Re: Digest Number 27

And my question is:
And if whatever is currently going on, both in our own personal lives and in the world, would be perfect?
If that which is happening to us and Earth is EXACTLY meant to be this way?
And what if because of exactly those reasons, we have the tools to grow into and become WHO we are supposed to be?

---
Experience a miraculous and prosperous day!

"Your environment is the physical picture of your thoughts, emotions and beliefs made visible."
Seth



--------- Original Message ---------

DATE: 3 Jun 2003 12:11:25 -0000
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Cc: 

>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>There are 3 messages in this issue.
>
>Topics in this digest:
>
>      1. Derrick Jensen Excerpts/philosophy
>           From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>      2. Living close to the earth
>           From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>      3. Revolution & news and world government
>           From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 1
>   Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 16:47:58 -0400 (EDT)
>   From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>Subject: Derrick Jensen Excerpts/philosophy
>
>(OurCultureOurCapitol: perhaps not relevant- I just want it
>in the archives)
>
>Here's something I started typing in last Thursday, and then
>added to.
>
>sent to:
>http://yoism.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/derrickjensen_discussion/
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ishmael_discussion/
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OurCultureOurCapitol/
>
>(Note I decided not to apply to the internship)
>
>Hello,
>For an internship at
>http://www.thedesertshaman.org/
>I'm answering the question:
>4.	Please give us a brief (100-150 words) personal
>statement of your spiritual beliefs and how they do, or do
>not, influence your care and concern for the Planet
>
>I was reminded I had thought of emailing you all a bit from
>Derrick Jensen's _The Culture of Make Believe_:
>
>p190
>Diamond wrote about morality in a civilized world: "Our
>moral syntax has no predicate. Hence we speak of doing
>*good*, good for its own sake, or *evil*. We convert each to
>a pure substantive, beyond experience, abstract. That is
>what [anthropologist] Paul Radin meant when he observed that
>the subject (or object) to which love, remorse, sorrow, may
>be directed is regarded as secondary in our civilization.
>All have the rank of virtues as such: They are
>manifestations of God's if not of Man's way. But among
>primitives ... the converse holds. Morality *is* behavior,
>values are not detached, not substantives; the good, the
>true, the beautiful or rather, the ideas of these things, do
>not exist. Therefore, one does not fall *in* love, one loves
>another; and that is an intricately learned experience, as
>hate, in a certain sense, also is."
>
>---
>I shall not be vague (Orion :) ), this is meant to lend
>support to my view that *Truth* need not be addressed in the
>Book of Yo (except perhaps to say why it need not be
>addressed).
>
>Here's some more from that same book (the reading of which I
>found to feel like a shotgun blast to the head which
>(miraculously) left me conscious. I'm not sure if that is
>due to my lack of self-control in reading the book (i.e., a
>lot, all at once), or the content, or the combination of
>both.): pp 601-603
>
>This book began as an exploration of hate in the Western
>world, and it ends, really, with the end of life on the
>planet. The problem, as near as I can see it, is the valuing
>of the abstract over the particular: of production over
>life; of economic (and other) systems over living beings, be
>they humans, or rivers, or polar bears; of our
>preconceptions of what niggers or Chinese or Irish dogs are
>supposed to be, instead of this black man, this Chinese
>woman, this Irish man, complete with his or her own cultural
>and personal histories, with desires and hopes and fears; of
>photographs of women over the women themselves, of the
>bodies of women over their whole beings, bodies and minds
>and hearts and sorrows and joys; of truncated conceptions of
>our own capacities, based on what we have benn allowed to
>express over who we really are. The problem is, simply, that
>of seeing ourselves and others as instruments to be used,
>instead of people to be enjoyed in relationship.
>
>What I propose as a "solution" to this problem of the
>ascendency of abstraction is a return to the particular. I
>support an anti-system to promote a falling in love [hmm...
