-------------------------------------------------------- From: "Robert E. Reynolds" To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: some good news from the Supreme Court... Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 05:39:40 -0400 I realize that most of the media is playing this as a victory for civil rights, but is it? The administration had two victories: l. The Court upheld the right of the president to declare prisoners as enemy combatants and hold them without trial subject only to the prisoner filing an action to prove he was not an enemy combatant. --<snip>-- 2. They deferred the most important case, Padilla until after the election on a technicality created by the Dept. of Justice. --<snip>-- I'm afraid I don't see this as a victory, but rather as another step down the road to a dictatorship. bob reynolds, orange park fl -------------------------------------------------------- From: "Sharon Coxen" To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: The transformational imperative and we the people Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 19:30:24 -0700 Dear Richard, At the heart of your proposal for transformation lies a single fundamental principle - that we as humans must take responsibility....for ourselves thus ultimately each other. You have addressed this well from the perspective of communities and nations. Please take this one step further to the local of local levels and share the personal transformations that also must take place to facilitate the whole . Kind regards, Sharilyn ------------- Dear Sharon, I'm not sure which personal transformation you have in mind. My own view is that that there is no personal transformation that needs to precede social transformation. Indeed, that's one of the main points I was trying to make in that last chapter. There's nothing in our current psychological make up that prevents us from cooperating to build a new world. What is lacking is the application of appropriate processes / gatherings in which we can learn to listen to one another, and realize that everyone is part of 'us' and has a contribution to make. In learning to take responsibility for self governance, personal transformations will occur--but they do not need to occur in advance, and they are very unlikely to occur in advance. There are many people, particularly those who strongly emphasize Gaia consciousness, who believe that people generally need to undergo a profound personal transformation of consciousness before humanity will be ready to enter a new age. I see that as the equivalent of blaming an animal for being in a zoo because it has failed to have a personal transformation. Domination and exploitation are not the core of human nature, but are rather a corrupted version of human nature. In our hierarchical societies the elites at the top have power, and power corrupts. We do not need to change human nature to address this problem, we need only eliminate positions of power in our societies. yours, rkm -------------------------------------------------------- From: "John Bunzl" To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: The transformational imperative and we the people Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 09:47:02 +0100 X-Priority: 3 Hi Richard! Thank you for another very interesting, well-written and thoughtful essay. As I was reading your comments about hierarchy, I wondered whether you had read Ken Wilber's "Sex, Ecology, Spirituality"? (or his shorter "A Theory of Everything"). These would, I think offer an alternative view which you might find quite useful. Also, take a look at the work of Elisabet Sahtouris which you might also find helpful. One of the key problems with our movement, I feel, is its phobia about hierarchy. It needs to realise that not ALL hierarchies are bad and that, rather, you can have "dominator" (bad, oppressive, unsustainable) hierarchies just as you can have "actualising" (healthy, stable, nurturing) hierarchies or, as some call them, "holarchies". It's only the DOMINATOR hierarchies we need to fight, not ALL hierarchies! If we try to fight ALL hierarchies we miss the point, and thus we'll continue, I think, to miss our target of transformation. When one has an understanding of actualising hierarchies/holarchies, one can start to see the mutual (though apparently paradoxical) link between smallness and bigness, between larger scales of cooperation FACILITATING greater small-scale autonomy, and so on. Without such an understanding, our movement will, I suggest, remain prey to what Wilber calls "boomeritis" and "flatland". Look forward to your comments. all the best John ---------- Dear John, I am familiar with the notion of holarchies and of mapping self-actualizing biological models onto society. I think those are interesting ideas, but I find them a bit fuzzy, and I don't think they reflect an adequate understanding of political dynamics. Indeed, none of those authors seems to pay much attention to political science. Since as far back as the first Sumerian civilization, some 6,000 years ago, there have been attempts by self-actualizing leaders to reform dominator hierarchies into actualizing holarchies. It has never lasted. A non-dominator political hierarchy turns out to be an unstable system configuration. It's like a top set spinning on a slanted table--you can put it up there all right, but it will eventually fall off. I remain convinced that the path to democracy and sustainability, if one exists, must lie in the direction of non-hierarchy. By non-hierarchy, I mean that there can be no institution of authority, no group of people who are empowered to make decisions on behalf of others. In the chapter "Democracy, localism, and sustainability" I will try to show that non-hierarchical systems are possible, that they can deal effectively with large-scale issues, and that they can be expected to remain stable over time. The two URL's below show an earlier (1999) attempt to explore those ideas. best regards, rkm http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?id='277'&lists='cj' http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?id='278'&lists='cj' -------------------------------------------------------- From: J Fadiman Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 03:28:19 EDT Subject: Re: William Greider reports on the coup... To: •••@••.