July 12, 2012

Under No Circumstances


Under no circumstances should anyone ever accept any “capitalism for me, anarchism for you” setup.
For example, governments and corporations are not “patriotic”. They regard the jobs and wealth of “their” people as infinitely offshorable. They have zero loyalty to any such notions. So why would anyone ever accept such propaganda from the system? And if you truly believe in patriotism, don’t you need to regard all the elites of the corporate state system as being traitors to the country?
Or the way system propaganda, like in the corporate media or with NGO front groups, tries to implant notions that the 99% could ever “owe” any morality to the system. But corporations are sociopathic in principle. They openly declare that their one and only imperative is profit. So why would anyone for a second entertain any notion that any of us could “owe” something like a “debt” to a corporation, as a matter of “morals”? Why would anyone ever reciprocate with anything other than the corporate Hobbesian mindset?
The fact is that it’s the elites of politics, economy, culture who made the conscious choice to completely destroy society and humanity itself, replacing it with a scorched earth free-fire zone of organized crime and psychopathic profiteering, with the formerly human victims slated to cannibalize themselves in a cesspool of cutthroat “competition”. It’s the elites who declared war on humanity. It’s the elites who want to turn the Earth itself into a cesspool of viciousness.
While we must strive with all our resurgent humanity to rebuild community among ourselves, toward those who would treat us as something less than human, toward the system and all who seek to ape it, we must reciprocate fully. We can start be rejecting in principle all morality, all authority, all legitimacy, where it comes to any system institution or meme.
Here’s one example: the “supreme court”, as a thing and as a meme. (In our context this overwrought term is appropriate, because the notion that something like a supreme court has any legitimacy, that its decisions have any objective existence and power, is indeed something injected into our psychology, like a physical pathogen, and intended to replicate itself through both contagion and heredity.) I see everywhere people who are generally skeptical of the system who are still prone to invest this court with some kind of objective existence and power. I saw one discussion about “when did the 90s end?”, with one commenter suggesting “Bush v. Gore”. He didn’t sound like he meant this symbolically. Rather, he seemed to think that a handful of scumbags calling itself a “supreme court” and issuing a proclamation intended to help a handful of thugs steal an election, somehow actually has more “legitimacy” than the same proclamation issued by a handful of scumbags on a street corner.
The truth, of course, is that just like Andy Jackson said, the SCOTUS has zero power to enforce anything, and depends completely on the executive’s thug arm. It’s nothing but a propaganda front for that might-makes-right arm. In the case of the 2000 election, to roll over and give up was 100% the unforced, voluntary choice of Gore and his sniveling supporters and voters. They made the infinitely shameful choice to surrender. No one but themselves is responsible even the slightest bit.
The same is true of any other decision. The SCOTUS does what its masters want it to do. Citizens United merely “legally” enshrined and intensified the existing vector of One Dollar = One Vote. It’s incoherent to accept the existing electoral regime but whine about CU as some kind of abuse. CU is perfectly mainstream jurisprudence and policy, agreed upon by liberals and conservatives. If you want to reject CU, you’d better start by rejecting Bellotti and Buckley, and the whole program of “elections” among contending factions of the 1%. But how typical of liberals to accept all that but whine about a trivial detail.
Similarly, the recent decision upholding the Obama Poll Tax is a perfectly consistent, normal decision, just as Obama’s tax is consistent, normal policy. (In both cases “normal” is referring to the corporate system’s vector.) How typical of the same conservatives who support the orgy of corporate welfare and corporate mandates everywhere else (how is the 10% ethanol mandate not a tax as well?) to cherry-pick an example like this and whine about what an abuse it is. How can you want the corporate state system, including a “health care” system based on private insurance monopolies, but not want the government to act as aggressively as necessary to force participation in that system (once such participation becomes necessary in order to maintain the system at all)?
The fact is that liberals and conservatives are both the same inertial coward and leech who is afraid of corporate power but also wants to free ride on it (thus the long since proven Big Lie of “trickle-down” is now the fundamental secular religion of both groups, along with electoralism itself). There’s also some intellectual laziness involved, a disinclination to even try to think beyond system brainwashing. The result is this craven, stupid acceptance of the “legitimacy” of the 1%, to the point that even those who want to reject its power tend to acknowledge its alleged authority. The cult of the “supreme court”, certainly the most obviously fraudulent “branch” of government by any objective measure (since it can’t even partake of the gutter legitimacy of Might Makes Right, which unfortunately is a legitimacy criterion to many), is a clear example of this.
One measure of our self-liberation shall be the extent to which we liberate our minds from the oppressor and casually think and talk of the fact that the SCOTUS has no legitimacy. This acceptance, once it becomes second nature, can then be expanded to encompass the rest of the corporate/state system.



  1. Superb and perfect for “election season”. I’m sending this out to all my American Idealist voting believers and superstitious. That mental prison is tough to break out of though as people still think it’s a form of “participation”. Try to tell them they are merely ratifying the totally illegitimate choice someone else has made for them and watch the eyes glaze over. I still hear “lesser of two evils” arguments every day and I just shake my head. Which daddy do I want to pound me slightly less?

    I’m curious how you respond when the inevitable “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain….” argument rears its head.

