enough learn~~endures.
     
     
     
    Nothing except certain, ephemeral, virtues.
     
     
     
    Certain ageless conflicts.
     
     
     
    Evil and Good.
     
     
     
    Wealth and Poverty.
     
     
     
    The desire to be respected and loved.
     
     
     
    The extent to which man will go to be respected and loved.
     
     
     
    The extent to which we all~~in our own ways~~chase ceaselessly after the wrong dreams.
     
     
     
     
    What to do about these vexing questions that follow us around all our life long as though a dog not wanted?
     
     
     
     
    Are there answers to life’s most nettlesome and vexing questions?
     
     
     
    More specifically, are there answers that are immutable?
     
     
     
    Always correct for all of God’s Children?
     
     
     
    Timeless?
     
     
     
    A Good Pair of Shoes” was narrated and produced by Major William G. Boswell.  Major Boswell took over the reins as Volunteer in charge of the Detroit post in 1946.
     
     
     
    The Volunteers Of America are a sort of Salvation Army, street-front social worker derivative group~~manned~~as are all other such groups~~by those who have endless patience for utterly thankless avocations.
     
     
     
    We are admonished that such men will get their reward in heaven and I~~for one~~hope very much that that is so~~don’t you, dear?
     
     
     
    The Detroit post of the Volunteers had previously been led most ably by Adjutant and Mrs. William J. Kelly since 1918.  The post had established a reputation as a bell weather of American religious volunteer work under Adjutant and Mrs. Kelly~~most particularly so during the desperately harrowing times of what is now called The American Great Depression of the 1930’s.
     
     
     
    Detroit, so heavily mechanized, was most particularly and brutally hit by the Depression and the Volunteers worked tirelessly to ease the burdens that sad time imposed upon the citizens of Detroit.
     
     
     
    The Volunteers also discovered in the course of their work in that sad decade that there was a direct correlation between truancy and absenteeism in the Detroit public schools and the manifest lack of suitable clothing available for children of school age.
     
    Children skipped school then, as now, for many reasons of course.  But among the reasons the Volunteers discovered during Depression era Detroit was as simple a thing as not having a presentable pair of shoes to wear to school.
     
    From this realization derives Major Boswell’s charming film “A Good Pair Of Shoes.“~~
    20-30s_m_shoes
    Some current day suggestions for the Detroit public schools lads~~to take a bit of a sting out of the~~present~~ Depression~~in that sad little hamlet~~
    All this fuss over shoes might strike the modern reader as quaint~~after all~~there are not many students~~or adults either~~who would pass for fashion plates today.
     
     
     
    In our time, for the very first time in history, clothes do not make the man~~at least not always.
     
     
     
    Ours is a modern~day in which the rich frequently seek to wear rags and the mostly badly dressed boy at school might well be the son of the richest man in town.
     
     
     
    This turnabout in fashion sense is a most recent and most assuredly, and blessedly, transient state of affairs~~but for now~~well then~~there it is~~
     
     
     
    Certainly in the 1950’s, when Major Boswell got ’round to putting together his film “A Good Pair of Shoes,” it was not the case that children were proud to wear rags.
     
     
     
    There was a great deal of embarrassment attendant upon not having presentable clothes for school and Major Boswell made good use of that theme in his little film.
     
     
    In that film, the desire of the school boys to have appropriate clothes and nice shoes does not strike the viewer as quaint at all~~even through the prism of our, own, shabby, modern epoch.
     
     
     
    Major Boswell introduces us to “Johnny, ” the protagonist of “A Good pair of Shoes. ”  A victim of cruel, grating poverty, and societal indifference and neglect,  Johnny steals shoes from a store to replace the charity case hand-me-downs that have caused him to become the butt of jokes and the subject of that unique strain of cruelty found only among school children.
     
     
     
    The cast-offs shoes have also driven a wedge between Johnny and his girlfriend.  Johnny’s mother laments that she is not capable of understanding how Johnny had come to be arrested for this theft as her son “already had a nice pair of shoes~~from The Christmas.”
     
     
     
    Mom cannot make out how this year~~the charity of Christmas had brought her Johnny boy not a Noel Blessing but rather a curse to wear upon his feet.  Mom cries bitterly and prays to an, apparently disinterested or pre-occupied, God, for guidance and resolution.
     
