“I felt this one wasn’t up to the usual high standard, partly because of all the conspiracy theories”
“Why did Prince Andrew give that interview? Because he’s stupid.”
“I don’t have the time or space to list all the gaffes and errors of judgement he has committed.”
“To suggest that he is somehow at the centre (British spelling, “center” in American) of a web of intelligence intrigue is just plain silly.”
“Is Epstein still alive? No.” Proof?
Suspect he’s probably on a beach somewhere in a sunny, non-extradition local. Which sunny local is an exercise left to the reader.
Your questions and statements are valid ones. I wish I had answers for you but I don't, at least not the type I think you're seeking (but more on that later). But I know this. When people don't know what to do for certain, but say "We have to do something!", the something usually doesn't turn out too well. What if the McPherson paradox turns out to be true and reducing particulates and aerosols along with carbon gases causes the planet to heat up even faster? I know, I know, there are some who claim the paradox has been debunked (just like there are those who, in my opinion, wrongly claimed questions of the JFK assassination and 9/11 have been debunked). What if the solar grand minimum folks are right and the planet will be heading into a cooling phase? We'd want all that CO2 to heat it up a bit. I know local weather is not an indication of climate change but I've shovelled 75 inches of "global warming" since Thanksgiving and am getting a bit tired of it.
I've had enough personal experience with the scientific mainstream both as a researcher in my early life and as a clinician in my main career to not trust it, especially with the degree of corruption that is permeating all levels of society these days with the moral decline of our culture. You mentioned NASA. One would think they are a pretty innocuous and trustworthy organization. I know I did, at least at one time. But I had an 8 hour conversation with NASA's top auditor (since deceased rather suddenly from cancer). He was the childhood best friend of a very good friend I've come to know as an adult. He revealed the shocking extent of corruption and deceit permeating that organization and the federal governmental bodies presiding over it. So I no longer trust them. And think about it. How did the National Aeronautical and Space Administration get into the climate business? Doesn't it seem odd that they are climbing all over this agenda? They should be dealing with rocket launches, satellites, and space exploration, not politicized hot potatoes.
I also had a fairly in-depth conversation with a PhD mathematician working for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission that I met on a cruise around South America. I played dumb asking questions. He was either very naive or stupid (and I doubt either of those) or lying through his teeth (that one I'd wager on) from what he told me. Refer to Dave C's discussion of Bart Chilton and silver manipulation for more on that subject. Suffice it to say, I don't trust that organization either based on their "fruits" (i.e. referencing the Biblical adage, "By their fruits, ye shall know them.").
I've seen the lies with certain medical procedures getting rammed down our throats. I seen the lies with certain pharmaceuticals getting rammed down our throats. I've seen the lies with certain vaccines getting rammed down our throats. I've seen the lies with the wholesale revamping of the American educational system, core curriculum, Chicago math, and the rest of that nonsense being rammed down our throats. I've seen the lies with cultural Marxism on our college campuses and in our media getting rammed down our throat. I've seen the lies with being told that surgical revision of perfectly normal genitals in a 3 year old who may have some degree of gender confusion at an age where they know next to nothing should be considered perfectly acceptable. I've seen the lies with wars getting rammed down our throats (democracy and freedom, yeah right). I've seen the lies with the war against drugs (while the CIA is the biggest drug dealer in the world) getting rammed down our throats. So forgive me if I don't wholeheartedly and unabashedly embrace the climate change narrative with no reservations. Nothing personal here but refer back to the life lessons I referred to in a post about a week or so ago.
Let's apply cui bono here. Do you think you and I and the average person are going to benefit from all this to the same extent as an elite who know that the whole climate change/carbon management agenda will be the most lucrative ever promulgated on this planet and will serve to extract and transfer wealth, consolidate and centralize power, and tighten control over the population more than any program ever promoted in history. Or are we going to be farmed for our labor and wealth? I tend to think the latter. Let's say we go to zero carbon. What about the dioxins, neonicotonoids, radioactive waste, microplastics, and the thousands of other forms of pollution affecting the planet, almost all of which, in my opinion, will have a far more deadly, unnatural, and irreversible effect upon humanity and the planet than carbon dioxide and methane. TPTB don't seem to be very worried about those, do they? Neither do they seem to have any heroic global plans for ridding the planet of these substances like they do for naturally occurring carbon dioxide and methane. Neither do they seem to have any plans to sacrifice their personal ease, comfort, convenience, and wealth for the cause but they certainly want us to. Does that hypocrisy cause you to question their agenda and their motives? It does for me.