>an abstraction in the service of particularization? I guess
>the whole book and the language therein can be described
>that way.] with the particular. To love this particular
>tree, this particular person, this glint o sunlight of this
>dragonfly wing, and, insofar as is possible, to perceive
>each of those around us as subjects. This is not a simple
>plea for us to all just get along. I'm not suggesting we
>replace abstract hate with a love just as abstract. That's
>pointless, absurd, meaningless, and, in the end, impossible.
>I am not an abstract being. I have fingers, flesh, bones. I
>love this person. I do not love that person. Nor am I
>suggesting we simply step away from violence. I'm suggesting
>that there is a difference--all the difference in the world,
>really--between real fights between real people--even when
>real blood is spilled--and killings based on preconceptions.
>What I'm suggesting is a return to our humanity.
>
>If we are to do that, the first thing we must do is see the
>inhumanity of our current system for what it is, and we must
>speak about it. If the first rule of a dysfunctional family
>or society is *Don't*, the first rule of a functioning
>society is *Do*. Talk about it. Speak out, like Ham, Noah's
>curses be damned.
>
>Of course, it's not so easy. It's all very fine for me to
>say how much joy it brings me to listen to birdsong, but my
>enjoyment, or anyone else's, is irrelevant to the suffering
>of others, to the degree that it does not compel me to shut
>down the source of the other's misery. Having fallen in love
>with our own lives, and the loves of those around us--even
>our honored enemies (though not McNamara and his likes who,
>by their actions, show themselves to be willing to
>exploit)--the next step is to get rid of our whole inhumane
>system, to quit valuing production over life, and to
>physically stop those who do. The next step is to bring down
>that which originated in conquest abroad and repression at
>home. The next step is a planet liberated from destruction;
>the next step is the end of civilization.
>
>*Get rid of civilization?* I can hear you say. *That's your
>solution?* the hatred that characterizes so much of our
>system--the hatred I've described and analyzed in this
>book--is not the product of biology. People are not
>fundamentally hateful. Our hate is not a result of several
>billion years of natural selection. It's a result of the
>framing conditions under which each of us was raised. It's a
>result of the unquestioned assumptions that inform us. If we
>want to stop the hate, we need to get rid of the framing
>conditions. Until we do that, we're bound to fail. So, yes,
>that is precisely my solution, we need to get rid of
>civilization.
>
>Maybe that seems absurd to you. It doesn't to me. It just
>seems like a lot of work, done by a lot of people in a lot
>of places in a lot of different ways. But I'll tell you
>something that does seem absurd to me: the possibility of
>allowing this inhumane system to continue.
>
>        *            *           *
>
>How do we bring down civilization? I cannot tell you. There
>are as many ways as there are people. The answers are
>particular, growing from particular people in particular
>circumstances in particular places. But I know that the
>first and perhaps most important step is to see civilization
>for what it is, to take into our bodies the enormity of what
>it has already cost us, and to learn that this realization
>did not kill us, thath we are stronger than the pain,
>stronger, even, than this long and awful history of
>exploitation. Having realized that, we will now be ready for
>the technical task of dismantling all that we, as a culture,
>have become. And though they--the ones who still gain their
>identity from the system--may hate us all and try, like
>Noah, to curse and enslave us, they will never be able to
>succeed entirely, because, beneath it all, our humanity runs
>far deeper than any socialization. We must never forget
>that.
>
>---------------
>
>I typed that in mostly to get me to pay closer attention to
>it.
>
>
>Here's the response I wrote: (Note I decided not to apply,
>and instead to look for farm work)
>
>
>4.	Please give us a brief (100-150 words) personal
>statement of your spiritual beliefs and how they do, or do
>not, influence your care and concern for the Planet.
>
>My spiritual beliefs can be summed up by the following, from
>( http://sacredlands.org/enemyofthestate_zerzan.htm ). It
>has been said that the Mbuti of southern Africa believe that
>"by a correct fulfillment of the present, the past and the
>future will take care of themselves." My approach to life is
>also expressed by the term I have given to what I do:
>experienceart, which is art where one's medium is one's
>experience. Philosophically, this can be understood by
>placing the individual human in the context of billions of
>years of evolution. While the job of the tree is to do what
>a tree does best (
>http://www.aristotle.net/~diogenes/worthles.htm ), my job
>here is to do what I do best. And that is to evaluate and
>create opportunities to have the kind of experience I most
>want to have, and to support others in doing the same. Most
>recently, I have been struck by John Zerzan's _Future
>Primitive_ ( http://www.eco-action.org/dt/futureprim.html ),
>even though it fits in perfectly to Ken Wilber's "pre/trans
>fallacy" concept.