     
     
    For those who have an interest in such matters,  Johnny’s shoes were spats, or, more aptly and accurately, spatterdash leggings, and, while in good condition and likely once quite pricey, spats, by 1950’s Detroit, were a curiosity children could simply not appreciate.
     
     
     
    Johnny’s theft was a clumsy, boyish, attempt to set right his embarrassment over having to wear Christmas spats~~ignorant~~as were the others~~that he wore high fashion upon his feet~~
     
    Spatspair
     
    Johnny’s Christmas spats were to him a curse~~when~~paradoxically~~they had once been~~when first bought by a long~forgotten owner~~the very height of fashion~~
     
     
     
    Major Boswell uses his saga of Johnny as a springboard to letting the viewer know that The Volunteers Of America had in place for sometime in Detroit~~at least since the Depression era 1930’s~~a concerted program that would have obviated against Johnny’s having to stoop to petty theft to assuage his boyish embarrassment.
     
     
     
    In conjunction with the Detroit school system and with the able assistance of the Detroit Council of Churches, The Volunteers Of America expanded an existing city~wide clothing drive that, in its first year of operation, helped to clothe 9,000 school children and in its second year 20,000.  The need was very great~~poverty was massive~~but equally so was the outpouring of alms and other aid~~freely given~~from the citizens of Detroit.
     
     
     
    The Volunteers Of America have been a positive, helpful presence and guiding hand to the misbegotten in the Motor City for more than 100 years.  In September 1897, Captain N. M. Cook organized the Detroit post.  By the time Major Boswell took over the post, its exploits in the hands~on dispensation of charity to the poor were already the stuff of legend. 
     
     
     
     
    Major Boswell’s film, “A Good Pair Of Shoes,” is an attempt to dramatize on the screen the often~hidden demon of poverty and her twin sisters~~shame and crime.
     
     
     
    Does Boswell’s movie work in that context~~that is~~does it satisfy its predicate goals?  Does the viewer come away with an understanding of poverty and of the programs that The Volunteers of America have set in place to alleviate it?  As with any film, we must ask~~is this movie watchable?  Interesting?  Provoking?
     
     
     
    I must say that Boswell is a clever producer in this sense.  He had a very modest budget and had to make do as needs must.  As the film’s narrator, he asks these very questions of his audience before they can even posit them on their own~~does this story I now tell interest you?  Grab your attention?  Stir your emotions?
     
     
     
    That asked~~the answer is~~the film is an all ’round winner because it does arrestingly address universal concepts~~one of the predicate conditions any film or book or painting must meet to be worthwhile.
     
     
     
    Anyone can understand the concepts of poverty, loneliness, shame, isolation, greed, envy, cruelty and~~reciprocally~~their antithesis~~goodness, kindness~~a helping hand~~freely given.
     
     
     
     
    Another predicate condition of the film’s viability~~the compellingness of Johnny and the other characters, also brings Boswell’s work home  a fleet, keen winner.  We all can, beginning to end, easily grasp the conceptual framework into which Boswell places his protagonist and likewise, we are all moved by the role renditions of Johnny and the other characters.
     
     
     
     
    So, then, what of this little movie?
     
     
     
    It is difficult for the reviewer to summon cogent opinions of any movie without making comparative observations.
     
     
     
     
    That said, given the utter dearth in recent years of anything even remotely watchable, universal, compelling or thought~provoking emanating from any of the major commercial movie houses, this little moral play, brought to us on a frayed shoe~string, is well worth the viewing.
     
     
     
     
    Everyone can find something to like in “a Good Pair Of Shoes.”
     
     
     
     
    ###30###
     
    reaching-for-the-moon-movie-poster-1931-1020380053
    Our Dougie Fairbanks~~remember him~~it seems ages now~~is over the moon in his white spats~~

    — 

     

     

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    image002 (20)
    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Tuesday, 16th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probablythe only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    mobster-spats

    A young sport in spatterdash leggings~~flashy footwear Wendy years ago called~~spats~~

    Funny how a good pair of shoes changes our attitude of life~~isn’t it~~funny?

    cottonclub

    Limousines for the feet~~spatterdash leggings~~

    A little girl with a direct point of view~Roman Catholic Dragon Lady~Madame Nhu~

    Image

    Title:

    Mrs. Ngo Dinh Nhu

    Caption: Mrs. Ngo Dinh Nhu firing .38 pistol. (Photo by Larry Burrows//Time Life Pictures/Getty Images)
    Date created: 01 Jun 1962
    Editorial image #: 50547637

    Mme. Nhu gets to the point with no sequestration or government shutdowns~~

    When I was a boy~~I much admired those who killed communists not simply for the self~apparent moral reason that to kill them pleases Jesus~~but likewise for the sport of it~~the sheer exhilaration and fun of it~~I still am so admiring, but on hearing late that Mme Nhu~~ardent Roman Catholic~~has now gone to her heavenly reward, I cannot think of any other Roman Catholic dragon girls to admire~~the world has become a gray, colorless place today~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2012

    Madame Nhu Closeup Photos

    Trần Lệ Xuân (22 August 1924 – 24 April 2011), popularly known as Madame Nhu, was the de facto First Lady of South Vietnam from 1955 to 1963.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Monday, 15th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~French actor Alain Delon

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    Madame Ngo Dinh Nhu, R.I.P.

    madamenhu1.jpg

    Madame Nhu, South Vietnam’s unofficial “first lady” during the administration of Ngo Dinh Diem, passed into eternal life on Easter Sunday at age 87 — just six days before the 36th anniversary of the fall of Saigon on April 30.

    Tran LeXuan was born in the line of Vietnamese royalty, descended from the ninth emperor of the Nguyen Dynasty. Her life would prove to be tragic in many respects. Raised a Buddhist, she converted to Christianity upon her marriage and remained a devout Catholic for the rest of her life. Strikingly beautiful, glamorous and intelligent, she had a tempestuous personality and blunt manner of expression. She became bitterly estranged from her parents for political reasons during the Diem years. Her husband was murdered along with President Diem by American-backed assassins in 1963. After this stinging betrayal, she spent her remaining years in exile in Italy and France, living in seclusion. Her oldest daughter died in an automobile accident in 1967. In 1986 her deranged brother was charged with murdering her elderly parents, with whom she had partially reconciled.

    Madame Nhu was permitted to influence public policy in the Diem administration. According to this interesting biography, her reforms were not always well received:

    She played a leading role in the moral reform President Diem instituted in South Vietnam, closing down brothels, opium dens and gambling houses. She was at the front of imposing what was known as the “campaign for public morality” on South Vietnam, which included the abolition of divorce, contraceptives and abortion. Nightclubs and ball rooms were also often targets. Even beauty pageants were halted as Madame Nhu believed they simply contributed to the objectification of women. This campaign of decency, while admirable, was met with a great deal of hostility by those who did not share Madame Nhu’s view of ethics.

    Mme. Nhu gets to the point with no sequestration or government shutdowns~~when I was a boy~~I much admired those who killed communists not simply for the self~apparent moral reason that to kill them pleases Jesus~~but likewise for the sport of it~~the sheer exhilaration and fun of it~~I still am so admiring, but on hearing late that Mme Nhu~~ardent Roman Catholic~~has now gone to her heavenly reward, I cannot think of any other Roman Catholic dragon girls to admire~~the world has become a gray, colorless place today~

    There is~~indisputably~~something very arousing about a hot, tiny, Asian girl~~who is Roman Catholic and~~likewise knows how to handle a gun well~~

    NATIONALISM APPROACHES ON LITTLE CAT’S FEET~The Battle of France has only just begun~nothing will ever be the same again~the decayed conservative and liberal parties of the west have failed the people and are in terminus~Globalization is in terminus~

    Front National andidate, Laurent Lopez waves to supporters as he arrives with  party deputy Marion Marechal-Le Pen after winning the second round of the local by-election in Brignoles.

    Front National candidate Laurent Lopez waves to supporters as he arrives with party deputy Marion Marechal-Le Pen after winning the second round of the local by-election in Brignoles. Photo: AFP

    France’s far-right National Front has won a bellwether local byelection in the country’s south, riding on discontent with Francois Hollande’s Socialist presidency and disarray in the opposition UMP party to a victory it believes will be a springboard towards the political mainstream.

    Laurent Lopez, the clean-cut 48-year-old candidate for the Provence town of Brignoles, scored 54 per cent of the vote to the centre-right UMP’s 46 per cent in the second-round run-off.

