LEFT- RIGHT

I've wondered for a long, long time, both during my life in the UK and since I arrived in the USA, how it can be that humans see matters of political importance in such diametrically different ways.....the black and white of it - the liberal and conservative of it, to attach available labels.

I attempted to write about the topic in April last year, in a post Political Preference - Brain Differences? Astrology in there anywhere?

If astrology "works", even at the most basic of levels, planet Saturn and/or its sign of rulership Capricorn (and possibly even its sign of rulership before Uranus was discovered, Aquarius), would have to be in some way more prominent or in a stronger position and without heavy conflict, in the natal chart of a dyed-in-the-wool right-wing conservative type. I don't have a view on what would likely be prominent in the chart of a strongly liberal left-winger, it's not as clear cut. Perhaps simply the absence of such astrological indications mentioned above would set political preference in the other direction?

Yesterday, How the Right Brain Works and What That Means for Progressives - an essay at Alter Net by Chris Mooney approached the topic (minus any astrology, of course). The essay draws on the author's book due to be published in April (The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science—and Reality ) and on certain interviews.

The essay is interesting. I found several comments in the thread beneath it excellent assessments also. Two especially caught my eye:

From Perry Logan

A good way to frame it is to say conservatives in the U.S. have an incredibly strong herd instinct, whereas lefties tend to be weak or deficient in this area.

The Right are profoundly tribal. This intense group instinct affects both the emotions and the thought processes of conservatives.The most notable cognitive difference is that the Right's concept of truth itself is tribal--that is, conservatives only accept information/disinformation from conservative sources. Liberal or lefty sources of information are rejected out of hand. In addition, righties will categorize any unwanted or threatening information as being "liberal" or tainted.

That's why the Right can reject an entire scientific discipline--atmospheric science--for the simple reason that the information is unacceptable. Those scientists--hundreds of them, from all nations, all over the world--must be lyin' libs. The whole thing must be a plot.

Likewise, when I offer years of research and reviews from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, which one might have thought an unimpeachable source, showing that guns are just as deadly and dangerous as common sense would predict, the gun guys just snort. "Harvard? What do they know?" and trot out some stats their cousin cooked up in the basement, which are more to their liking.

Lefties are not clear-eyed, objective observers, by any means. But in my experience, they are rarely capable of such a profound degree of cognitive bias.

The result of all this reality-filtering is that the Right literally have their own facts about everything. It's as if they lived in a parallel universe, where liberals are the cause of all our problems, if the world could only see. Those are some weird brains they have over there.

When I say the left are "deficient" in herd instinct, I don't mean it as a criticism. Our relatively weak herd impulse is one of our virtues, it seems to me. At the same time, it puts us at a distinct disadvantage in politics. We're not the great followers our rightward brethren are.

The Obots are very tribal, by the way. Obots--Obamacrats--are strikingly similar to wingnuts in their thinking and behavior. That's because Obots are not true lefties, but are members of personality cult centered around the Bammer.

And..... from a different angle:

Along Came Jones

I found this article interesting from a philological prospective but I am not so sure of it's practical use. While there are certainly differences in the extremes, those difference begin to dissipate when considering the total attitudes between the extremes. There has always been this difference and likely always be a difference. I also suspect that civility has had it's ups and downs and will continue to ebb and flow. However, I don't believe these differences account for the problems we face now or similarly in 1890 or 1920.

There is a percentage of a group somewhere between 5-10% that either works at cross purposes, is unsuitable, is delinquent, or what have you. If you start with this premise it becomes clearer the nature of most problems. The problem society faces is how to justly isolate this percentage so as not to impede the group.

To cut this short and offer a quick summary of today's conditions:

1. 95% of people will obey safe driving rules either by choice of peer pressure, while 5% will not. Thus the need for traffic laws to protect the 95%.
2. We have allowed a small percentage of people, many of which are psychopaths or sociopaths, to game our political, economic, and social systems. When judged by wealth alone many are at the upper levels of respectability.
3.This small percentage of wealthy misfits uses distraction to confuse the other 95%.

These periods of the 1890's, 1920's, and today are similar in this case and I am sure there are other similar periods in history. If I had to guess, it is generational in nature, ie: one generation of abuse followed by one of reform, one at rest. and one diminishing group diligence. It starts over again as the last generation that remembers dies off.

"...one generation of abuse followed by one of reform, one at rest. and one diminishing group diligence. It starts over again as the last generation that remembers dies off. That proposition would benefit from some research, astrological and otherwise - as would the original conundrum of why people seem to naturally gravitate left or right politically. Perhaps more posts on this, sometime, if I can get my head around the best way to do it.

EQUINOX & Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson

It's not feeling very springlike around here - stormy, wet with flash flood warnings, the odd tornado watch, but the grass is growing and greening, at last, and trees are budding.....so it must really be spring!

For winter's rains and ruins are over,
And all the season of snows and sins;
The days dividing lover and lover,
The light that loses, the night that wins;
And time remembered is grief forgotten,
And frosts are slain and flowers begotten,
And in green underwood and cover
Blossom by blossom the spring begins.