>
>The hypothesis I am now testing is that I will be more
>joyful in life if I develop the relationships that will
>allow me to live less destructively. I have long lived
>without using a car, even while living in a country built
>for the car. In the past I have tried gardening, and gone on
>long outdoor trips. But only now am I making it a primary
>goal to personally grow, gather, or hunt what will allow me
>to live (within the context of considering what is best for
>the "group of all things").
>
>I do not think people can have quality relationships with
>themselves, each other, or existence, as long as they are
>living in an extravagantly destructive way. I would like to
>believe that anyone who listens to her billion-year-old-self
>will choose to withdraw from driving a car/eating pesticide
>food/using a computer, even if all those around her are
>doing such things. But it is difficult to reject a way of
>living if one has no awareness of alternatives.
>
>-------------
>
>
>
>Colin
>http://j9k.org
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 2
>   Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 20:03:20 -0400 (EDT)
>   From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>Subject: Living close to the earth
>
>Here's something I started typing in last Thursday, and then
>added to. First it was just for the yoism discussion group,
>and then decided to send it to... almost everyone!
>
>http://yoism.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/derrickjensen_discussion/
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ishmael_discussion/
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CarFree
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OurCultureOurCapitol
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ishmael-dc (local info)
>http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/carfreeecovillages
>
>
>I've tried to set it up so you can skim past the parts that probably don't interest you to the parts that might. A lot of it, I moved out of the email on to articles at http://carfreeuniverse.org
>
>Topics:
>
>     *Carfree living scenarios* in the eastern US. (living
>where there are no cars)
>     *Farm work (non-mechanized & horse-power)*
>     *Raw diets*
>     *Primitive skills*
>     *Is an ecovillage world possible?*
>     *Philosophy & Derrick Jensen excerpts*
>     *Research on Amish, Conservative Mennonites*
>
>
>     *Carfree living scenarios*
>
>http://carfreeuniverse.org/Members/colin/carfreePlacesNomad
>
>Some thoughts on living where there are no cars using
>primitive skills and a nomadic lifestyle in the Eastern
>United States. In particular, the C&O canal (180 miles of
>beautiful carfreeness), the Appalachian Trail (Maine to
>Georgia, & intersects with the canal), and the intercoastal
>waterway (Norfolk, VA to Florida).
>
>
>    *Farm Work*
>
>I began researching conservative Mennonite & Amish
>communities. While doing so, my sister called and pointed me
>to:
>
>http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/intern.html
>
>On there, I found at least 4 horse-power farms, and many
>other wonderful opportunities!
>
>And, in fact, a whole site devoted to apprenticeships on
>such farms (& horse-power logging):
>http://www.ruralheritage.com/apprenticeship/
>
>One can do farm work on organic farms of all kinds, and even
>be paid !
>
>Here is a non-Amish who uses his horses for transport to market as
>well! (most non-Amish horse-power farms still use trucks for transport)
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/2932697.stm
>
>
>So, from a carfree perspective, a possible future, aside
>from becoming a resident of the Appalachian Trail or
>intracoastal waterway, is to learn organic growing, and then
>situate oneself in a community with conservative Mennonites
>(they are even in places like Belize), or Amish, to be
>around others who use horse & buggy, and farm.
>
>    *Primitive Skills*
>
>I am also doing things like practicing trapping and hunting
>and scavenging (roadkill for example), learning edible
>plants (just got Petersen's guide), learning different kinds
>of gardening (just got _how to make a forest garden_).
>
>I've set paiute deadfall traps (
>http://wmuma.com/tracker/skills/traps/paiute01.html )
>
>around the house here for a rat that likes the compost pile,
>and some chipmonks burrowing under the front step, but I
>clearly need some practice because I haven't caught them
>yet, and managed to wound myself. (my dad, would be poisoning the rat if I don't catch it)
>
>On my early-morning jogs I see bunnies, and now have a mind
>to see if I can ever catch one (perhaps via throwing stick).
