Posts Tagged ‘Art’

Art As Devil Currency, & Clinton’s Fading Worth

November 12, 2015

Why Clinton Won’t Be President Again, And Why Art Is Tax Evasion:

“If you live long enough, you’ll make mistakes. But if you learn from them, you’ll be a better person. It’s how you handle adversity, not how it affects you. The main thing is never quit, never quit, never quit.” [― William J. Clinton.]

This is typical of the sound-good idiocies we have to learn not to take as below our dignity to lash out after. Sophisticated thinking is of no help if the worst thinking is left unmolested, free to grow, corrupt, and rule, most minds

Neither G. W. Bush, nor Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung, or the Khmer Rouges, or Louis XIV, or Philip II of Spain, or Antipater of Macedonia, ever quit, but it would have been better if they had. And as the Romans had it: “Perseverare Diabolicum”.

Learning from mistakes can go both ways: to profit humanity at large, or profit the learning individual. The latter may, or may not profit the humanity at large.

If one never quits, just to embrace the Dark Side, ever more, methinks matters are not improving for humanity, at large. That Bill Clinton thinks learning made him a better person, automatically, is only the sort of self-indulgence he is famous for, and which will probably cost his wife the presidency.

Dark Currency: Such A Beauty Cannot Be Taxed Or Detected

Dark Currency: Such A Beauty Cannot Be Taxed Or Detected

[That painting was sold at auction for more than 170 million dollars… to a “former taxi cab driver turned billionaire art collector”… I will be even more interested to know his connections to the Triads, the multi-century old Chinese crime organizations. It’s already known that the entire gambling industry on Asia is connected to sophisticated money laundering.]

And why no Clinton again? The sheeple is not that dumb, that it cannot smell something is amiss. The Clinton presidency was as devastating for the (world) middle class as that of G. W. Bush. A difference: Clinton was part of the pre-condition for G. W. Bush.

It’s not just that Clinton deregulated, thus unleashed the financial sharks onto the world (thus making possible the economic crash which followed 2008). It’s not just  that Clinton got away with it. It is that the crushing success of propaganda was blatant: because Clinton was a “Democrat”, he could only be doing good.

Hence Clinton, by succeeding to make the meek, weak proverbial little guys feel that finance unchained was good for them, showed that there were no limits to what propaganda could achieve. The lies of Blair and Bush were just a further little step away.

This is why Quantitative Easing (giving ever more money to banks who had caused the crisis) has been glorified as the way out of the 2008 crisis.

Now there is a new twist. A twist within the twist, after the “Twist” (the Federal Reserve of the USA actually set-up a bank helping scheme it had the effrontery to call… “The Twist”).

The twist has been this: the banks have been slowly squeezed under “Dodd-Frank”… While, discreetly, “Dark Money” in “Dark Pools” or not, has been unleashed, more than ever.

Hence the on-going rise in the price of “art”. “Art is  parallel currency: it’s often not taxed (even in France!). It goes across borders, get stored in other countries, and change hand to hand, without having to be declared to the authorities.  Meanwhile the little guys one thousand dollars (let alone euros!) transactions are scrutinized, and meticulously registered. The currency of the wealthiest people on Earth is a Dark Currency, so dark authorities themselves can’t see, let alone understand it. Why would you want to understand your masters, except to please them?

So what of the Commons in all this? The Commons smell a rat. A rotting rat, and Clinton reminds them of that smell.

So does, by the way Jebb Bush, the latest model from that (Hitler sprung) dynasty. This is why (pseudo) anti-establishment candidates have been running strong.

Yet, the Devil lurks in the ugly, most obscure, worst smelling corners. As long as the Commons are not willing to quit their comfort zone, to relish exploring those disgusting places (as I obviously do), their understanding, thus their action, will not disrupt the oligarchy’s mental order enough to unsettle it.

Patrice Ayme’

Art, Philosophy, Science: Joy Of Knowledge

July 9, 2015

As Ludwig Van said: “O Freunde, nicht diese Toene! Sondern lasst uns angenehmere anstimmen und freundenvollere!” (“Oh friends! Not these tunes! Instead let’s strike more pleasant and friendly sounds”)  [My translation of Beethoven’s 9th lyrics introduction.]

Oh friends, not this Germanoid Greek Euro tragi-comedy! Enough of those critters so unworthy, they can’t conceive of themselves, independently of America!

Considered abstractly, and in essence, philosophy, art, science, and even engineering are extreme aspects of general cognition.

This Is Not Just Art, But Discovery. Grotte Chauvet.

This Is Not Just Art, But Discovery. Grotte Chauvet.

[Chauvet cave is up to 32,400 years old, according to Carbon 14 studies; some of the paintings are 12 meters wide, more than 3 meters tall; the cave was discovered just 20 years ago. Picasso once said after exiting the Lascaux cave back in 1940 that “we have discovered nothing”.]

When intellectual property lawyers describe inventions, they use the term “art”. Was the art innovative?

Each of philosophy, art, science, engineering is both knowledge and method. They are tied together, and go together being the opposite poles of cognition. Science as a body of knowledge, is what is known, for sure. Philosophy, as a body of knowledge, is what ought to be true.

Science as a method is the category (Aristotle!) of all ways to ascertain what is absolutely true.

Science, as a category of established facts, enables a plane to successfully take off, more than once a second, worldwide.