I've written about this in the past but it was before you joined this site so at the risk of being repetitive, I'll state a couple of things again. As a young person in elementary school and high school, I was fascinated by such things as nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, magnetohydrodynamic generators, etc. Just after I graduated from college, my wife to be and I went out with one of her friends who had just started dating a PhD in nuclear physics. I remember asking the physicist why, with all our technological development, the predictions were that practical nuclear fusion for the generation of electrical power was still at least 100 to 150 years off. I'll never forget his answer. He smiled and said, "We all need jobs.". In other words, they were in no rush since these areas provided life time employment. Then we could get into the issue of Tesla, free energy, energy transmission, etc. but that is a whole other subject.
Here's another thought. Anyone who has studied the subject realizes that we are not alone in this universe and alien contact has been made. That's not speculation, that's for certain. And it's clear they have two things that could prove incredibly valuable in providing mankind with a quantum leap into the future. One is a transportation system that is completely silent, totally non-polluting (at least chemically), and unbelievably fast. Two is an energy generation system that would provide power beyond our wildest imagination. Imagine we had both of these. Imagine how life on this planet could be transformed. These things are known by people in the government. The NASA auditor I mentioned above was one who talked about it. I can hypothesize about why this knowledge hasn't been released though. One possibility is that it would strip much of the elite of their ability to extract wealth from the masses. Imagine if you didn't have to pay your gasoline, oil supplier, natural gas supplier, electricity supplier, etc., etc. Another possibility is that those who created and possess the technology deem us not sufficiently advanced spiritually to make wise use of these technologies. The Billy Meier readings have alluded to such things. I don't know. But I do know we don't have them but some do and they could change life on this planet in a heartbeat for the better.
That brings me to the subject of spiritual development. To me, this is THE most important issue for humans. A spiritually advanced human is not greedy. He does not take what is not his (and does not needlessly and recklessly incur debt). He shares what is his with those who are truly in need (not those who just want what you have when they haven't rightfully and honestly earned it). He does not take more than he needs. He is his brother's keeper and takes responsibility for helping his fellow man. He is a steward of the planet and takes care of the animals, plants, the earth, the water, the air, and rest of the natural world. He takes care of his own body, mind, and spirit as well. He eschews ignorance and strives for knowledge and applies that knowledge for the betterment of himself, his family, his community, his nation, and his world. He seeks wisdom even above knowledge. He seeks the light, not the darkness. He eschews evil. He strives to know where he comes from and what his purpose is and where he's going. He recognizes, respects, and values his connections to all things. In this universe of multiple dimensions beyond the four we commonly interact with, the spiritual world shapes the physical world, not the other way around. If we work on developing ourselves and others into these advanced spiritual beings, the problems of Energy, Environment, and Economy will melt away like butter on the sun. The problem of climate change, as far as man can control it, will disappear like the smoke from a match in a hurricane. That my friend is the best solution I can offer. And if I may be so bold, it's the only solution I think will work.
If we were happier with much less, looked after others, revered nature as an expression of the greater spirit, we would be living in a different world.
I guess we have to overcome fear, revulsion, hatred and egocentricity first. Hard to do as these features of character have become survival mechanisms.
AO-
While I agree with almost everything you said… 
There remains the possibility that humanity is not ready for space travel. Cheap, limitless energy also brings with it the potential to travel to the stars. Why would that be a bad thing?
Well. Before we get to the stars, there are all those asteroids floating around in the solar system. Interplanetary travel available to the masses (or just “the rich” - or maybe even just small organizations) might enable some terrorist organization to strap boosters on one (or more) of those asteroids and fire it (at some fraction of lightspeed) at the earth, at the cost of a few million bucks.
Cheap space travel (which would result directly from “free energy”) really complicates keeping the earth in one piece. And maybe that’s why they are keeping it all a secret. And have been since - say - 1947.
Imagine this scenario. Aliens meet the President. They show footage of planets that “got space travel”, many of whom have had ELEs due to on-planet warfare turning into asteroid-lobbing contests. Perhaps they have statistics. Perhaps those stats are not so favorable.
Its just a thought.
That brings me to the subject of spiritual development. To me, this is THE most important issue for humans. A spiritually advanced human is not greedy. He does not take what is not his (and does not needlessly and recklessly incur debt). He shares what is his with those who are truly in need (not those who just want what you have when they haven’t rightfully and honestly earned it). He does not take more than he needs. He is his brother’s keeper and takes responsibility for helping his fellow man. He is a steward of the planet and takes care of the animals, plants, the earth, the water, the air, and rest of the natural world. He takes care of his own body, mind, and spirit as well. He eschews ignorance and strives for knowledge and applies that knowledge for the betterment of himself, his family, his community, his nation, and his world. He seeks wisdom even above knowledge. He seeks the light, not the darkness. He eschews evil. He strives to know where he comes from and what his purpose is and where he’s going. He recognizes, respects, and values his connections to all things. In this universe of multiple dimensions beyond the four we commonly interact with, the spiritual world shapes the physical world, not the other way around. If we work on developing ourselves and others into these advanced spiritual beings, the problems of Energy, Environment, and Economy will melt away like butter on the sun. The problem of climate change, as far as man can control it, will disappear like the smoke from a match in a hurricane. That my friend is the best solution I can offer. And if I may be so bold, it’s the only solution I think will work.This speaks very strongly to me. It is the path. We either evolve spiritually - or in consciousness - or we mostly die off and maybe go extinct. So much is possible if we can set aside our monkey-mind egos, and begin to truly see, and feel, and be at peace (or as one) with what is. We know it's possible because individuals can do this. As I was thinking about writing up a piece that spoke to this dynamic, along came Caitlin Johnstone writing up the exact piece, only better than I could have done. As we sit on the very cusp of saying goodbye to the Twenty Teens, and lurch into the Twenty Twenties, I would offer up this contemplation of hers as the a beacon of sorts for the journey we need to be taking:
Humanity’s Salvation Will Necessarily Look Like A Leap Into The Unknown If humanity is to turn away from its murderous, omnicidal, ecocidal, oppressive and exploitative trajectory, it will necessarily involve a sharp, drastic deviation from all its previous patterning. You would think that this would go without saying; obviously a drastic change in behavior will look drastically different from the behavior which preceded it. This is self-evident. Yet when you look at the arguments that people are making today, there’s almost universally a built-in assumption that humankind’s salvation will in some way involve a continuation of its previous patterning. Most people with an ear to the ground understand to some extent that the collective behavior of our species is unsustainable. Where they differ in opinion is on what should be done to address this problem. Where they unify in opinion is on the assumption that the solution will look like their own personal ideology winning out over all the others. Capitalists believe that capitalism will provide technological solutions to the problems that capitalism has created, and that this will happen more quickly and efficiently if the fetters on capitalism are removed. Socialists believe that socialism will solve the problems that socialism has been powerless to provide this entire time, if only this consistent pattern of socialism’s inability to obtain dominance is magically deviated from somehow. And so on. But if you really think honestly about it, how can that possibly be? How can any preexisting ideological pattern possibly create a deviation in patterning? Any ideology you are bringing to the table will almost certainly be one which has been a part of humanity’s collective patterning for generations, and probably for centuries. How can an ideology which has been promoted in more or less the same patterns for generation possibly lead to a pattern deviation? Believing you can create a sharp change in direction by shoving in a direction people have already been shoving for generations is like believing you can dry yourself off using water. The old patterns cannot create new patterning any more than water can create the state of dryness. It is against their inherent nature. Because of our limited lifespans and our cognitive inability to perceive everything at once, it’s difficult to see the big picture of humanity’s plight as a whole. It’s difficult to give due significance to the fact that the ideological tug-of-war game which seems to be presenting in one particular election in one particular location we’re particularly passionate about has actually been going on all over the world since long before we were born, and all that it has gained us is the situation in which we now find ourselves. The shoving of your one preferred ideology is inseparable from the whole of our total collective patterning, and it always has been. What this means is that if there is to be any deviation from our species’ self-destructive trajectory, the cause of that deviation will come completely out of left field. No one will expect it, because it won’t come from a direction that we have been conditioned through our experience to look. Our unpatterning will necessarily come from a completely un-patterned direction. A collective movement in an unprecedented direction will necessarily have an unprecedented antecedent. So in what way is what I’m saying useful to you? If the only hope for humanity lies in the arrival of conditions you can’t possibly predict, then it makes no difference what you think or do because those conditions will either arrive or not regardless of your conditioned patterning, right? Well, yes and no. Obviously there’s nothing you can do to create the conditions of a change agent you can’t possibly anticipate with your learned mental patternings. So in that sense you may as well keep fighting the bastards in whatever way seems best to you in order to keep them at bay for the time being (and also because fuck them). But one thing you can do in order to help grease the wheels of drastic change is to