>Two mornings ago a fox barked at me! I also need to learn to
>fish. Maybe three generations ago someone in my ancestry had
>a reasonable garden? We've been away from the land for a
>good while.
>
>Yesterday, on my way towards the farm (
>http://potomacvegetablefarms.com/ ), I found a fresh
>roadkill with a nice fur, and thanks to Tom Elpel and
>http://www.braintan.com/ I'll try tanning it soon. I already
>have a squirrel hide from one I scavenged (in the forest in
>winter), but it's brain had already been eaten by a crow, so
>I did not tan it. I'm not sure what kind of animal it is but
>it is black and bigger than an opossum. It's in a refrigerator
>(don't tell my mom). (She just found it- now its in it's own
>icebox)
>
>Somewhat neo-primitive, and very cool is:
>http://www.caneloproject.com/pages/cqc.html
>http://www.loe.org/archives/010525.htm (search for "bale")
>
>    *Raw Diets*
>
>You may know the question of diet interests me.
>here's some new inputs:
>
>(baby of raw vegans dies from malnutriton)
>http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/5957434.htm
>http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/5964380.htm
>
>http://www.westonaprice.org/myths_truths/myths_truths_vegetarianism.html
>
>Weston A Price also writes on the evil of Soy products!
>Ken Wilber in _boomeritis_ jokes about soy causing brain
>decay, but this guy is serious (doesn't mean he's right). (
>http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soy_update2002.html )
>
>(these I may have already sent you)
>http://www.rawhealth.net/jesusdiet.htm
>http://www.eco-action.org/dt/wildup.html
>http://www.geocities.com/becnalrio/possumliving.htm
>www.beyondveg.com/cat/psych/. In particular, The Psychology
>of Idealistic Diets....
>
>summary: raw fruitarian / pure vegan diets may work well for
>some people (see the beyond veg link). Weston A Price,
>however, suggests that even that is suspect, pointing to the
>troubles of pure vegans who moved from India to England
>where food preparation differs.
>
>What I find even more interesting than the jesus diet people
>are the raw paleo people. In reading about how some indians
>lived, eating raw mice (I've heard about the hantavirus) and
>lizards was mentioned...
>
>here's something from the myths_truths_ link:
>
>Parasites are easily avoided by taking normal precautions in
>food preparations. Pickling or fermenting meats, as is
>custom in traditional societies, always protects against
>parasites. In his travels, Dr Price always found healthy,
>disease-free and parasite-free peoples eating raw meat and
>dairy products as part of their diets.
>
>and here is:
>http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/  RVAF means raw, vegetation and
>animal foods
>In one of his stories (
>http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/raw-foods-babes-1.html )
>he mentions eating one or two dozen raw eggs a day!
>
>So from the jesus diet people (and apparently the Hebrews in
>Homestead FL), we've got one extreme, and from Vinnie in
>Frederick, MD, we've got another.
>
>The possibility of eating raw animals interests me because
>hunting and trapping in many areas is illegal ( for good
>reason ), and so is camping, and in the interest of saving
>time and hassle, and reducing detectability, being able to
>eat all foods raw is desirable. Obviously there are risks.
>
>
>What do I know for sure about diet?
>
>* The more exercise (Including weights, flexibility, and
>high-intensity aerobic) I get, the happier I am (to a
>point). The more I sit around and don't move much, (typing
>at a computer), the worse off I am.
>
>* Eating locally organically grown food is a good thing.
>
>...
>
>Oh, and I read _This organic life_, which gives much the
>same message as _the culture of make believe_ !
>
>http://www.google.com/search?&q=this%20organic%20life
>
>Her main message is about eating locally grown foods year
>round. And she lived in Congers, NY and now, Nyack, NY, and
>nearly all of her food for the year comes from her garden (or local farmers)!
