Essay—A State of Denial—(65)

Summary—This essay argues that we are in a state of denial regarding Canada’s government debt, the theory of one and existentialism—and that radical steps are necessary to avoid a catastrophe of the state.

Quotation—The art of revolution lies in dislodging established customs by probing down into their origins in order to show how they lack authority and justice.  There must be a return to the basic and primordial laws of the state which unjust custom has since eradicated. —Blaise Pascal

Sheldon Kopp’s 1972 book, If You Meet Buddha on the Road, Kill Him, offers a fresh, realistic approach to altering one’s destiny and accepting the responsibility that comes with freedom.  He says that, “No meaning that comes from outside ourselves is real.  The Buddhahood in each of us has already been obtained and need only be recognized.”  We ourselves must decide what values—like Canada’s government debt, the theory of one and existentialism—are real for us as individual citizens.  We should stop basing our values on what economists, physicists and doctors tell us and start thinking for ourselves.

The History of Canadian Debt.  In 1979 Joe Clark and the Conservative party of Canada won a minority government.  After excessive spending by the Liberals, the Conservatives were intent on fiscal restraint.  Their stringent budget proposed cutting programs and implementing tax increases that would have resulted in a balanced budget.  The Liberals, led by Pierre Trudeau (1919-2000), would not support it and the minority government was defeated just seven months after taking office.  In the following election Trudeau and the Liberals won a majority government and soon after introduced a deficit budget that was to be the start of trouble for Canada’s incomprehensively massive government debt of $1.3 trillion as of 2016.  In 2015 Justin Trudeau (Pierres son) and the Liberal party won a majority government based in part on his promise to run a budget deficit of $10 billion.  The Conservatives were defeated in part on their promise to run a balanced budget.  In his first budget Justin Trudeau set forth a $30 billion deficit that was $20 billion more than he promised in his campaign.  As GW Hegel (1770-1831) said, “History teaches us we have never learned anything from history.”

Dealing With Debt.  The fact that we are selling off all our non-renewable resources essentially depletes the value of land.  And letting tens-of-thousands of refugees into Canada is not much different than giving away land.  My radical suggestion is that we sell land to pay off government debt.  Some people might be offended by my suggestion, but I am simply thinking outside-the-box.  Servicing the interest on the debt in Canada costs $60 billion per year and payments on the principle of $1.3 trillion over the next 50 years would be $26 billion per year.  The government is dreaming in Technicolor if they believe we will not eventually go bankrupt if they stay the course.  Furthermore, if they were to pay off the debt the government in Canada would have an additional $86 billion per year.  As it stands, the government is predicting deficit budgets for the next six years.  According to estimates, we will run out of oil and gas in 50 years at which time we may be unable to heat our homes and feed our families.  In 50 years the chance would be minuscule that we could pay off our then multi-trillion dollar government debt without the benefit of oil and gas tax revenues.  Selling land now is a preemptive alternative to imminent disaster.  Consider my wild idea that we sell Vancouver Island to the Israelis for $1.3 trillion.  My proposal would bring stability to the Middle East and would also give the Jewish people peace and happiness.  Vancouver Island is 32,000 square kilometers and Israel is 22,000 square kilometers, 60 percent of which is desert.  The Israelis could fund the sale by selling their own land and with contributions from other countries with a vested interest.

The Theory of One.  The theory of one (2001) solves the greatest scientific problem of all time by uniting relativity theory (1905) with quantum theory (1925).  It proves that the universe is bounded, that there is only one photon (ie. a being of light), that one photon is God, and that reality is an illusion—meaning the Moon does not exist when no one is looking at it.  As Jorge Luis Borges said, “We have dreamed it.”  Physicists are in a state of denial because my theory pulls-their-pants-down.  They are claiming victory from the newly discovered gravitational waves, but I believe that gravitational waves are minor compared to my theory of one.  The problem is my theory is off the grid and physicists cannot assimilate it.  Physicists in the past 50 years have not built a base as I have done with my theory of one.  As FS Northrop said, “If one makes a false or superficial beginning, no matter how rigorous the methods that follow, the initial error will never be corrected.”  The boundedness of my theory gives a scientific basis to the notions of God and souls that exist eternally at the boundary between spacetime and nothingness.  If we work out our salvation with diligence, as Buddha told us, then our being would reside in our eternal souls rather than in our temporal egos—ie. Being versus being.