    Marine Le Pen, who took over the National Front leadership from her father and party founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, said after the result was announced on Sunday night it was a ”beautiful victory” that showed ”when united, the French are invincible”. ”It shows a willingness for change among the French,” she said.

    Brignoles attracted national interest when Mr Lopez knocked out left-wing rivals in the first-round vote and took twice as many votes as the UMP, the party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy.

    The October 6 first-round vote sent shock waves through France and prompted calls by the ruling left for a ”republican front” to stem the party’s progress.

    The National Front, which took 6.4 million votes in last year’s presidential vote, is normally a magnet for protest votes. Miss Le Pen, however, has tried to change its image as a movement of racists and anti-Semites, increasingly reaching out to disgruntled mainstream voters with tough talk on crime and immigration, as well as capitalising on the struggling economy.

    Miss Le Pen was recently placed joint third in a table of politicians the French want to see more of in the future.

    The unpopular Socialist government and the deeply divided UMP are alarmed by the rise of the National Front, whose next major political test will be municipal elections in March in which Miss Le Pen hopes to build a strong local base by winning seats on local councils.

    Telegraph, London; AFP

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/le-pen-party-rides-home-discontent-in-byelection-20131014-2vik1.html#ixzz2hiYHXpe8

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Affiche-FNJ-11-500x666

    Allons~Y~~~Mes Enfants~~

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tN2j-PBGF0

     images (67)

    Marine Le Pen (French pronunciation: ​[ma.ʁin lə.pɛn]; born Marion Anne Perrine Le Pen; 5 August 1968) is a French political leader, who is a lawyer by profession, a French politician and the president of the Front National (FN), the third-largest political party in France, since 16 January 2011. She is the youngest daughter of the French politician Jean-Marie Le Pen, former president of the FN and currently its honorary chairman. She is the aunt of Marion Maréchal-Le Pen.

    She joined the FN in 1986, its Executive Committee in 2000 and was a vice-president of the FN for eight years (2003–2011). She currently is an ex officio member of the FN Executive Office, Executive Committee and Central Committee.

    She has been a regional councillor since 1998 (Île-de-France: 2004–2010, Nord-Pas-de-Calais: 1998–2004, 2010–present), a Member of the European Parliament since 2004 (Île-de-France: 2004–2009, North-West France: 2009–present) and was a municipal councillor in Hénin-Beaumont, Pas-de-Calais for three years (2008–2011).

    In 2010, she was a candidate for the leadership of the FN set up by Jean-Marie Le Pen on 5 October 1972.[1][2][3][4] She successfully succeeded him during the FN congress in Tours, Indre-et-Loire.[5][6][7] On 16 January 2011, she was elected with 67.65% (11,546 votes) as the second president of the Front National.[8]

    She is described as a significantly more democratic and republican presence than her nationalist father; she wants to considerably reduce immigration, while her father wanted to abolish it. However, like her father, she strongly opposes same-sex marriage andeuthanasia.

    On 21 April 2011, she was ranked 71 in the most influential person in the 2011 Time 100.[9]

    She was a candidate in the 2012 French presidential election.[10] On 22 April 2012, she polled 17.90% (6,421,426 votes) in the first round and finished in third position behind François Hollande and incumbent president Nicolas Sarkozy.[11][12][13]

    Marine Le Pen represented the FN as the FN leader at the legislative election in Pas-de-Calais’ 11th constituency, on 14 May 2012.[14]She lost the race by about 100 votes.[15]

    touche-pas-à-mon-peuple

    “Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he’s the only one who’s sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own.”~~French actor Alain Delon

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    14 OCTOBER 2013 – 14H30
    Mainstream baffled as French turn to far right
    French far-right Front National party President Marine Le Pen and her father Jean-Marie Le Pen acknowledge the audience at the party's summer congress on September 15, 2013 in Marseille, southern France
    French far-right Front National party President Marine Le Pen and her father Jean-Marie Le Pen acknowledge the audience at the party’s summer congress on September 15, 2013 in Marseille, southern France
    Bruno Gollnisch, Front National far-right party candidate for the municipal elections in Hyeres, France, poses on October 14, 2013
    Bruno Gollnisch, Front National far-right party candidate for the municipal elections in Hyeres, France, poses on October 14, 2013
    Marine Le Pen, president of the French far-right Front National party, delivers a speech on October 12, 2013 in Paris
    Marine Le Pen, president of the French far-right Front National party, delivers a speech on October 12, 2013 in Paris

    AFP – France’s mainstream political parties were Monday scratching their heads over what to do about a surge by the Front National (FN) after a breakthrough by-election win for the far-right party.