~ Algernon Charles Swinburne (1837–1909)
Atalanta in Calydon (1865)


Neil deGrasse Tyson is the 21st century's version of the late Carl Sagan. A guy who has that rare talent of engaging, educating and entrancing an audience of people quite unversed in science and astrophysics, with never a hint of pomposity or talking down. He's obviously in love with his subject - the mark of greatness in any teacher or communicator.

He had some contact with Carl Sagan: (From Wiki):

Astronomer Carl Sagan, who was a faculty member at Cornell University, tried to recruit Tyson to Cornell for undergraduate studies. During an interview with writer Daniel Simone, Tyson said, "Interestingly, when I applied to Cornell, my application dripped of my passion for the study and research of the Universe. Somehow the admissions office brought my application to the attention of the late Dr. Sagan, and he actually took the initiative and care to contact me. He was very inspirational and a most powerful influence. Dr. Sagan was as great as the universe, an effective mentor." But Tyson chose to attend Harvard University, where he majored in physics ...

For Astro fans: Dr. Tyson has Sun/Mercury and Venus in Libra.....his charming presentation style! Neptune/Jupiter in Scorpio, his dedication and passion for the subject. Moon somewhere in the first half of Cancer - his sensitivity to his audience. Saturn in Sagittarius, Mars in Gemini.

I came across this video yesterday. Watching it helps to wash away side-effects of the Santorums of this world. It's appropriate, too, for this day of equinox:

Moonlighting and its Piscean Credentials: Al Jarreau, Bruce Willis, Lee Holdridge.

Before Sun leaves zodiac sign Pisces for another year:

Al Jarreau, jazz singer, whose birthday it was last week (12 March) first arrived on my radar with his recording of the theme from a favourite 1980s TV show Moonlighting. The Moonlighting theme was composed by another Sun in Pisces type, composer and orchestrator Lee Holdridge (born March 3, 1944). Leading male actor in Moonlighting, Bruce Willis (Happy Birthday today BW!) makes up a trio of Sun in Pisces types involved in the show's pedigree.

Al Jarreau was born in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin in 1940. He didn't set out with an ambition to find success in a musical career. With a Bachelor of Science Degree in Psychology, and Masters Degree in Vocational Rehabilitation he became a counselor, in California. He began, as a hobby I guess, performing in small jazz clubs in Los Angeles. His first LP was released in the mid-1960s, and by 1992 he had received a fifth Grammy, and become part of a rare category of artists who have won a Grammy in three categories, jazz, pop and R&B.

Lee Holdridge, composer of the Moonlighting theme has written, arranged, or conducted for numerous artists in the music industry, has penned countless scores for both TV shows and motion pictures. Born on 3 March 1944 in Port-Au-Prince, Haiti, raised in Costa Rica, Holdridge began studying music at age ten. By teenage had decided his chosen path would be composition. He relocated to Boston, later to New York City. Holdridge composed chamber works, rock compositions, theater music, and background scores for films and TV. Neil Diamond convinced Holdridge to move to Los Angeles to write for him. They collaborated on the film score for Jonathan Livingston Seagull. Many years of scoring for film and TV followed, leading to work with some of the music industry's biggest names, as well as several albums of his own works.


Third Sun in Pisces type, Bruce Willis - actor with music as something of a sideline - co-starred with Cybill Shepherd in TV's light-hearted show about a private detective agency:Moonlighting, it originally aired from 1985 to 1989.

Bruce was born on March 19, 1955 in Idar-Oberstein, West Germany. His American father, in the military, and German-born mother, later re-located to the USA. Bruce grew up in New Jersey. He discovered his flare for acting in college, with a stroke of luck landed a plum role for his TV debut: David Addison, wise-cracking private eye in Moonlighting. Movies followed, first light romantic comedy, later in a transition I've never been able to understand or appreciate, he became the definitive tough guy as disillusioned cop John McClane in Die Hard and its several sequels.

Many more and varied movies followed, including some interesting roles in the sci-fi genre :12 Monkeys, Sixth Sense, The Fifth Element, for example.

He has now starred in more than sixty films, said to have grossed over 6 billion dollars in worldwide box offices, making him sixth highest grossing star of all time.

Bruce's musical credentials: his musical inclinations have been clear, even from several scenes in Moonlighting.He has performed with his own Blues Band for many years, his albums have sold over 4 million copies and have become worldwide collectors' items.

ASTROLOGY




My desktop computer crashed before I had a chance to complete this post and set up all three natal charts, so Lee Holdridge's chart is missing here. An ephemeris tells that along with natal Sun in Pisces, he has Mercury and Venus in Aquarius, Mars, Saturn and Uranus in Gemini, Moon in either Gemini or Cancer. Quite an Airy mix added to an emotional Pisces base note!

Al Jarreau's planets spread mainly into Aries and Taurus, remain in a focused bunch with plenty of emphasis on Venus-ruled, musical Taurus. His early pull into counseling connects to both Pisces Sun/Mercury and Sagittarius rising - Pisces and Sagittarius, both ruled by Jupiter have sensitive, philosophical and spiritual traits, all valuable in that sphere of work.

Bruce Willis's chart has a classic "splash" configuration - but with emphasis on Pisces and Aquarius - Sun/Mercury in Pisces, Moon/Venus in Aquarius - and hmmmm, got to untangle this......
Aquarius's ruler, Uranus is in Moon's rulership sign, Cancer; and Jupiter, traditional ruler of Pisces also in Cancer conjoining Uranus. There's a clear blending of eccentric Aquarius and emotional Pisces traits in Bruce's charcter, with the ultra-sensitivity of Cancer thrown in. He hides extreme sensitivity with that quirky Aquarian wit of his, but it's there, for all to see - in his face!

Finally, a reminder of what links these three Pisces-types - some scenes and memories from Moonlighting, that wonderful, long-gone, series. They don't make 'em like this anymore!

RICK SANTORUM 2016?

Rick Santorum, "dark horse". I had been hoping that honour would go to Jon Huntsman. Santorum really did come from behind (no pun intended re the definition of his surname in the slang or urban dictionaries).

The Republicans' campaign for nomination of presidential candidate has developed in increasingly bizarre directions. Santorum makes Rick Perry seem like a benign, if rather scatty, uncle.....And there I was, a few weeks/months ago, thinking that it was Perry who'd try to lead the USA into Dominionism.

Curiouser and curiouser!

I've avoided looking at Santorum's chart 'til now. What prompted me to do so was remark - almost a throw-away remark, part of a comment on a political website....it went something like this:

...even if Romney cannot steal the White House from Obama in 2012, Santorum will be the Republican frontrunner in 2016 and it will be their turn.....

Bearing in mind the pendulum-swing effect which is commonly a part of electoral patterns, and because Santorum, barring any bad slip-ups in the future, will have a feather in his cap for doing so well in this campaign......need I go on?

Here's Santorum's natal chart, set for 12 noon, in the absence of a birth time. I'm not going to interpret it fully - astrologers have done that already, and their views on it are easily accessible via Google search. I'm looking only for anything indicating some big change in the guy's life, due to happen around 2016.



Most significant indication of change is this: by November 2017 transiting Saturn will reach the exact degree it held at the time Santorum was born - this is known as a "Saturn Return". For Santorum, it'll be the second such event in his life cycle thus far.

In layman's language from Wiki:

In astrology, the Saturn return is an alleged phenomenon which is described as influencing a person's life development at 27 to 29 or 30-year intervals. These intervals or "returns" coincide with the approximate time it takes the planet Saturn to make one orbit around the sun, i.e. 29.4 years. It is believed by astrologers that, as Saturn "returns" to the degree in its orbit occupied at the time of birth, a person crosses over a major threshold and enters the next stage of life. With the first Saturn return, a person leaves youth behind and enters adulthood. With the second return, maturity. And with the third and usually final return, a person enters wise old age. These periods are estimated to occur at roughly the ages of 28-30, 56-60 and 84-90

Although November 2017 is a year after the 2016 General Election, I still see his Saturn Return as significant in this context. I recall reading that Saturn Returns can be "felt" a year or so before and after Saturn hits one's exact birth degree. The indication of lifestyle change could manifest in a number of ways, connected or unconnected with his political aspirations. It'll be interesting to watch what happens.

Of course, should Mitt Romney (or any other Republican) beat President Obama in November - all bets are off. In 2016 we'd then be waiting for a left-winger (a real one this time) to save the day.

All things considered, astrology aside, I'm leaning towards 4 years of Romney being the better outcome. That would almost certainly ensure Santorum would never get anywhere near The White House in 2016. With a President Romney there'd likely be no discernible difference from the last 4 years with President Obama, but the Democrats might start opposing stuff that Obama would have managed to get away with free and clear - that alone could make a President Romney worthwhile! Then, come 2016, with The People more awake than ever after continued efforts by The Occupy movement, the road would begin to turn sharply towards that real time of revolution and reform(hopefully bloodless) that I reckon will be due in or around 2025.

St. Patrick and The Cosmic Serpent

Happy St Patrick's Day!

As I have no known Irish credentials I was going to give today a miss posting-wise, until I read a piece on the legend of St. Patrick by blogger Chris Weigant written in 2010, but he linked back to it yesterday. In a nutshell Mr Weigant explained that the legend of St. Patrick ridding Ireland of snakes is, of course, a metaphor. The snakes were not real snakes but images of snakes allegedly carried (as tattoos?) on the arms of Druids who were, in effect, Ireland's priesthood before the coming of Christianity. St. Patrick, via the legend, is being credited with ridding Ireland of Druidic influence, so that Christianity could flourish.





That tidbit of information reminded me of something else I'd read earlier in the week at Cherie's Place, the blog of Cherry Pie who mentioned a book titled The Cosmic Serpent by Jeremy Narby. Putting two and two together - and I hope not making five and a half - perhaps what the Druids carried on their arms was an image of the Cosmic Serpent, symbolic snake representing the DNA of life? The cosmic serpent is found as a symbol in shamanism all over the world, according to Jeremy Narby.