prepare yourself and the world for a leap into the unknown. Because that’s necessarily what a drastic pattern deviation will look like: a leap into the unknown. The precipice of the changes we all intuitively sense are on our horizon is the precipice between the known patterns and the unknowable unpatterning. The annihilation that many are predicting will look like literal human extinction may well end up actually presenting as the annihilation of our conditioned patterning. Which is, experientially, a kind of death. So what you can do on a personal level is let go of your attachment to the known. Sell off all stocks you’ve invested in your conditioned mental patterning and begin doing the hard inner work necessary to embrace the unknown and unknowable. Begin surprising yourself, and opening doors to allow life to surprise you. Take chances on new and unpredictable situations instead of taking refuge in the known and the familiar. Give less and less interest and attention to your conditioned, looping mental narratives and more and more to the uncontrollable present moment in which literally anything can be born. You can carry this embrace of the unknowable out into the collective level by creating and expressing from it. Make art which comes from an unpatterned direction. Do things which make people question how reliable their patterned expectations are. It may sound cliche, but there is immense wisdom hidden in the saying “practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty”. Making this your way of life can help create little gaps in our patterning, so that if and when the change agent for humanity’s evolutionary transcendence of its self-destructive patterns arrives, you and those who’ve encountered your unpatterning dance in the world will be better able to improvise along with it, without fear or inertia.Can I get another Amen? Amen! That's really the challenge here. How do we allow for these whole new patterns to emerge? Because it's plain that trying to tackle climate change or any other predicament by tweaking from within the current framework ('fixing' debt-based money via MMT, or microplastics via more regulations) is using the same patterning as created the predicament in the first place. Might as well treat your alcoholism by switching from beer to wine. Let's solve personal transportation by using lithium instead of gasoline. All which means the great undertaking of the next century is the rebalancing of life. Equal measures to both the profane and the divine. The earthly and the spiritual. To the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of need and the very tippy top. Whatever your preferred orientation or language is just fine. The question then, is how to get there? It's like we need some new arrangements, a new center of study that doesn't fall prey to the usual dictates of ego. I'm very curious about this - what can we do as individuals beyond attending to our own individual development? How do we then advance together so that our individual transformations and spiritual development becomes our transformation and spiritual development? It's such a worthy pursuit. Maybe the only one that actually has any purpose or meaning. All the other efforts seem to be rearrangements of the deck furniture.
Thanks AO and Chris …Yes…solutions are most likely going to come from a spiritual realignment and I’d like to add “good communication” to that. My mission lately, in light of all the violent rhetoric and divisiveness, is to find common ground in any and every random encounter.
Quick story.
I was in a Starbucks getting high octane fuel for my old body when I saw a guy sitting alone with a screaming bright tee shirt that said something about Mother’s for Gun Control. I looked down to see if I had my tiny Ruger 380 in my pocket. It is so small that it often lives there unnoticed. It must have been in my truck. Anyway I cautiously approached the man and Asked if he would like to talk about gun control. He looked at me carefully trying to figure out where this might be going. And he asked “what Is your position? ” My answer was “ My position is that communication and dialogue is possible no matter what people believe.”
He softened and invited me to sit down. At the same time the Starbuck’s barista must have noticed our encounter and thought that it was a potential “situation”. His contribution to world peace was to bring over two cups of complimentary coffee with some white stuff surfing on top. I drink my coffee black…and I drink lots of it, but I graciously accepted the gift as did the guy with the screaming loud tee shirt.
What we talked about for 30 minutes isn’t nearly as important as the fact that we were diametrically opposed in our views, but managed to listen to each other, and enjoy each other, and gain some new understanding.
He had long hair and was about 50 and of course I love to look at people and try to figure out what they do for a living, what interests they might have, what motivates them. It very often yields an opportunity to find commonality. So besides knowing that he wanted more stringent gun control, I decided to take a stab at guessing his profession.
(By the way…in addition to believing in the 2nd amendment right to gun ownership, I do support universal background checks.)
But anyway…I said…”are you by any chance a musician? “. He smiled and showed me a YouTube link of his group pounding out some acid rock music in front of a pretty big audience.
I told him that I was a wannabe musician in a bluegrass band and played in my church as well. ( I didn’t mention that my job in church was to lock the side door when the service started and have my little 380 on standby) We truly enjoyed each other…and the free coffee.
It’s such a worthy pursuit. Maybe the only one that actually has any purpose or meaning. All the other efforts seem to be rearrangements of the deck furniture. My answer was “ My position is that communication and dialogue is possible no matter what people believe.”And Dave, what you hypothesize is certainly possible. It's what I alluded to when I said we may not be spiritually advanced enough to be allowed to have these things. In other words, if we haven't learned how to play nice, we may not get these new toys. After all, if we haven't learned how to behave on our own planet, why would any more advanced civilizations want us running around the rest of the universe, spreading our mayhem and havoc.