    The ruling Socialist party and the centre-right Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), the party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy, face humiliating reverses in municipal and European elections next year if the FN can sustain its current standing in the eyes of an electorate thoroughly fed-up with record unemployment, rising taxes and a perceived increase in crime and insecurity.

    A poll published last week suggested the FN could emerge as the best-supported party in the European elections with 24 percent of those asked declaring themselves ready to back the party led by Marine Le Pen, the daughter of FN founder Jean-Marie Le Pen.

    That shock survey was followed on Sunday by a spectacular victory for the FN in a local by-election in Brignoles, where FN candidate Laurent Lopez claimed 53.9 percent of the vote in a run-off against the UMP candidate.

    “The left and the mainstream right are blaming each other for what is happening, but the reality is they’ve both been knocked sideways,” said Nonna Mayer, the Research Director at the National Research Centre CNRS. “Neither of them know what to do.”

    There were particular, local factors in Brignoles which influenced the outcome of a vote being held for the third time, the result having been judged too close to stand on two previous occasions, when the run-off was between the FN and the Communist Party.

    The southeastern town has struggled with high unemployment since the closure of local aluminium mines in the 1990s and the gloomy economic backdrop has exacerbated tensions between established residents and a large community of North African immigrants, creating fertile ground for the FN in a region where it traditionally does better than elsewhere in France.

    But the scale of the victory for Lopez was nevertheless widely interpreted as an indicator of how the FN is capitalising on current voter concerns to appeal to a broader slice of the electorate than ever before.

    A smartly-dressed former businessman, Lopez, 48, is the perfect embodiment of the more voter-friendly image that the FN has projected since Marine Le Pen took over from her controversial father at the head of the party in 2011.

    Harder to treat as a pariah party

    The pledges to end net immigration, most controversially by ripping up family reunion rules, and to begin moves to pull France out of the European Union, remain in place.

    But the FN is now far from being a one-issue party, notably making its voice heard on education to the extent that it has recently been able to announce the creation of a network of supporters amongst teachers – an unthinkable development a decade ago.

    Marine Le Pen, has worked hard to dispel the image of the party as fundamentally racist.

    She has expelled activists who make bigoted public statements and the FN lists in next year’s municipal elections will include a handful of ethnic minority candidates.

    All of which is making it harder for the mainstream parties to prevent the FN from winning more than a handful of elected posts by treating it as a pariah party and urging their voters to cast their ballots tactically to keep them out of power, an approach referred to as the “Republican Front”.

    “I think we can safely say the Republican Front is now dead,” Marine Le Pen declared after Sunday’s triumph in Brignoles, and her opponents acknowledged that she was probably right.

    “It just doesn’t work, voters don’t like being told who to vote for,” said Thierry Mandon, the spokesman for the Socialists’ parliamentary party.

    Despite the current disarray of the mainstream parties, the CNRS’s Mayer still believes the recent upturn in the fortunes of the FN remains primarily a protest phenomenon.

    “The change of leadership has given the party a slightly slicker image, but for most French people, it remains an extreme right party founded on racist ideas which is incapable of governing,” Mayer told AFP.

    “Marine Le Pen does have a better image than her father. Unlike him she is not associated with the legacy of the second world war and anti-semitism.

    “Local factors played heavily in their favour in Brignoles. On a national level there is enormous disappointment after a year of the Socialists back in power, and the issues of crime and insecurity are beginning to weigh heavily in the national debate, which plays in the FN’s favour.

    “But don’t forget that, in the municipals, the FN will have candidates in one town in six at most. It is not as strong as it pretends to be.”

    Merci, avec~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Sunday, 14th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~French actor Alain Delon

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    NATIONALISM APPROACHES ON LITTLE CAT’S FEET~The Battle of France has only just begun~nothing will ever be the same again~the decayed conservative and liberal parties of the west have failed the people and are in terminus~Globalization is in terminus~

    Following Sunday’s result, the FN issued a celebratory statement: “The FN has proved that it can rally its countrymen around its candidate, and that the mainstream parties have been completely shunned and defied by voters.”