>
>
>
>    *Is an Ecovillage world possible?*
>
>http://carfreeuniverse.org/Members/colin/evWorld
>This is an excerpt from page 132 of _Ecovillage Living_ by
>Hildur Jackson and Karen Svensson, presenting the case for
>why ecovillages need to be made within the mega-cities as
>well as out in the countryside.
>
>
>
>   *Philosophy / Derrick Jensen excerpts*
>
>(only if you're bored?)
>http://article.gmane.org/gmane.culture.discuss.our-culture-capitol/44
>
>-------------
>
>   *Research into Amish / Conservative Mennonites*
>
>   http://carfreeuniverse.org/Members/colin/AmishAndMennonites
>   Many of you know the Amish do not drive cars. Recently I found the same is true of conservative Mennonites in various places, including Belize! What can be learned from these existing, successful, and growing communities of carfree people? What follows are some notes and links for consideration/discussion.
>
>   This document/notes are also especially relevant to the yoism & Derrick Jensen projects.
>
>Colin
>http://j9k.org
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 3
>   Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 23:05:04 -0400
>   From: Colin Leath <[email protected]>
>Subject: Revolution & news and world government
>
>sent to:
>http://yoism.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/derrickjensen_discussion/
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OurCultureOurCapitol
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ishmael-dc
>
>I'm attemping to make a quick post regarding Tom's reply
>(way at the bottom), and the discussions about world gov't
>on OurCultureOurCapitol.
>
>This is a huge question and important, though I've avoided
>it thinking there's little a possible answer would help me
>with.
>
>On one hand we have:
>libertarians, religious right, anarcho primitivists,
>right-wing militias, Amish
>
>Who either are actively opposed to US abdication of power to
>international organizations, or they don't care one way or
>another (some don't care because the world's going to hell
>and it won't matter)
>
>On the other hand there are the Leftists (http://zmag.org),
>Quakers, and the "integral politics," and "third way"
>politicians, and planethood people. Who are actively working
>to bolster things like the UN. (I'm really no expert on
>this...)
>
>And as Cal points out, we have the corporate interests
>making their own special international govt's that gives
>them even more special powers than they already have.
>
>
>
>To respond to Tom:
>
>> We should be less interested in revolution than in the
>> pursuit of life beyond civilization. Revolution is an
>> attribute of our dominant culture. In a way, your choice
>> of words validates its futility, because in the long run,
>> revolutions are better at producing future chaos than they
>> are at "solving" anything.
>
>> Why do we even need leaders in our effort to abandon a
>> culture that does not merit our support? As DQ suggests in
>> Beyond Civilization, our culture has effective mechanisms
>> for defending itself against revolutionaries, but is
>> relatively defenseless against abandonment.
>
>> It starts with simple living.
>
>In some ways that is the Amish approach.
>
>here's something from two posts ago:
>
>I would like to believe that anyone who listens to her
>billion-year-old-self will choose to withdraw from driving a
>car/eating pesticide food/using a computer, even if all
>those around her are doing such things. But it is difficult
>to reject a way of living if one has no awareness of
>alternatives.
>
>
>The key problem is awareness of alternatives! (combined with
>a motivation to try the alternatives)
>
>
>I was talking with the professor I used to work for, and he
>mentioned a book- L. Festinger's _Human Legacy_ .
>Um, He also mentioned the enormously long time it took for
>early humans to "advance" from chipping an arrowhead one way
>to chipping an arrowhead another way... Or maybe that was
>something from Tom Elpel's books?
>
>It doesn't matter-
>
>The "revolution" I was talking about is very much related to
>work of Quinn, Jensen, and even Wilber. (and A. Roy, and
>Chomsky, and Elpel)
>
>These people are speaking out, they are making people aware
>of alternative ways of behaving.
>
>Jensen in particular is saying that violence in defence of
>non-human things is justified! That is pretty revolutionary.
>
>When someone of his capability starts to advocate that in a
>way that is accessible to non-rabid anarchist readers, that
>is significant!
>
>The revolution, if it ever occurs (I am skeptical), will
>involve many people changing the way they look at things.
