The System's Dilemma, As I See It

During the competency hearing last month some twelve or so doctors testified on the question of my sanity. All of them, both for the defense (who claimed I was insane) and for the government (who claimed i was sane), concluded that I was not malingering (faking symptoms or being dishonest), and all of them also agreed that all of my decisions, both legal and otherwise, were inextricably intertwined with and based upon, my unique belief system. But the defense doctors said my belief system was psychotic and delusional, while the government doctors all claimed it was idiosyncratic, but perfectly rational.

While my full "belief system", as they call it, is complex and admittedly difficult for me to articulate, there are certain aspects of it that clearly and directly effect the so-called "choices" I have made in regard to my case, and hense directly relate to the question of my so-called "legal competence". For example, the decision to represent myself and and to waive the appeal of the several death sentences ordered against me.

Unlike most defendants who make such choices, I did not imagine that I could do a better job representing myself than my attorneys, nor did I desire to die, or otherwise seek some personal objective in any regard. I only wanted to "let the Truth speak for itself" and not "interfere with the process". It was consequently this Truth - with a capital "T" - as I see it, that became a focal point of the competency hearing.

The question the court must answer is: Is Mr Duncan's understanding of "the Truth" delusional or rational? And therein lies the Systems dilemma. If my understanding of "the Truth" is rational (which a finding of competence would assert) then it is rational to view the System as "an evil entity with an intelligence and will of its own" that cannot be "outsmarted on its own terms" and can only be overcome by submission to an even higher "intelligence" which I incountered directly "on the mountain" just hours before I turned myself in. This was the "epiphany" that I have often spoken of since my arrest in 2005, which also became a major focus of the competency hearing.

Was my "epiphany" a rational choice, or a psychotic event? If the court decides that it was rational, then it also admits that the System itself can be rationally perceived as "evil". And if the system can be rationally perceived as evil, then shouldn't we be questioning the system's competence, instead of mine?

I can only hope that the significance and importance of this question, as derived above, is realized by those who would pretend to judge. It is a question that strikes at the lying heart of the System, and has the potential, if asked and answered honestly, of exposing the true nature of the Beast, and bringing about a revolution in the way we all think about ourselves, and our roles in this world. And that is what my "belief system" is all about!

The Color of your Soul

A person cannot change their psychological makeup any easier than they can change the color of their hair or skin. They can dye their hair, and tattoo their skin, but that doesn't change the nature of these things any more than behavior therapy or changing a habit changes the nature of the person.

So to judge someone for the way they think, ie. the color of their soul, is no better than judging them for the color of their skin, or other physical attribute. In many ways it is the ultimate form of prejudice, and incidentally one that literally defines most religious institutions and that causes most of the misery in this world.