Posted on25th July 2024 The obscene thing I witnessed was like a parable of the madness of extreme wealth. By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 24th July 2024
Hi Martin, fellow followed from x! Noticed you have the substack, essential when the elites do not like what we have to say! I think George should have a sub a/c and post his brilliant work, (he seems to have, like Owen Jones, a blind spot when talking about the aggression against Russia, I find many cannot join the dots between US greed in Middle East and eyes on Russian vast assets, we have on our sites the Rand report which exposes the US billionaires deep states arrogance. They have destroyed Europe again by buying up the politicians, media and universities. Other than that both hugely contribute positively.
You know, Neill, I have this inalienable (and for most, highly irksome) autonomy in thinking, wherein all I know NEEDS to be consistent and integrated, so there CAN be no dots - of course within the always limited scope of what I am able to observe and understand (also certainly not perfectly, it is always an ongoing learning process) - and so I feel uncomfortable with "strange bedfellows" who might be convenient in the moment, even allies on a vital current issue - but who clearly are quite inconsistent in their thinking. So, we have the cases you mentioned, then many US "anti-imperialists" who have this SICK preference for Trump and are (the case in Germany, too) invested in all kinds of conspiracy-theories, e.g. about Corona - even Caitlin Johnstone has these dark spots, e.g. in previously being a fan of Tulsi Gabbard and maligning the Dalai Lama - and essentially writing the same old story for years with NO development toward an alternative and (then) antidote (maybe "unnecessary", since she and the others earn well enough being influencers).
I think you will agree that wisdom starts with self-knowledge, extends to understanding others (in their completely different character) in relationships and society - extending finally, moving to ever larger scope, to geopolitics - and you have to keep revising understanding of each of these realms as you learn more in another. I am sure you have better explanations of this within your wisdom on personality and it's development - but IMHO if you skip the first step and keep dark spots THERE - then all your understanding within a larger scope will be tainted.
Thanks for the reply Martin, We seem to share a common outlook, I have morphed into a belief that dialogue as outlined by Bohm is the only place that meaningful exchanges can take place, particularly in diplomacy, establishing common open concepts to the myriad of words heavily laden with historical detritus ( god, evil, good, democracy, ism’s etc). Prior is essential to avoid the trap of miscommunication, then having established those parameters in a group meeting, one can truly embark on meaningful progress, avoiding pre-conceived bias.
Then the taking a universal cosmic multi-perspective that avoids ego-based positions, removing the immature position of believing what you say is gospel! That is having an open mind to concepts outside ones experience. Having said that I still have ‘boundries’ where positions adopted by ego-riddled closed narcistic minds can not be countenanced.
At the risk of stepping away from a humble position, I have decided not to reply to those extreme inconsistencies but like you no one can have it all taped! So I promote those bits that I feel are considered and hope that Enlightenment will dawn on those spots!
TYPO ERROR, ….extreme inconsistencies but like you SAY no one can have it all taped! So I promote those bits that I feel are considered and hope that Enlightenment will dawn on those spots!
We're both intelligent enough to be able to handle a few typos and even missing words🤝😉 ... so editing the post for other readers where you can't be so sure of that should generally suffice.
Yes, Neil, you are one of the few i have had some meaningful dialogue with - and indeed I also read up about Bohm's concept a while back and found it very appealing - vs. the kind of "discussion/debate" we have in ANY context, from relationships to society. So I tried to apply it, motivating that via his authority and the benefits it provides - but it worked only in some case - raising the question WHY that is so. My reflection of this linked with observations I made in parallel on clear differences in temperament (as precursor of character) among siblings (e.g. me and my brother, my 3 daughters) as well as ideas from anthropology, see e.g. https://aeon.co/essays/what-the-ju-hoansi-can-tell-us-about-group-decision-making.
The upshot of all this was that the ability for dialogue, pretty much in Bohm's form, is ACTUALLY a natural human ability - one that we developed via evolution for good reasons - but that ability is present more or less in individuals (temperament) and develops (as all abilities must) depending strongly on the affirmation and encouragement of it bythe environment - which brings us back to the influence of culture - and what culture evolved to affirm and encourage in this way.
This has become a general theme for me, i.e. what humans actually evolved for (putting myself in "evolution's place", verifying in anthropology and history) - and what they DEVOLVED to - because of other TOXIC abilities they have - which got amplified in civilizational development.
So anthropology, sociology, political-science, etc. find some clues to what's wrong - psychology gives us some explanations within typical disorders - and yet EVERY such disorder is clearly described in old texts, e.g. the Mahabharat with it's vast spectrum of characters - and the civilizational degeneration was ALSO predicted there (not only in Indian textx) - because those ancient sages saw it happening THEN.
My conclusion is that there is really no lack of wisdom (the good part) - there is NO NEW WISDOM - what's new are the mechanisms to PREVENT us from benefitting from old wisdom (the bad part), not least via culture morphed to a system of brainwashing - which no one should really be surprised about since Goebbels, Orwell and "Manufacturing Consent" (for it's later refinements).
Amen.
Tax billionaires out of existence
Trouble is that the law makers are paid for by those tax billionaires, watch what happens to any rogue humane politician when they run that one!
Thanks for sharing🙏I commented to George on X: https://x.com/MPAnantharaman/status/1816720346810057018
Loosely related, on what life our deeper (animal) nature is longing for - beyond such recognition of the meaninglessness of our present life:
https://x.com/MPAnantharaman/status/1816715387783823702
Hi Martin, fellow followed from x! Noticed you have the substack, essential when the elites do not like what we have to say! I think George should have a sub a/c and post his brilliant work, (he seems to have, like Owen Jones, a blind spot when talking about the aggression against Russia, I find many cannot join the dots between US greed in Middle East and eyes on Russian vast assets, we have on our sites the Rand report which exposes the US billionaires deep states arrogance. They have destroyed Europe again by buying up the politicians, media and universities. Other than that both hugely contribute positively.
Speak soon, regards Neil
You know, Neill, I have this inalienable (and for most, highly irksome) autonomy in thinking, wherein all I know NEEDS to be consistent and integrated, so there CAN be no dots - of course within the always limited scope of what I am able to observe and understand (also certainly not perfectly, it is always an ongoing learning process) - and so I feel uncomfortable with "strange bedfellows" who might be convenient in the moment, even allies on a vital current issue - but who clearly are quite inconsistent in their thinking. So, we have the cases you mentioned, then many US "anti-imperialists" who have this SICK preference for Trump and are (the case in Germany, too) invested in all kinds of conspiracy-theories, e.g. about Corona - even Caitlin Johnstone has these dark spots, e.g. in previously being a fan of Tulsi Gabbard and maligning the Dalai Lama - and essentially writing the same old story for years with NO development toward an alternative and (then) antidote (maybe "unnecessary", since she and the others earn well enough being influencers).
I think you will agree that wisdom starts with self-knowledge, extends to understanding others (in their completely different character) in relationships and society - extending finally, moving to ever larger scope, to geopolitics - and you have to keep revising understanding of each of these realms as you learn more in another. I am sure you have better explanations of this within your wisdom on personality and it's development - but IMHO if you skip the first step and keep dark spots THERE - then all your understanding within a larger scope will be tainted.
Regards, Martin
Thanks for the reply Martin, We seem to share a common outlook, I have morphed into a belief that dialogue as outlined by Bohm is the only place that meaningful exchanges can take place, particularly in diplomacy, establishing common open concepts to the myriad of words heavily laden with historical detritus ( god, evil, good, democracy, ism’s etc). Prior is essential to avoid the trap of miscommunication, then having established those parameters in a group meeting, one can truly embark on meaningful progress, avoiding pre-conceived bias.
Then the taking a universal cosmic multi-perspective that avoids ego-based positions, removing the immature position of believing what you say is gospel! That is having an open mind to concepts outside ones experience. Having said that I still have ‘boundries’ where positions adopted by ego-riddled closed narcistic minds can not be countenanced.
At the risk of stepping away from a humble position, I have decided not to reply to those extreme inconsistencies but like you no one can have it all taped! So I promote those bits that I feel are considered and hope that Enlightenment will dawn on those spots!
Great to exchange,
Neil.
TYPO ERROR, ….extreme inconsistencies but like you SAY no one can have it all taped! So I promote those bits that I feel are considered and hope that Enlightenment will dawn on those spots!
We're both intelligent enough to be able to handle a few typos and even missing words🤝😉 ... so editing the post for other readers where you can't be so sure of that should generally suffice.
Yes, Neil, you are one of the few i have had some meaningful dialogue with - and indeed I also read up about Bohm's concept a while back and found it very appealing - vs. the kind of "discussion/debate" we have in ANY context, from relationships to society. So I tried to apply it, motivating that via his authority and the benefits it provides - but it worked only in some case - raising the question WHY that is so. My reflection of this linked with observations I made in parallel on clear differences in temperament (as precursor of character) among siblings (e.g. me and my brother, my 3 daughters) as well as ideas from anthropology, see e.g. https://aeon.co/essays/what-the-ju-hoansi-can-tell-us-about-group-decision-making.
The upshot of all this was that the ability for dialogue, pretty much in Bohm's form, is ACTUALLY a natural human ability - one that we developed via evolution for good reasons - but that ability is present more or less in individuals (temperament) and develops (as all abilities must) depending strongly on the affirmation and encouragement of it bythe environment - which brings us back to the influence of culture - and what culture evolved to affirm and encourage in this way.
This has become a general theme for me, i.e. what humans actually evolved for (putting myself in "evolution's place", verifying in anthropology and history) - and what they DEVOLVED to - because of other TOXIC abilities they have - which got amplified in civilizational development.
So here we are, REDISCOVERING what was known aeons ago, here's an example I had on my time-line today: https://x.com/NickTimiraos/status/1816949112312324278
So anthropology, sociology, political-science, etc. find some clues to what's wrong - psychology gives us some explanations within typical disorders - and yet EVERY such disorder is clearly described in old texts, e.g. the Mahabharat with it's vast spectrum of characters - and the civilizational degeneration was ALSO predicted there (not only in Indian textx) - because those ancient sages saw it happening THEN.
My conclusion is that there is really no lack of wisdom (the good part) - there is NO NEW WISDOM - what's new are the mechanisms to PREVENT us from benefitting from old wisdom (the bad part), not least via culture morphed to a system of brainwashing - which no one should really be surprised about since Goebbels, Orwell and "Manufacturing Consent" (for it's later refinements).
Regards, Martin