>That will only happen because revolutionaries are making the
>effort to present that other way of looking at things to
>them. That event will be helped by conditions that encourage
>others to look about for alternative ways of behaving (e.g.
>a possible collapse of an oil-based economy).
>
>For one last example of this: I sure don't know how to grow
>my own food- but there are leaders in that revolution,
>thankfully, that I can learn from.
>
>(_cultural creatives_ covers this whole discussion of
>revolution, I think)
>
>Now, on the world gov't level, we can't all just walk away
>into the forests! Or, eventually, others will be hunting us
>or chopping them down.
>
>this is where
>http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/iraq.cfm
>Wilber, Quakers, UN, Planethood people come in.
>
>As Cal points out- power has already been centralized on an
>international level by corporations.
>
>A similar buildup in power of corporations preceeded a
>buildup in power of federal gov't in the US, partly to
>"address" the power of the corporations on a national level.
>(I'm not suggesting that it did--but people were revolted at
>corporate actions, and politicians at least pretended to
>address the problems)
>
>
>----
>Well that is a fair amount of late night babble.
>
>Conclusions:
>
>(1) Discussing this question does not help me (?)
>
>(2) In my own life and actions, I try to follow Tom's
>"Simple living is the best way." To some extent- for anyone
>interested in a peaceful and fullfilling life, ignoring the
>"red dust" and heading to the hills is the only way.... But
>even the masters at doing that (Chinese hermits), said there
>were times to be in the hills, and there were times to be
>participating in more worldly affairs.
>
>(2.5) I also allow for the reality that the way I am
>thinking/see things will forever remain confined to a
>minority view- just as not every person (or anywhere close
>to a majority) in China became a religious hermit. Again
>that is why I talk of "Our Culture and Our Capitol"-- like
>the Amish, like the Hasidic Jews, we're creating ways of
>living for our people, and to some extent, ignoring everyone
>else.
>
>(3) I continue to keep my eye on what Wilber, Quakers,
>Planethood people might say, (and A. Roy),
>
>Because just as there was a progression of separate European
>states to a European Union, the same is concievably possible
>on a world level, as Wilber describes (pasted below)
>
>(4) At the same time, I am still a member of the libertarian
>party (not sure if I'll renew), and my distrust in gov't as
>the solution and in centralised power is the same as Cal's
>and as Derrick Jensen's and as John Zerzan. But that doesn't
>mean the rest of the world will agree with us. And quite
>possibly enough people will agree with Wilber and the
>planethood people to make it happen.
>
>I really am not sure that global problems can be addressed
>in a "laissez faire" way.
>
>_If_ the POCLAD project http://www.poclad.org/ was
>successful, and in accordance with Derrick Jensen's wishes,
>corporations ceased to exist separately from the individuals
>that worked for them, and there was no longer any such thing
>as limited liability, and CEOs could be put to death for the
>deaths their business practices caused,
>
>_Then_ I could possibly consider the "Libertarian" reality
>more likely to actually occur. (decentralized nation states,
>free trade, would be all that is necessary to address world
>problems)
>
>But even then, what do you do about devastation of oceans?
>Nuclear accidents? (presumably no individual would be
>willing to take the risk of participating in such industry)
>For the libertarian scheme to operate there must be
>ownership of all resources. For ownership of the ocean to be
>possible, there needs to be something to enforce the
>preogatives of that ownership...
>
>
>Now, like I said, I personally am not going to be
>campaigning for a world gov't. But I have often thought
>that the most effective response to the excessive display of
>bloody American flags would be to replace the flags with
>Earth flags!
>
>
>Even though I have somewhat invalidated the libertarian
>perspective in my mind, I may continue to support the party,
>because they appear to be the only ones who do not believe
>that our problems can be solved through more government.
>
>This is a question that is on my list to better understand,
>and to have a firmer position on, but as I'm not attending
>Harvard's JFK school of gov't, but instead, "Colin's
>UnSchooling UnUniversity" this sort of thing gets short
>shrift as being less relevant to my future life than does
>learning how to tan a fur, fish, or plant a forest garden.
>
>Below is the Wilber excerpt.
>
>Colin
>http://j9k.org
>
>
>
>http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/iraq.cfm
>(read the whole essay at the shambhala site to get a better
>understanding of the color references)
>
>      A second-tier, integral, World Federation--in my
>Utopian view--would therefore prevent any first-tier memes
>from dominating, attacking, or exploiting any other
>populations. If necessary, a World Federation would do so by
>using force, just as all democracies today have an internal
>police force to curtail murder, rape, robbery, extortion,
>and so on. Somebody whose center of gravity is green will
>not commit murder, rape, or robbery. However, somebody whose
>center of gravity is red will do any or all of those,
>sometimes happily. And because everybody is born at square
>one, and must progress through purple, red, blue, and so on,
>some sort of police will always be necessary to protect
>others from those who do not evolve to a worldcentric level
>of care and compassion.
>
>      So any World Federation would have some sort of police
>force, of necessity. Call them the World Cops. Needless to
>say, the World Cops would be regulated by the World
>Federation, not by any country (and certainly not by
>America, Britain, France, Germany, etc.).
>
>      This police force is NOT allowed to tell people what
>level of consciousness they should be at; it is NOT allowed
>to govern what individuals do in the privacy of their own
>homes or dwellings; it is NOT allowed to coerce or
>intimidate people who are not at the average level of social
>development. It is, however, allowed to prevent (or punish)
>those whose public behavior stems from a
>less-than-worldcentric stance. For example, in the privacy
>of my own home, if I wish to think about burning at the
>stake all people who do not accept Jesus as their personal
>savior, that is my right. However, if I actually shoot you
>because you do not believe in Jesus, then the State--in this
>case, the World Federation--can arrest and incarcerate me.
>
>      The simple rule, which is already implicitly used by
>all worldcentric governance systems (i.e., at orange or
>higher, including Germany, France, America, Britain, Japan,
>etc.), is this: in the Left-Hand domain, think what you
>like; but in the Right-Hand domain, physically behave
>according to worldcentric law or you can be removed from the
>public sphere.
>
>      As we were saying, in Western democracies, the "law of
>the land" is largely orange; in the last 30 years, this has
>been supplemented with an increasing number of laws drawn
>from the green wave, including equality-in-the-workplace
>laws, healthcare freedom laws, and (anti)hate laws. Those
>mean, for example, that you are allowed to hate homosexuals
>(in the privacy of your own Left-Hand mind), but if you
>publicly (Right-Hand) express that hatred (e.g., through
>hate speech), there are penalties for doing so. Thus, in
>many Western democracies, free speech (a classic orange
>value, and, in this country, a First Amendment freedom) has
>often been supplemented with limitations on free speech (a
>classic green value: green wishes to limit speech not in
>accord with its values). My only point is that both of those
>express the implicit rule I stated in the previous
>paragraph.
>
>      An Integral World Federation would therefore, in that
>regard, be no different: one could think whatever one
>wanted; but one must behave according to laws stemming from
>the center of gravity of the governance system, in this
>case, yellow. Thus, the values embedded in the "law of the
>land" would not be orange or green but yellow or integral;
>not first tier, but second tier. Accordingly, although
>individuals are again allowed to think or believe whatever
>they want (Left-Hand), their public behavior (Right-Hand)
>would be regulated according to yellow (or higher)
>standards. Because the major stance of yellow is
>integrative, this means all first-tier value systems would
>have a respected place, but no first-tier values would be
>allowed to colonize others.
>
>      This would mean, for example, that America is allowed
>to despise Iraq (in the privacy of its own Left-Hand,
>national, cultural space). America is not, however, allowed
>to attack Iraq (in the Right-Hand, public, international
>commons).
>
>      But that is only half the story of what would not be
>allowed by an Integral World Federation. Saddam Hussein, by
>conservative and uncontested estimates, has murdered
>approximately 200,000 Kurds and another 200,000 of his own
>people, often after torturing, raping, or gassing them. Any
>Integral World Federation would, through use of force if
>necessary, prevent both of those actions. Neither of those
>actions meet yellow standards and therefore neither would be
>allowed under yellow world law. America's invasion of Iraq
>meets certain blue-to-orange standards; and the action of
>Saddam Hussein meets certain red standards. Neither of them
>would be allowed by an Integral World Federation.