    1

    NATIONALISM APPROACHES ON LITTLE CAT’S FEET~The Battle of France has only just begun~nothing will ever be the same again~the decayed conservative and liberal parties of the west have failed the people and are in terminus~Globalization is in terminus~

    “Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he’s the only one who’s sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own.”~~French actor Alain Delon

    Rethinking Abe Lincoln~

     Image

    Abe Lincoln freed the slaves~~or so say the school teachers~~and Abe has perhaps the best reputation of any politician in American history, absent Mr. Jefferson~~slaveholder.  Does Abe deserve his reputation?  Let’s have a think~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Abe Lincoln is today honored~~even venerated~~by both conservatives and liberals~~but the reality is that Abe~~in unleashing his “total war” upon the south in the American war of secession~~enslaved Americans who merely wanted to be free of the American United States~~and to live in peace on their own.~~
     
    While Abe has left for us a note that he was “engaged in a great civil war”~~he was there being duplicitous~~perhaps better~~diffident~~as~~the south simply wanted to leave the American Union and live by itself in peace~~which is secession~~not~~civil war.

     
    I can only conclude that while Abe freed some slaves, he imprisoned and enslaved his fellow American southern citizens and forced them~~at gun point~~to remain part of a nation they wanted to leave.

     
    Abe is~~invariably~~listed today as everybody’s American hero.
     
    Yet~~it is reasonable to ask~~just how heroic was Abe’s behaviour?
     
    Specifically~~How does Abe’s behaviour differ materially in substance and in kind from that of the English King George 111?
     
    King George~~called by American school teachers all~~a tyrant and a rough and a rogue~~rained down violence on the infant Americans~~
     
    As Abe spoke at Gettysburg~~”Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”
     
    ~~Abe there referred to the infant Americans fighting King George 111~~because they did not want to be part of George’s Empire and, instead, to live in freedom and peace on their own.~~
     
    King George 111 fought bloodily~~savagely~~to force the infant American United States~~at gunpoint~~to remain a part of the English Empire~~when the infant Americans simply wanted to leave King George’s Empire and be left alone in peace~~
     
    That all said~~Does Abe really deserve his near~universal veneration today~~and deserve to have his face on an American fin?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Dieu et mon droit~~

    Image
    Image
    Abe was a Republican and George a Royalist~~yet they shared an odd fondness for~~Dieu et mon droit~~God and MY right~~and a self-perceived divine ordinance to force men to knell before the thrones of their respective central governments~~and remain in bondage to Kings and Presidents~~when the people seek to live at peace and in freedom on their own~~knelling before no man~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    While Abe was no day at the beach to look at, he had other, admirable qualities~~at least if they are tempered with some moderation~~I am most admirerous of good writing and speaking~~just a sucker born for both those talents, I am.  I will concede that~~from a writing standpoint~~Abe could bring what we used to call in my craft~~a “barn burner.”

     
    I hear from school teachers that Abe not only wrote pretty~~but also spoke pretty~~a nettlesome combination in a political man~~as we all well know at Washington~~Abe’s speech at Gettysburg is an artwork and topped off by its being~~so~~blessedly~~brief~~modern political man~~make good note of that last bit~~brevity~~
    Abe’s Gettysburg Address follows on now~~

    Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

    Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

    But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    ###

    It was a great speech~~one of the best~~but I was always in trouble at school because Lincoln is a sacred cow~~you can not even ask questions about him~~you simply must quietly make~~deep genuflection~~before him~~but to the southerners of my family Lincoln was no different from George 111~~both forced different generations and regions of the Americans to do what they did not want to do~~at the point of a gun~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Saturday, 12th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

     

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

     

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

    
    

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    Image

    In Memoriam~~

    Abe Lincoln freed the slaves~~or so say the school teachers~~and Abe has perhaps the best reputation of any politician in American history, absent Mr. Jefferson~~slaveholder.  Does Abe deserve his reputation?  Let’s have a think~~

    I can only conclude that while Abe freed some slaves, he imprisoned and enslaved his fellow American southern citizens and forced them~~at gun point~~to remain part of a nation they wanted to leave.

    That all said~~Does Abe really deserve his near~universal veneration today~~and deserve to have his face on an American fin~~when his behaviour during the American war of secession constituted his turning his back on his fellow citizens of the south~~and enslaving them in a Union they no longer wanted to live in?

