Books by A.O. Kime
"Metaphysical realities in America's politically-challenged democracy"
"A sagacious accounting of the Stone Age and the beginnings of civilization"
U.S. colleges and trade schools
Odd combination of directories you think? See 'faces'
A.O. Kime Articles:
Shoofly Village ruins
Stone Age history
Stone Age timelines
Stone Age tools
Dynamics of now
Evil (nature of)
Gift of life
Light (nature of)
Time (nature of)
Curse of science
Int'l Criminal Court
Rule of law
(2nd edition [reedit] - Apr 2014) by A.O. Kime
for information on 'renting' this article, see Rent-a-Article
It wasn’t until the 19th century that
ordinary people were able to communicate their thoughts to the world -
something they had yearned to do since the beginning. And, as evidenced
by their countless but usually ineffective one-on-one attempts, most
fervent was this desire. Then finally, at long last - after centuries
of being dominated and controlled by the church and state - the printed
word became accessible to all. While the right to publish (freedom of
the press) had been obtained earlier in the 18th century, the newly
acquired ability to mass produce books was the last part of this great
accomplishment to fall into place.
Then, of course, the 20th century ushered in the telephone, radio talk shows and the Internet… being more ways for the average Joe to widely communicate.
An excerpt from Encyclopedia Britannica’s History of Publishing (external link)
Printing in Europe is inseparable from the Renaissance and Reformation. It grew from the climate and needs of the first, and it fought in the battles of the second. It has been at the heart of the expanding intellectual movement of the past 500 years. Although printing was thought of at first merely as a means of avoiding copying errors, its possibilities for mass-producing written matter soon became evident. In 1498, for instance, 18,000 letters of indulgence were printed at Barcelona. The market for books was still small, but literacy had spread beyond the clergy and had reached the emerging middle classes. The church, the state, universities, reformers, and radicals were all quick to use the press. Not surprisingly, every kind of attempt was made to control and regulate such a “dangerous” new mode of communication. Freedom of the press was pursued and attacked for the next three centuries; but by the end of the 18th century a large measure of freedom had been won in western Europe and North America, and a wide range of printed matter was in circulation. The mechanization of printing in the 19th century and its further development in the 20th, which went hand in hand with increasing literacy and rising standards of education, finally brought the printed word to its powerful position as a means of influencing minds and, hence, societies.
Certainly, it must be said, when the grip on communications
by the church and state was finally broken was a great milestone… as
great or greater than any milestone. However, the focus here is on
the age-old dream to widely share one’s thoughts, the perils and our
metaphysical connection to their frustrating challenges.
Stepping back a few centuries, the ability to widely express one’s views - what they believe and where they stand on the issues - had long been dangerous to do. Yet, history has told us there were always people who took a stand and kept it regardless. A stand, they felt, was the only way they might impact the direction of justice. In extreme cases, it was the attempt to make life worth living - just existing wasn’t an option.
But, a heavy price was paid for the outside chance one could make a difference.
Of the more notable instances, it is well documented by the Catholic
church that many ‘heretics’ chose to be burned alive at the stake rather
than renounce their views. By the second half of the 18th century an estimated
burned at the stake in Spain alone. For anti-government stances the likely
outcome was almost as horrid … although any chance to recant was practically
non-existent. Jailing, torture or death loomed… but in far greater numbers.
Throughout history governments have slaughtered their own people by the
Then and now, the addictiveness of power is responsible for the evil within governments which has been proven insatiable at every level. It poses the greatest threat to freedom and why citizens will always challenge their governments. How the taste of power can be so addictive is utterly remarkable. In comparison heroin is a lollipop.
Before the ability to widely communicate came into being, it was almost
impossible for one to gather support for the purpose of overturning an unjust
policy. They couldn't get the numbers. So lonely and deadly were their
largely futile attempts. One man versus the establishment might only make
the tiniest of dents.
While very rare someone could muster a consensus, any uprising or revolution indicates one or more persons somehow managed despite the prevailing apathy, despair and hopelessness. Overcoming these pathetic drags on society is nothing short of a miracle. But since one can’t count on a miracle, so very disheartening it must have been knowing beforehand their chances were slim.
Yet, even the tiniest of gains often required the death of hundreds if not thousands. In effect, the good resulting from a single death was not even measurable. While occasionally one's sacrifice might have contributed to success in some small way, it is absolutely incredible one would willingly risk their life for such a meager gain.