>
>      Moreover, it goes without saying that the World
>Federation would itself invade and police Iraq if
>incontrovertible evidence of mass homicide was presented at
>a World Federation hearing. Mass homicide anywhere violates
>worldcentric values. Saddam Hussein is allowed to hate the
>Kurds (in the privacy of his own red-meme mind); he is not
>allowed to gas 200,000 of them. If he did so, the World
>Federation police would use military action to prevent
>Saddam Hussein from continuing to do so, if he did not
>voluntarily cease and desist immediately.
>
>---------------------
>
>On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Cal wrote:
>
>> i'm in agreement about the news. we can all live
>> without it. and i believe it is a virus of fear used
>> by the establishment to keep the body politic immobile
>> and promote consumerism at the same. "feeling anxious
>> about drunk drivers? buy a gucci bag."
>>
>> i disagree totally about sandrine's conclusions about
>> a world goverment. perhaps a world government will be
>> put together by a few capable and ideal people, but
>> once the power is centralized, corruption and abuse
>> will be that much easier.
>>
>> this is what the lord of the ring myth warns about.
>> any centralization no matter the degree of good will
>> it starts with will eventually be used for control and
>> slavery.
>>
>> biologically, we grow to a certain size then split off
>> into different parts. this is where diversity comes
>> from. diversity is a protection against unpredictable
>> cataclisms. in our evolutionary history, we have met
>> many catastrophes, but because of diversity some have
>> survived and continued life.
>>
>> to capture all ways and means of life, political and
>> economical, under some sets of regulation will make us
>> volunerable to folly of one set of policymakers.
>>
>> is there a difference between this and the
>> establishment's call for a "new world order"? i don't
>> think so. but despite my disagreements, this is
>> happening. it may not look like a political body such
>> as the UN but it will be an economical body like,
>> NAFTA, European Union, ASEAN. btw, just in case some
>> of you don't know, NAFTA trumps the US court systems
>> decisions.
>>
>> -cal
>>
>> --- sandrine christophe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > And I believe that the only to stop the way society
>> > is currently going, is by creating a world
>> > governement (based on what I read in Planethood),
>> > where just like here in the US, you don't have wars
>> > between states anymore, but laws that regulate
>> > everything. Which is a a more peaceful way in my
>> > opinion.
>> > When we have that settled, and people are all acting
>> > towards someone who would violate the law (the law
>> > is for everyone the same!) then we would soon be
>> > able to leave without armies and war, and without
>> > civilians being violated or killed and we could live
>> > in peace again.
>> >
>> > That's that for today.
>> >
>> > Sandrine
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Experience a miraculous and prosperous day!
>> >
>> > "Your environment is the physical picture of your
>> > thoughts, emotions and beliefs made visible."
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>From: Tom Tomaka <twotom@>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [ishmael-dc] [derrickjensen_discussion] "Democracy is the
>    Free World's whore" - Arundhati Roy (fwd)
>
>Colin,
>Thanks for posting those links, which contain very interesting and useful
>information. They provide ample reason why our current way of life is
>unwozkable -- never has and never will. We live in a culture of death and
>destruction, lies and deception, ignorance and denial.
>
>I am less enthusiastic about your statement "I am not planning to be a
>leader in the new revolution, but I'm looking for the people
>who will be (and curious to see how long until their assassination)."
>
>We should be less interested in revolution than in the pursuit of life
>beyond civilization. Revolution is an attribute of our dominant culture. In
>a way, you choice of words validate its futility, because in the long run,
>revolutions are better at producing future chaos than they are at "solving"
>anything.
>
>Why do we even need leaders in our effort to abandon a culture that does
>not merit our support? As DQ suggests in Beyond Civilization, our culture
>has effective mechanisms for defending itself against revolutionaries, but
>is relatively defenseless against abandonment.
>
>It starts with simple living.
>
>- tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>
>



____________________________________________________________
Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/.DlolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/