Comments on: The myth of the limited solution

By: consentient

consentient — Sun, 20 Oct 2013 13:55:05 +0000

Thanks for your kind words. I am trying to confront what I think are the most important questions, and I appreciate the all-too-rare considered responses from people such as yourself, who have taken the time to read what I’ve written and engage with it.

In response to your points on definition, I couldn’t agree more. Whole swathes of supposedly-liberatory theory has been completely derailed by too narrow or too hazy a focus on what freedom actually is. Anarchism, for example, is a political philosophy that, at heart, tries to find a way for people with completely different sets of values to live together, in order to preserve the kind of mass societies that anarchists presumably see as good, else they would challenge them more. It also is seemingly only capable of imagining governments as perpetrators, and not corporate oligarchs, vicious parents and tribal chieftains. Through a lack of imagination and also research, anarchism has rendered itself almost wholly redundant to those masses of people beginning to awake to the fact that there is something fundamentally wrong with the world.

Those people could, if properly motivated and informed, seek to live in enclave communities, culturally and physically distant from the destructive civilizations-of-origin; it is this method that forms the centerpiece of my practical prescriptions, and I’ve written about it at some length if you care to peruse my writings further.

Thanks for the recommendation. I have not read (or even heard of) Galambos, so will give him a try.

By the way, for a thinker to make it onto my short list requires very special messages indeed.

Jon is on there because he deals with the most relevant issues of the days in stark yet beautiful language. My open letter briefly mentions my love of his writing, but I could write whole reams on it if I wanted, such is my love for his words. I’ve never seen anyone consistently and prolifically produce such incredible work.

My open letter simply tries to draw his attention to that which is the biggest disagreement between us. I hope someday to receive a reply.

http://consentient.wordpress.com/2013/02/14/an-open-letter-to-jon-rappoport/

By: musicis2words

musicis2words — Sun, 20 Oct 2013 11:11:37 +0000

Absolutely correct on how people have been beaten down through propaganda… & I would add that some see the situation as so huge that they feel powerless to do anything about it.

Most people have been conditioned. Some people can resist some of this conditioning, but it is done on so many levels, that almost everyone has been brainwashed to some extent.

By: RJ Mann

RJ Mann — Sat, 19 Oct 2013 01:21:57 +0000

Well, I disagree about the importance of imagination/creativity in these matters. Actually, Jon open my eyes regarding how crucial this is.

Imagine someone is taking a vacation up in the mountains and is staying in an isolated cabin cut off from civilization. Someone comes to the door and warns that a mad man will be at the cabin in 5 minutes with the intent to murder everyone there. How would the vacationer respond to this potential threat ? If the vacationer did nothing, would it be because he was just lazy ? “Thanks for the info, but I’d rather take a nap on the couch right now.”
If the vacationer did nothing it would likely be because he doesn’t imagine that the threat is real or doesn’t think he could do anything to overcome it. (Or his mind is in some way impaired.)

A lot of people think the government and other so-called authorities are ‘good’ – a substitute Mommy that takes care of them that they can not imagine would seek to harm them. Many people have been so beaten down through various methods of propaganda (from public schools to t.v., etc) that they have few original thoughts at all They can’t imagine problem solutions outside of the agenda that is pushed on them.

By: joanie

joanie — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:58:51 +0000

No, no, no.
It’s not that people lack an imagination, or fear non existent alternatives, they fear doing the work.
People know what is going on (we’re born with intuition and a moral compass), but most are lazy.

Playing ignorant is blissful…

The populace is aware of choices. For example – walking, biking or driving to work, but since the job pays for the expensive alternative, (never mind it is a huge expense) life is easier with the automobile, as well as, (fill in the blank). How about a choice to work for an evil corporation with a high salary or a low paying job that is considerate of people, as well as the one natural law, “do no harm”.

A structure by and for the people would be an entity (not calling it a government because that is an evil “over men” structure) that coined its own money and provided all infrastructure services, like roads etc, not food, health care, education etc. People would through their own labor be able to afford a healthy life without taxes. Taxes are only a means to control. See definition – tax = penalty

If people have not figured it out by now – the democratic structure is communal, communism/socialism, an entity at the top takes (via taxes) from the collective and provides food etc for the ones that are not laboring for their own survival. Presently, less people would naturally exist by the laws of natural if survival was up to the individual. The animal that does not search for food and shelter dies…

People have imagined the individuals receiving (goober stolen) funds for doing nothing (fill in the blank) instead working for their supper, doing anything the societal infrastructure needed – Numerous problems solved. The present gooberment structure does not work this way because then people would be shown to have value, instead of the present state, controlled chattle… The money system need not be backed by precious metals the elite control, rather value through humanity laboring = toil = to be.

Shut off entertainment of all kinds and start “being”, show the world your value.