    Comment by Pete — July 19, 2012 @ 8:34 am

    • You can’t quantify evil, but you can legitimize it. Voting for evil legitimizes evil.

      In any event, both Romney and Obama intend to do the most harm to their bases. Republicans should be voting for Obama, and Democrats should be voting for Romney. That’s how bad things have become.

      Comment by Tao Jonesing — July 20, 2012 @ 10:51 am

    • The most obvious retort is that the truth is clearly the opposite – those who keep voting for proven criminals are voting for the crimes they commit. Voters thus, at best, forfeit all right to complain, and are arguably complicit in the crimes. (Certainly older ones are.)

      (Sorry I’ve been absent for awhile.)

      Comment by Russ — July 30, 2012 @ 7:49 am

      • Hey, Russ. Hope all is well.

        At work today, I rolled out the meme that Romney and Obama each intend to do the most harm to their base today. I got a chuckle. I don’t think they get it.

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — July 30, 2012 @ 11:21 pm

      • Thanks for the good words, Tao. Lots going on here, and I haven’t been online much.

        I admit it’s not clear to me why two-party tribalists among the 99% would be better off voting for the opposite tribe’s candidate. Either candidate intends to liquidate and enslave them all. Everyone (that is, a critical mass) needs to reject the system completely.

        Comment by Russ — July 31, 2012 @ 5:35 am

      • They’re actually better off voting for nobody, but what they fear most from the opposition party is something only their party can deliver. Only a democrat can eliminate Social Security. Only a republican can ban guns.

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — July 31, 2012 @ 10:44 pm

      • You’re right, that’s often been the case for some things. Though I think Republicans will happily gut SS the next chance they get.

        Comment by Russ — August 1, 2012 @ 2:54 am

  2. Nicely put. Thought you guys might enjoy this http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2012/07/carte-blanche.html

    Chomsky speaks about “The Charter Of The Forest” and the Magna Carta, protection of the commons and all that jazz. Full article here http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175571/

    Comment by Pete — July 24, 2012 @ 8:11 am

    • Thanks for the links, Pete. I picked up the book cited by Chomsky.

      Comment by Tao Jonesing — July 30, 2012 @ 11:19 pm

    • Thanks for the link. Interesting article. I knew nothing about the Charter of the Forest.

      Comment by Debra — July 31, 2012 @ 12:19 pm

      • My pleasure. It was news to me too. Interesting stuff- as usual from Chomsky. And @ Dave outlaw (and all), I think Charles Eisenstein helps us to imagine the possibilities of how we might transition from the current rotting system to a more traditional, and ironically ‘conservative’ way of living that doesn’t falsely attempt to decouple economics from the ecology. It gets cookin’ after the first 5 minutes…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JKOcb3UygA

        It’s a conversation with (“policy consultant”) James Quillagan.

        “Last month I had the pleasure of a dialog with James Quilligan on the subject of the commons, gift economies, crisis, and transition.

        It felt like an especially significant conversation because James and I come from two different worlds. James is an internationally known policy consultant who engages with people in the highest echelons of government. I, on the other hand, am an uncredentialed social philosopher with no position in academia, government, or anywhere else really. Yet here we were, speaking with mutual respect and building on each other’s ideas. It felt like we were bridging two worlds.

        Such merging of worlds is bound to become more and more common, as the Ancien Régime falls apart and those within it become more open to new thinking. I think this is a really powerful video and I hope it spreads and has an impact.” http://charleseisenstein.net/category/news/

        Comment by Pete — August 1, 2012 @ 12:31 pm

    • Hmm… I’m not all that keen on the Ancien Régime falling apart.
      It’s the NEW REGIME that has me up in arms…
      It’s so mercantile and graceless…
      France is indeed testimony that you can have a revolution, and get back to business as usual.
      With “system” running the works, rather than incarnated people.

      Comment by Debra — August 1, 2012 @ 2:27 pm

  3. I voted in our last legislative elections. The first round, at least…
    I didn’t want to, really.
    But, for family peace, I went ahead and did it…
    Sometimes principles can be lethal. For you, and for others.
    They are, after all, merely… abstractions.

    Comment by Debra — July 30, 2012 @ 6:39 am

  4. Russ Juts curious…If we rid opus selves of the whole system what would we replace it with?

    Comment by Dave Outlaw — July 31, 2012 @ 12:39 pm

    • Since the end of the fossil fuel age will necessarily mean some level of relocalization anyway, we must use this necessary trend as the fulcrum to reconstitute integral local/regional communities, of the sort which have predominated throughout the vast majority of human history.

      The fact is that meaningful human communities can never be very large (in numbers or geographical extent) or hierarchically centralized. Beyond a certain threshhold, size and centralization dissolve community (and have many other destructive effects) and benefit only predator/parasite elites.

      So our mission is to take what’s historically/physically necessary (necessary on account of the fact that energy consumption will soon return to historically normal levels) and turn it to the best outcome.

      Food Sovereignty is, I think, the basic framework for this revolution, since:

      1. Everything will depend upon our ability to feed ourselves post-oil, so the goal of transforming all agriculture to organic agriculture is an absolute biological necessity.

      2. This goal in turn dictates the mindset and goal for every other issue. To give the most obvious example, it requires that we take back the land, and therefore the whole political philosophy and strategy which that requires.

