Posts Tagged ‘latin’

Puente Tito

Puente Tito

Tito Puente, Millie P, and the Poncho Sanchez Orchestra

Latin Pop

Latin Pop

Enrique Iglesias, Latin Superstar and Maltese Citizen

When you think of successful Latin music stars, one name instantly comes to mind: Enrique Iglesias. The son of a successful musician, Iglesias has rocked the English-speaking music industry in more ways than one.

Born in Madrid in 1975, Enrique's early life was spent in Spain. He and his brother were sent to live with their father, singer Julio Iglesias, in Miami in 1983. That may have been when his passion for music blossomed and grew.

With the release of his first album in 1995, Enrique established himself as somewhat of a phenomenon. The album sold half a million copies in the first week alone. This is a rare feat, not only for an unknown musician but especially for a non-English language album.

His subsequent albums continued to fare much better than anyone, even Enrique, expected. He developed a loyal fan base, many of whom didn't even understand his Spanish lyrics. Several of his songs have appeared in television shows and in movies.

In 1999, Enrique crossed over in the English-language music market with his fourth album, Enrique. There were several notable Latin artists on the English-language charts at that time, and Enrique's emergence as a crossover artist gained him countless new fans. Since his first English-language release, Enrique has made albums in both Spanish and English.

Since his rise to fame, this down-to-earth superstar has seemed to live a golden life. His albums have all been well-received, making him one of the very few Latin-American crossover artists to enjoy long-standing success. He has performed another difficult crossover by acting in several small roles, including one alongside Antonio Banderas in the movie Once Upon a Time in Mexico.

Enrique Iglesias has become the biggest-selling Spanish-language pop star in the world. He has achieved a record breaking 16 number one songs on the Billboard Latin chart. His albums have sold over 65 million copies. His fame extends all over the world, even in countries where the primary language is neither Spanish nor English.

Recently, Enrique performed in Malta for the Isle of MTV Malta Special. He won over the locals by proclaiming his love for the island nation while enjoying the multitude of tourist activities there. Malta was apparently just as enamored of the star. Following his performance, he was awarded honorary Maltese citizenship by Valletta's mayor, Dr. Paul Borg Olivier. He is only the second foreigner to receive this honor.

Enrique leads what might, in the music industry, be considered a quiet life. He has a long-term girlfriend, Russian tennis player Anna Kournikova, and he suffers from very little negative publicity. When he was accused by Howard Stern of lip synching, he immediately performed live on Stern's radio show to clear his name. He maintains a good-natured and positive public image despite having been in the limelight for well over a decade.

It's hard to imagine this superstar feeling that he needs to improve his music, but he has been quoted as saying that he is constantly striving to make better songs. He is clearly a focused and driven artist who will continue to capture hearts all around the world as his star continues to rise.

latin pop megamix

Tjader Cal

Tjader Cal

Dave Brubeck: The Master of Improvisation And Unusual Rhythms

Jazz pianist Dave Brubeck is one of the stalwarts of jazz piano. His music is characterized by unusual time signatures and can be either extreme - totally dynamic or or completely relaxed. His most famous piece - Take Five - is so popular it has taken on almost cult status, and rightfully so.

David Warren Brubeck (aka Dave Brubeck)was born on the 6th of December, 1920. His thing for music came from his mother - an aspiring concert pianist who was formally taught. She used to take piano classes to supplement her income. Despite having such organized music at home, Dave Brubeck took to his own way of learning and playing the piano opting to create his own melodies. He purposely avoided a situation where he had to read music and play using his bad eyesight as an excuse.

When in college, it was discovered that he could not read written music. This caused for the professor in charge to take action and expel him but his other professors stood by the fact that despite his inability to read music, he had a good abilities when it came to counterpointing and harmony. Taking his case as an exception, it was decided that he be allowed to graduate from the institute promising to never teach piano.

Armed with a degree from the University Of The Pacific, he was drafted to join the army in 1942. During his service in the army, he met his future partner in music, saxaphonist Paul Desmond. While serving in the US Defence Forces, he played in a band which brought both fame and dislike to his musical stylings.

After almost four years serving in the Army, he went back to college and got himself enrolled in Mills College in Oakland, California. There he studied with the French composer Darius Milhaud who recognized his unusual talent for improvisation and uncommon rhythms.

Immediately after finishing his course in Mills College, he was signed to Fantasy Records in Berkeley California. He started singing with an octet and a trio which eventually became a quartet when Army pal Paul Desmond joined the group which originally included Cal Tjader and Ron Crotty.

Taking after his inclination to play music that was more unusual than not at the time, they recorded some music which didn't have enough mass appeal to be a success which hence gave them very few gigs. After failing to draw in crowds, Dave Brubeck spent many years playing nothing but the opposite of what he had intended to when he started out playing jazz standards with the other members of the trio except Paul Desmond.

In 1951 after an almost fatal swimming accident, Dave formed his next group The Dave Brubeck Quartet - this time with Desmond in it. They were the house band for awhile at the Black hawk nightclub in San Francisco. The new quartet was very successful. They started touring college campuses and made a series of recordings including Jazz At Oberlin, Jazz Goes To College and Jazz Goes To Junior College.

The fame and success got Dave Brubeck space on the cover of Time Magazine - the only jazz musician to have the honor since Louis Armstrong. Sometime around the mid 1950's one half of the group - two members Bob Bates and Joe Dodge - quit the group. They were replaced by Eugene Wright and Joe Morello. Eugene Wright's presence in the band put the band on a black list for some venues since he he was a African American. Many concerts were called off because club owners were averse to having an African-American play in their premises.

Upon realizing that there were plans to not film Wright during a particular television show on which they were performing ,Dave canceled the appearance, winning praise from other musicians and many jazz critics. 1959 saw the release of Time Out which had the one quality of Dave Brubeck that he is known by today - unusual time signatures. Despite them not being in common time but instead in 5/4 time, the album was a hit and the album was soon certified platinum. When Dave plays Take Five at concerts, the audience almost always goes wild with applause.