    Aristotle had no watch to wind or to mind~but he gave us our concept of the preciousness of time~and of how man’s precious time makes him~in turn~God’s most precious creature of all~

    Image

     Vacheron Constantin makes the finest watches in the world~~they are not free~~but then~~they ought not to be free~~as it is in the capacity to discern time properly that makes human souls superior to all others and permits man to put a brake on desire in deference to proper reason.   Attend then~~closely to your time and timepieces, my dears~~watch and wind them well~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    It is helpful, dears, to absent ourselves from the daily mundanities and to think on our brother Aristotle who cautions us to remember that our souls are the superior souls as human souls only can discern a notion of time~~a capacity that permits us to separate the momentary desire from the constraints of proper reason~~As a recognition of time belongs alone to human souls~~let us use our time wisely and recognize that it is so very precious~~

    Image

    Aristotle never wore a watch~~but he was first to note that Man alone of all God’s creatures can discern time~~and it is that capacity that makes man superior above all other souls~~and his time so precious~~make my dears~~every tick of your time~~so very precious~~as~~there is so precious little of it~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Image

    Gustav Adolph Spangenberg, Die Schule des Aristoteles (School of Aristotle), Fresco 1883-1888

    The Peripatetics were a school of philosophy in ancient Greece. Their teachings derived from that of their founder, Aristotle.

    Aristotle founded the Peripatetic school in 335 BC when he first opened his philosophical school at the Lyceum in Athens. The name of the school derives from the Greek word for walking: either from covered walkways at the Lyceum known as peripatoi, or Aristotle’s penchant for walking while he lectured.

    The most prominent member of the Peripatetic school after Aristotle was Strato of Lampsacus, who increased the naturalistic elements of Aristotle’s philosophy and embraced a form of atheism.

    Members of the Peripatetic School include:

    ——————————————————————————–
    Peripatetic is also used more generally to mean “wandering”.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Aristotle (384-322) was born in a small Greek colony in Thrace called Stagira.  His father was a physician and served the grandfather of Alexander the Great.  Presumably, it was his father who taught him to take an interest in the details of natural life.

    He was Plato’s prize student, even though he disagreed with him on many points.  When Plato died, Aristotle stayed for a while with another student of Plato, who had made himself a dictator in northern Asia Minor.  He married the dictator’s daughter, Pythias.  They moved to Lesbos, where Pythias died giving birth to their only child, a daughter.  Although he married again, his love for Pythias never died, and he requested that they be buried side by side.

    For four years, Aristotle served as the teacher of a thirteen year old Alexander, son of Philip of Macedon.  In 334, he returned to Athens and established his school of philosophy in a set of buildings called the Lyceum (from a name for Apollo, “the shepherd”).  The beautiful grounds and covered walkways were conducive to leisurely walking discussions, so the students were known as peripatoi (“covered walkways”).

    First, we must point out that Aristotle was as much a scientist as a philosopher.  He was endlessly fascinated with nature, and went a long way towards classifying the plants and animals of Greece.  He was equally interested in studying the anatomies of animals and their behavior in the wild.

    Aristotle also pretty much invented modern logic.  Except for its symbolic form, it is essentially the same today.

    Let’s begin with metaphysics:  While Plato separates the ever-changing phenomenal world from the true and eternal ideal reality, Aristotle suggests that the ideal is found “inside” the phenomena, the universals “inside” the particulars.

    What Plato called idea or ideal, Aristotle called essence, and its opposite, he referred to as matter.  Matter is without shape or form or purpose.  It is just “stuff.” pure potential, no actuality.  Essence is what provides the shape or form or purpose to matter.  Essence is “perfect,” “complete,” but it has no substance, no solidity.  Essence and matter need each other!

    Essence realizes (“makes real”) matter.  This process, the movement from formless stuff to complete being, is called entelechy, which some translate as actualization.

    There are four causes that contribute to the movement of entelechy.  They are answers to the question “why?” or “what is the explanation of this?”

    1.  The material cause: what something is made of.
    2.  The efficient cause: the motion or energy that changes matter.
    3.  The formal cause: the thing’s shape, form, or essence; its definition.
    4.  The final cause: its reason, its purpose, the intention behind it.

    1.  The material cause:  The thing’s matter or substance.  Why a bronze statue?  The metal it is made of.  Today, we find an emphasis on material causation in reductionism, explaining, for example, thoughts in terms of neural activity, feelings in terms of hormones, etc.  We often go down a “level” because we can’t explain something at the level it’s at.