      Comment by Russ — August 1, 2012 @ 3:07 am

      • Agree with most here.
        I may add that over thirty years ago, I went backpacking around the Mt Blanc chain with my husband.
        It was truly amazing what we managed to survive on, in terms of food. (Hint : little little…)
        And while exerting our flesh and blood bodies too…

        Comment by Debra — August 1, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

      • Russ,

        I’m surprised you responded. The question was positively Skippy-esque and purely rhetorical, at least to me. The lack of detail in the question made it feel like a “dare” as in “stop yer bitchin unless you have a real alternative that achieves the same result as the present system, which you obviously don’t.”

        Frankly, I interpreted the question as a slave asking “what will you chain me with once my shackles are gone?” I appreciate your optimism.

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — August 2, 2012 @ 12:38 am

      • Regardless of whether or not the original question is sincere, the answer will still need tens of thousands of repetitions for the sake of ever-growing new audiences.

        Comment by Russ — August 2, 2012 @ 4:36 pm

  5. umm…“what will you chain me with once my shackles are gone?” Tao are we saying we need anarchism ? Is no system a solution? I do have to give you credit …Your assumption that my question was skippy..esque was rhetorical and stop yer bit-chin unless you have some suggestions was fairly accurate to a point. I am not one to mince words, and I certainly do not have all the answers and I will bitch too until I get some, so the bitching process is part of the way we find solutions, and i did not exactly intend to say stop your bitching , we are all entitled to that it just does not get us anywhere unless we move on and have a better way of doing something.. I like what is being presented as solutions and the dilemmas in life we make choices about all come with trade offs (as all know very well). Change only comes when we fear that the current system is more risky than the unknown we will replace it with. so it is pretty simple what we must do to mitigate the risk of a new system..discuss the proposed changes and find out what is better . and I am like Russ am an uncredentialed social philosopher with no position in academia or government. However I am an activist and have made a resolve to do what i can to get the changes we need made for the benefit of us all.

    We can criticize the politicians and bitch about them all we want, the real problem lies in the system that allows us to do the dastardly deeds we all do in one context or the other, so do not get me started on polishing my halo, I found out the culprit of this mess and stared him in the face as I looked in the mirror. i was Guilty of being a human with the desire to connive just as Machiavellian theory suggest, however his revelation was not to try and change us he simply said keep changing the system to address our penchant for wanting too much power over others so we can have it our way…ummmm….. Change the system is what we are after, but to what . The age old idea that we can legislate behavior with laws was proven ineffective by Moses with the coming of Christ who came to replace the law with one law of love your fellow man.. (I am not a religious nut I just know my biblical history and the messages that you can gleam from them if you are not into hermetic analysis I.E. the old testament was a bunch of stories about man trying to understand the nature of god and putting their own spin on it. The new testament just reflected that the we gave up and said the answer is love …so now we have to define who what when where and how we must love. I do have some answers for that but its not time for that yet) I will write a little each night I..but have to get some sleep so i can do my real job.. i have a few ideas that requires collaboration to get us out of our current trends…more to come
    Kind regards Dave Outlaw

    Comment by Dave Outlaw — August 2, 2012 @ 1:53 am

    • Your assumption that my question was skippy..esque was rhetorical and stop yer bit-chin unless you have some suggestions was fairly accurate to a point.

      In that case, the question is indeed ridiculous and disingenuous. What’s this whole blog been for years now but “suggestions”, and far more than that?

      But don’t worry, although I’ve been unable to write much lately, I’ll get around to restating all suggestions, and in a far more systematic form.

      Comment by Russ — August 2, 2012 @ 5:30 am

    • Any form of.. “law” of love can only produce the perversion of love. Like some other human (and animal ?) conditions, it will not be commanded, willed, or … controlled. (At least, some forms of love.)
      Basing social order on an IMPERATIVE to love our neighbor (or in modern thinking… empathize with him…) produces the contrary of what we would like it to produce.
      In my opinion.
      What is amazing to my mind is the deeply entrenched Christianity of the way we think.
      Always wanting to… “save” somebody, something.
      Extraordinary, don’t you think ?
      How we continue this paradigm ?
      Even when we believe that WE are not.. religious nuts ?
      What will bring us together (again) ?
      Maybe… just doing certain activities together could be enough to build a sense of community ?
      There is a sense of community in our small theater group that I will return to next year for the fourth year…
      Could that possibly be enough “belonging” ?
      Do we really need outsized SOCIAL projects to get us up in the morning ?
      Why ?
      Because of an itching to feel… useful ??
      A deep underlying FEAR of being.. parasites ourselves ?
      (One man’s parasite is another man’s blessing, she says.)
      As I wrote on Toby’s blog yesterday, too too much.. activism.
      The world needs A BIG REST from all our developmental activism.
      It needs for us to slow down, and stay in one place for a while.
      Less… BUSYNESS, huh ?