Yet, risk everything they did. Not for themselves but for their grandchildren and future generations they did. After all, changes are agonizingly slow to materialize… sure to take decades. Even today.
With enough of the background now painted, let's see how we're still affected.
In order to explain the unwavering commitment of those today who most fervently champion human rights - which their personal experiences most often can't - one might quickly think of two possibilities. Either God has a hand or in another life they were these people (past life). However, these conclusions would likely arise as the result of everyone sharing the same subconsciousness... usually referred to as the 'pool of subconsciousness'.
While it's just a theory, it's a very good one. Now, let's
assume it's true and see how it would affect today's activist.
Perhaps the following will bolster the credence of this theory as well.
This common pool of subconsciousness - which we are all connected and draw from (in addition to our personal subconsciousness) - would contain all sorts of vibes including the frustration from being underfoot for so long. The most unusual psychological makeup of the activist - being a volatile mix of tenacity and bravery - must be influenced somehow and the most likely cause is this pool of subconsciousness. This influence is the fuel for any action taken although a spark would likely be needed (something aggravating).
This pool - which is comprised of all memories - would explain their largely reasonless loathing of government and authority in general. Activists might also have a hatred for Catholicism or Islam even though they were likely never personally wronged by these institutions. So why Islam too? Well, who knows over which incident… maybe the deaths due to the Moors invasion of Spain in the 8th century. But, it matters not which. Any tragic event can make the point.
Being tethered in such a way - being subconsciously privy to every human
event (at least the cumulative emotional element as a whole) - not only
explains the activist's overall fervor but would be exceedingly
phenomenal. We've all seen their mystifying bravery (against all
odds)... being a spectacle to behold. It is most evident in mass
This phenomenon is especially evident in those people who become activists at a very young age (say, in their teens or early 20s). Their drive seems to have come from out of nowhere. After all, how many bad experiences with government can one have at such a young age? Not enough to warrant it, one would think.
For those who aren’t activists until they are 50, 60 or 70, and while probably largely due to what they have seen for themselves, it doesn’t necessarily rule out this subconscious connection. One thing is clear about emanation, a connection is a matter of degree which in turn is predicated on the belief in the process and the effort to connect.
As an analogy it’s a signal being broadcast on a particular frequency but as it concerns the pool of subconsciousness how it emanates is quite different. Normally a divine connection requires a great deal of effort but in this case it appears entirely automatic. That emanating for the activist however (the substance of emanation varies) is seemingly dependent on their metaphysical connection to the past. In particular the unjustness.
These activists may not even know the reason themselves... what drives them. But something is and the unsettled scores of the past is the most likely reason. After all, unsettled scores have a way of lingering and as 'bottled up frustrations' they are the activist's source of energy. While the same killers, torturers and oppressors may no longer exist - the institutions or mindsets they represented would and thus the activist's unchanging target. Keeping score, of course, is our collective subconsciousness (the pool).. It's all about the demand for atonement. One could call it revenge.
This phenomenon also applies to the freedom fighter and war correspondent. Their tenacity and bravery simply goes beyond any explanation the psychiatrists or psychologists can muster. Of course, that's because these professions refuse to recognize the existence of emanation.
But since no activist champions every cause - being quite selective - it makes one wonder why. Are they being influenced more by the lingering wishes of their linage? In that case it would be effectively the same as having a 'past life'... and perhaps largely responsible for that literal belief.
While activists can always ignore or tune out these metaphysical messages, odds are they'd be far less energized. You wouldn't find them on the front lines.
Lastly, it shouldn’t matter how old or recent these historical occurrences. Much like our own subconsciousness, our collective subconsciousness is forever psychologically impacted by a wrong too... but all of them. And, like the human subconsciousness, it never forgets.
But wouldn’t one’s knowledge of history (via history books) explain
one’s anger and/or provide their reason to hate? Well, on the surface it
seems logical except why should someone today care what England's
King Edward did in the 13th century or what the Moors did in the 8th
century? Specifically, why is this caring transcending the ages when it
can have no impact? Well, it's memories regurgitated with the bad ones
forever seeking some kind of atonement. The activists are therefore the
atone seekers, the responsibility enforcers. We witness this in our
personal lives as well, in our later years we try to atone for our past
mistakes. Call it the 'balancing of the scales'... a seemingly
One can also make the case that written historical accounts are also memories. Although in printed form, they are still memories (they are ‘recalling’) and always intertwined with memories are emotions. However, since neither ink nor paper are capable of transmitting emotions there must be another carrier. It is hereby proposed that the carrier is our collective subconsciousness (the pool) in that it would contain the impression of the incident (the memory) and with it the common reaction at the time. So then, when we learn of the incident we should also be experiencing the same emotional reaction to some degree. But if one's spiritual forces have been injured significantly then they are just absorbing the cold hard facts.
However, since nobody is emotionally affected by all historical accounts - even though they could be considered equal in some manner (equally egregious or sad for example) - there must be a reason. As posed earlier, perhaps because none of OUR ancestors were involved?
Skeptics would also argue that any emotion arising from reading about a
historical incident is simply due to one’s imagination. For example, in
visualizing the detailed accounting one might imagine the horror. While that is
effectively true, little is known about what constitutes the imagination
or how it operates. We don’t have to experience something (or see it)
to imagine for example. Even some dreams tells
us that. Wherefrom comes our data base? How is it put together? Our
data base may be shaped in dozens of ways with words being just one of the
'prompters' (words, specifically, bring the data to the surface).
Since some words can be used in a dimensional fashion (past tense, present tense) along with others useful contextually, and still others having emphasizing aspects - therefore indicating the great flexibility in languages - there's no telling the limitations of any one word. A word, and especially certain combinations, can be exceedingly powerful. While we all know words can also conjure up visions and emotions, they don't always so the emphasis here is on 'can'. It requires receptiveness and that's when the pool of subconsciousness gets involved. Effectively, it's the 'memory container' and the 'emotion connector'.
While the ability to speak is a magical process unto itself, that
languages consist of words makes it all the more magical.
Effectively, it’s like “what can a word do for you today?”
In response to a draft of this article it was suggested by a friend that
the pool of subconsciousness could be part of (or the) soul of man.
Well, it all depends on how the definition of the soul is put forth but
if given enough latitude it could be said. For sure, however, it can be
said the pool is either part of our soul or that we’re somehow
connected to it… but who can say which? In ethereal matters one can
only impart the general idea in that everything is based on vague
Part of our soul or not, for simplification purposes the pool of subconsciousness is portrayed herein as a ’stand alone’ phenomenon and therefore we’re just connected.
It was also suggested that the mind of man could be evolving and now, as a result, includes this pool of subconsciousness. Well, either specifically that or humans are evolving into being more receptive. Some humans, at least.
Not all voices - in whatever medium - will be heard even today however…
but often the same message said enough times will be heard. The ‘louder’
it becomes. Each voice then is a contribution. Of course, the better
presentations are the most effective. Having grabbed the needed
attention with some very effective ‘way with words’, these words often
become adopted. Or maybe the whole presentation. Assuredly, there is
nothing more effective than things said best - although it can’t be
accomplished without the help of the muse.
The ultimate use of words is likely beyond the reach of mortals however as evidenced by the fact the muse are never satisfied. Grudgingly, they might only issue one a passing grade (one can sense whether they got one or not).
Of course, it’s also necessary to deal with the down-to-earth realities.
Namely, it’s helpful for a writer to already be known in the right
circles. Or to already have a large following. All other writers and
speakers can only add their voice and probably most accept that role.
But, as was soon learned, the freedom of the press doesn’t guarantee a wide audience. A wide audience must be fought over… gleaned somehow from the social landscape. Our ancestors likely never imagined this problem. After all, so many voices can now speak at once. The whispers our ancestors knew became a deafening chatter about all matters under the sun. One must now vigorously compete to be heard… especially if it‘s about a new matter.
Nor could our ancestors imagine such an avalanche of information or the profusion of ‘causes’ we now have. With so many causes circulating it’s become a matter of having to pick and choose. After all, one can’t effectively support every cause. There are now hundreds if not thousands.
So… if the ghosts of our ancestors were to know this, what would they suggest?
Well, perhaps their spokesman would say…
“Swing your swords and axes as wide as you can my friends, and be relentless… never complain of having too many opportunities to slay injustices.”
Then, likely, but in a raised voice…
“Power bases are the biggest threat to freedom so fight the hardest for congressional term limits. Sadly, in 1787 a huge mistake was made by deleting them from the Articles of Confederation."
Then, likely, as he begins to fade…
“Limit too the bureaucrat, judge and newscaster.”
Personal note: If I made my case it's largely due to your very healthy imagination.
Last modified: 03/09/16