Behaviorism vs Existentialism.  I would argue that we are using the behavioral psychological model exclusively in Canada.  Behaviorism only asks that we behave normally and is the cause of the sickness that pervades our society.  Existentialism cures it by asking each of us to take total freedom and total responsibility for the world.  Unlike behaviorism, existentialism would give us purpose in our lives.  Doctors, like physicists, are guilty of the agency problem, which is that they have chosen their own wellbeing over the health of the nation.  I would argue that doctors are making people sick with behaviorism and are in turn making a killing off this inflicted illness.  Like the physicists are in denial, the doctors are also in denial of their pain-fully obvious mistake.  Behaviorism is the brainchild of a couple of halfwits named Watson and Skinner.  Existentialism is the product of a long history of great thinkers that goes all the way back to Socrates and includes Shakespeare, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky, Kafka, Camus and Sartre.  Sartre tells us for man, existence precedes essence.  Consider a pen for example.  Its essence is designed on the drawing board and then it comes into existence, so essence precedes existence.  But for man who arrives on the scene and then creates his essence, existence precedes essence.  Furthermore, with existentialism there is no predetermined human nature that man is obligated to become.  We are thus free to create our own destiny by committing to it.

Elephants in the Room.  The “Elephant in the room” is a metaphor for an unaddressed, obvious truth.  The expression applies to blatantly clear problems that we are denying.  We will not find peace and happiness until we address the elephants in the room, which are—the Canadian government debt, the theory of one and existentialism.  As a country, we are limping along and will not be made whole until we face reality head-on.  Native American Indians say that, “We do not inherit the Earth from our parents; we borrow it from our children.”  By dealing with debt now we could pass on a sustainable world to our children.  Teaching children about the theory of one would give them a solid foundation for a better world.  Edna St Vincent Millay said, “Safe upon the solid rock the ugly houses stand—come and see my shining palace built upon the sand.”  Existentialism and the theory of one are the ugly houses and behaviorism and string theory are the shining palaces.  By teaching children existentialism we would be making them much better decision-makers—like deciding to sell land in order to deal with our elephant-sized debt.

Preparing for Paradigm Shifts.  A Frank & Ernest comic strip shows a chick breaking out of its shell, then looking around and proclaiming—Wow, paradigm shift.  In his 1962 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn contrasts normal science with paradigm-shifting science.  Kuhn argues that scientific knowledge is not strictly evolutionary, but is a sequence of peaceful intervals interrupted by sporadic and violent revolutions of the intellect.  Paradigm-shifting is revolutionary while normal science is evolutionary.  Paradigm-shifting is my right hand while normal science is my left hand.  Both are necessary.  With paradigm-shifting science, one theoretical view is replaced by another.  With normal science, progression takes place in a linear, orderly fashion.  I would argue the recently discovered gravitational waves are normal science.  They are ripples in spacetime that propagate outward from the source at lightspeed produced by massively dense phenomena like black holes.  The Copernican view of heliocentricity that the Sun is the center of the universe was paradigm-shifting.  It was a change from one way of thinking to another.  I was recently speaking to a Member of the Canadian Parliament who believes change should take place in an orderly fashion.  But we must prepare for paradigms shifts that are intellectually ferocious and potentially upsetting.  As Peter Bernstein said, “Paradigms shifts are not unpredictable, just unthinkable.”  Stanislav Grof said, “We are approaching the time of a major paradigm shift.”

Conclusion.  The government is in denial about the simple truth of our debt and the great possibility that we will be consumed by it.  We are steaming toward the canyon and the bridge is out.  The theory of one fundamentally alters our perception of reality.  It proves that the universe is bounded, that there is only one photon, that one photon is God, and that reality is an illusion.  We are lying to the children in that a lie of omission is still a lie.  Choosing existentialism is a recipe for salvation.  We need to accept the responsibility that comes with freedom and stop denying the elephants in the room.  Canada needs to be morally strong and free from debt in order to become a true world leader.  Justin Trudeau could show his true leadership by responding to this essay.