      Comment by Debra — August 2, 2012 @ 6:56 am

      • Sorry Debra for being such a hyper human . I hope you do not interpret the idea of Love as an answer i was merely making a point that we as a society think it is because we gave up on making system to get people to behave in society.. So I do concur with your thoughts…But was hoping you expand on the thought further for me please? But before you do please read my next comment and see how it is that we have arrived at our personal opinions

        In my opinion The human mind is obviously the culprit here as it is what defines our actions. Our decisions from the mind are fear based or should I say based on survival. the premise of the mind is identify consistency ( patterns That reproduce) this produces predictability, predictability produces safety as we know how to react. So my definition of fear is that anything that does not produce or sustain life is not part of our DNA and will bring us harm and we should fear it. Now we seem to forget the old noggin is a chemical factory and releases all kinds of things ( endorphins and adrenaline ) that make us feel the we way we do. You are indicating I have too much adrenaline and I think you have to much endorphin ) when we see patterns we think will bring harm… so this little group obviously is seeing patterns. but each mind in the group sees different patterns and now we have a collection of patterns we must digest and I hope you see my intent is too be respectful as I do not know it all.. thanks for the reply…

        Kindest regards

        Comment by Dave Outlaw — August 2, 2012 @ 8:25 am

    • I am not one to mince words

      And yet all your original comment does is mince words. Luckily for Russ, “I speak jive.”

      and I certainly do not have all the answers and I will bitch too until I get some, so the bitching process is part of the way we find solutions,

      You cannot find the solution, if you do not know what the problem is. You are so keen on replacing the current system with another like it, only better, that you do not perceive the nature or depth of the real problem. If you think the buck stops with you as an individual, or any of as individuals, you have to plum the depths quite a bit farther.

      Tao are we saying we need anarchism ? Is no system a solution?

      I said what I said, Dave. I offered no solution. I merely implied that your demand for a particular kind of solution demonstrates that you don’t truly understand the problem that needs to be solved. You implicitly reject Russ’s approach because you instinctively conclude that it must be too far different from what you consider “normal” to be workable, which really means that for something to be workable for you, it must be very close to what we have today. Call it an instinct towards “progressivism,” if you will. It’s a natural reaction, so I am not condemning you for having it, I am merely naming it for what it is.

      the real problem lies in the system that allows us to do the dastardly deeds we all do in one context or the other, so do not get me started on polishing my halo, I found out the culprit of this mess and stared him in the face as I looked in the mirror. i was Guilty of being a human

      No, you are not the culprit, Dave. You are just not that far up the food chain (nor am I). And any Machiavellian machinations you involved yourself in were of no consequence because Machiavelli’s writings do not include the truth he kept for himself and those he served. The hidden truths are what make the asserted truths of philosophy and religion– those things which the vast majority of people are taught to live and serve– a lie that serves as the primary means by which the masses are controlled.

      Comment by Tao Jonesing — August 2, 2012 @ 11:59 pm

      • It seems as though we have seen a few picking up on the idea of our fears, Russ the gut brain connection is a medical fact and we use it to make decisions.
        The most important thing we must realize is that decision making is connected to our emotions and although we have all kinds of decision making models that try and eliminate the emotions they are flawed because in the end we decide with our heart and what we care about the most , those that we call family. I have a theory that in the system of “decision making” we also use information to make decisions but that information is used to mitigate our risk and in the end we base all our decision with the interdependent fear factors.
        Those fear factors are:
        1. Our fear of the known- (what we have learned through our life experiences),
        2. Our fear of the unknown, (what we must learn by education)
        3. Our fear of the unknowable (we fear the unknowable future and most who chose to believe in a deity pray incessantly to it to protect them the rest just worry about how to reason with the believers and worry about those in control of the religious institutions and lastly we have
        4. Our fear of being judged. (This is the premise of civilization we see it as culture as we try and demonstrate the same patterns of dress and likes and dislikes, language and we ostracize those who do not match.) Overcoming these fears is key to our survival as the corporate system understands these fears all to well and uses them to manipulate us all.

        Gut feel is a combined warning system warning us that a pattern of safety have been violated and we are on high alert

        Throughout these posts we are warned over and over something is not right and we must correct it or face the consequences. Solutions are what we must move to, as all the issues are before us, historically if the fear factors are not strong enough we stall our decision making until we have enough information to validate our fears, and then we change ever so slowly as we venture in the world of the unknowable future as we have done time and time though out history…

        I asked a question in my first post, with it I did not advocate change I only pointed out that with all the alarm , have we arrived at the point of making change?.. it was merely a question yet others worried if it was a sincere or purely rhetorical and exhibited their concern that I did not understand the scope of the problem..Really ? The attack on my question “do we have a solution?” demonstrates a perceived elitist intellectual culture in this group… and I must ask do you really think a question is a demand and do you really think there are secrets? In my experiences in life I have found that there is only one secret and it is – there are no secrets!… anyone who seeks revelation will not be denied. a common theme in these post is constant revelation, so we who do seek will be able to deal with the our ever changing world..that demands we change to survive.

