But first, an announcement from Richard Cook:
From: Richard CookDate: 25 August 2009 13:23:03 ISTTo: <•••@••.•••>Subject: American Monetary Institute National Conference on Monetary Reform
Dear Speakers and participants at our forthcoming 5th Annual AMI Monetary Reform Conference at Roosevelt University in Chicago;
We have put together a truly impressive group of speakers who will present at the Conference.
Please see their photos and bios and topics at
We now ask a favor of all of you:Please forward this email to all those on your email lists informing them that you are speaking and encouraging them to attend. Direct them to that website above. There is still time for them to make the necessary travel arrangements, if this is done now, this week.
Warm regards to all,Any questions, please write.
Stephen ZarlengaDirector, AMI224-805-2200
From: Molly MorganDate: 24 August 2009 03:52:34 ISTTo: Richard Moore <•••@••.•••>Subject: Re: a dialog about beliefs
Hi, Richard –
rkm> what most people mean by “changing consciousness” is that we as individuals need to become enlightened, in some sense, before we can proceed to bring about social transformation. People talk about Indigo Children and Light Beings and those kind of things. Wishful thinking, hoping for a magic bullet to change things for us. It is the pursuit of transformation, by us, as we are, done in the right way, that can change our consciousness.
Yes, I believe I am beginning to understand this better. Not having been part of the New Age movement, what I am gleaning is that most of that activity — of which I presume Indigo Children and people who call themselves Light Workers and many other variations — clings to the pretension that if you just think positively enough, if you simply refuse to acknowledge anything other than your best self exists, change will happen. The problem is that to get to the light you have to go through the dark! But the dominant spiritual traditions for several thousand years have been repressing the dark, and it’s wreaking its vengeance in the cultures that we have now. The kinds of processes you advocate include needing to learn how to deal with the full complexity of human behavior so that we can awaken and consciously choose the ones that lead to cooperative communities and become a species that is in harmony with the rest of the universe.
What you say makes a great deal of sense. But it’s your insight, not what I was getting at. When I talk about ‘awakening’, I’m talking about awakening to our power as people when we work together. Awakening to the fact that we can be more than cogs in a machine, that elites become powerless when we all stop doing their bidding. It’s more a political and cultural thing than a spiritual thing.
However, I also believe that if we awaken to our power, and create inclusive democratic communities, that human nature will lead us on to spiritual awakening as well. We are naturally loving, co-operative beings.
From: Thomas SchleyDate: 24 August 2009 05:24:58 ISTTo: <•••@••.•••>Subject: RE: a dialog about beliefs
“Hi Dave,Trainer’s stuff is very interesting. I also recommend it. I’d like to get in touch with him, and I couldn’t find an email address on those websites. Do you know how to contact him?”
You may be able to contact Trainer through his blog where you can leave comments. His latest blog is an intriguing look at Spanish collectives of the 1930s.Hope this helps Trainer seems to have both feet planted on the ground, and is awake to what is coming down the pike.Best regards,Tom
Thanks for the pointers. Here’s the description of that latest blog entry:
The Spanish Anarchist Collectives; Look what we can do!Posted July 30th, 2009 by Ted TrainerMost people would probably doubt that we could organize satisfactory communities without vast state bureaucracies and corporations. The achievements of the Spanish Anarchist workers collectives in the 1930s show what miracles ordinary people can do. We are entering severe scarcity where centralised and globalised systems will fail to provide for us and we will have to develop highly localized economies.
From: “erik andersen”Date: 24 August 2009 15:33:29 ISTTo: “Richard K. Moore” <•••@••.•••>Subject: Dialogue
Hi Richard;Enjoyed reading your latest exchange on the topic of banks and particularly the Federal Reserve.It is meant as a compliment when I characterize your discussions as “Tuesdays with Morrie”, the play.Regards from Erik
I had to look up the Morrie reference, but many thanks for the compliment. I don’t think I could wear his boots, but I’d say our paths are going in the same direction.
From: “Jerold Hubbard”Date: 24 August 2009 17:20:06 ISTSubject: Re: a dialog about beliefs
Dear Richard;I really enjoyed your dialogue! It is a perfect example of how diversity can be BRIDGED! There are many rich sources, which hope to use even the most insignificant issuse to divide the masses, furnish them the arms to kill each other, and then they swoop down at the last minute, when the killing is over, and become the heroes with the answer!Divide and Conquer is still alive and well on planet Earth! To me this leads into the question you posed on why people love ILLUSION more than ACTUALITY! To me, it is because mankind wants to feel he is in control of his own destiny! This happens from books, shows, and news articles that print stories about how self made men, became successful, working their way to the top! And if this underpriviledged person could do this, anyone CAN! This story in itself is illusionary!We are all born into a SEA (SEE) of DECEPTION! We assume we see things and know things as they are whenever we do not! I have heard people say, I have lived with you for 40 years, do not think I do not know you! This to me becomes very illusionary because from this statement one thing becomes crystal clear……They have lived with themselves all their life and they do NOT know themselves, how could they actually really know another?????Life is a contiunal waking up! It is a continual recognizing of one’s own BLIND SPOTS! The world we presently live is is dominated by the MOST CLEVER DECEPTION SCHEME or what Carl Zimmer calls, the most clever PARASITE, the ability NOT to directly kill one’s prey, but to turn them into living slaves to do the bidding of the slave master! This happens in all relationships! In people who have been married for years, one spouse may say to the other, “I have ASKED you 3 times to do this for me, WHY haven’t you done it?? Why was the pharase “I asked” used instead of “I told you”?Simply because SELFISHNESS is much more affective when DISGUSIED!If one believes one is free on is in control, one had best look around a little more critically because it is obvious, one has become the prison guard to his own enslavement!The reason I know I am free because I can do anything I want whenever I want! If this is one’s thinking, one had better start investigating where the DESIRES one has embedded within his mind……CAME FROM!Thanks again for the INTERACTION and mental NETWORKING!Jerold Hubbard, Top Soil Miner, Pest Creator,… ALIAS…. GRASS ROOTS FARMER from the USA! “The beginning of wisdom is to call something by it’s right name!”
Thanks for your thoughts. I do have one response, re/ ‘mankind wants to be in control of his destiny’:
I don’t think it makes sense to generalize about mankind based on current circumstances. You cite stories about self-made men as a causative factor, and let’s say that’s true, for us today. I’d say that’s a description of our current conditioning matrix, rather than a ‘truth about mankind’.
From: “Howard Switzer”Date: 24 August 2009 19:09:43 ISTSubject: Re: a dialog about beliefs
rkm re/JFK: He was having the Treasury start to print currency, cutting out the Fed.
I think Lincoln was killed for much the same reason.Howard Switzer, Architect668 Hurricane Creek RoadLinden, TN 37096931-589-6513
I’ve seen reports on that as well. In general, it seems that assassinations are not typically done by lone crazies, even though in the history books that seems to be the standard story. It’s such a simple formula: find a stooge, put him up to it or put him in the vicinity, get rid of him afterward, and you’ve got your cover story. Oswald, Ruby, Sirhan Sirhan, etc etc. Such a standard formula that we get a wrong picture historically of what assassinations are about.
One of the standard scenarios, as with JFK and Lincoln, is a leader who becomes so successful in his job, and with public support, that he dares to attempt to shift the power system. Off with his head, comes the orders from behind the curtain. Where do you want this killin’ done? Why out on Highway 61.
I have my own suspicions about FDR’s timely death. We were at a turning point. We could have not dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; we could have not started the Cold War; we could have used the UN for peace rather than an agent of imperialism. Was he contemplating such a future? Did they put something in his soup?
From: Susie JenkinsDate: 25 August 2009 09:51:32 ISTTo: RKM MooreSubject: RE: a dialog about beliefs
Thanks for sharing that dialogue.
In one of the replies below you said “We either transform society or tyranny continues.”
I wish it were that easy. But people are involved. I find it very difficult to believe that even if Transition Towns were successfully maneuvered into your hopeful local communities they would not last long. Someone(s) in those communities down the line would decide (he, she, or they)- want more, want the”One Ring to rule them all” type of society for themselves.
The prerequisite is to transform people.
But I feel we’re required to keep trying anyway.
Thanks for being here to motivate changes and enlighten us.
Unfortunately, there is no way to transform people as a prerequisite. There are paths to transformation, along the lines of Zen et al, but few in any generation ever take such paths. Those paths keep the flame alive but they don’t transform society. By the time a path broadens to include a significant fraction of a population, it turns into a religion, and the transformation part gets left behind.
One problem with such paths is that they separate ‘the seeking’ from the rest of life. They become in some sense hobbies, as seen from outside, in terms of their effect on society. You can be seeking enlightenment, or you can be playing tennis, and the effect on society is about the same. Even if everyone were enlightened, how would that change the system? Unless you are waiting for the rulers to be enlightened, and that’ll be the day! Those with power have very little incentive to follow such paths. Seeking is an act of humility. The powerful are seldom humble, except perhaps for photo-ops. Never forget: power corrupts; power corrupts; power corrupts. The exceptions to this rule usually get assassinated, either by their courtiers or their handlers.
It turns out that transforming society is easier than transforming people. There have been many successful revolutions in history, and very few if any examples of mass enlightenment. The only example I can think of that comes even close are the Cathars.
In addition, it is not necessary for everyone to be enlightened in order to have a sensible society. What is necessary, is to have no positions of power. In my proposals about community democracy, whether or not they are achievable, an essential element is no positions of power. Yes, there would probably be some individuals who would aspire to power, but there would be fewer of them in such a society, and there aren’t any points of leverage for them to grasp. At least that’s the idea behind the proposals.
From: “JAMES MACGREGOR”Date: 25 August 2009 11:15:32 ISTTo: “‘Richard Moore'” <•••@••.•••>Subject: kennedy assasination
Hi Richard,Hope you are well. With regard to Bill Blum’s question re your evidence about Kennedy slaying, this article is possibly important:
Thanks for the reference. We find there:
On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress.
From: “John Lowry”Date: 25 August 2009 19:11:40 ISTSubject: Re: a dialog about beliefs
Dear Richard.I also want to thank you very much for the hard work you have done for so many years. I wonder, how old is cyberjournal? How many subscribers? Is there much turnover?I am not willing to abandon Obama. I’m sure he feels touched by God and beleives he can mediate any dispute — even the one between rich and poor, between liberal and conservative. I think it’s possible. The good part of corporate capitalism is that power rests with the board, which is subject to public control. (I know how weak this is as a force of control.) But we can use their own theories as a lever to wrench power into a more public place. The words themselves give it away: Mix capital with labor and you get goods. Wealth derives from weal — “the general prosperity”. When capitalism started the root definition of “profit” was mutual benefit. But the way it developed, 1970 dictionaries give “gain” or “advantage” as the new root meaning. It’s now clear to all that things went awry.The establishment of The Fed was a phase of our development, like changing from the gold standard to the information standard. Even though reason seems to be a parlor game we love to play but do not allow to inform policy; and culture is so much an hypnotic trance where our everyday exchanges decide positions of dominance and submission, participartory democracy has become fashionable. So far, his-story has been war. This generation has begun making peace. Doing this from the bottom up assures long term viability, but working from within can help save time. In the 1970s there was a ‘start over’ movement. We know about the failures. We don’t know about the successes, if there are any.Stay well,jl
Thanks for your comments about cyberjournal. I think it started in ’95. We have a little under 700 subscribers at the moment. I don’t think there’s much turnover. A few new folks every month, and a few go away. But basically most people have been here a while.
So, you’re not abandoning Obama. You and millions of others. What I can’t figure out, is why? That’s really what this thread has been about. I have my theories, and your comment about culture being a hypnotic trance is pretty close to my theories. For me, reason is not a parlor game, and reason, ie a rational examination of the facts, reveals that every single thing Obama has done has been exactly what the bankers want, and exactly what we don’t want. He’s much worse than Bush in terms of what policies are being enacted. But he’s got the golden rhetoric, the winning smile, and some wonderful things have been published under his name. At least Bush was honest in the persona he presented, and his lies were obvious.
This generation making peace? Are we on the same planet?
Moderator: •••@••.••• (comments welcome)