    2.  The efficient cause:  The motion or energy that changes matter.  Why the statue?  The forces necessary to work the bronze, the hammer, the heat, the energy….  This is what modern science focuses on, to the point where this is what cause now tends to mean, exclusively.  Note that modern psychology usually relies on reductionism in order to find efficient causes.  But it isn’t always so:  Freud, for example, talked about psychosexual energy and Skinner talked about stimulus and response.

    3.  The formal cause:  The thing’s shape, form, definition, or essence.  Why the statue?  Because of the plan the sculptor had for the bronze, it’s shape or form, the non-random ordering of it’s matter.  In psychology, we see some theorists focus on structure — Piaget and his schema, for example.  Others talk about the structure inherent in the genetic code, or about cognitive scripts.

    4.  The final cause:  The end, the purpose, the teleology of the thing.  Why the statue?  The purpose of it, the intention behind making it.  This was popular with medieval scholars:  They searched for the ultimate final cause, the ultimate purpose of all existence, which they of course labeled God! Note that, outside of the hard sciences, this is often the kind of cause we are most interested in:  Why did he do it, what was his purpose or intention?  E.g. in law, the bullet may have been the “efficient” cause of death, but the intent of the person pulling the trigger is what we are concerned with.  When we talk about intentions, goals, values, and so on, we are talking about final causes.

    Aristotle wrote the first book on psychology (as a separate topic from the rest of philosophy).  It was called, appropriately, Para Psyche, Greek for “about the mind or soul.”  It is better known in the Latin form, De Anima.  In this book, we find the first mentions of many ideas that are basic to psychology today, such as the laws of association.

    In it, he says the mind or soul is the “first entelechy” of the body, the “cause and principle” of the body, the realization of the body.  We might put it like this: The mind is the purposeful functioning of the nervous system.

    Like Plato, he postulates three kinds of souls, although slightly differently defined.  There is a plant soul, the essence of which is nutrition.  Then there is an animal soul, which contains the basic sensations, desire, pain and pleasure, and the ability to cause motion.  Last, but not least, is the human soul.  The essence of the human soul is, of course, reason.  He suggests that, perhaps, this last soul is capable of existence apart from the body.

    He foreshadowed many of the concepts that would become popular only two thousand years later.  Libido, for example:  “In all animals… it is the most natural function to beget another being similar to itself… in order that they attain as far as possible, the immortal and divine….  This is the final cause of every creatures natural life.”

    And the struggle of the id and ego: “There are two powers in the soul which appear to be moving forces — desire and reason.  But desire prompts actions in violation of reason… desire… may be wrong.”

    And the pleasure principle and reality principle:  “Although desires arise which are opposed to each other, as is the case when reason and appetite are opposed, it happens only in creatures endowed with a sense of time. For reason, on account of the future, bids us resist, while desire regards the present; the momentarily pleasant appears to it as the absolutely pleasant and the absolutely good, because it does not see the future.”

    And finally, self-actualization:  We begin as unformed matter in the womb, and through years of development and learning, we become mature adults, always reaching for perfection. “So the good has been well explained as that at which all things aim.”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I do very much thank Mr. George Boeree for his very useful research in furtherance of our missive this night.  We look forward to visiting him again soon for more about the philosophers and about how man came to think of himself in the way that he now does~~All research note~~© Copyright 2000, 2009, C. George Boeree.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    
    

    Thursday, 10th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    
    

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

    
    

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    43043-000R-9592_sp

    Vacheron Constantin makes the finest watches in the world~~they are not free~~but then~~they ought not to be free~~as it is in the capacity to discern time properly that makes human souls superior to all others and permits man to put a brake on desire in deference to proper reason.   Attend then~~closely to your time and timepieces, my dears~~watch and wind them well~~

     

    Image

    Aristotle never wore a watch~but he was first to note that Man alone of all God’s creatures can discern time~and it is that capacity that makes man superior above all other souls~and his time so precious~make my dears~every tick of your time~so very precious~as~there is so precious little of it~

    Image

    Aristotle had no watch to wind or to mind~~but he gave us our concept of the preciousness of time~~and of how man’s precious time makes him~~in turn~~God’s most precious creature of all~~