The last part of your post really spoke to me. If you don’t mind I’d like to share it with some friends. It is difficult for me to communicate with friends about these issues without emotions getting out of hand.
Thanks so much for pointing out the importance of spiritual capital as we move forward! Regardless of the language and symbols that speak best to each of us, it’s very important to have a “guiding star”. Without it, we are prone to “wander in the wilderness”.
I would submit that established religions and philosophies don’t have a blueprint for where and how we need to make this journey. Perhaps contemplative practice–just remaining quiet and being present to what is–will help us to be open to new insights and actions that will help us in this transition.
I would like to suggest a couple of resources. One is the programs and daily meditations led by Richard Rohr through the Center for Action and Contemplation. They are available at www.cac.org/category/daily-meditations. The other is a book by Rob Hopkins titled From What Is to What If: Unleashing the Power of Imagination to Create the Future We Want.
Ah, we wake-up this morning to unrest in Baghdad, a puppet regime. There are more tools to the markets than financial manipulation. If all else fails, take us to war. War and rumors of war.
Thanks for the well written response AO.
One humorous outcome - I’m committed to not letting my spouse and friends know I’m a dues paying member to a community that believes in aliens, but is skeptical of climate science. lol.
What I take from your explanation is the skepticism is more that TPTB will seek political and economic gain from climate change hysteria, but you’re not necessarily skeptical that global temperatures are warming, glaciers are melting, or that human industry and agriculture are pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. That would be a good differentiation for me. I get that. This could be compared to the pharma industry as you referenced. The science behind developing drugs is just science. The drug does what it does, like alleviating symptoms, and possibly causing side affects (some stated, some not). The marketing, profit optimization, politics, and lies of the pharma industry is a different beast. Pure scientific endeavors (a spiritual like commitment to principles) = good, big pharma = bad. You might also compare elite athletic competition to modern olympics. Amature athletes competing on elite scale = good. Olympics/nations/commercialization = corrupt.
I think your solution is a good one (spirituality and truth) for individuals, however, I don’t hold out hope that it will occur on a grand enough scale to solve the issues of energy, economy, and environment in my lifetime. It is an important part of the solution. However, spirituality = good, organized religion = ???
Those that are “climate skeptics” seem to separate the issue of climate change from other forms of human caused environmental issues. They’re all in the same bucket, caused from bad industrial or agricultural practices. All in the name of good (free markets, freedom from poverty, health), however, are subject to greed, politics, and lies. The solutions are also in a similar category with many descriptive lines starting with the word “less”. There’s no need to separate climate from environment, but there is a need to separate the concept that we’re destroying the environment from the concept that greed, politics, and lies will interfere with accurately identifying the problem and then coming up with properly positioned solutions.
I do believe doing something is better than doing nothing, especially when you have enough information to at least be directionally correct (not good advice for brain surgery, but good advice for agriculture and industry).
Thanks for the discussion!
These discussions are why I love PP!!
I strongly agree to a point regarding the importance of spirituality. For many years I was a student at a Zen monastery – dozens of intensive retreats, a monthlong monastery residency, hours of daily mediation practice at home, literally tens of thousands of hours of silent “cushion time” over the years, etc etc. From having had lived with and interacted with a few different teacher, monks, and hundreds of other students with similar aspirations, I’ve concluded a few things:
Regarding with people who have practiced much more intensively than I ever will, there will always be human foibles, blind spots, etc that manifest themselves in many different weird and undesirable ways, in spite of a context of the focus on intensive and exceptionally difficult practices oriented towards self-realization. And moreover, spiritual practice of this nature is an excruciatingly difficult endeavor on many, many different levels – so much so that only a small fraction of the population are pre-disposed to even begin to engage in them in the first place. And it is a major endeavor to even scratch the surface in own’s own practice – my time spent doing Zen practice revealed just how hard it is to shift really sticky things in one’s life even just a little bit.
Moving the needle on true sustainability in a collective sense has to come about through a shift in cultural narratives (or myths if you will), and related norms and values. It can (and should be) be informed sensibilities that arise from the few that go deep into these practices (and only if some a minefield of pitfalls are avoided), but will never come about through mass adoption of intensive spiritual practices, valuable as they may be on the individual level.
One passage in a book that I’ve been slowly reading (The Patterning Instinct – Jeremy Lent) has stuck with me – he relayed a story of an anthropologist working with a group of hunter-gatherers, who had gifted to this group a fat oxen to butcher and eat in a time of hunger and scarcity. But instead of being thanked for the gift, the researcher was castigated and criticized – the fat ox was denigrated as skinny and pathetic, and the effort itself to bring forth the gift was cast off as a waste of valuable time. Precisely the opposite reaction of what was expected. Turns out this researcher encountered a cultural mechanism that enforced an egalitarian social structure within the community. Hunters returning with a big kill were treated similarly. This reaction was a cultural device to avoid any one individual from gaining too much prestige, power, and ego-inflation, because these things were more damaging to the integrity of the tribe than the gains that were realized from the gifted or hunted quarry. Contrast that to our own culture.
To me this is an example of the level of needed cultural change that is alluded to by Caitlin Johnson’s article, and the type of change we are looking at when we talk about creating a society that is more sustainable and just. The changes are unimaginable, foreign, off-putting for anyone our western industrialized society (including myself).
An effort has to be made to plant seeds, but those seeds will only have a brief chance, if at all, to grow after existing structures collapse, attendant with a horrific measure of human death and suffering.
The most difficult transition of all I’m afraid will have to be some kind of shift away from individualism to people viewing themselves as more importantly a part of a larger tribe or group. To use just one example, in our culture, having children is viewed as an expression of individual fulfillment and perpetuation of a family. In other cultural contexts, having children is more seen as “feeding” a tribe/village/culture, and often adults-by-age are not considered true adults until they have children, because they have failed at this fundamental aspect of contributing to the perpetuation of the culture/village. In contrast, our basic social unit is the individual and then the family.
I say this as a childless mid-50’s white guy who is as baked into the western industrialized individualist norm and value structure as anyone. I have no idea how to plant seeds to make this leap, but we have to somehow try. And I’m happy not to have kids, because I see less in our culture that is worth feeding and perpetuating, and on balance, more that somehow needs to be extinguished.
I’m slow to engage in conversation even about a subject I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about—spirituality and religion—because I’m a slow writer, I have other demands on my time, and the effort of reasoning through things, a matter that is relevant to this discussion and Caitlin Johnstone’s article: while introspection, empathetic connection, and openness to new ways of living should not be neglected, they are not directly useful for epistemology, how you come to know what you think you know. What I think I know, or perhaps better framed as what I have confidence in, is a result of thousands of hours of careful study, collaborating with others who have worked thousands of hours in their respective fields. This way of knowing looks a lot like science, but includes a lot of inference to the best explanation in less testable fields such as history, linguistics, and psychology. It looks a lot like what Dave Collum tries to do in his amazing years in review. But it doesn’t look much like turning inward and simply “knowing” something as in many mystic traditions.
I see a danger developing. As people get worn down in a flood of information, much of it fake news and deliberately misleading “science,” our social networks collapsing because no one knows who to trust, people increasingly turn inward for direction. The problem is that when you turn away from the tools of discovering objective reality, you become vulnerable to suggestion and control. Perhaps people will find common ground in their inward experiences, and this collective dream might seem to be the path to world peace, but what really remains in a person when you throw out logic? Only instinct and barely-controlled power, both the perceived impersonal energy of the cosmos and power over others.
Only by appeal to reason do we consent to be governed, through working out laws that we hope will limit the power of the elite. It’s too much to expect that those who have access to power will not abuse it, so the proper level of analysis is still the individual, not the collective. Unless you think individuals really don’t matter, that there’s no injustice when Thanos kills half the population.
I have the luxury of holding some legacy ideas such as justice for and the worth of the individual because, contrary to what you might expect from my defense of logic, I am some flavor of Christian, the kind everyone is suspicious of because I don’t conform to any church and I’m pretty darn literal in my interpretations. I have some definite expectations for the next several years, and having that confidence brings me peace. (In the heady days of Peak Oil theory, I didn’t have a good idea of the future, and as a result I built a resilient homestead such that reading Ben Falk’s book was mostly a review of what I had already experienced.)
Which brings me back to epistemology. While I don’t think being nice to everyone and meditating on your oneness with the universe brings knowledge directly, I do believe in a God who is the rewarder of those who diligently seek him. I can give many examples of information that metaphorically dropped into my lap while I was just serving others as I thought Jesus would have done. These realizations have made me even more enthusiastic about science done in back rooms and dusty corners while creating separation from Christians who are increasingly spurning logic for inward guidance. I don’t think it will go well for them.
PaulJam- 15 years or so ago I listened to an online discussion between Ken Wilber and someone by the name of Tammi (Tammy). Tammi/Tammy recorded conversations with individuals who were considered spiritual leading lights. One of her comments stuck with me… She indicated that all of these folks had major flaws/issues…
…I’m wondering how many here are familiar with Process philosophy – the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and others? To me, this could be the leap that Caitlin Johnstone is talking about. I am in the process of completing a reading of a book that is the result of a tribute to one of Process Theology’s most critical thinkers. The book is entitled Reason and Reenchantment: The Philosophical, Religious, and Political Thought of David Ray Griffin. Many of you may know that DRG has written 10 books questioning the official explanation of 9/11. Most may not know that he is one of the most prolific writers/thinkers in the area of Process Philosophy/Theology. The tribute to DRG gives one some insight into why DRG jeopardized his career to ask questions that needed to be asked. (Several years ago I asked a long-time correspondent who has written several books on Integral Philosophy what he thought of DRG’s latest book. He responded that due to DRG’s 9/11 books he (DRG) was now persona non grata. That was my last correspondence with this individual.) It should be noted that the core constituency of Process Philosophy/Theology has stuck by DRG as evidenced by the essays in the book mentioned above.
The bottom line is that I think that understanding Process Philosophy/Theology may be the key to understanding the leap discussed by Caitlin and it also dovetails with the spirituality comments on this thread.
Happy New Paradigm, Matt
P.S. It should be noted that adherents to all sorts of religions – Mormons, Catholics, Jews, etc. – have embraced Process Philosophy.
We have a long way to go in terms of shifting or changing patterns of thought and emotion. The change will likely be imposed on us from external forces, working with a series of events, in tandem with what can best be described as the conjuring force of the imaginal realm.
I sense that entheogens like magic mushrooms will be a big part of the future. People will be able to gently go from zero to transcendent in a brief period. It shouldn’t take years and years and be hard hard work. Or, you could say that we need a glimpse of the eternal before committing ourselves to endless years of meditation.
We have been operating outside of the natural world and have suppressed our natures, through a war on some drugs. It’s made us cripples…able to think but unable to feel, experience and sense reality directly.
Entheogens will help us adapt to all the weirdness that is bound to occur in the next while. It’s going to be shocking. Have to qualify that though. They will only help insofar as they don’t overwhelm. After the weirdness kicks in, full force, it will NOT be a good time to expose your brain to anything entirely new, in terms of drugs of any sort.
So best to try them in conservative quantities beforehand.
Up front, there’s a disclaimer. I’m not a Catholic. In truth, I can find much fault in the Catholic Church. But I don’t find fault in those who are Catholic and are seeking the truth. My best friend in adulthood is one and is one of the finest men that I know. I’m hoping none find offense in this message that I personally found to ring true and I think, despite our beliefs (or lack thereof), this is a message we can all benefit from as we enter into a new year and a new decade.
https://www.wordonfire.org/resources/blog/on-mercy-in-a-merciless-age/26133/
Happy New Year all!
Very nice, AO. Thank you. Random acts of kindness, for sure. So many religions seem to have an infectious bacteria or a hungry archon that demands worship, at their core.
I like to think of God and angelic forces as being friends and Jesus as someone to emulate, not worship. Can’t do that. That’s like feeding botulism.
C.S Lewis always frames things away from gob smacked worship, in favor of careful and articulate explanation. I’ve read everything he has written.
When people claim it is belief alone that sets you free, it’s a turnoff. It’s the shadow aspect of Abrahamic religions and in its own way it mirrors shamanism that devolves into sorcery.
If all you have to do is believe (usually goes hand in hand with excessive worship) it creates an illusion of freedom. Acts set you free. Kindness and goodness set you free. The belief alone idea allows for horrible behavior as long as the gods are appeased with worship and belief. Creates holy wars.
TLWA-
One humorous outcome – I’m committed to not letting my spouse and friends know I’m a dues paying member to a community that believes in aliens, but is skeptical of climate science. lol.Your entirely accurate assessment made me laugh too. :) I think it comes from being a cranky, skeptical bunch. If the gang in charge were desperate to label everyone who worried about the climate as tinfoil-hat nutjobs, denied them grants, and whatnot, while Greta Thunburg marched on Davos and demanded they all do something about contacting the Aliens, and this Alien-focused campaign was massively supported by the mainstream media, with those who were skeptical about Aliens pilloried by all right-thinking people as "deniers", we would probably have a different set of beliefs. It goes back to ao's 7 principles. If the entire system is shoving something down your throats (as they are with climate, and other things), then you should probably be skeptical. If they are ridiculing it as a tinfoil hat conspiracy that only nutjobs would believe in (as they are with Aliens), then it might require closer examination.
From AO and DaveF
If the entire system is shoving something down your throats (as they are with climate, and other things), then you should probably be skeptical. If they are ridiculing it as a tinfoil hat conspiracy that only nutjobs would believe in (as they are with Aliens), then it might require closer examination.This is where I am at with vaccines. As of about 2005, 15,000+ cases had been submitted to the "vaccine court" for vaccine induced long term neurologic injury that included autism and and many other symptoms. Many of the parents and families of these kids are highly educated people with a deep conviction that the autism is related to the vaccination. They will not be going away. Yet balanced information on vaccine safety is simply not available. So I just don't know if the overall value to current society is positive or negative. The information just isn't there. The great foil: Correlation is Not Causation (or, "These are Not the droids you are looking for") So Dirty Harry shoots a guy in the chest with his 44 magnum revolver, "the biggest handgun" made. The punk falls over and dies.
The explanation is offered that just because he collapsed and died right after being shot doesn't mean that the shot killed him. Correlation is not causation.
I mean, perhaps he had a congenital heart defect or something that manifested suddenly at the moment of the gunshot? The temporal concordance of the gunshot and the death doesn't prove anything!
I have expert scientist who will tell you which droids you are looking for and these droids are not them.
I stopped reading through David Collum’s annual write-ups awhile ago, since they seemed too heavy on snark, drama, and attitude while being underweight on truth, and the humility and deep balance that goes with it, from my point of view. Balance often doesn’t make for as interesting reading, though, since the truth is complex, frustrating and difficult, and people are generally a mix of good and bad qualities, not the caricatures we make of them – and so not nearly as satisfying and entertaining as calling out absurdity or over-reach, it seems – and there’s a lot of that on all sides to call out. I find earnestness less satisfying but much more useful than snark these days, though, even though I can certainly be faulted for my own snark at times. Overall, I find Chris to be much better at trying to track truth and balance, even though I strongly disagree with him now and then, as seems bound to happen between any two people trying to figure out what’s true to any depth.
I agree with Collum’s view that science should always be open to other views and to possible disproofs of climate change findings, & that science is never settled. But my own strong belief (and it’s just that – no one knows for certain) is that the IPCC probability predictions on climate are very likely true. It’s also true, as with everything in life, that we almost always have to make decisions – often crucial ones - and to act based on probability and partial information rather than certainty. My belief comes not just from IPCC reports, but from the entire context of my life experience, seeing and reading about weather events over my life, seeing videos of melting glaciers, the NASA video disappearing Arctic ice, and importantly, from making character judgements about the people and organizations on each side of the argument. I’ve heard from Eskimos who’ve talked about historic changes in the regions where they live, about melting permafrost on ground that in living memory has always been perpetually hard, from midwest farmers who are seeing the timing of seasons shift from when they were much younger. I’ve talked to Robert Watson, a former head of the IPCC and heard from other scientists. I certainly trust the character and intent to avoid bias far more from scientists and others I’ve heard from who believe climate change is likely a significant threat than from the fossil fuel supported establishment Dems that do nothing about it or fossil fuel supported Trump and his supportive Libertarians & establishment Republicans who deny it’s happening. As a Libertarian, Collum outlines the conspiracy case for self-interest by those evil globalists make would make us slaves in their fight against climate, while ignoring the multi-decade and well-documented conspiracy case that the oil companies and Libertarians like the petro-elite Koch brothers have poured huge sums into supporting libertarianism and climate change denying views and electing climate denying politicians. Heaven forbid that humans would ever have to organize to collaborate at a level much higher than the local town council – better to not acknowledge there might be a reason to do it. (okay, now I’m getting into my own snark tendencies, apparently). Anyway, I think Collum is downright foolish on this subject, and I imagine he’d say the same of me.
Again, with Greta Thunberg, Collum is his happily offensive self, and demonstrates both his divisive snark and his extremely poor character judgement all at once, IMO. It’s pretty clear that Greta is sincere and adamant in her beliefs, whether you think she’s right or wrong, something I think Chris has pointed to more than once in a positive way before. Cynically implying that she’s in it for the speaking fees, as Collum did in his write-up, is absurd on its face. Again – just more attitude and drama, more red meat for the libertarian or denialist tribe. I don’t need it – there’s enough of that disease already going around.