••• nice item- passed it on to better lists than mine. let their heads roll ( off their necks) ( and of course love, peace and compassion for all living beings) -------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Hickey" To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: William Greider reports on the coup... Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 05:25:09 -0700 X-Priority: 3 Hi Richard, Thanks for the very interesting information! I will save it in my files. -------------------------------------------------------- From: Evelyn Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 15:36:50 EDT Subject: Re: Beware the Liberal War On Terror To: •••@••.••• I don't think I mentioned it before, but I am going to the Democratic Convention as a Delegate. It MIGHT give me the opportunity to question motives further, and to see how far what has been said is "politics", how much is rhetoric on the part of the news media, which chooses, many times to either report poorly, or to tuck away news and views in obscure corners. It should be a most interesting experience. ---------- Evelyn - let us know what happens - rkm -------------------------------------------------------- From: "Butler Crittenden, Ph.D." To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: Beware the Liberal War On Terror Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 09:37:37 -0700 X-Priority: 3 rkm> "Personally, I make the choice not to send in an absentee ballot. I'd rather protest the charade of democracy than exercise my little difference against Bush. But I respect those whose logic pushes them into electoral seriousness. And I must admit to inconsistency: I do vote here in Ireland because it seems more real in a smaller society. But I must admit the system is fundamentally the same or even worse here--all control is centralized in Dublin, including the police force." Richard, the time has come to re-think eschewing your vote in the U.S., even assuming you'd get your absentee ballot from California, which is seen as a safe state for Kerry. Like many others, I've considered not voting, voting for a third-party candidate, and writing-in your name -- all to avoid voting for Kerry or Bu$h. I'm still not likely to vote for Nancy Pelosi or whomever of the peas-in-a-pod California Democrat senators is up for re-election -- so disaffiliated I am from mainstream Democrats. But if I can hold my nose and vote for Kerry, in hopes that his election can be the beginning of regime change in the U.S., then so can you. If you can stand the inconsistency of Ireland, then gut up and stand the inconsistency of the U.S. I don't think very many of us on your list see voting as "electoral seriousness". Surely we all know that at this point in American history voting is a highly delusional activity -- where we pretend it makes a difference. The hard, endless, often thankless work of formulating new ideas and convincing others to think about necessary changes, or at least new approaches, is what we can take seriously. But the irony of voting is that occasionally it makes a difference regarding the hard work you're all about, and the reason we love you so and listen to you. Don't let us down now. Butler ---------- Butler, Sorry, I don't see Kerry as a regime change but rather as a regime consolidation. He challenges neither the War on Terrorism, nor the Patriot Acts, nor the general policy of imperialism. His platform seems to be mainly that he can pursue these agendas more competently than Bush. While Bush remains President, we progressives can view the fascist innovations as being an aberration brought in by the radical neocons. Once Kerry gets in those innovations will gain considerable legitimacy, given that someone who supports them has received an electoral mandate. best regards, rkm -------------------------------------------------------- From: "Abati" To: <•••@••.•••> Cc: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: Beware the Liberal War On Terror Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:11:22 -0500 Do hear Bill Moyer's recent talk? Please get current, so the info. you disseminate will be accurate and on-point. If real objectivity is your goal. Go: www.kpftx.org Click Archives select June 22, 9 pm, "Voices At Work". FF appox. 16 min. into the show. I doubt U will want to save this and or pass it on; but just in case I'm wrong: What solutions do you propose, to address and reverse the Program of The Treasonist Junta in control of the rains of government and the mightiest war machine on the planet? Advise, Abati --------- Abati, Thanks for the Moyers update. I don't think the general direction being pursued by the junta can be changed without a total transformation of civilization. That's why I'm working on my current book. cheers, rkm -------------------------------------------------------- From: •••@••.••• Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 17:10:52 EDT Subject: Re: Beware the Liberal War On Terror To: •••@••.••• all sensible as usual and the larger picture is that Kerry is no answer but it is a slowing down of the worst of it. But not to vote is a vote for Bush- pure and simple. Not always, not in general but right now this time. A vote of Nader is a vote for Bush. A non-vote a vote for Bush,. that's why the Bush people are helping Nader get onto the ballot in Swing states. They understand that you're being turned off to he process is a big win for their agenda. It worked last time. Assuming you're still registered in California -it won't matter in terms of the national electoral vote count, but it is a strong statement and one I'd like you to rethink. no one will give a damn about your not voting except that it is a very strong part of the Republican way to win elections. We know that a dirty election turns off voters, but when the Republicans know that their base won't be turned off, it is a very successful way to lower turn out which always favors the Republicans. You are a real voice now to your list and well beyond. Consider that while every vote doesn't count, every intention does. With Kerry in, the left can begin to do more than fight desperate fight after desperate fight. In a hundred years it won't matter but then again neither will you. with affection always Jim --------------------- Jim, If we are realistic, I think it is clear that Kerry will win by a considerable margin. "Fahrenheit 9-11" will contribute a lot to that, as will the covert campaign by Intelligence and Pentagon insiders to discredit Bush and the neocons, as reported by Greider and others, and as launched by the release of the staged torture photos. The Nader vote will be electorally insignificant, but the larger it is the louder will be the expression of general disgust with the mainstream parties. If I was going to vote in this election, it would probably be for Nader. we each must do what we need to do, rkm -------------------------------------------------------- From: "Butler Crittenden, Ph.D." To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: Pat Buchanan interviews Nader Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 10:55:56 -0700 X-Priority: 3 So, Ralph f'ing Nader is cozying-up to Pat Buchanan. I wonder if Pat is part of the program to get Nader on the ballot in swing states, and assure that enough RumpUgly bucks flow Nader's way, in a dirty trick to help Geo f'ing Bu$h get reelected. Lamentably, Nader has his head screwed on straight but is totally blind and doesn't care if he costs the Dems the election -- AGAIN! "TAC: Is there any circumstance in which you can come to an arrangement with Kerry campaign not to run? "RN: The time to drop out is before you drop in. You cannot build a national campaign and get tens of thousands of volunteers working their hearts out and then in October feed the cynicism of American politics by cutting some sort of deal. The answer is no." Lest anyone get confused, here's a block of articles from the most recent "The American Conservative". ---<snip of articles showing how misinformed conservatives are>--- -------- Butler, hello again, Emotions are evidently riding high. I appreciate you sharing that aspect of your sentiments. Do you really blame Nader for Bush's victory? After what happened in Florida and the Supreme Court? From my perspective, and with no disrespect, I see your judgement, like Jim's, as being clouded by undue fear. Bush isn't going to win. His administration has pissed off too many people in high places and he's become a liability to the establishment. We have no reason to allow ourselves to be herded by fear into the corral of the mainstream parties. There is safe room for those with a radical analysis to vote for someone who is attempting to offer a radical alternative. Without undue fear, I don't think you'd be quite so quick to imagine a diabolical conspiracy behind Nader's attempt to find common ground among diverse constituencies. It is only by finding common ground between left and right, black and white, men and women, etc., that we can hope to create a democratic society. It is divisiveness that enables elites to rule. As long as progressives think in terms of defeating the right then they are trapped in an adversarial game that only elites can win. warm regards, rkm -- ============================================================ If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website (http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email list by sending a message to: •••@••.••• You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website, provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and this disclaimer. Richard Moore (rkm) Wexford, Ireland _____________________________ "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the Reichstag fire." - Srdja Trifkovic There is not a problem with the system. The system is the problem. Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs. _____________________________ "Zen of Global Transformation" home page: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ QuayLargo discussion forum: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ShowChat/?ScreenName=ShowThreads cj list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj newslog list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog _____________________________ Informative links: http://www.globalresearch.ca/ http://www.MiddleEast.org http://www.rachel.org http://www.truthout.org http://www.zmag.org http://www.co-intelligence.org ============================================================
Share: