http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090222/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_french_caribbean_roots_of_unrest

i think that a lot of the issues surrounding the economy, imperialism and the environment have similar solutions and i think that this is an area where a lot of people can come together and come to the same conclusions. we are realizing this global system does not work and there are some common denominators as to why and in the what we should do about it.

Great resource here for grassroots networking in local communities dealing with local economic self-sufficiency, food production and environmentally sound practices.

http://transitionus.ning.com/notes/Help_--_Who_We_Are

"is it really so "under control" that we can't make a difference and anyone
who tries is just a dupe? isn't this in itself an admission of defeat and
an excuse not to get involved?"

That's why I said somewhere back there that the DEEPEST deep-cover agents may be on the extreme left. In fact I was told of one with a popular (among us) website.

The Sandinistas et. al. used the language of the Declaration in their own documents--my point was that those enlightenment ideas about the Rights of Man (sic) reach back into ancient, pre-Empire times. Tom Paine and John Locke didn't invent them. This is why they resonate--and why, I guess, they are so ripe for manipulation. I would like to think that humans are wired for freedom. For the vast majority of RECORDED human history, the poor have been under the whip. The big difference now is that the planet is understood as a whole planet, comprehensible as one because of instantaneous global communication, and it is increasingly understood that whatever our fate, it is a common one. I think that the revolutionary implications of this are just beginning to be felt.

"That is why the resonate-and why, I guess, they are so ripe for manipulation." I think that is a good point - I think this is the same with religions, etc.

Indeed while there has been a setup of this global communications by the powers that be, there is no telling what that has led to or what that will lead to - I think that is a good example of your point about "them" not having all the control. There is no telling what we collectively can and will do with access to information and how that will effect the "established order." I think the music industry is an example - with the proliferation of ability for artists to market their own music to an audience without the help of the major record labels - the recording industry has been forced to change. You no longer need to be signed to one of the traditional labels to be popular anymore. Record companies have lost revenue because they don't "own" the "means of production" so-to-speak anymore - global communication has made them more irrelevant. I think this is why they try to scoop up the means of communication once they gain momentum as is the case with MySpace and steer it in a particular direction using the cultural glue of greed/ego-tism and selfishness(as Starshyne mentioned). Whereas it could be a tool of revolutionary implication if it were utilized correctly.

"That putting Obama in the white house was a power move? To cool the masses through “a necessary good faith gesture”.  I am saying that people are not so stupid as you might like to think nor as easily duped."

* For the record, I DON'T think people are stupid for voting for Obama - I understand the many complexities and reasons why people would do so. I know many people who I have a lot of respect for voted for Obama and had very good reasons.

Look at this:

"Well lets just go to DC and get Tim McVey-ish on them?! Since the problem is within the symbols & rituals, lets go do it up alqaeda styleE!"

* I mean is this not an insinuation? I felt this was a dramatic mis-statement of where I am coming from, like a jab.

"But I have to say that my recent shift is partly due to seeing my own and others' assumption that they know all this stuff that others don't somehow places them above the fray--like using information to bludgeon people into a sense of helplessness--this won't work, that won't work because 'they' are working at this whole other level that only the super-perceptive among us can discern...

The suggestion that such thinking gives is that anyone doing any work to change things is just being naive, if not stupid..."

* I think when I started learning all this stuff I initially got fearful. I admit that - it is some heavy stuff. At the same time though - I didn't take it to start seeing people as "stupid" and people working for change as "dupes." To be honest I have thought of myself as someone who has tried to see the good in people and that has not stopped over the years - it has only intensified. I have tried to see things in different lights and that is why I am thankful and open to the views expressed in this reasoning. It honestly is very refreshing to hear and I take it to heart.

I think there are other ways to look at the ideas that I have presented.  I understand how this "mode of thought" can lead to a psychic environment of know-it-all-ism combined with a feeling of help-lessness. However - can't it also lead to getting involved on a local level, questioning our faith in the system and trying to make meaningful changes within our own lives? I think it is more about balance and recognition that we do not "know it all" - it is humility and the possibilities that blossom from this perspective. Deep down I appreciate the call to do house-cleaning in my own mind/house in regards to what delving into all this "stuff" really means and if it actually results in me seeing people as "stupid," etc. It makes me get defensive though because I KNOW that I am not coming from that place and I resent the fact that in some ways what I present is taken like that.

Starshyne:

It is your assumption about how I view people as "stupid" is what I was referring by your insinuation. You do NOT know how I view people.  As soon as you make that assumption of course it is gonna turn me off, and your joking style - which I thought was just you being playful initially reveals itself to be mocking.  I also don't stick to definitions and usages of words as  you might - culture/society/common heritage, etc - I use interchangably whereas you see important differences. THAT'S why I didn't understand your question re: CULTURE and I didn't get it until you "answered it yourself" - it was not an intentional avoidance to speak more about symbolism, it was a misunderstanding of what exactly you were asking.

I didn't want to engage what I viewed as your insinuations about how I think and what my points were, because this would not have been productive to the reasoning at hand. I was speaking of my own internal process, of what might have been a typical move on my part, to focus and put energy into some long-winded reasoning trying to hash out just what I meant. I instead decided to focus on and call out your points that I thought were very good and got me moving.

Thank you for further expanding your points in your post. More to think about.

what this reasoning has made me think about:

when we believe that there is some master-plan and we focus on it,
perhaps we disempower ourselves from the change that we can really
accomplish. if we are removed from our own conception of our ability to
make a difference, it gives power to ones who would rather we were just a
captive audience.

is it really so "under control" that we can't make a difference and anyone
who tries is just a dupe? isn't this in itself an admission of defeat and
an excuse not to get involved?

___

With all its good ideas, the enlightenment is still laden with arrogance and based on a certain group of people's(the European) experience -
it has brought some good things to some, but a lot more suffering to others. I guess I find it offensive that the world - in the throws of the outcome of the enlightenment which has united the world economically, technologically, etc - has its natural resources, finance,
etc. concentrated in the hands of a few people who throw their weight around and in the process wiping away the vestiges of so many
cultures/peoples that are now delegitimized in the scope of their contributions to human history. I find it very interesting that
"socialism" and "capitalism" - at least in their concretized  forms around which societies are organized have their origin in the enlightenment. This
is where we see the root of the seemingly divergent branches - Simon Bolivar and George Washington, the embryonic socialist French philosophers
and Adam Smith, etc. You mention Chavez and Morales - they are not Europeans and although their policies CAN be viewed in the light of enlightenment socialism - they are FIRSTLY coming from the perspective of people who were victims of the double prong of the European incursion -  the church and then the enlightenment. How many of the virtues espoused in the enlightenment philosophy existed pre-European invasion in the indigenous populations, but we still want to see the Native American struggle in the framework of the great work of the enlightenment? This is an example of why I speak of the framework, the symbolisms, etc - these are important - even as you and I speak they are framing the discourse.

"basic civil rights and separation of church and state and a coherent court system and free universal education improve people's lives" - this
may be new to "us"  but this is the frame in which it is set, it is loaded with assumptions and a perspective about the world. with everything that has been destroyed, with history erased/revised/rewritten, with the conquerers telling the stories -  can we say this for certain? how much has been wiped clean? i think that an illusion we get caught up in is the paradigm that these
ideas are new/necessary when in reality the discourse is set in the European experience(I know you know this - I am just making a general statement.)
i.e. church/state separation - what does this actually mean? what is the difference between the church and the state really - a separation of church and state reflects perhaps an improvement in European societies - but is it necessary, address a need in other societies as a universal? and what is religion? - and how did the secular state become devoid of it when it is STILL based in assumptions about the world, when it is based around ritual, about belief in what it is, what is the difference?? basic civil rights - again, this is a european discourse - who said these did not exist in other societies? court system, free education - again, who is setting the discourse here? all these things reflect a discourse set up in european societies, they reflect the evolution of european societies, the needs of european societies - are these things universal? and since we start out with the exceptionalism of Europe, its improvements MUST of course be the best that humankind has achieved.

I think symbolism is important in the process of trying to tie together a culture/society - to give it a meaning, a focus and a trajectory. I don't know if there is necessarily some secret office of symbolism - it does sound kind of silly, but I don't know why it is silly to consider the importance of symbolism in light of how other societies employed it, such as the Egyptians/Aztecs/Mayans - planning, basing calenders/events on a timeframe - on date in the future, etc..  A Priesthood class in charge of the ordering of society - around events, natural/celestial and otherwise. These kept the society ordered/moving. Everything about the founding of the US is based around repetition of symbolisms and around natural/celestial events. Its seal employs a cipher and hidden message. Major events have occurred on a schedule, whether it is the atomic bomb or 9/11. I can see how these events are laden with INTENT/RITUAL and used to steer society in a certain direction - I see these in the light of the way older cultures employed statecraft. I would say that "they" don't have absolute control over the way things are interpreted though or what is spawned from their "creations" - as Mumia Abu Jamal pointed out in a recent interview - symbols often-time take on a life of their own. So I agree with you - "THEY" really don't have THE power and I like your positive spin that we should take advantage of this open area of dialogue that has been brought in the process of the election of a new president. however  - i will not allow this to be framed in the context of the symbol that Obama represents in the context of the U.S. legacy. WHAT IS important is that people had their hearts activated by 8 years of shit, so yeah, let's take advantage of THAT.

the "tracking of symbolism" as you call it is a FRUIT in itself of my very rewarding study of history. of course this study of history is nothing if it is not applied to actions and i totally agree that the usual spin on "conspiracy theory" tends to seize gears rather than have us move forward since it lends to the conception of an "us" and a "them" - usually with "them" having all the power. i think however my "spin" is different - i understand that what "they" are doing is really nothing new to the world of civilizations - it has to to with order. it is not something to be afraid of, it is something that just is - and if it is scary and we don't like the trajectory - it is  because it indeed is a reflection of what WE collectively have allowed it to become.

So yes -
** "Manipulators of symbols, like Starshyne said, are bound to have it backfire. The rise of the modern nation-state
may have been accident or imperial plot or inevitability, but here we are, so what do we do about it?" **

i mean maybe i'm just pissed off and the punk rocker in me doesn't want to submit to the fact that i must think of change on the terms of "the way it is and not how i want it to be" (to paraphrase immortal technique).

i could correct you on the many insinuations about where you think i am coming from, and the mis-statments of my intent and points i was trying to make -  but that would not be a productive use of energy in regards to this reasoning.

since this is about action - i will state that you have made many good points. what i have taken away from it is this - and your main point(correct me if i am wrong):

the cohesive glue is the how we interact with one another(ego, greed, self-centeredness, arrogance, etc…) - this is the tangible substance of the "American culture" and the place which we can actively engage in changes in our everyday lives/actions. i see how you are saying that is a much more productive place to expend energy "on the ground" than what you see as a waste of energy trying to figuring out "the plan." since "the plan" is an intangible and while it may exist it is not important for us to spend too much time on since the REAL work is in fostering better/tangible changes in our everyday lives - in whatever way we can.