        Comment by dave Outlaw — August 4, 2012 @ 1:51 am

      • Umm, Dave Outlaw, I am an elitist.
        I am not necessarily an elitist ONLY because i want to be an elitist.
        I am one because OTHERS perceive me to be so, and exclude THEMSELVES from engaging with me.
        This is going on… in my family, for example.
        My daughter in law is from the deep South (outside of the U.S., Dave, outside of the U.S…).
        She reacts to me the way others have reacted to me (not everybody, thank God) since I was 9 years old.
        They say : “you talk funny. You use words that I don’t understand. Why don’t you sound… just like me ? If you don’t sound just like me, well, you must think that you are better than I, and YOU ARE ELITIST.”
        What’s the answer, Dave ?
        Should I be policing myself 16 hours a day to make sure that I am not getting uppity, for example ?
        (But… how do I know that I am using words that she doesn’t understand ? Is that my infamous… lack of empathy ?? (snort of impatience, here))
        This little intrafamily predicament can be generalized.
        There is a deep seated feeling of inferiority in many people that stems from the failure of our mass education systems to transmit our culture. (But… could mass education ever transmit what needs to be passed on from one generation to another ? I think not. Rousseau had a good grip on this.)
        After a while, when people EXCLUDE THEMSELVES (it’s not so simple as the 1% always excluding the 99%, for example), they get so caught up in rage and inferiority that they want to destroy what they feel excluded from.
        I argue that the Paulinian project of “in Christ there is no north nor south, in Him no east or west” has taken us so far, and is still so present in our way of thinking that sometimes I despair that we will give up our.. totalitarian humanitarianism. Always doing the Vicar’s work, Dave. Always evangelizing, but for different.. masters ? ideas ? utopias ?
        What would we be like if we weren’t evangelizing all the time, and looking for the next utopia ? I keep dreaming…
        On this blog, among other things, I try to point out the myriad ways in which people ACTIVELY participate in their own “enslavement” (through their legitimate desire to be protected, their need to admire and emulate others, their need to construct their individual identities through finding flesh and blood models. And through their need to escape from the crushing responsibility of being isolated individuals.)
        If they didn’t…. things would change a lot faster, Dave.
        I am also a devil’s advocate. One of the biblical roles of the devil is to be “the obstacle”.
        That’s fine with me…(although one might see it as a form of… evangelizing, heh ? ;-))
        I refuse the temptation to cast problems in terms of the binary oppositions “true/false”, “the truth/lies”.
        My experience prevents me from seeing the world this way, or at least, I try not to…

        Comment by Debra — August 5, 2012 @ 4:53 am

      • I know this is a bit off the main intent of the blog but I felt I needed to respond just so I clear up my intention in participating as it is interdependent with my future input …Debra the answer to being called an elitist is it was only an observation based on my experiences not a condemnation. In my opinion it was meant to complement and that goes to others as well. I do not mean to be combative by expressing what I perceive. There are others like you that (because you are different) validate my theory of decision making in regards to how we behave as humans when it comes to culture. We ostracize those who are different and we all fear being ostracized unfairly, so it a common human characteristic.
        Other may not perceive you as elites as they are more intelligent than me. But for now I am attracted to people such as you as I learn from them, I find them extremely thoughtful and though they may at times seem disagreeable it only because they want to bring one more bit of missing information to the table and in fact help the decision making process.

        Debra In the case of your family, I have no way of having all the variables to correctly assess it , but I can provide you with a few answers and they are by no means all of them… my guess is when you provide elite information it creates a threat to those who do not understand why nor have the mental capacity or desire to so. While it is not an intentional act for you to so it can manifests itself as a dilemma when you deal with individuals with lower self esteem. Even their choice of low self esteem is a residual of parenting or environment and they cannot help themselves so please do not demonize them they really cannot help themselves either unless they seek therapy, and suggesting therapy to any person is a dilemma too as it confirms to them they are lesser and that is exactly what they fight, because they are fearful if anyone were to find out it would make them even more lesser.

        Sometimes I run into some elitist who have low self esteem too because they are different, fortunately most elitist see this dilemma and understand it. While I do not consider myself to be an elitist I do not have low self esteem. I was fortunate to have a mother who told me I was special when I was young. Her gift has been engrained in me in a good way I hope because to me to me the only way you can be special is too help someone along the way. It is not savior mentality and I know I cannot save the world I can only help explain and make it more palatable. And I am not the only special person in the world..There are many more that are doing their part. Debra I must say my perception of you is quite different than your relatives, you are a good person seeking away to help others with your gifted thought process.

        Russ seems to think the only way out of our current dilemma is revolution. It is a faster way to change things and it may be required if we are out of time and if our plight accelerates it may be the only way. For now I think evolution is the better way. Just as there are a number of individuals that have mutated with better brains all we need to do is harness them and understand them and we can produce a better world for those to come.
        There several other points you mention such as education and things that I can see right away that we are in agreement with I will elaborate more as time goes on… our educational system in the US is in dire need of change and we are changing it on the local level.

        I once read a quote by John Naisbitt that said “don’t get too far ahead of the parade that people don’t know you’re in it” so and so we must wait for others to catch up, and Viktor Frankl was right ..if we live for those we care about we will always wait to the last minute.. We just do not know when the last minute will be until it is here.