Dave's next act was a musical that he and his wife Iola wrote - a jazz musical based on the experiences that they had during an international tour on behalf of the US State Department. It had all the big names of the time - Louis Armstrong, Hendricks & Ross, Lambert and Carmen McRae. Later albums of the quartet include Time Further Out: Miro Reflections (1961), Countdown: Time in Outer Space,Time Changes and Time In. All these albums had iconic album covers by contemporary artists. They held a concert titled At Carnegie Hall in 1963 which was described as Dave Brubeck's greatest concert, but 40 years later he is still playing great concert after great concert.

Cal Tjader-guachi guara

Greatest Salsa

Greatest Salsa

Debunking the Myth of Freedom and Democracy in America with Facts and Overseas Experiences

•    "America is the epitome of democracy, the best form of government the world has ever known. The world envies our form of government by the people."
•    "America is the freest nation on Earth."
•    "In America we have something called freedom which those in other countries don't have and wish they did."
•    "It's a free country."
•    "Everyone in the rest of the world dreams of coming to America."

These cherished fanatical beliefs of America and its propagandists have no actual basis in fact or reality, yet they are chanted by many Americans, their media and education system as a religion and set of Gospel truths that are universally agreed upon and unquestionable. Thus they are the antithesis to a free-thinking and truth-seeking mind.

This is not an essay promoting anti-Americanism, but merely exposes the truth. We compare fact vs. fiction, reality vs. BS, truth vs. propaganda, and experience vs. illusion. Truth is our bottom line, not conformity.

What is very revealing is that only those Americans who have never left their country for long believe in these myths, whereas American expats who have lived in multiple countries or are well-traveled (including me) do NOT, but in fact KNOW that they are hogwash.  Now, what does that tell you?!

As a matter of fact, America is alone in believing that it is the epitome of freedom and democracy. The rest of the world does not share these myths about America. Even fascist regimes, dictators and terrorists do not see America as a "free country" (contrary to what Hollywood and the US media misportray). Rather, they see America as an evil Imperial Empire trying to take away the freedoms of the rest of the world, and attempting to dominate and control everyone to take advantages of their resources! (they did that to the Native American Indians, so why wouldn't they do that with the rest of the world too?)

(Remember that no one considers themself to be "the bad guy". Even Hitler and Stalin do not view themselves as "evil" or "bad guys". They found excuses and reasons to justify in their own mind whatever atrocities they committed as "righteous".)

These facts shatter these cherished American myths about itself, exposing them for what they really are - pure self-propaganda. Thus, America will NEVER confront these facts, only deny them, for they destroy the propaganda of delusions and illusions that hold the country's morale together.

With that, I ask: Why does America perpetuate the myth that it is the only country in the world that has "freedom" and indoctrinates its citizens with this belief, when this is not supported by any facts, not agreed by the rest of the world or even by well-traveled Americans?

We will get into the reasons why later.

These myths about freedom and democracy are programmed into the American populace, who are taught to chant them like religious mantras without thought or critical examination. There is no question that it's a form of brainwashing.

The few who think outside the box and are able to bypass their programming see through the falsity of these lies. However, there is a price to pay for knowing the truth, which in this case is to be subject to the ridicule and contempt of the herd mentality for not conforming to its religious fanaticism, all in the name of patriotism and pride. So much for "freedom".

Let's dissect these myths and see how they match up to facts, commmon sense and real life experiences:

1) "America is the epitome of freedom and democracy for the world to emulate. It is the ideal form of government by the people that the world envies."

We will get into freedom later, but for now, let's address the democracy issue.  Technically, a democracy is defined as a "rule by the majority".  Hollywood, the media and our education system all chant that America is the epitome of democracy as though it were a Gospel Truth that is universally agreed upon (but it is not by far). It is so ingrained in our culture that most never dare to question it.

The founding fathers never intended America to be a democracy and in fact didn't even believe in one. Most Americans would be shocked to learn this. Anyone who casually researches the American form of government and its founding in the late 18th Century will see that technically, America was not set up as a democracy but as a Constitutional Republic.

A Republic is "rule by law" and tends to be the most just and stable form of government, protecting the rights of its citizens while limiting the power of government to a minimal level.

The first video above contains quotes from the founding fathers expressing their thoughts on democracy, which you will see was anything but positive.

In fact, there is no mention of the word "democracy" in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. Even the Pledge of Allegiance cited by school children mentions that America is a Republic:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The founding fathers were intellectual elites who knew their history. They knew that a democracy was unsustainable, for it was in essence a rule by a lawless mob. The fundamental flaw in a democracy is that the majority is unrestrained.

Critics of democracy use this revealing analogy:  "Democracy is like three wolves and one sheep voting on what's for dinner." In other words, if 51 percent of the population voted to harm or seize the property of the other 49 percent, who's going to protect the 49 percent? This reveals the inherent flaw in democracy, which America does not dare bring light to.

In fact, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights were designed to PROTECT you FROM a democracy! (Most Americans would flip if they heard that) For example, in a true democracy, or a "rule by majority", if most people in your town voted to seize your property and hang you, your assets would be confiscated and you'd be hanged. Simple as that. But in a Republic with a Constitution of rights, your rights and property are protected by law. If you are accused of anything, you have the right to a fair trial. That's how a Republic works. And that's how it PROTECTS you from a true democracy.

The ancient Greeks tried having a true democracy, but it failed, led to chaos and eventually to oligarchy. Even the greatest Greek philosopher, Socrates, did not believe in a true democracy. He advocated that the wisest and most virtuous rule society, not the common populace. In Plato's great work "The Republic", Socrates likened a "democracy" to the crew of a ship committing mutiny against their captain and taking the helm. In such a scenario, the ship, run by "the mob", would never be run efficiently nor get to its proper destination, as the mutineers would constantly bicker, quarrel and change their minds. There would be no order. The ship would be blown around by the wind, so to speak.

So why doesn't a true democracy work, you might ask? Well you see, most people are followers, not leaders or thinkers. They are emotional, not logical or rational. Being gullible, they are changeable on a whim, quick to jump to conclusions, and not wise. A true democracy is like having a mob take control (as in Socrates' example above) without laws or protection. It is neither efficient, stable nor sustainable. And besides, there is no logical reason to presuppose that the majority is always right either. As the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius said, "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding onself in the ranks of the insane."

Though on paper, America began as a Constitutional Republic, it gradually evolved into a form of oligarchy (rule by the elite), plutocracy (rule by the rich) and corporatocracy (rule by corporations). These terms are more accurate to describe America's governance than the term "democracy". Any unbrainwashed observer can see why. Yet the elite continue to perpetuate the democracy propaganda to instill patriot religious pride and fervor in its citizens, to get their compliance and obedience (ironically). They see it as a "necessary illusion" as Noam Chomsky, the renowned intellectual and American critic, would say.

Nevertheless, there are some who will try to argue that America is a "representative democracy" or a "Constitutional democracy". And in fact the school system uses such terms too. But this is just a play on semantics and grasping at straws in an attempt to try to insert the word "democracy" into the equation to try to validate the cherished belief that America is a democracy. But either way you look at it, America cannot be a democracy because in a democracy, the majority rules, and in America the majority certainly does not rule in any way, for so many reasons (we can't even cover them all here). Rather, the majority in America are masses of sheeple the elite control and manipulate in the interest of the economy and their agenda.

In addition, consider the following:

a) According to polls, most Americans do not feel that they have a say in their government or its policies, and do not feel that their vote even matters. (Hence voter turnout during elections tends to be under 50 percent) There is a good reason for that. The government and the elite who run it often act in contrary to the will of the people.  

For example, most Americans did not want the Vietnam War or the Iraq War, yet the US leaders insisted on them and shoved them down our throats, with the help of the media of course (see the film "War Made Easy" on Google Video). People also do not want higher taxes, yet the government continually raises them.

So, if a democracy is a "rule by majority" then how come most people have no say in the country's policy making, either foreign or domestic? That says a lot, yet most Americans still believe the democracy myth. (Fortunately though, with the surge in the conspiracy movement and the internet, more Americans are beginning to wake up everyday)

b) According to the historical track record, no matter who holds the office of President, whether Democrat or Republican, Conservative or Liberal, US policies, both foreign and domestic, remain the same.  Thus, critics liken the whole political system to a show or theater, since the power networks that own both parties really represent the same interests. The system is designed to maintain the illusion of democracy, to appease the gullible dumbed down public.

Therefore, people don't really have a say in the policies their government sets. They are simply given the chance to elect Presidents every four years, and Congressmen and Senators every few years, as an illusion of some control in the democratic process. In reality though, no matter who gets elected, the power networks (corporate giants, banking elite, military industrial complex, secret societies, etc.) make sure they are in control. They are the real masters, not the President of the United States, who is merely a fall guy.

Why do you think that US Presidents tend to reneg on their campaign promises that won them the election? Do you think any man likes going back on his word and breaking his promises in front of the whole country's population? I don't think so. It's obviously because he has no choice, since he's not really at the top of the hierarchy and cannot do whatever he wants. He is controlled by a "shadow network", where his real allegiance lies. Otherwise he wouldn't be in office, or he better submit to them if he wants to remain in office, lest he suffer the consequences (as JFK, our last real President, did, which was a warning to all that followed).

The elite merely need to present the illusion of democracy to appease the masses. And they do it by giving you the charade of political elections, and calling it "democracy". All they have to do is control the tiny pool of candidates that you have to choose from, in one form or another, and they remain in power, NOT you. That is why no matter who is elected, policies (including covert ones) remain the same.

Of course, the elite themselves don't believe in a democracy either, for a true democracy would usurp their power. Therefore, they are knowingly spreading myths that they don't believe themselves, which is both hypocritical and deceitful.

c) Immigrants and foreigners from other countries do not usually say "Wow we have so much freedom and democracy in America which we never had in our own native country" as Hollywood portrays. Go ahead and ask them yourself. They do not come to America for its freedoms or democracy, but to earn the almighty dollar and pursue career opportunities. In reality, most in the rest of the world do not see America as an "ideal democracy" but many do see it as an ideal country for making money and pursuing higher career opportunities.

Furthermore, it is not true that most people in the rest of the world want to live in America.  Immigrants to the US are predominantly from Asia or Mexico, who come to make money, not for "freedom".  In fact, a large percentage of immigrants regret coming to America, feeling lonely and isolated and wishing they were back in their homeland, which the US media never covers of course.  

See these revealing thoughts and feelings of immigrants in the US which I've put together:  

http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page32.htm

Of course, America does not bother to try to explain away any of these major discrepancies. It doesn't have to. It only needs to keep the public dumbed down with mass entertainment, and busy with working and consuming, to be left alone to do whatever it wants. America doesn't really care if you see through its lies, and it knows that dissidents will always exist. You can say or think whatever you want, as long as you don't DO anything to upset its power or agenda.

And that brings us to the next myth...

2) "America is the freest nation on Earth. Our enemies hate our freedoms, and the rest of the world envies it."

This one really takes the cake.  Even as a school kid, I always thought it was odd that we were constantly told that "America is the freest country on Earth" yet I was forced to go to school, do homework everyday, and would get a "detention slip" if I wasn't in class when the bell rang. My everyday life did not seem "free" at all, yet I was constantly told that it was, as though it were a religion.

The problem is that this fanatical claim is very vague, not specific at all, and not supported by anything except the US media, Hollywood and education system. It has no actual substance or basis to it, and it makes no sense either. This statement is more of a religion than a fact.

What's especially revealing is that no one who is really well traveled believes that America is the "freest" in the world. Only those who have never left the US buy into it. What does that tell you?! That in itself is very shattering to this American myth.

Now, if America were truly free, do you think it would constantly have to boast about it to reassure itself? Such blatant boistering is usually the mark of an insecurity or inferiority complex, not the sign of a happy free people. As one of my forum members wrote:

"As a person of intelligence doesn't need to tell others he is intelligent, a truly free society doesn't need to be told it is free."

In fact, America is alone in believing that it is the epitome of freedom. The rest of the world does not share this myth about America. Even fascist regimes, dictators and terrorists do not see America as a "free country" (contrary to what Hollywood and the US media misportray). Rather, they see America as an Imperial Empire trying to take away the freedoms of the rest of the world, and attempting to dominate and control everyone to take advantages of their resources! (they did that to the Native American Indians, so why wouldn't they do that with the rest of the world too?)

For some reason, Hollywood and the US media perpetuate this bizarre stereotypical image that ALL countries outside the US are living under facist regimes governed by martial law, with soldiers and machine guns pointed at everyone, keeping them in terror, and that America is the only country free from all that. This is totally bogus and laughable, yet many Americans seriously believe it, sadly enough.

The reality is that most countries do NOT live under facist dictatorships. Yet America claims to be the only country that's "free" of fascism, using the worst examples of dictatorial regimes to contrast itself. In doing so, America uses a classic advertising technique of comparing the best of your side with the worst of the other side, which is a total misrepresentation and fallacy. (a more accurate and logical comparison would be to compare typical examples from both sides).

American culture, media and movies insinuate all the time that all foreign countries are under oppressive fascist regimes, while America alone fights for freedom and democracy. This is extremely inaccurate and does not reflect reality at all. Yet America will NEVER confront this fact of course, for it destroys the propaganda of illusions that hold the country's morale together.

Hollywood is also fond of portraying all immigrants as idolizing America's freedom, and all terrorists as jealous of America's freedom and plotting to eliminate its threat to fascism.

For instance, in the 1985 film Invasion USA starring Chuck Norris, an army of terrorists break into Florida during the Christmas Season. While parked in a suburban neighborhood, the leader of the terrorists looks around at families celebrating Christmas in their homes, and then mutters something about "Americans enjoying their freedom" (in accordance with the myth that America's enemies hate its freedoms) before using a bazooka to blow up some homes. For some reason, Hollywood likes to portray America's myths rather than reality and is the epitome of stereotypes. Call that a conspiracy if you like.

Now let's dissect the concept of America being "the freest country".

What does America mean by "free" exactly?  That you are free to do whatever you want without any laws or rules?  Certainly not!  As in every country, America has many laws, regulations and controls that you must abide under.  Such vary from country to country of course, but there is no evidence to suggest that America's laws are much more lax than that of most countries.  On the contrary, government regulations are much more stringent in America, which is one reason why corporations are outsourcing, besides cheaper labor costs.

In reality, in most countries, is that as long as you have money for transportation and accommodation, and you don't break any laws, you are "free" to go wherever you want on public lands, visit any attractions you like, eat, drink and be merry.  So how is that any different in America?  What exactly are you "free" to do in America that you can't do anywhere else?

In fact, arguably, since America is one of the most expensive countries in the world to live or travel in, one's purchasing power is diminished there, whereas it is multiplied much greater in third world countries. Thus, one's ability to "purchase their freedom" is greatly diminished in the US. So if you define freedom by purchasing power, then in that sense the US is "less free" than cheaper third world countries where your purchasing power would be much greater. Any expat living in third world countries (e.g. Philippines, Thailand, Costa Rica, etc.) will tell you this.  And sorry Hollywood and CNN, but virtually none of these expats will say that they are "less free" outside the US.  In fact, they tend to say that they are "more free" outside the US, which shatters Hollywood's stereotypical propaganda.

(You might also be surprised to know that no one I've met who's been to the Middle East reports that it is less free than in America, despite the extreme black and white Islamic laws there. They all report that the US media's image of the Middle East is total BS. And in fact, Arabs from the Middle East do not consider America to be "freer" than where they came from, since they define "freedom" differently. However, funnily enough, one freedom they do have in the Middle East, that you don't have in America, is that they can show up for a job late and not worry about getting fired; they will only get their pay docked.)

Here are some examples from eloquent expat letters. As you can see, they definitely feel freer and happier in other countries. (So much for Hollywood's propaganda)

http://www.happierabroad.com/Great_Letters.htm

In addition, many countries have freedoms not possible in America. For example, Holland has far more liberal laws regarding drugs and prostitution, and is far less prudish or puritannical about sex than America. In Europe in general, there is more of a lively social scene and connectedness, giving you the "freedom" to meet more people, make more friends and socialize more, contrary to the US environment where strangers do not usually speak to each other except for business purposes, where "every man is an island", where there is an "ice barrier" between strangers, and where people are paranoid of each other. In addition, in most countries, a man can flirt with a girl, woo her, or ask her out without feeling like a "creep" or "predator", unlike in America.

In Latin America, one can dance freely or hold salsa fiestas out in their neighborhood on a whim, whereas in America it would be inappropriate and out of bounds. Also, in Russia and many other countries, one can walk around outside drinking beer, whereas in the US that is illegal. So you see, there are many "freedoms" that are only possible outside the US. Thus the American assumption that "Anything not possible in America is not possible anywhere else cause America is the greatest in all things" is factually false.

Jeremy Rifkin, author of The European Dream, sums up the difference between the idea of "freedom" in Europe vs. America, explaining why the European concept is more evolved and progressive:

(Pages 13 – 14)
"The American and European dreams are, at their core, about two diametrically opposed ideas of freedom and security.  Americans hold a negative definition of what it means to be free and, thus, secure.  For us, freedom has long been associated with autonomy.  If one is autonomous, he or she is not dependent on others or vulnerable to circumstances outside of his or her control.  To be autonomous, one needs to be propertied.  The more wealth one amasses, the more independent one is in the world.  One is free by becoming self-reliant and an island unto oneself.  With wealth comes exclusivity, and with exclusivity comes security.

The new European Dream, however, is based on a different set of assumptions about what constitutes freedom and security.  [b]For Europeans, freedom is not found in autonomy but in embeddedness.  To be free is to have access to a myriad of interdependent relationships with others.[/b]  The more communities one has access to, the more options and choices one has for living a full and meaningful life.  With relationships comes inclusivity, and with inclusivity comes security."

The popular phrase by ignorant Americans, "It's a free country" is often used to justify doing whatever they want. Yet it's one of the stupidest statements ever. When I was in junior high, kids who picked on me or bullied me would use the "It's a free country" excuse to do whatever they wanted to me. It was totally moronic. There is no "free country" that lets the common person do whatever they want, especially to others. Every country has many laws, rules and regulations. It appalls me how easily brainwashed people are.

So what exactly are you "free" to do in America that you can't do anywhere else? America doesn't answer this important question. But I'll take a crack at it. Let's see...

You are free to work and make more money than you can in most countries, yeah, but the high cost of living offsets that. In fact, Americans are more in debt than those in any other country, and most Americans live paycheck to paycheck and are one paycheck away from being broke. Most do not own their own homes, but have mortgaged it, making themselves slaves to the bank. Is that freedom?

You have individual rights under the Constitution, yeah, but in most countries, especially Europe and Australia, human rights exist too. Most countries do not have the extreme human rights abuses shown in the US media. But let's get real here. In any country, those in power seek to keep their power and control, not protect its citizens' rights. It's the same in the US. There can never be truly clean ethics as long as money can be used to influence and control things.

Americans like to boast that they have freedom of speech and that they can speak out against their own government and leaders legally, without getting arrested, whereas in all other countries, doing so will get you arrested or shot. But again, this is misleading. While it is true that you are legally allowed to speak out against the government in America, the truth is also that in most countries you are also allowed the same, (albeit a few fascist regimes) as long as you don't actually DO anything to interfere with the government's power and control.

The same applies in America. You can think what you want, engage in activism and protest, and write whatever you want (like I'm doing here), as long as you don't actually get in the way of the elite networks and corporatocracy that run it. If you do, you will be subject to punishment or imprisonment, and if you are a popular leader capable of making big waves you can even be assassinated (e.g. Martin Luther King Jr, JFK, RFK).

So essentially, it's the same thing. The only difference is that citizens of other nations can see the state of their freedom the way it really is, whereas Americans are under the delusion that they have a special status as "the freest nation on Earth".

Sure, there are some countries like communist China or North Vietnam where dissidence is not tolerated and leads to incarceration, but these are extreme examples, and do NOT apply to most of the 200+ countries in the world. Besides, it is misleading to compare only with the worst examples out there, as the US media and Hollywood does. It would be more accurate to compare typical examples of most countries rather than the most extreme ones just to support your agenda, but America doesn't do that obviously, for truth and reality are not its highest aim.

Either way, being able to legally speak out against the government does not make America the "freest nation on Earth" as its propagandists preach. Besides, there are a lot more "freedoms" important to life than just being able to speak out against the government, which is just one thing in the broad spectrum of life.

Australia and most of Europe, for example, have the same basic "freedoms" that Americans do, if not more. Yet they do not go around boasting that they are the "freest nation in the world" for all to follow, nor do they invade other countries under the false pretense of fighting for freedom. They are much more down to earth and real about it. It's America that has these pumped up delusions which it tries to force onto the rest of the world. Americans seem to have an inferiority complex that makes them need to overstate and flaunt their patriotism and importance to the world. It's a sad thing that indicates a lack of true wholeness inside the American psyche. As I've always said, America is a very fragmented and disconnected country, both psychologically and sociologically. You can see that in its citizens and the complete lack of human or social connection in its environment.

In reality, most of us conform to schedules and routines set by others, and submit to authority of some kind. As children we conform to school and submit to its authority, schedules, rules and workload. As adults, we submit to the same in the corporations that employ us. Most are not "free" to wake up and do whatever they want, especially not in an expensive workaholic country like America. That's life. So what is "freedom" exactly? That's the big existential question.

Since we are all under someone else's control for the most part, in one way or another, there is no "true freedom". Most of the world realizes this. It's Americans that do not, instead living under the delusion that they are a free country and a free people, and that the rest of the world envies them and wishes they could immigrate there to attain "freedom", despite evidence to the contrary.

So why then, do Americans believe this myth about their exclusivity to freedom when it has no basis in reality and makes no sense? Well I can only surmise that:

a) Most people are followers, not leaders, visionaries or independent thinkers. They are unable to think for themselves, and believe whatever they are told by establishment and authority. They conform to what they've been programmed and brainwashed with, and do not resist it. Even if their indoctrinations conflict with their everyday experiences and feelings, they will still hold to it, even if it's self-contradictory or doesn't add up.

b) Since America is a lonely country where one can only depend on oneself and is socially isolating and segregated as well, with social disconnectedness as the norm, people are going to naturally feel empty inside and need something to believe in, whether it's a religion or blind patriotism in being the freest country in the world. Otherwise they have no motivation to feel proud and to continue becoming slaves and consumers of the system.

Ironically, though you are expected to be independent and autonomous in America, you are also expected to conform to the propaganda and religious beliefs of the "herd mentality" mentioned above. It's a silent contradiction that America never bothers to resolve, cause obviously, America isn't interested in intellectual debates over truth, but in profit, power, control and property.

c) The elite have a vested interest in promoting this illusion. It instills pride in the population, dumbs them down, keeps them ignorant about the rest of the world, and gets them to comply with US foreign policy, including military aggression overseas (tragically) and hostile takeover of foreign lands, under the guise of freedom and democracy.

This is especially the case if you are in the armed forces, in which case you need to be fully indoctrinated into believing that you are fighting for freedom and democracy, in order to instill absolutely loyalty in you, even if in reality you are on the side of evil engaging in an act of military aggression and hostile takeover for profit and power, bombing innnocent civilians in the process. Otherwise you wouldn't follow orders to fight, risk your life or kill others if you knew the truth.

3) "In America you have freedom of speech, but if you question what you are told, such as the religious myths above, you will be deemed a heretic."

In other words, "you have freedom of speech as long as you believe what you are told and don't question it."

This of course is ultimate hypocrisy and a direct contradiction that America cannot reconcile. There are many such contradictions. For example, Capitalism is said to be based on Christian values and ethics, yet it teaches that greed is good whereas Christian Scripture clearly teaches that greed is evil. But you are not supposed to question such things. So much for freedom of speech.

But then again, America sees freedom of speech as essentially harmless. Talking can't hurt after all, unless of course you do something about it. And America knows that most people are passive. They may talk the dissident talk, but most will never do anything about it, and that's the bottom line to the elite.

It's a tricky form of mind control where you are deceived into thinking that you are free, when in reality you are mind controlled. The great intellectual American critic, Noam Chomsky, explained in his film Manufacturing Consent that since America does not have a totalitarian government militarily, the elite must control the masses' thoughts instead. Therefore, they are engaging in a form of "totalitarian thought control" rather than by military rule. This means that they gain control of you one way or another.

4) "America starts starts wars and invades countries to protect freedom and democracy or spread it. It is your patriotic duty to support all wars America gets involved in, even if you disagree with them."

You might think that brainwashing its citizens with myths about freedom and democracy is a harmless act that merely keeps the sheeple dumb and passive. But it goes beyond that.  These myths also serve the function of garnering public compliance when America gets involved in wars or invades other countries and occupies them, such as Iraq, killing innocent people for profit, greed and power.

So, it is your duty to support all US sponsored wars even if it is in the wrong or are "the bad guys" in the conflict. Anyone who doesn't is condemned as "unpatriotic" or a heretic. Even celebrities and public officials are afraid to speak out against the Iraq War for fear of jeopardizing their position and careers. (so much for free speech) America uses a sick form of mind control that insinuates that if you are loyal to your country, you will support all its wars and invasions, even when it is in the wrong or on the side of evil. Otherwise, you are seen as a "traitor" and there is something wrong with you.

In essence, what America is saying is that loyalty and patriotism are above truth, justice and even life itself. It is willing to sacrifice innocent lives, including its own, and spread lies, for its diabolical purposes. This is plain wrong as well as evil. It is the total antithesis of freedom and justice. As a chilling reminder, Hitler also did the same.

In doing so, America again contradicts itself in claiming freedom of speech, while at the same time forbidding you to question what it preaches. In effect, America is saying "You are free, but you are required to agree with everything we say and do without question", which is total hypocrisy.

The elite understand that they must hide their motives for getting involved in wars all the time. If the public was told the truth, that America's wars are about power, greed, control and acquisition, the American people would not be willing to risk the life and limb of its troops for such purposes. No way. That's why the sheeple have to be deceived. The elite behind the military industrial complex know that they are lying, but believe that they can get away with it because they are at the top of the pyramid, have a "God complex" and are "above the law". Their souls are truly lost. Hopefully they will get their justly due karma.

This is especially the case for those serving in the armed forces. If you watch documentaries about the life of US troop stationed in Iraq or Naval personnnel stationed in ships off the coast of Iraq, you will see that everyday they are constantly drilled with lies and propaganda that they are there to fight for freedom and democracy, and that they are heros and liberators of Iraq. I pity these folks the most, for in reality they are sacrificing their life, limb and sanity for greed, profit and power, which no sane person would knowingly do. The military is a fascist hierarchical organization and its subjects have no choice but to conform to whatever they are told. Despite their honorable intentions, they are the epitome of gullibility. They've been transformed into non-thinking robots, which is a total degradation to their humanity.

The 2009 blockbuster film Avatar accurately portrays the motives of US military aggression. In the film, the US Marines are sent to plummage forests in an alien world to mine special minerals that sell for "20 million a kilo". To do so, they had to move alien tribes off their lands in order to plunder their forest and cut down their main "tree of life". The film is honest in revealing the motives of both sides. What was unusual about this film was that the US Marine Colonel was honest to his men and told them upfront that they were fighting to mine minerals for profit, not to spread "freedom and democracy". And as you learn about the blue alien tribe, you understand the sacredness and beauty of their life, and the living energy of the forest. With this reveals, it becomes apparent that it would be wrong and inhumane to destroy it all in the name of corporate profit. With this revealed, the viewer's conscience naturally sides with the blue alien tribes, who are the victims in the conflict, and realizes that the US military are the aggressors and "the bad guys" in the conflict. Thus the audience begins cheering when the tide of the battle turns and the US military starts getting wasted, since after all they are "the bad guys" in the wrong and on the side of evil. This film is marvelous for many reasons (such as its 3D feature), but it is groundbreaking in that it reveals that truth and life are ultimately more significant than patriotism and loyalty.

Similarly, the 1990 film Dances with Wolves starring Kevin Costner depicted the same accuracy in its portrayal of the conquest of the American frontier. When Dunbar (Costner) bonds with the Sioux tribe and begins to understand them and become one of them, the US Cavalry is revealed for what they really are, instruments of aggression and plunder who steal lands from Native Americans and commit atrocities against the innocent to achieve such ends. When the viewer understands this, he/she naturally sides with the plight of the Sioux tribe. So when Dunbar is rescued by his new Sioux brothers near the end, the audience cheers as the US Cavalry men are taken out, who by then are seen as "the bad guys".

I applaud such films for their accurate portrayal of the motives of the US military, and for showing the light of truth and compassion over blind patriotism and loyalty.

Conclusion:

So you see, America's religious myths about freedom and democracy, which it considers to be Gospel Truth and indoctrinates into its sheeple, is essentially baseless and not supported by facts or reality upon casual examination.  These myths are a religion, nothing more.  Many logical reasons and comparisons from ordinary examples and experiences have been presented here to debunk these myths.

America does not address the hard questions posed in this essay, nor the fact that so much of reality contradicts the propaganda and myths it spreads, but treats them as nonexistent. Instead, America merely throws its propaganda at you, knowing that most people will buy it and ignoring the few that don't (unless they get in the way), then offers you a life of pursuing a career (aka becoming a corporate slave), consuming to help the economy, and dumbs you down with forms of mass entertainments. That's all American life is. It's not about truth or answering the hard questions. It's about serving the profit system and corporatocracy. If you don't like it, America doesn't care, as long as you don't get in the way.

What we can conlude then, based on all the above, is that "freedom" and "government by the people" are illusions.  They don't need to actually exist.  The public merely needs to be given the illusion of freedom and democracy.  

But unfortunately for America and its controllers, truth tends to be self-evident and surfaces sooner or later.  Every time the public finds out that they've been lied to, their trust in government greatly decreases.  Without trust, foundations crumble, as we have been seeing in America recently.  That's how great empires fall, such as Rome.  They collapse on the inside first.  We are already beginning to see that happening with the American Empire, as more and more of its citizens become disillusioned with it.  

In short, America is reaping the consequences of its self-destructive behaviors and ways, and in due time, the consequences of its deceptions and brainwashing on its own population will manifest as well, as truth eventually comes out.  That is, unless it decides to make amends and change its ways of exploiting others for profit, power and gain, and using lies and myths to cover for its crimes and wrongdoings.

But alas, people do not like to change their ways, especially if they are at the top of the pyramid, in which case they have a vested self-interest in maintaining the status quo.

The Roman Empire was also imperialistic, conquering lands belonging to others to expand its power and control through military aggression, and forcing others to submit to its totalitarian regime. The difference is that Rome was honest about its intentions and purposes, whereas America isn't. Instead, America claims its imperialism is about promoting freedom and democracy. That's why America doesn't like to refer to itself as an "Empire" or use the world "Imperial" to describe itself, for such terms contradict its self-ascribed myth that it stands for freedom and democracy (but in reality of course, it stands for power, acquisition, control, dominance and greed).

It's a pity that America doesn't see the wisdom of one of its own children's parables known as The Boy Who Cried Wolf, which teaches that consequences of lying is the destruction of one's own credibility and mistrust from others. If America had heeded this simple parable, it wouldn't be in the mess it is today. But of course, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've seen that throughout history, and America is no exception.

The game of America's elite has always been to induce conformity in the population while at the same time maintaining the illusion of freedom and democracy. It's a delicate game that is self-contradictory, which intelligent freethinkers can easily see through. As a result, the elite have had to find ways to weaken the public, dumb them down, and distract them. They've done this by segregating the populace, making its citizens paranoid of each other, emphasizing competitiveness, and distracting you with mindless mass entertainment and promoting a rampant consumer lifestyle.

But alas, they are playing a losing game and are losing their grip.  God only knows what they will resort to next.  Those in power do not give it up easily, and will not go down without a vicious fight.  Let's hope that whatever changes, revolutions or global awakenings that are coming next will occur through a peaceful transformation.

I also pray that the public becomes informed, enlightened, intellectual and wise, so that history does not repeat itself (as it usually has in the past). As someone once said, "Those who do not learn history are condemned to repeat it."  Hopefully, the free flowing of information on the internet will help make that possible.

Until then, if you would like to learn about how you can enjoy more freedoms and benefits abroad, and are ready to venture beyond the US Matrix to see the real world, come visit my website at http://www.HappierAbroad.com

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,
Winston Wu

PS - If you wish to start down the path of becoming a freethinking intellectual, as we have, let me warn you first though, that it comes with consequences as well as benefits. (Though it may not be a conscious choice on your part, but rather a realization of what you already are) By becoming one, you will certainly have a richer inner life that others don't have, and you will be able to see and know things at a depth and level that common people can't. You will also attain the freedom to rise above the programming and conditioning of society, which the common person didn't even know existed. You will be able to see things the way they really are, rather than how you were programmed to.

However, you will find it hard to fit into social groups and circles, for deep down an intellectual does not like to "conform" to something, for conformity is the antithesis of freethought. Also, you will find yourself looking down on common people, who are usually conformists and follow the pack, as ignorant sheeple do, so you will not really feel like you belong or fit in with them. To you, common people will seem like zombies. Thus it will be hard for you to remain modest, as pride and snobbiness may become part of your disposition.

You may find yourself often estranged from others, engaging them merely for superficial greetings or socializing. This means that you will find few people in life who can truly relate to you. Even the ignorant can sense vibes on an instinctual level, and they will sense that you are somehow "different" than them, vibrating at a different frequency. However, since like attracts like, you will certainly find others like you from time to time, through circumstances and coincidences. But you will not be connecting with the majority.

In addition, being able to see things that others can't and know things that others don't, you will find yourself annoyed at flaws and discrepancies that others don't get hung up on. Sometimes "ignorance is bliss" after all. Others may perceive you as "anal retentive" for noticing imperfections that don't matter to them.

An expat friend of mine, also a freethinker, had this to say on my Forum about the life of a freethinking intellectual:

"Why would the government want to properly educate the masses? They would lose their power in government cause then the average person would be able to see all their lies and fallacies. They realize a small percentage will break out of their matrix and they will either be ostracized from main society or they will be brought into the circle of power as one of their own.

To be able to break away from either of those labels takes a strong sense of purpose and some kind of divine intervention that was agreed upon before birth and intertwined into ones life. There are always people like this that break the mold, but society generally doesn't realize their greatness until they have departed the Earth plane. Individuals that are well ahead of whatever is going on in society are the ones that keep society moving forward, but are often ridiculed in the process of trying to make others see the light. Most people do not have the capability to visualize what the future will bring, or they do it wrong cause they interpret the future using their current preconceived notions of reality.

A true visionary sets themselves apart from the mainstream and isn't offended by brash comments upon their person."

That being said, if you seek to find an intellectual majority or population, your best chance, in my experience, would be in Europe, where knowledge, culture, education and broad-mindedness seem to be at the highest levels.

Discuss this article in this forum thread:  http://www.happierabroad.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6881

To learn more about America's dysfunction and how you can have a happier life overseas, visit my website at HappierAbroad.com

Nuyorican Cafe! one of the best Salsa Clubs in the world!!

Afro Cuban

Afro Cuban

How to Relate to Jazz Artists

Jazz is a musical art form which originated at the beginning of the 20th century in African American communities in the Southern United States from a confluence of African and European music traditions. Because of the continuing popularity of Jazz we explore it's history and how to relate to jazz artists.

Jazz music was, ultimately, the product of New Orleans' melting pot. These groups were formed by Italians, Creoles and all sorts of European immigrants. Jazz bands took the piano from ragtime, and the saxophone and trumpet from dance hall bands. This type of music was very much a continuation of blues music, except that it took advantage of the instruments of the marching band.

Jazz would eventually be assimilated by white pop music (from Broadway show tunes to Tin Pan Alley ballads) without causing any major upheaval. This became the unchallenged popular music of America during the Swing era of the 1930s and 1940s.

It was, indirectly, also another stage in the process of black assimilation of white musical styles, because jazz was founded on ragtime, and ragtime was fundamentally the grafting of European musical styles (such as marches and waltzes) onto West-African syncopated rhythms.

Jazz has, from its early 20th century inception, spawned a variety of subgenres, from New Orleans Dixieland dating from the early 1910s, big band-style swing from the 1930s and 1940s, Bebop from the mid-1940s, a variety of Latin jazz fusions such as Afro-Cuban and Brazilian jazz from the 1950s and 1960s, jazz-rock fusion from the 1970s and late 1980s developments such as acid jazz, which blended jazz influences into funk and hip-hop.

This genre can be hard to define because it spans from Ragtime waltzes to 2000s-era fusion. Jazz, however is often characterized as the product of democratic creativity, interaction and collaboration, placing equal value on the contributions of composer and performer, 'adroitly weighing the respective claims of the composer and the improviser'.

Jazz musicians began to compose their own material because improvising on other people's material was neither fun nor as rewarding as improvising on one's own material.

Early stars included other New Orleans musicians like King Oliver and Jelly Roll Morton, a Creole musician who, in the early 1920's, recorded over a hundred of his own and other's Jazz tunes.

Trumpeter, bandleader and singer Louis Armstrong was a much-imitated innovator of early jazz. Trumpeter and sin ger, and first internationally known jazz soloist also pioneered the Bebop movement in 1945 along with Charlie Parker.

Louis Armstrong was born and raised in New Orleans, a culturally diverse town with a unique musical mix of creole, ragtime, marching bands and blues.

Armstrong was immediately popular and added to the growing prestige of King Oliver's band. Oliver's band played primitive jazz, a hotter style of ragtime, with looser rhythm and more improvisation, and Armstrong's role was mostly backup.

Louis Armstrong soon grew to become the greatest Jazz musician of his era and eventually one of the biggest stars in the world. Armstrong played with King Oliver for a short period of time and then formed his own group, the Hot Five.

Armstrong applied a similar technique to his vocals, which did more than just popularize "scat" singing. They invented a way to sing without singing. Armstrong turned the human voice into not only an instrument but an instrument that was as legitimate for improvising as any other instrument of the orchestra. Armstrong became famous for his improvisations on covers of blues and pop standards.

Jazz fans, both African American and white, crowded in to hear Duke Ellington's Orchestra. Famous for his "Big Band" sound, Ellington was himself a fine pianist.

Musicians such as Pharoah Sanders, Hubert Laws and Wayne Shorter began using African instruments such as kalimbas, cowbells, beaded gourds a nd other instruments not traditional to jazz.

Musicians began improvising jazz tunes on unusual instruments, such as the jazz harp (Alice Coltrane), electrically-amplified and wah-wah pedaled jazz violin (Jean-Luc Ponty), and even bagpipes (Rufus Harley). Musicians working in this field popularized this form of music through their creativity in jazz music.

Musicians who worked with Miles Davis formed the four most influential fusion groups: Weather Report and Mahavishnu Orchestra which emerged in 1971 and were soon followed by Return to Forever and The Headhunters.

Jazz fusion music often uses mixed meters, odd time signatures, syncopation, and complex chords and harmonies. Jazz continued to expand and change, influenced by other types of music, such as world music, avant garde classical music, and rock and pop music.

Jazz poetry, fashion, and industry were effected by the "basement" music that took the United States by storm. The music also exacerbated the racial tensions in the post war period as Jazz represented a break from Western musical traditions, where the composer wrote a piece of music on paper and the musicians then tried their best to play exactly what was in t he score.

By listening to the earlier jazz musicians it would be easier to assimilate this style of music by learning how to relate to jazz artists.

Afro Cuban All Stars- Los Sitio Asere (Live)