By: MrPeabody

MrPeabody — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:19:19 +0000

Sight of the original problem was lost under Constantine when the church fathers created a unified Christianism that rejected membership in the family of gods, although the name of the god who fathered the figure of Jesus, Jehovah or Yahweh, was explicitly cognate with the father god Jove. This organization which expropriated the temples and hierarchy of other cults, most notably the Mithra cult, served as the template for all political totalitarianism, acting as a gatekeeper for the Roman court in both the West and the East for both the Roman and Byzantine Empires. The order survived the government which sponsored it, baiting converts with unselfish virtues, then locking them into whatever local and current political order curried their favor, regardless of whether such regimes exemplified or brought about those values. Later political totalitarian orders such as the Jacobins, the Fascists, the Nazis, and the Bolsheviks, were simply trying to duplicate Constantine’s achievement by controlling all institutions and sources of information to rule through the hearts and minds of every individual, exterminating all opposition by leaving it no opportunity for respite. No kind of “final solution” can be envisioned because one has already been supplied in the background, enduring for over 1700 years by claiming to hold a monopoly over love, mercy, charity, and benevolence while gathering support against, or even working to suppress movements beyond its control which might be attempting to realize such ideals outside of the boundaries of their faith. The Christian faith, in all its manifestations, is an absolute betrayal of all it professes to achieve.

By: RJ Mann

RJ Mann — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:35:33 +0000

IMHO you can present great ideas, but you have to break it down into digestible pieces if you want to impact people. – – – One example of this is the drastic shift in public opinion away from the wars. The arguments can be broken down into “Look how much the wars are costing.” “Look how many lives have been lost.” “What have they achieved ?” “Who made money off them (no bid contracts, etc) ?” “What are we doing over there (US troops guarding poppy fields) ?” “Who are the innocents that have been a victim of this (bombed men, woman, children) ? What lies got us to go along with this (no weapons of mass destruction) ?

By: RJ Mann

RJ Mann — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:08:38 +0000

“What one man can do, so can another”

By: RJ Mann

RJ Mann — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:06:09 +0000

Laura – excellent insights. I think people need to experience a certain level of pain until they are motivated to think for themselves, and to think differently. (I know that was true in my own case. I used to think of Ron Paul as a ‘whack job’ in the past. Not now.) Some people seem to be into cult like, childish hero worship. People like that were devastated when RP lost the election and think they need to vote in the ‘right politicians’ in order to ‘regain’ their freedom.

By: laurabruno

laurabruno — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:38:59 +0000

Funny, I awoke yesterday morning with an article about healthy ecosystems as they relate to the GMO debate — fully formed article, but I haven’t had a chance to let it spill out onto the keyboard. Cheers!

By: RJ Mann

RJ Mann — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:31:13 +0000

Well, I’m not Jon and can’t speak for him – but I read your blog post. We agree on many points, but in my opinion, people get bogged down in certain details.
No, America has never been at any time an actual ‘Heaven on Earth’. As long as this planet is peopled by flawed human beings that will never take place. I doubt that Ron Paul is under any delusions on that score. He has said many times that it comes down to what the people want and are willing to make happen. That said, the core of the American Ideal came from the Age of the Enlightenment. It was born out of the idea that human beings had inherent natural rights and that people should command their own lives. This was a drastic departure from previous world history. (Of course, it met with great resistance from the ruling parties in power.)

To me it comes down to supporting that which promotes and advances individual human liberty and potential (while not infringing on the rights of others). The battle has always been between freedom/creativity and control.

The psychopaths who seek to control everything are at war against freedom/creativity – that is, against the very heart of the human soul. (In this, they will ultimately fail.) They see freedom/creativity as a potential threat to their control, and in this they are correct. Independent, free thinking, creative people cannot be controlled. (Though they may freely come together and consent to support a common purpose.) We need to address directly actions that seek to limit our freedom & creativity – – – and put it in those terms. For example, the debate on Obama-care has often been framed in terms of ‘cost reduction’ and ‘health care for everyone’. I haven’t really heard strong arguments made based upon asking whether anyone has the right to force something like this on others. And I haven’t heard anyone stress having the right to creatively come up with their own solutions. Ron Paul did point out that healthcare used to be something affordable that people were able to pay for themselves. But, others seem to get bogged down in the details presented by the controllers and those who are their useful dupes. They allow others to frame the issue. They don’t ask why healthcare is so expensive now and what can be done about it. (I won’t even get into the ultimate purpose of the use of the govt ‘healthcare” system as a weapon against the people. It fails based upon the rationale for it that the controllers feed the public, alone.)

I’ve used the ‘hard approach’ when bringing these kind of issues up with others. Its often generated anger and strained relationships. Peoples long held view of the world was challenged. I’ve used the ‘soft approach’ and in that case it didn’t elicit any response at all. Nothing fundamental was challenged. They were left in their comfort zone and did nothing.

I think I’ll use a different approach now. Show how peoples freedoms are being stolen & express confidence in their ability to come up with creative solutions that work for them. Perhaps this will speak to the soul in others.

I think Ron Paul’s greatest contributions are his speaking about Liberty, educating others, and especially the next generation (and their parents) with his new home school curriculum. These are actions to support freedom and creativity. Regards – – –