        And Russ I am continuing to read the blog and you may have a good book in the making… I am sorry if you perceived my take on the blog as wrong and appreciate the clarification. I am like a blind man starting to feel an elephant and describing it as they are only feeling one part. I am sure as I get through the post the patterns will be what you describe.
        Kindest Regards
        Dave Outlaw

        Comment by dave Outlaw — August 5, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

      • Thanks Dave. The main reason to accept that nothing short of a full transformation can work isn’t that it’s “faster” (although the clock’s ticking on major collapses of industrial agriculture, as well as CAFO pandemics), but that nothing short of that can work. Reformism, which has had its way for centuries, is by now empirically proven not to work, if the definition of “work” is to establish economic equality and stability, broad-based prosperity, and basic human happiness for all. (All the things capitalism promised, for example, if we just let the “invisible hand” and trickle-down “evolve”.)

        Comment by Russ — August 6, 2012 @ 4:11 am

      • I agree, However, the invisible had does work if we can keep the rich from putting in their pocket.:) There are multiple ways we can ease the pain while we go through the transition. that is why I support the move to amend, buddy Roemer is starting his own reform movement too… people eventually do get it but it has to be through people such as yourself who sound the alarm.

        Comment by dave Outlaw — August 6, 2012 @ 8:54 am

    • Dave Outlaw, may I suggest, in true evangelist fashion that you might ALSO enjoy engaging with Toby and me, and occasional others, on Toby’s blog “Econosophy”…
      In my opinion… we are all different, but some of us are more at ease with our difference than others…

      Comment by Debra — August 6, 2012 @ 5:39 am

      • Thanks Debra. Based on your comment of blogging to him I actually tried to search Toby on the web yesterday and could not find him with the name of the blog now I will try to join in tonight.

        Comment by dave Outlaw — August 6, 2012 @ 9:04 am

  6. I have a theory that the Corporate fake food system and their allies in the American sick for profit industry that prescribes the SDA (standard american diet)- which basically replaces real food with processed/refined/chemically treated/hydrogenated/genetically tinkered with rubbish- is what is disrupting the “gut-brain” axis that is supposed to keep everyone behaving in a natural way. An overstressed, malnourished, psychologically depleted society is much easier to control and persuade. Thus easier to replace normal human traits like compassion, empathy, generosity, etc. with cut-throat competitiveness, (irrational) fear, anger and all the other traits necessary for a de-humanized system that wishes to dissolve communites.

    On the adrenal gland http://robbwolf.com/2012/04/09/real-deal-adrenal-fatigue/

    Imagine the behavioral difference in populations reconnected with the land and the healthy real food that they would be growing & ingesting rather than the chemically toxic food supply everyone blindly accepts as ‘nutritious’ in the world of Walmartsanto. I think Russ strikes at the heart of the dragon when he focuses on our struggle to regain food sovereignty. It’s one of the deep roots of our illness where many symptoms flow from.

    Comment by Pete — August 2, 2012 @ 12:36 pm

    • I’m sure you’re right about that. Even as the food supply is being enclosed against us, it’s also being poisoned in order to physically and psychologically debilitate us.

      Comment by Russ — August 2, 2012 @ 4:34 pm

  7. Dave, I am not really sure that I understand what/how you are saying.
    I think that what caracterizes the human animal more than any other animal on the planet is the degree of malleability it ? has.
    That means the overwhelming effects of circumstance and environment on the way we behave.
    Does “the chemical factory” make us feel the way we do, or do… the thoughts, memories, beliefs, perceptions (all over our body, and not just centrally/hierarchically located in our brain…) make us feel the way we do ?
    What is the relationship between these heterogenous factors ?
    I think that we have overly simplified the complex relationship between mind/body/language in our current pseudo scientific models.
    On fear and the mind : any animal is confronted with the necessity of discriminating between : “the same” and “different”.
    Like in “belonging/not belonging”, for example..

    I find it.. interesting that we have tunnel vision on empathy.
    Empathy means the capacity of identifying with another being.
    Of walking in his/her/its moccasins.
    That doesn’t necessary imply… feeling exclusively positive and cuddly emotions.
    There is nothing DEHUMAN about all the above… negativity.
    Anger, competitiveness, fear are all human.. TOO. They are part of us.
    A dehumanized system is one in which ALL emotion, positive AND negative, is banished, or disqualified as being unnecessary sentimentalism.
    For example… one of the Nazi hierarchy’s goals was to get SS in the position of committing mass murders to NOT FEEL any kind of emotion.
    No pleasure in killing, for example. (No guilt, or remorse, either…)
    Just.. killing… machines, right ?

    Comment by Debra — August 2, 2012 @ 5:48 pm

    • Thanks Debra, i was only asking to determine teh level of knowledge you had….I see you do understand and think what you have written exemplifies an individual who is one who chooses to understand the complexities of life. You asked on question about the hierarchy of how our emotions get triggered. The normal mind uses it senses to detect changes in patterns of sound, sight , feel, smell, and taste. based on it stored experiences it then quickly scans our memories to match the pattern with an inexpert that either brought danger or safety and acts accordingly with the speed in which the pattern is made. In addition because we have those who mince words and define things using borrowed words from their original defined purposes we confuse the newbies. In my opinion we have only two priory emotion Trust and fear all other feelings are generated by the chemical dumps most define as moods. In addition while I have described eh normal mind we have some minds who are super sensitive to changes in patterns and can recognize them quickly and sound the alarm prematurely.. The resown I want to start here in this blog is make sure I am not in a group who uses their sense making mechanism exclusively, to define another without asking questions. this is the premise of prejudice where we see a pattern start and we use similar patterns that we have experienced to complete the pattern before it has a chance to show it is not exactly eh same thing we previously experienced. Hope this makes sense and if you have otehr ideas about what I have written or question please fell free to engage. What I am trying to do is be a part of a solution and not a part of the problem by being insulting.