Philosophy, as a method, determines not just what “ought” to be true morally, but what “ought” to be true, as an educated guess. Thus, all and any application of the scientific method, requires the philosophical method. The philosophical method is the first approach, always.

An obvious, and state-of-the-art example, is the notion of infinity, where the debate is not just still on-going, after 25 centuries. Progress is made, in the sense that logical subtleties, which lay uncovered for millennia, were recently revealed. Uncovered for the first time, just as those Chauvet lions. Looking differently at Archimedes’ axiom, 23 centuries old, Model theorists discovered something new about numbers. (Model Theory is a part of pure logic which interface strongly with mathematics; actually I just found, as per Archimedes himself, that it should be called Eudoxus Axiom.) I have proposed to go much further with a different philosophical insight in Number Theory (in still another direction Archimedes could not have imagined).

And what of art in all this? Well, it’s the third pole of cognition, where emotion finds truth, before philosophy and, a fortiori, science, ever can. More than the logos, it depicts, or resounds with, the logics of emotion.

Both art and philosophy need just one fact, one intuition, to make a world. Science finds, painstakingly and patiently, what this world is really made of. Just as patiently and painstakingly, mathematics imagine, what this world is really made of. And then philosophy and art lash back further far out.

Cognition is one, approaches to it, and possibilities, are many. There are many possible worlds in our future minds than we can imagine, and they will blossom, as long we take joy in doing what we do best: “Plus Oultre” (“Plus Ultra”)!

Patrice Ayme’

The Art Of Plutocracy

May 13, 2015

Paintings, and sculptures just sold for unprecedented amounts of money. In a world of deflation, “art” has been increasing in value at 12% a year. A Picasso was sold for 179 million dollars, illustrating the increasing might of plutocracy.

As I have been trying to explain, as recently as yesterday, the wrong obsessions act as cover-ups for the real levers of power (yes, the Atlantic Slave Trade was abominable, but arguably not as much as the alternative). People look at beautiful paintings, and do not realize that they are valued, not at all for themselves, but as UNTAXED CURRENCY.

Hyper expensive art is mostly about tax evasion. Not just about rising inequality.

Nice. Yet, I Can Do Just As Well, But It Would Not Be A Currency For Plutocrats

Nice. Yet, I Can Do Just As Well, But It Would Not Be A Currency For Plutocrats

One can buy a million dollar painting, pay with cash, and it’s not written down anywhere in a financial system, or documented to a tax authority. Hyper expensive art provides with tax free exchange among those who can afford it. Let’s consider the usual suspects.

In Socialist France, “art” escapes most (colossal) taxes on inheritance. As simple as that. How come the so-called “French Socialists” did not notice, nor any other French government in the last few decades? (That is similar to no USA government having noticed that the USA is the greatest tax heavens, anywhere, thanks to the enormous tax code subtleties…)

“Some people use art, especially expensive art, as a form of money laundering,” said Nouriel Roubini, famous for predicting the housing crash, and now a professor at New York University. Some people, yeah. In truth, most plutocrats use art as bin Laden’s Al Qaeda used diamonds: untraceable mean of exchange. A parallel currency, bit-coin for the haves.

It is actually even worse than that: art can be exchanged “in kind” and thus be used as an OFFICIAL NON TAXABLE CURRENCY.

(That “in kind” transactions are NOT taxable is the number one subtlety of the USA tax code system, an exquisite knowledge reserved to plutocrats and their attendants…)

And, once again: how come nobody has noticed? (Go ask the sort of “authorities” who systematically censor my comments at the New York Times… It’s not because what I say is false, or irrelevant; it’s the exact opposite: I get censored because what I say is true, and relevant. Yet dangerously destabilizing as some plutocrats told me to my face.)

Paul Krugman and associates are starting to notice this, that a certain naivety on the part of self-described “progressives” makes progressivity a joke. How can one “progress” when one does not know what is going, nor, even what has been going on?

See Krugman’s post: “Fighting For History”. By manipulating how the past is perceived, minds can be changed in the present. For example, much of American plutocracy aided and abetted Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. This is revealing upon the nature of said American plutocracy.

In 1953, the Bush family was actually paid a gigantic amount of money for managing the American-Silesian company (13 million in 1953 dollars, and that is 125 million in 2015 dollars). Adolf Hitler viewed American-Silesian as the “Reich’s most important defense company“. The Nazi dictator explained to Prescott Bush that he had to nationalize the company, but would he please stay as the excellent manager he was, as he would be fully reimbursed after the war, no matter what. (Prescott Bush had to resign in August 1942, under the pressure of the government of the USA, which nominated him to the U.S. Senate in compensation.)

Had these facts been known by the public, would it have been possible to elect any Bush to the presidency? Or the Vice-Presidency? Or allowed to head the CIA? Of course not. “Progressives” do not study history enough.

Recently organizations representing American Jews asked the French SNCF, which suffered hundreds of its employees executed at the hands of Nazis for acts of resistance, to pay reparations (for having transported Jews who were assassinated).

How come they have not asked something similar from the Bush family?

Not just because they really absolutely do not know.

But because the powers that be know that the questions one asks have to do with the power one wants.

To sort out the plutocratic art problem, the answer is the same as for Greece’s main problem. Determine who owns what, and tax accordingly. Worldwide.

Patrice Ayme’