I like this and will definitely be taking it into consideration:
"I think we would better off engaging things like change and hope. Re-circuiting the negative and magnifying the positive… the concepts of hope and change are not illusions. We indeed are energy channelers. It is biological and environmental. "

Thanks for sharing.

i apologize if this is rather stream of conscious - i tried to organize it, but i had many thoughts and tried to relate it to things that were posted that may not flow - good feng shui? you decide!

harken - yes, i guess i'm all caught up in presidential power speeches, powerful oration, yadayadayada - oh the zeitgeist of it all! symbolism - i would say that pointing out something is not akin to having fear of it, it can just be a recognition of a reality. and no, they have not failed
miserably, from  9/11 to the crowning of Obama as the beacon of the achievement -  unified in a common cause whether by fear or ecstacy and
the greatness of WE the PEOPLE(c). it IS being used as a part of who WE are, as a definition of WHERE we are at. THAT is our collective heritage,
our psychic energy focussed - it happens anytime a grand event happens, framed in the discourse of OUR common heritage. it is not just about how IN CONTROL they are either - it is an attempt to define our COMMON heritage in a certain frame - to maintain order within the grand scope of a large society, it is necessary to do this - it is the matrix within which culture is framed. we will find examples of this in any large scale society/empire - societies cohesion based around time, order, calendar, things in a due time and season. 44 years since voting rights -  44th president  and first non-white president, crowned the day after King day, the last day of bush's administration 9/11 reversed. am i reading too much into it or recognizing a pattern? people got organized in the civil rights movement - this created a dialogue and things changed, that is a case and point of my point of the back and forth exchange with government.  However -  this movement was infiltrated and compromised AND then FRAMED to give the credit to OUR COMMON HERITAGE, King,  the poster boy, dialoging with Johnson in the White House got too deep into the roots and inconsistencies and  was destroyed and even his legacy became the property of our misguided conversation about civil rights, notice the FOCUS on King's relatively non-threatening thoughts vs. the ones in later life. now they frame King, IN THEIR EYES and line it up with THE GREAT ACHIEVEMENT OF OUR WAY OF LIFE and symbolically link it up with our first non-white president. 

however it does not mean that this trajectory/intention is a given or even function the way that it is intended. 9/11 was meant to serve as a unification of our common consciousness through fear/trauma/rebirth - catalyst to war, yet it also sparked many to question the official version and how this catalyzing event was being used to further something along. the crowning of obama can serve a similar function - there are "NEW" issues on the table(but for a reason which ALSO serves the empire) BUT it does not have to be framed this way. It could mean the world is changing and with it the empire is being force to change its image, and supposedly its course, history is causing it to change. the superman(Nietzche) may create his own reality and his own rules, but the superman also realizes the necessity to answer to greater forces. the reference book of rhetoric that is always called on to defend OUR way of life, the lip-service ideals of the founding fathers, of the enlightenment, liberty, equality, fraternity - these are being called upon now - the call now is to put it into action to really be a beacon unto the
nations(but damn, they aren't getting out of everyone's hair, that's what really gets my GAOTU.) I can only think we've(there's that WE again -
can't seem to shake the hegemonic psychic vampires!) gone through this before with a man named FDR, public works, working together as a
community, we are all in it together and then bam - WWII, united in common cause.

and just why is change on the table. do we not consider why it is all of a sudden there? does it matter? and why must we wait on the time table of an empire who feels the time is right for it to be on the table? is it just taking advantage of a scrap from the table?

"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season." - MLK

my comment about feng shui  was about re-arranging a house which is already built - which is what the house-cleaner obama is doing in the white house, not re-arranging feng shui where power relationships are questioned at their root. i thought this was cute:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/16/obama-chic-decorate-white-house-tough-times/

you said that what needs to be done and how it is done has not changed even though we have a new administration, i agree. and NO it does not HAVE to go this way - things are not SET IN STONE(pun intended) to the point of being immovable. i think this is the defeatist attitude that is encouraged and the use of paranoia and conspiracy and "figuring it all out" that can lead to this - but Rootsie was very right, people all over the world struggle day in and day out without losing focus and it is only right that we at least do as much.

when we focus on something it gives it power, so why give power by focussing on it - by trying to decode the symbolic instead of focussing on the work at hand. that is a good point, but i think they can go hand in hand.

word/power, 360.

what say you to the responses of rootsie and starshyne? i think they made some very deep insights that definitely deserve more than the short response you gave. i haven't responded in detail yet to the many points starshyne made because i am till digesting what was said.

I recommend Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: the Rise of Disaster Capitalism. She really got me to thinking about whether really its' ideology that moves these you know what's, or simple old-fashioned greed. They came up with the whole "Neoconservative Movement" rhetoric.  Good cover story.

I was not referring to the Bush administration/neo-cons only when I said philosopher kings. I have read Naomi Klein's book. However American Empire or whatever it is morphing into is not a new thing having to do with these radicals - it has only been a means to a trajectory that has been in full motion for quite some time now.  I was speaking more in general terms of the priest-hood class, to the ideals -  enshrined in our nation's symbols, architecture, holidays, and events which have a very intentional playing out. As Starshyne pointed out - "symbol-rich freemasonry that designed this nation" - which harkens to the soul of this nation, symbolisms, ritual that are the stuff of the cohesive glue of the culture, just as they have been of all empires past.

Empire cannot be sustained without some sort of temperence, the dreams of the founding fathers, the dream of world civilization cannot be left to the whims of racketeers only, to greed only. People must actually believe in what they are a part of for it to work. It is not hard to LOOK good after all the steps taken by the Bush Administration. These are necessary good faith gestures, like re-arranging the living room to give it more feng shui. However there is NO indication that Obama intends to reverse the trajectory of empire - if you read the likes of George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski you understand that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

 

"360

I know neither starshyne nor I are naive about what volunteerism can be a cover for, or unaware of how change happens.  There are people on the ground doing all kind of good stuff all over the place."

* My intent was not to imply you two were naive.  I was making a general point about the reasons for the call for volunteerism that is part of the Obama strategy as part of my general overall response to the issues brought up in this thread.

http://counterpunch.org/libby01192009.html

people have to be organized to affect change. other than that - it is empty rhetoric and it becomes a political tool preying on people's ineffectual "hopes" for change and places the burden of change on the symbolized "changer." i wouldn't say this is the sole plan/plot of the power structure though - as the interaction between the government and the governed is always a back and forth exchange, but many people have forgotten this. the level of consciousness and willingness to take steps in a better direction, the work on the ground is a responsiblity that is always on the people - there is not one example of meaningful change that benefits "the people" without the organization and groundwork of the people - this is how it works. government and vested interests will ALWAYS take advantage of a non-organized/lacadasical populace, that is its nature. i think it is up to "conscious" ones to recognize this and work recognizing this law regardless. the liberating thing about this recognition is that we realize how much power we DO have - something that "they" would have a lot harder time "governing" if more people realized it. and you watch how quick "they" try to contain the "change" when the "change" gets out of their hands. it is indeed a crisis of perception to a certain level. this is an avenue that needs to be fully explored.

i think the call for volunteerism is something that was in fact set in motion by the outgoing administration and i think it would be mis-informed to think that the incoming administration's calls for it have something to do with anything other than political expediency. we are going to NEED to do this more as things become "tighter" - we will NEED to recognize our resources amongst ourselves as the economy is changing. this DOES however open up a crucial space for us to recognize how much we can organize locally and make better, more active decisions about our lives and our communities. just as the bush administration opened people's eyes to the utter corruption of our system, the obama administration may open our eyes to our own power of not needing "them" to effect the change that we want.  an empire is a full time job, and EVEN with all their surveillance and obama's "black widow*"(btw - how f'd up is THAT name for a big brother operation?), etc. - they can't control all the people all the time.

http://www.truthout.org/010709M
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9VGZjBQHr0s/SRbkAVNUtoI/AAAAAAAACU4/D_V698VmEo8/s1600-h/BlackWidow.jpg

they - the dominating ideology, the "philosopher-kings" want to take the credit for change, that is why they frame this "evolution" in the language of their symbolism. that is why there are ritualized "events" that occur at pre-determined times which then crystalize as focal points for "change." we however are no less than the stars - we are no less than "them" no matter what ideology they hold onto and try to make us feel different. reality is not what they say it is!