      Kind Regards

      Comment by Dave Outlaw — August 3, 2012 @ 8:20 am

      • One question, Dave.
        The Eskimo, who has over thirty different.. words for describing what we call “snow”, is he mincing words ?
        Personally, I am a word mincer.
        Chomp, chomp, chomp.
        At this point in time, I am not sure that I want to be.. part of anything…
        Don’t take me too seriously, Dave….

        Comment by Debra — August 3, 2012 @ 12:04 pm

      • Debra if your intent to mince words is to add clarification and not add confusion then “mince” away. My intent in making the statement was to warn I can be blunt. My use of Southern euphuisms is not jive and were intended to amuse and break the seriousness. Tao assumptions were a bit off the mark but it really doesn’t matter to me. This blog has some very brilliant post and I am just getting started, I do not profess to be a speed reader as I find I might miss something. The purpose of the blog is quite explicitly defined at the top and I did read that. The posts that follow started with an OCD focus and digressed into an ADD blog about all the interdependent things that caused the dilemma we are trying to address. so i was not sure where to jump in.

        Comment by dave Outlaw — August 4, 2012 @ 10:13 am

      • Your characterization of this blog is wrong and, in my opinion, reveals your own lack of understanding. From day one this blog has been consistently pro-democracy and anti-corporate/state. It has described the corporate tyranny in many of its forms, analyzed humanity’s prospects, explored ways to fight back, developed an affirmative vision for humanity’s future, and worked on some basic ideas for goals, strategy, and tactics. If you can name a set of posts which aren’t part of this framework, please do so. And there’s certainly no “intellectual elitism” here. On the contrary, this blog has been consistently against the intelligentsia and academia and everything about them.

        Meanwhile, I didn’t “attack” your question. I gave my basic answer. I only expressed some skepticism about your motives when you yourself admitted you weren’t completely serious about it.

        But I don’t want to be combative. If you’re interested in our project, then welcome aboard. I’m glad you’re reading earlier stuff, since I worry about the whole Internet mindset. I feel like I’ve written the equivalent of a book, but since it’s in the form of hundreds of blog posts, people have a prejudice against reading this book. I’ll need to rewrite it all in systematic form, and title the posts “Part One, Section One”, and so on.

        Comment by Russ — August 5, 2012 @ 4:47 am

  8. Ahhhhhhh….. long sigh of self contented satisfaction.
    This morning I spent over an hour scrubbing away at one of my cabinets, cleaning it out, sorting out stuff I want to get rid of.
    Hard, sweaty WORK in our heat wave.
    And I was musing away in those meditations which bring me… nearer to God (mine, at any rate…)
    Thinking about that outrageus episode where Jesus invites his buddies to dinner (inappropriate vocabulary, of course…), and when they arrive, HE GETS DOWN ON HIS HANDS AND KNEES in front of them and starts washing their feet.
    How many people in power (knowledge is power, don’t forget…) do YOU know who would get down on their knees and… wash their guests’ feet (or scrub down their cabinets while we’re at it…) ?
    That is truly… SLAVE BEHAVIOR, now, isn’t it ?
    These days in France, I am not sure that you could even.. PAY SOMEBODY to scrub down your cabinets for you, you know.
    The EU even has incredibly tortuous regulations forbidding legitimately employed (!!!) cleaning ladies from climbing onto a ladder to clean your windows for you.
    Really, a lot hinges on the concept of.. “slavery”. Even though we are constantly running around hysterically and excitedly proclaiming that we have done it away in our, ahem.. NEW, MODERN and IMPROVED world.
    Scrubbing down cabinets is basically considered slave work, in the eyes of the bourgeoisie (and not just…).
    WHO WANTS TO DO SLAVE WORK ? (Even paid cleaning ladies are above it…)
    Lol. Even though we pay people to do work, their salary is no guarantee that we do not consider them to be… slaves, of a sort.
    So, Jesus’s gesture in getting HIMSELF down on hands on knees, and playing ? being ? the slave is truly… an aristocratic one, in a way.
    Those opposites… they keep colliding, as I tell Toby…
    Tao, these days on this blog you sound even more sibyllin than I do.
    That’s saying something…

    Comment by Debra — August 3, 2012 @ 7:51 am

  9. Forgive me as I stray into a deeper look into our broken “gut-brain axis”. If at all possible I try not to venture into the supermarket anymore. There’s nothing “super” about it. I like pointing out to people that the supermarket did not appear on earth until about 1940…. all those hundreds of thousands of years, how did we ever make due without them? When I do venture in, I cannot help but look around at all the herd members tossing frankenfoods into their carts without so much as a single critical thought given to their choices (it’s on the shelf, it must be real food and it can’t possibly be toxic). It really is a cause for despair (but also for hope). I can’t help but wonder what kind of positive differences would occur all around us by simply providing basic nourishment to people again. Bye bye zombieland. It seems clear to me though. You simply cannot have a “healthy” world in which the greater percentage of the populations are unknowingly malnourished, ill, and disconnected from the natural world.

