Letters to the Editor:  Dear Editor: I found Mr. Modeleski's piece on his version of why postal zip codes exist the most egregious nonsense ever printed anywhere and that includes "fundie" publications. Come on! Zip codes are not proof of government "threat, duress, or coercion," as Mr. Modeleski seems intent to prove. I've worked for the Postal Service for 10 years and can assure Mr. Modeleski and other readers that the sole purpose for asking that the codes be put on mail is to ensure quick, reliable delivery. True, one can mail pieces without zip codes, but the mail then must be sorted manually rather than by machine, thus slowing things down considerably. In reality, zip codes are no longer needed on letters with machine-printed addresses since there are new high-speed Optical Character Readers that can read the street address, city, and state and spray a nine-digit bar code on the bottom of a letter. Still, it is a good idea to put zip codes on even that mail since it may not pass through such a machine on its way to its destination. For packages and irregularly shaped items, zip codes are more important because automated machinery to read such matter is not yet available. In my experience, everything is sorted by zip codes. It makes the job of sorting the billions of pieces of mail Americans send every year quick, efficient, and inexpensive. Even private express companies like Federal Express and United Parcel Service use them. U.S. postal codes date back to the World War II era but it was not until the mid-1960's that the current five-digit zip code was introduced. The first digit represents the zone, the first three digits represent the "sectional center" or large city, and the last two represent the "associate office" or post office where your letter carrier prepares to deliver your mail. A few years ago the Postal Service introduced Zip+4, which is your regular zip code plus a four-digit add-on that enables automated machinery to sort your mail even better. There is even talk of adding two more digits for even better sorting. In any case, Mr. Modeleski's claims are utter and absolute nonsense but typical of the "junk info" peddled by the purveyors of conspiracy theories. Vincent F. Safuto, Lake Worth, FL We suspect that Mr. Modeleski will respond. -ed Dear Editor: After reading your short biography, on AOL, I believe you might be able to further your fight against Quantum Unreality with the help from Roger Penrose's book The Empire's New Mind. He discusses the completely deterministic qualities of Schrodinger's wave equation given the initial conditions (momentum, position). Please respond; I would like to discuss the book with someone in the field. On the economic front I think you should read the complete works of Ludwig Von Mises. He is much more substantive and lucid than any other traditional freethinker (Locke, Hobbs, Hegel, Smith). I think you will find great joy in his books and as always you won't be able to understand how such wisdom came to lie on the back bookshelf of human thought. Looking forward to your response. From: Wk365, AOL P.S. Von Mises will unequivocally prove to you that economics is an exact science like math or physics. More importantly, he loathed Karl Marx for his irrationality and not his actual beliefs; he just proved those false. P.S.S. My favorite is Human Action. WBL: to Wk365 Your email went to the right person at the right time. First I'll talk briefly about quantum mysticism. I'm in the middle of reading Roger Penrose's book, and I'm a little cold on it, since other, more urgent reading came up. Your letter will raise the priority of getting back to it. If you can stand being technical, a good article on an alternative to the "Copenhagen interpretation" appears in the July 1986 issue of Reviews of Modern Physics. Authored by Cramer (his first name is not in my head at the moment), it offers the Transactional Interpretation. Another quantum anti-mystic is Martin Gardner. Yet another is Bernard Katz of the Humanists of South Jersey and also a co-editor of the American Rationalist. I think we can accept the concept of nonlocality and that the universe is indeed a strange place without giving up object-ive reality. My parody of the Copenhagen interpretation is: "The facts of reality compel the conclusion that there are no facts of reality." I think this is not a gross misrepresentation of the Scientific American article by Alain Aspect (Nov 1979). The main point of Penrose's book is not quantum philosophy but rather the impossibility of an artificial consciousness, and I part company with him on that. An example of an error of thought is in his discussion of the Mandelbrot Set. There he says something like "The set of rational numbers will never be adequate to come up with the tendrils of the Mandelbrot Set." (For an exact quote, find this point in the book, or I'll email it to you in the future.) All of the tendrils so far known have been discovered and represented solely by rational numbers! That's how wrong he is. And I think he carries this error over into the idea of human consciousness. On another subject, I think his idea of mathematical entities as Platonic realities is a good one and deserves more attention from us materialist philosophers. I'm also a Ludwig von Mises fan, but I must admit profound ignorance. If you've read my article on an overview of money and banking (Truth Seeker, v. 119 #3,1992), you'll recognize my debt to Murray Rothbard and his book What has the Government Done to Our Money?, and Rothbard is a strong promoter of von Mises. However, other than his Bureaucracy, which I'm most of the way through, my von Mises reading is still in the future. Again, your email will stimulate me to more action in that area. Thanks again. Look forward to hearing from you. -WBL Dear Editor: I recently received some sample materials from Atheist groups and ran across a reprint of your article, "A New Role for Atheism," for the Truth Seeker Vol 118, #1 by Mel Kornbluth. It was a refreshing departure from the typical anti-Christian emotional focus of most Atheist material I've seen. I particularly liked the frank opening, "... atheism and freethought have been a dismal failure in gaining popular support." It's uncomfortable to be reminded that having a more accurate concept of reality has little to do with human belief. Even the best idea has to be "sold" to become embedded in mainstream human awareness. Mel Kornbluth drove the point home fully with your Atheist audience by implying they liked their emotions of "confidence, superiority, and perhaps smugness." I think it's revealing that the most significant Atheist article I found spoke to Atheists rather than at believers. You spoke directly to Atheism's significant weakness. When a belief exclusively favors rational logic over human emotion the emotional needs win. It's like saying we should only be half human (logical) and should get rid of the wrong-thinking emotional half. This has great appeal for our rational, intellectual side and accounts for the popularity of Commander Data and Mr. Spock. Of course, desires to become superior intellects are driven by the emotional superiority and smugness you cited. Rationality and emotion are brain functions arising from a degree of functional hemispheric bi-camerality, the limbic system, and other brain functions we are discovering. We are by evolution naturally both rational and emotional. Both make us human. Rationality causes us to create scientific method and seek to understand the universe. An accurate concept of reality increases our ability to manipulate the physical universe, survive and prosper. Emotionality (including our internal and social natures) causes us to create emotionally satisfying human relationships, of which religions are one type. Without satisfying our emotional needs to seek pleasure and avoid pain, we'd lack motivation and become extinct. To be human is to be emotional and rational and any belief that rationally or emotionally ignores this reality has a weakness. If we have a better idea and fail to sell it the fault lies with us and not others. Either our idea is flawed, by not addressing human emotionality in our case, or our sales pitch stinks. We need look no farther than our mirrors to explain Atheism's dismal popular support. Well! I know I'm preaching to the choir. It felt good to see someone expressing views similar to some thoughts I've had. It was an emotionally satisfying experience to share rational conclusions, I must say, Howard Thompson El Paso, TX Dear Howard: 1. The times they are a-changin'! There's lots of freethought on the loose in the mainstream, particularly in some comic strips, e.g., Calvin & Hobbes and Bloom County. 2. Religion's ugly face has, for the most part, been well hidden. It has increasingly come to public view, e.g., at the 1992 Republican Convention. 3. We seek not to convert committed religious people but to find kindred spirits and cheer them up. 4. When religious people use reason, or some imitation thereof, to promote their doctrines, they're on our territory, not their own. It pays to have good answers made more widely available. -WBL Dear Editor: With due respect for Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson, their roles in the anti-slavery movement have been distorted by Joseph Lewis (Truth Seeker, vol. 120, no. 1). Paine deserves much credit for his March 1775 essay on slavery, and for inspiring the society which formed in April 1775. But that doesn't make him the "only" opponent of slavery in America "at that time," nor "the first voice raised upon the American Continent" in behalf of slaves. In human history, absolutist terms like "first" and "only" offer an easy way to lose bets. For earlier opposition to slavery here, look mainly to the Quakers (Friends). Yet Paine, as a participant in the French revolution, could glory in the abolition of French slavery in 1791 (and weep at its revival, 1799, in French colonies). Lewis proclaims "the absence of any such sentiments, acts or articles in behalf of Negro slavery ever being associated with Thomas Jefferson..." As for sentiments, Jefferson hated slavery even though he practiced it. Had he been braver, he could have led the anti-slavery movement. At least he should have taken his slaves to a free state and emancipated them. But, alas, he was unwilling to bankrupt his family, to become unwelcome in his beloved Virginia, and perhaps to share Paine's humiliation: rejected by Americans as a far-out "French-style" radical. Before condemning Jefferson's lack of courage, get to know this tormented man who struggled with the dissonance between his beliefs and his lifestyle. Likewise, note how he often kept his religious dissents "in the closet." Those who are braver than Jefferson are duly entitled to cast the stone of mockery. Yet the brave, having known fear and fought anyway, sometimes forbear to scorn their weaker cousins. Jeff Tortuga La Jolla, CA Dear Editor: It has been my intention to write to you since receiving the current issue of Truth Seeker. I was not aware of your publication until a fellow-convict suggested I read it, which was Vol. 118, No. 3, 1991. By the way, I presently find myself confined to Leavenworth Penitentiary. My so-called "crime" was conspiracy with the attempt to possess with the intent to distribute a nonexistent kilogram of cocaine. For such a heinous "crime" I was sentenced to 27 years without parole in February, 1989. Anyway, along with Liberty magazine (Libertarian publication) I found Truth Seeker to be the most thought provoking magazine I have ever read and shortly thereafter became a subscriber. Upon reading Vol. 119, No. 2, 1992, I became incensed resulting from your ad for the Secular Humanists' convention. I was so enraged, because I thought you were connected with them that I unceremoniously disposed of it in the nearest waste receptacle. I used to be a Secular Humanist and many are members of the Council On Foreign Relations and/or Trilateral Commission including Carl Sagan and his mystical Nuclear Winter theory which couldn't withstand reason's scrutiny. Then I received Vol. 119, No. 3, 1992, from which on page 8 I quote ". . . The history and structure of the Federal Reserve system, together with an evaluation of it, lie outside the scope of this article." I concluded from that that you weren't prepared to elaborate on the Federal Reserve and that there must be an underlying reason. Then I thought you were connected with the elite bankers or not wishing to ruffle their feathers. Further, I was disappointed and felt betrayed as your magazine had such a profound effect on me initially. This prompted my hasty letter to you. I say hasty because I was shocked to read your current issue which contains several in-depth, accurate and scathing articles about the Federal Reserve system. Needless to say I was flabbergasted by said articles and very embarrassed at having been premature in my appraisal of Truth Seeker. Does that make me a paranoids' paranoid, looking under every rock for a conspiracy? No, it doesn't, but I was wrong and will admit it. You stated that you were able to hear the sounds of the New World Order but were unable to detect the product. I like the way you stated that and my response to it is "let's go shopping." The first and most blatantly unconstitutional product of the elite bankers (NWO) is the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. There is more than enough factual evidence supporting the covert activities of those who planned and ultimately created the FRA which is also included in your currrent issue although a little short on info concerning pre-1913 activities. The 16th Amendment (income tax) was not properly ratified. The IRS is merely a collection agency for the privately owned Federal Reserve system and is a product. The United Nations is a product which was established and financed by the elite bankers. U.S. State Department Publication 7277 calls for the "General and complete disarmament of the United States." Only the United Nations "Peace Force" would be armed and all other weapons would be destroyed. The preamble of the World Constitution (a product) says the age of nations must end. Approximately 24 (can't remember the exact number but I'm close) U.S. Senators and 80 Representatives have signed a "Declaration of Interdependence." They would turn our nation and resources over to a global government as we turned our gold over to the Federal Reserve. Rhodes Scholar "Slick Willie" Clinton is a product and a member of the Trilateral Commission and Bilderbergers. You can rest assured that Clinton will pursue the same foreign policies as did Bush. One merely has to read The People's Pottage by Garet Garrett which is so highly touted by Truth Seeker. Roosevelt was a functional illiterate but he did an admirable job from the elitists' point of view as he pulled off one of the biggest heists in our history. Or I should say the elitists who pulled the strings did an admirable job. After all, who has control of the money? Remember the quote: "I don't care who the government is; let me control the money and I will control the country." The stockholders of the Federal Reserve financed and brought into being, in 1921, the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR), a product. Harper's magazine called the CFR the most powerful organization in the United States. From the CFR come 90% of the people in the State Department and key positions in the Executive Branch. The CFR publishes a magazine called Foreign Affairs (a product). Read it if you want to know what is going to happen in the coming years. The CFR's Annual Report in 1974 says the project for the CFR in the '80's will be "The management of the international economy, global poverty, environment and the new commons . . . the oceans, the seabeds and space, and interstate violence, including gun control." What they are really saying is The management of our money, our land, our food, our guns and the destruction of our sovereignty. As you already know, there is virtually no difference between our two political parties, despite the rhetoric. You will find that the CFR produces the leaders of both parties and both are headed in the same direction. I can readily understand why someone once said "ignorance is bliss" but I by no means agree with it. I made a firm decision about a year ago that if I can ever get out of this hell hole I will dedicate my life to rescuing our constitution. Our constitution has been trampled almost beyond recognition. I'm pleased you did not follow through on my request to cancel my subscription. Even though it expires this month I was pleased to find that our institution library is receiving it as I could not afford to renew my subscription. The Truth Seeker is doing a tremendous service for freedom and I sincerely thank you. Please take particular care of your self. If you happen to see someone without a smile, then by all means, give them one of yours. For liberty and responsibility, Jim Penick Dear Editor: A couple of days ago, I heard three of your members on Honolulu's radio station KGU. It was a refreshing switch from the standard menu of that station. The frenetic attacks that you received from Bible-bats were only to be expected from the audience characteristic of KGU. For many years I taught school in the Bible Belt. I found the Bible to be an invisible monitor in every classÑa situation that led me to devote more study to the Bible than it merits. Over the years I have become convinced that the Bible is a major obstacle to a valid education in our society. I shall be most interested to hear more of the "The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You To Read!" May I have your literature please? Aloha, Lars M. Lofgren Honaunau, HI It's on the way. -ed Dear Editor: Capitalism died in 1929, according to the esteemed pundits of our day. Since that fateful year, the prominent intellectuals and politicians of our country have been promoting the welfare state as a "safe, responsible, middle ground between the opposite poles of capitalism and socialism"Ñthe perfect system to preserve freedom, maintain economic stability, and bring about the good life. However, today's chaotic and corrupted America does little to corroborate that notion. What the last 60 years have shown is that the welfare state is not a stable middle ground at all, but a highly unstable mixture of individual freedom and government coercion that is evolving steadily away from freedom toward an all-pervasive statism. It becomes more obvious each year that what Ludwig von Mises repeatedly declared throughout his extensive writings is true, that there can never be a third way between capitalism and socialismÑthat is, a third way that does not degenerate into socialism or progress to capitalism. Sincerely, Nelson Hultberg Escondido, California Dear Editor: While I have been attracted to the ideas and conclusions of Karl Marx since the great depression, I find the economic theories of Ludwig Von Mises enlightened. So long as we live in a world where capitalism is the dominant system we can violate capitalist economic and social guidance only at our peril. For us to be competitive is the sine qua non of survival as individuals and as a nation. If capitalism could guarantee the growth and stability that its supporters promise, Karl Marx would not have been taken seriously and most people would not believe that a better life is possible. More than a century ago the great American writer Thoreau wrote that "we live lives of quiet desperation." That is still true because a hostile society subjects us to wars, unemployment, economic ruin, crime, knavishness, etc. Above all, I believe with Karl Marx that our deliverance from capitalism can come only in an economic crisis that is worldwide. We have been in such a crisis since 1929, and when many people become aware of our predicament we will become dedicated to a society of production for use, economic democracy and equality.   Monroe Prussack Jersey City, NJ Table of Contents | 1993 Issues | Subscribe Truth Seeker | Feedback | Freethought.com Webmaster Credit card Orders call: 800-321-9054 or fax: (619)676-0433 Or send check or money order to: Truth Seeker / 16935 W. Bernardo Drive, Suite 103 / San Diego, CA 92127 $20.00 annual U.S. subscription ($35.00 international). Individual issues—$10.00 + $2.50 postage and handling Or be a committed freethinker and send $35.00 for a two year subscription. Truth Seeker is published by Truth Seeker Co., Inc. (ISSN 0041-3712) © 1996