    CHRIS KRESSER: “I think the sooner we get rid of this idea of linear causality in the body the better. One of the coolest things about Chinese medicine (and Chinese philosophy in general) is that they don’t really tend to see things in linear fashion. They see things in a cyclical way. And they way they look at the body, they would never say ‘this causes that’, like from A to B. It’s always ‘this and that’. Or, ‘and both’. For example, they’ve always recognized that the emotions, psychology, and physiology are one in the same. In fact they don’t even really have a separate word for emotions, like in the medical sense. Of course they do in language, but they look at systems of the body. The liver system, or the lung system, or the heart system. Each system includes both physical symptoms and also emotional and psychological and even psycho-spiritual aspects. So it’s a pretty cool way of looking at the body and I think in that sense it’s more advanced than our way of looking at it, which is ya know, like a car, with a bunch of separate parts. We understand that they’re related but we still talk about them as being and distinct. But the truth is, you can’t really talk about emotion without talking about physiology. And you can’t talk about physiology without talking about emotion. They’re not connected, they’re the same system. So I think that’s important to understand and it kinda makes the chicken and egg thing a moot point. In the sense that it’s really difficult, if it’s all part of the same system it’s really difficult to say which came first and which followed. Once you’re in the cycle you’re in the cycle. So, that’s good news, bad news because it means that when it comes to treating it, you don’t have to figure out which one. You do both and both will improve. But you can figure out which one you havn’t been focusing on, which in most cases for most people is the brain. And so you might get more milage by focusing on one area because you’ve been neglecting it.”

    In this episode we discuss the gut-brain axis: the relationship between digestive health and cognitive function, memory, depression, anxiety and other mental and behavioral health issues. We cover:
    ■the basic physiology involved
    ■how inflammation in the gut affects the brain
    ■how decreased brain activity compromises gut function
    ■how to recognize the signs and symptoms of gut-brain axis dysfunction
    ■studies demonstrating gut-brain dysfunction and its effects on health
    ■dietary and lifestyle modifications to improve gut-brain function.

    I think the gut-brain axis is one of the most important and least recognized factors in human health.


    Comment by Pete — August 3, 2012 @ 8:30 am

    • Everything is part of a holism, while to try to separate the natural whole into atomized parts and then synthesize them is at the core of everything that’s gone wrong with civilization.



      Comment by Russ — August 3, 2012 @ 1:42 pm

      • Trying to separate the whole into atomized parts is what is called… analytical thinking. What reason is based on.
        It is necessary in order to… hunt, for example. Shall we say… to CATCH something when you hunt ?
        If the synthesis you are talking about is… Hegelian, yes, I agree. (But don’t call me out on Hegel, my understanding of him is secondary, not from my own reading of him.)
        We are trees with our roots in the ground and our heads in the sky.
        Dixit the rabbis.
        You don’t synthesize paradoxes. You make do with them.

        Comment by Debra — August 3, 2012 @ 6:40 pm

    • Pete..good to see you do understand systems. Peter Senge has championed the systems view of all systems and how they are all interdependent just as quantum physics is. However in any system if one of the components goes awry it will affect the whole system,. So to correct a body system malfunction you do need to understands its function, and some times before you can get it corrected it can cause damage to the other systems and make them malfunction so may times we often misdiagnose the entire root cause as we tend to stop a the first place we find the malfunction.

      In addition the Human mind can conceptualize system and diagnose things as a whole. The reason the conceptualization is important to understand is that the normal mind can only hold about 8 variables max,. So a team of people who understand the system can harness their collective knowledge and come up with a better analysis. The capitalistic system and corporate system combined with globalization has brought on new dilemma as we can no longer control this system with all the different governments as we could before we had global information technology. There are two paths we can take on is world government the other is what we call Glocalization. Model where local communities control all their own government, food and water and manufacturing. Unfortunately we are not all rich in resources so we do need to rely on others, and we will have to sort the generalizable systems that all communities can do and co-op the rest.

      Comment by dave Outlaw — August 6, 2012 @ 12:55 pm

  10. @Dave Outlaw,

    Here is a link to Toby’s blog, in case you still don’t have it: http://thdrussell.blogspot.com/

    Comment by Tao Jonesing — August 6, 2012 @ 10:19 pm

    • Thanks Russ. I did find it last night and have been reading the content…seems like a good place to discuss some ideas. I am assuming Toby is in Germany and Debra is in France so there is about 6 to 8 hours difference. What time zone are you? are you on linked in? i would like to have some off discsuusions befroe i go to far with my assumptions.

      Comment by dave Outlaw — August 7, 2012 @ 7:51 am

      • It was actually Tao who gave you the link. I’m in the eastern US. I’m not on linked in, but we can discuss stuff here.

        Comment by Russ — August 7, 2012 @ 8:15 am

    • Thanks Tao…i thought Russ had sent me the link…

      Comment by dave Outlaw — August 7, 2012 @ 9:11 pm

      • I’m on linked-in in real-life but won’t share that here.

        Feel free to email me at taojonesing at gmail dot com so as to allow me the persist in the belief that I remain anonymous. 🙂

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — August 9, 2012 @ 1:20 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: