Is 2017 Really “The Summer of Hate”?

It appears that the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville last week was part of a larger project called “The Summer of Hate”. The rightists seem pretty cognisant of the this being the 50th anniversary of the “Summer of Love” (1967), and so even this year has symbolic value as a target — the destruction of all the values that defined the counter-culture and The Summer of Love, ironically by trying to emulate it.

Is there any further evidence of the “Shadow” at work than this choice of theme — “The Summer of Hate”? That broader “statement” about the fellowship of hate, or the solidarity of the haters and the righteousness of hate, hasn’t received as much attention as the “Unite the Right” event itself, an event that makes the term “Right” now virtually synonymous with “Hate”, and a belief that hate is more powerful than love or compassion.

As the Wikipedia entry on the Summer of Love notes, the Haight-Ashbury hippie newspaper, The San Francisco Oracle, announced the event:

A new concept of celebrations beneath the human underground must emerge, become conscious, and be shared, so a revolution can be formed with a renaissance of compassion, awareness, and love, and the revelation of unity for all mankind.

Those are all the counter-culture values that the “Summer of Hate” holds in contempt and which it aspires to extinguish by attacking them altogether under the guise of being only “political correctness” or “Cultural Marxism”, which is a ruse and a ploy. Hate, however, is a rotten foundation upon which to try and erect a society or anything like a “civilisation”.

Paul Mason, writing in today’s Guardian, states that “the far right has declared culture war…“. He seems rather forgetful about the fact that a cultural revolution  already occurred in the sixties against “the Organisation Man” or “The Man in The Gray Flannel Suit“. “Culture war”, as such, has been going on a long time.

Summer of Love or Summer of Hate? Pretty clear where the fault-lines lie here and which values are at stake and in play. Despite all the smoke and fog being spread around all this, at root it’s really quite simple.


68 responses to “Is 2017 Really “The Summer of Hate”?”

  1. mikemackd says :

    If we are to avoid a summer of hate, that capacity not to be sucked into the Satanic State via its seduction strategies is facilitatory, perhaps preconditional to competence to respond by skilful means. While the problem may be simple to diagnose, the treatment may be a wicked problem. Not a solution; by definition, wicked problems don’t have those; but they can be managed.

    There are countless ingredients in this particular wicked problem, but you missed a biggee in the previous string in focussing on the Irish, I.W. The vehement anti-Catholicism of the KKK and even of liberal Americans:

    Not without cause: intra-megamachinic causes, not teachings-of-Jesus causes. . In “Faith for Living”, Mumford pointed out that the Pope of the time made a pact with Mussolini to establish the Vatican State; the Pope’s side of the deal was not to oppose Mussolini via pulpit propaganda, thereby assisting the rise of Hitler as well “Political interpreters have set various dates for the beginning of the Fascist uprising against civilisation; but most of them go back no further than 1931. This is a curious blindness; the betrayal of the Christian world, very plainly, took place in 1929, in the Concordat that was made between Mussolini and the Pope”.

    I mean, how ungrateful can those fascists get? The Pope empowers them, and STILL they are anti-Catholic? More: according to Mumford, the clock is the best metaphor of the megamachine, and the Benedictines revived its tick-tock (that Krishnamurti and Rosenberg differentiated as I mentioned in the Propaganda string). That megamachinist tick-tock is so well displayed by the goose-steppers of authoritarian regimes, but goes much deeper into them than that. So while the Satanic State supplies them with the motive, the catholic church supplied them with the means and opportunity.

    I guess they could be rather like spoilt teenagers rebelling against their parents; in this case, holy mother church?

    On the other hand, in WWII Mumford was virulently anti-fascist, and extremely critical of those liberals against the USA entering the war – firstly in an article entitled “The Corruption of Liberalism”, and secondly in the abovementioned book, Faith for Living. Liberals pushed back just as harshly (for example, refer I am not sure what they had to say once the full viciousness of the Nazis was revealed.

    Anyway, in Faith for Living (1940) he asserted that “One cannot counter the religious faith of fascism unless one possesses a faith equally strong, equally capable of fostering devotion and loyalty and commanding sacrifice”. What might that be in the USA, I wonder? Does Yeats’ comment that “the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity” STILL apply? How shall the summer of hate not happen?

    Naturally, I table Mumford’s works as highly relevant in that context, particularly in his emphasis on love. Also naturally, as with Krishnamurti’s discernment I do not consider Mumford’s works sufficient in themselves, because its treatment is a wicked problem.

    Meantime, as Trump tweets and fiddles, his megamachine could burn, and people in it. I was interested to see how, after the killing and maiming, a right-wing speaker has got along with his tactic for fomenting a summer of hate. He accused protesters of being possessed by hate. Clearly, they should not have got upset just because they were being murdered.

    The alt right seems replete with failed men with a ten year-old’s idea of a real man. As Tweedy points out on p. 161, they consider as heroes as “rather pathetic and pitiful figures”, “remorselessly killing men by the hundreds.” Kids. You gotta laugh. (Irony alert).

    I heard on the radio just before sending this that Steve Bannon was responsible for Trump’s lack of specific condemnation of the murder. Trump has now made that condemnation, but his silence spoke volumes. The reported also said there are moves afoot to sack Bannon and that would be rigorously opposed by some Republicans.

    • Scott Preston says :

      Karlheinz Dreschner’s God and the Fascists is probably the definitive work on that collaboration of the Churches (Catholic or Protestant) with Nazism and Fascism in the early part of the 20th C — the Faustian bargain, as it were. Many Catholic priests were not just sympathetic to fascism, but also enthusiastic participants in mass murder. Dreschner’s book makes for some pretty uncomfortable reading at times. Some of the things the Church did in collaboration with the fascists (especially in Spain) are so absurd as to be scarcely believable.

      I’ve been meaning to research this, because I hadn’t heard of this before, but Dreschner says that during the Spanish Republic, some 250,000 Bibles were printed and circulated. Apparently, there was no Spanish language Bible until then (!). When the Fascists came to power, the Church had all those Bible’s confiscated, apparently in the belief that it would result in diminished loyalty to Church and priestly authority (i.e, might lead one to liberalism or Protestantism).

      • mikemackd says :

        I had not heard of Dreschner before, but have now bought the Kindle edition of his book.

        In the Foreword, mention is made of “‘The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity’ (1986), in which [the author] proves that Christianity is not founded on the Jewish Jesus but the Greek Paul, who composed a highly virulent mythical mix of gnosis, mystery cults, and the story of Jesus and, therefore, started off two thousand years of Christian anti-Judaism, which culminated in the Holocaust.”

        I have long considered that there were three forms of Christianity; that of Jesus, the Jewish rebel against the megamachine of his time and place, that being the Temple bankers and the Roman Empire, Pauline Christianity, and Constantinian Christianity, which put Christianity at the controls of the megamachine. Here, I find I have been having occasion to quote from the first, but rarely if ever the second or third.

        The description of Pauline Christianity quoted above sounds more than a little simplistic and biased from my prior interpretations. For example, Paul was both a universalised Jew and a Hellenised Roman citizen. He was a tentmaker by trade, and would be likely to encounter all sorts of ideas in such an occupation in a part of the world with trading connections from the west of Europe to the south and east of Asia. Plain and simple truth isn’t.

        Anyway, I’ll look into it. I have at least one oodle of books where I do not agree with the book’s tenets before, during or after, but have been nevertheless enriched by what the author has brought to attention along the way.

    • InfiniteWarrior says :

      you missed a biggee in the previous string in focussing on the Irish, I.W.

      Not really. This is common knowledge in the States. It’s intertwined throughout American history. The election of JFK was considered by many to be a watershed moment because, until it happened, it was apparently inconceivable that an Irish-Catholic could possibly be President of the United States. (The Protestants, of course, wound up breaking with the Catholic Church rather than actually reforming it, so there is some degree of lingering animosity between the two to this day.) We saw a repeat of this “watershed” mentality when Obama was elected, and I expect Clinton fans were hoping for a watershed moment of their own in 2016.

      The trouble with the “watershed” mentality, however, is obvious: the actual policy positions of candidates presented and perceived as “breaking through” one or another barrier usually reflect nothing more than servitude to the Megamachine themselves. (This, of course, in the current configuration of the “poltical compass.”)

      I thought your response in that thread quite appropriate to the reality as opposed to the illusion. This is a human issue, not one of nationality, party, race, class, gender or what have you. And until we are all united in confronting and transforming our “Beast,” nothing will change, except for the worse.

      Re: Charlottesville

      The Internet apparently has its own sense of “justice”, but this is just as unsettling to me as the events themselves. Allow me to explain.

      The Internet, in a fit of self-righteousness, has brought its own brand of vigilante justice to bear upon everyone who attended that rally regardless of their reasons for being there, including people who had nothing whatever to do with the heinous acts that followed.

      It never fails.

      This happens every time regardless of cause or venue. When Black Lives Matter held its vigil in Charlotte, that was precisely the group’s intent: a prayer vigil; a “consciousness-raising” event. And, as long as the sun hung overhead, that’s exactly what it was. Quite impressive. As soon as night fell, however, the rabblerousers began crawling out of the woodwork to fight, riot and loot. Ergo, BLM’s “critics” were able to point and say, “See? Look. I told you so. Just a bunch of malcontents.” Shortly followed, of course, by “paid provocateurs,” just as protestors of any stripe at any public event are categorized away as “paid provocateurs” by their “adversaries.”

      And it’s getting us precisely nowhere fast. I expect the Alt-Right is taking copious notes on just how to handle the next legitimate public counter to the Megamachine’s influence with their own sense of vigilante “Internet” justice in tow.

      At least, the “public conversation” has to turned to “paid.” If the public thinks protestors are being paid, perhaps the public will actually ask, sooner or later, just who they’re supposedly being paid by without coming up with the stock answers. (The stock answers being the Koch Brothers and George Soros in the States.) Then, maybe, our attention as a species can be turned at once toward the vested interests that have us all bound and gagged in the “marketplace” of the Matrix.

      As long as the Spectacle’s spotlight is trained incessantly on these extremist polarities (and it’s high time we stopped pretending that there is no “leftist” version), they will continue to grow in power and rule…Nevermore.

      • mikemackd says :

        Yes. Thanks, I.W. I’m not an American, and I take your point.

        Another aspect of this deserves attention here. So far in the book Scott referred to and I bought, Deschner appears to be condemning the catholic church as an evil organization. Yet an organization is a machine, an artefact. Can a machine have morals? Just as the moral culpability of the driver of the car that plunged into the demonstrators lies with the car’s driver not the car, so the crimes committed via the catholic branch of the megamachine must logically lie with the driver/s: in its case, the pope concerned and all his staff members responsible for perpetrating the respective evils. So it is with every manifestation of the megamachine.

        Machines carry cultures though. This is where Zimbardo’s “The Lucifer Effect” swings into relevance, as do the Nuremberg trials. “We were only following orders, your honour”, “nothing personal: just doing my job” and other such excuses simply do not hack it. I consider that both Zimbardo and Nuremberg got it right; the responsibilities are with the people, not the machine. The surrender of responsibility by humans to a machine or some other social imaginary or artefact is untrue.

        In some circumstances, one may be called upon to exercise the epitome of strength that abdulmonem referred to below. I have never been placed in circumstances as stark as millions of others have, especially in war, and so I am incompetent to judge them: but not the act.

        In McGilchrist’s and Tweedy’s framing, I see abdulmonem’s god of truth entering us through our right hemispheres, beyond the god of the left hemisphere’s magisteria. For some of us, there may be hell to pay. If it seems that isn’t happening to our satisfaction, that’s not our business any more than our judgement of others is. Ours is about the act.

        Hence the need for the rule of law, and hence also the need for Augustine’s qualification of that rule: unjust law is no law. Hence what Jesus did, all the while knowing he would be crucified for it.

        • InfiniteWarrior says :

          I see abdulmonem’s god of truth entering us through our right hemispheres, beyond the god of the left hemisphere’s magisteria.

          I see abdulmomen’s god of truth entering us through the “heart” of consciousness and properly balanced in the “corpus collosum” between the two hemispheres.

          Let’s be practical for a moment. What has happened — for millenia — when we’ve assigned the “virtuous” to one “hemisphere” or the other? The “left hemisphere” has usurped or otherwise appropriated, over-analyzed and overthought it to the extent that it no longer makes sense. Neuroscientists do not assign such “qualities” and activities exclusively to one or other hemisphere of the brain, so why should we? The “trick” is to find that balance and act on it.

          • mikemackd says :

            I.W., have you even read McGilchrist’s or Tweedy’s works? I said “In McGilchrist’s and Tweedy’s framing” before the bit you cut and pasted, and if you were familiar with that framing you would not have said the rest. The right hemisphere is the portal to the heart et al in that frame – all but anger, manipulation and extrinsic valuation which are the left hemisphere’s domain: again, in that framing. That framing was based not upon studying neurons, but observing the effects of strokes upon their victims. Bolte Taylor provided an example as well. In fact, the subtitle to Tweedy’s book is “Blake, Bolte Taylor and the Myth of Creation”.

            “Let’s be practical for a moment”. Two things: I had no idea I wasn’t being practical, and no idea that you were the arbiter of what is and is not practical.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              if you were familiar with that framing you would not have said the rest.

              Of course, I would. That framing was even repeated in the context of your original comment. I simply said that I see the entry point of abdulmonem’s “god of truth” (ntm, “Master” and “emissary”) a little differently than in the terms of that framing.

              The right hemisphere is the portal to the heart et al in that frame

              I’m familiar with McGilchrist. I’m familiar with Bolte-Taylor. I’m not familiar with Tweedy. I like the terminologies, but do think that framing is a little off.

              I’ve noted many times the seemingly impossible to cross chasm between “mystical” branches of thought (right hemisphere) and their more prevalent, authoritarian counterparts (left hemisphere) in practice. It is this “chasm” to which my comment speaks.

            • mikemackd says :

              Let me try to understand you properly here, I.W. Please don’t take these questions as being rude. I am asking them because I think I am missing something here, and because you said it I think it could be worth finding out.

              > Of course, I would.

              Why? Do you consider it to be an either / or? Couldn’t be part of the same process with a different focus?

              > I’ve noted many times the seemingly impossible to cross chasm between “mystical” branches of thought (right hemisphere) and their more prevalent, authoritarian counterparts (left hemisphere) in practice. It is this “chasm” to which my comment speaks.

              So has McGilchrist. That’s not news.

              Is it McGilchrist or me you consider to be impractical? What value are you trying to add here? I cannot see how he’s “over-analyzed and overthought it to the extent that it no longer makes sense”, and nor can I see that in my case.

              His book made sense to me, and what I am saying makes sense to me too. That doesn’t make either true, and it certainly doesn’t mean I have any claim to be his spokesman here. He doesn’t need me to explain him. As well as a psychiatrist, scientist and practitioner he was an Oxford English professor after all, and Tweedy has an Oxford English PhD. I do not consider myself to be as fluent as either: all I can do is my best to apply them in addressing these problems.

              In that attempt, I don’t know how I can make it any simpler than my “three feet away” example. All I can say is that, in McGilchrist and Tweedy’s vocabulary, the god of the left hemisphere is not the god of truth, and the right hemisphere is the portal to the rest – including to hemispheric integration towards full integration which, according to McGilchrist, requires a Master and an Emissary.

              So, again: in my example, the distance is the right hemisphere “master”, the “truth”, the Ruler, and the ruler of that distance is the left hemisphere “emissary”, the measure or ruler, telling us the distance is three feet, thereby giving us a means of sensemaking to ourselves and others about it when we use the same means of measurement. Just like we use McGilchrist and Tweedy’s words in their books. Just words. On that basis, I am saying that integration involves valuation, as in what happens when we zoom in and out from someone as Scott explained, just as in Max Scheler’s hierarchy of values as quoted by McGilchrist, and that latter integration is where the peace that surpasses all understanding can be found, if at all.

              The chasm breach may be seemingly impossible to the ego, because it is actually for as long as it takes itself as the Master, but we are not just our egos. Sure, McGilchrist and Tweedy words could all be B.S. and so could mine. But theirs and my and all our words are rulers, not Rulers; maps, not territories: the distances are still there.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Do you consider it to be an either / or?

              Obviously not. Read my comments re: the “either/or” (otherwise known as “pro-” or “anti-“) mentality.

              Is it McGilchrist or me you consider to be impractical?
              It is human beings (as opposed to) Nietzsche’s (et al) “trans-humans,” I consider to be “impractical.”

              Show me a “man” who actually practices what he preaches and I’ll show you a man who is actually “trans-human.” We know of quite a few, but how many of us are still stuck in that godforsaken never-land of “Nevermore?”

              I shudder to think.

              McGilchrist’s and Tweedy’s words could all be B.S. and so could mine

              Hardly. We’re all in the same boat and the best we can do is paddle along with the oars (otherwise known as “handholds”) we have through the straights of Scylla and Charybdis.

              “The only way out is through,” as the saying goes. And I’m all for “through.”

            • mikemackd says :

              A bit off topic, but still apropos re Scott’s earlier post Vitruvian Man and the Holomovement which led to my Ruler / ruler string, including the above. It’s about a year old, but I hadn’t seen it before it landed on my Facebook page a few minutes ago:


              What I had noticed decades before, though, is that if you go to clap but withdraw before your hands touch each other, you get a force-feely feeling. Try it, and then try it with other parts of your body, the table etc. For me, it only works with the hands.

            • mikemackd says :

              > “The only way out is through,” as the saying goes. And I’m all for “through.”

              Me too.

            • Scott Preston says :

              Yes, well I’m certainly not expecting a White Wizard with an army of Rohirrim to show up at the last minute and save the day.

      • Scott Preston says :

        You’re always going to have a left wing and a right wing, progressives and conservatives, and especially if your national symbol is a bird! Without contraries, there is no progression, and if you lop off a wing of the eagle, it won’t fly. Totalitarianism attempts to lop off a wing and then expects to fly.

        The wings exist to get the bird airborn. Observe a bird in flight, how it now emphasises its left wing, or its right wing in order to navigate the currents. But the wings exist for the sake of the bird, not the bird for the sake of the wings.

        “Without contraries there is no progression” is especially true of a bird, and a bird in flight. This would be a very good meme presently to develop and spread especially in the States, as a counter-image to “Pepe the Frog”. Hasn’t anyone actually done that?

        • InfiniteWarrior says :

          As it happens, the “bird cannot fly without both wings” meme has popped up on occasion. Of course, a bird also cannot fly without a head and a tail. (That would be the four most prominent aspects of a bird in flight, which has also come up on occasion.)

        • mikemackd says :

          > Hasn’t anyone actually done that?

          Yesterday;s feature cartoon in The new Yorker fashioned a Pepe the Frog helmet out of Trump’s hair.

          Australia has been invaded by cane toads; highly poisonous creatures from Central and South America that spread death wherever they go, particularly to their attackers. Maybe we should call them Pepes.

          The only natural predator with much success against them are Torresian crows. It also smacks of I.W.’s raven saying Nevermore But really …

          Jabba the Hutt may be a better meme for those wanting to engage at this level (which number does not include me). After all, according to Wikipedia it already has some currency in the USA along relevant lines: “often employed by the media as an attack on prominent figures”. The character’s life includes a 1990s comic book series called “Jabba the Hutt: the Art of the Deal”, and Jabba had fat, stubby fingers.

          • InfiniteWarrior says :

            • mikemackd says :

              Yes, the puffed-up ego represented by that portrait is the product of dwelling in the Satanic State (hardly the exclusive preserve of Donald Trump). Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis is one thing; getting something that bloated through the eye of a needle is quite another. A war with the ego simply strengthens it; It takes Krishnamurti’s definition of the highest form of intelligence to just “drop it’ as being one’s self.

              As Tweedy (op. cit.) says on pp. 264-265:


              the ego is singularly ill-equipped to understand or even to recognise what is real, let alone guide the individual in engaging with reality …

              Lacan maintained that the ego cannot be organised by the reality system “precisely because all its structures are characterised by the effect of misrecognition …

              There is no “ego” apart from the thoughts; the thoughts, the identification with thoughts, is ego. These thoughts, and thought programs, can be immensely useful to the individual, and involve such processes as the ability to focus on specific things, the ability to measure and evaluate its own objects of thoughts, and so on. The mistake is to identify with these programs (thereby endowing them was a false or fake sense of “self”), rather than to use them simply as tools, as programs, to be directed and harnessed by the more imaginative and empathetic , as well as more sophisticated and aware, right hemisphere …

              … in order to access this alternate sense of who one really is, the individual must let go of the ego: this is necessary because the ego is actually the cause of the inhibiting, hardening, moralising, confabulating, manipulating compulsions of the psyche, not the solution to them. Blake refers to this process of letting go of the Selfhood as a “casting off”:

              Each Man is in his Spectre’s power
              Untill the arrival of that hour
              When his Humanity awake
              And cast his Spectre into the Lake.

              (Blake Jerusalem 41 Illustration p. 184).


            • mikemackd says :

              I add that Tweedy regards this insight as the summum bonum of Blake’s life:

              In many ways, Blake’s whole poetic output has been leading up to this moment: the moment in his work where the individual finally realises the nature of his own psyche, and becomes aware of the pathological nature of his the Egoic Selfhood that had previously controlled and conditioned him (Op. cit., p. 268).

              So Tweedy sees it not as a war between the Self and its ego. War’s the ego’s tactic, as intrinsic to it as Mumford sees war is to the megamachine. Rather, it’s an insight-led transformation, the light bringer arising from the State of Satan. That rupture comes before rapture, not the other way around: a necessary but insufficient precondition.

      • abdulmonem says :

        It will be fatal IW if our soul from out that shadow shall be lifted nevermore.

        • InfiniteWarrior says :

          No kidding. We’ve “repressed” our Shadow for millennia. This is the reason, methinks, so many of the authors we’ve studied over the years have advocated integrating (or “wishing peace”) to the Shadow rather than perpetuate a pointless “war” between the Master and his emissary.

  2. Scott Preston says :

    I was musing about writing something up about what the present antifascists are doing wrong, repeating many of the same errors as the German and Italian antifascists (and that didn’t turn out so well). I may yet do that.

    The “Unite the Right” rally at Charolottesville may have been a watershed event much like the Battle of Lewisham. These rallies are intended as “propaganda of the deed”, but Charlottesville backfired on them when one of their’s went berserk. They created a “Social Justice Warrior” martyr (Heather Heyer). That wasn’t in the cards. So, they may have overplayed their hand there.

    The fascists are following the rules of “the propaganda of the deed” fairly closely (until then, that is). That’s what the “antifa” doesn’t seem to get, and they are playing blindly into that propaganda narrative. Even this term “Antifa” is German, apparently following the same tactics, and that didn’t turn out very well for the antifascists then. If you’re going to defeat fascists, you have to be smarter than the fascists, and not just hurl stuff. You have to knock them off their narrative — the propaganda of the deed.

    • mikemackd says :

      While I was typing the above, the same radio program had a feature on a new book by an Australian journalist called “Balcony over Jerusalem”, his memoir of, and conclusions from, six years there. Then after posting it, I received a circular from Rabbi Michael Lerner, another Zionist, one whom I admire, even though, after long deliberations and equivocally because again it’s a wicked problem, I do not share his views on Zionism.

      For example, I have noted here before that Israel was created via a similar Faustian bargain to those you just mentioned. According to “The Secret War against the Jews” (Aarons and Loftus, 1997, Kew, Australia. Mandarin, part of Reed Books). Rockefeller was effectively blackmailed into garnering votes in the UN in support of the establishment of Israel from his fascist ruler friends in South America. The deal was in exchange for not prosecuting American fascists and their fellow travellers, including powerful figures within the USA and, indeed, the CIA of the time.

      A particularly interesting account of subsequent developments within the USA polity in this context appears on pp. 370-376: “Although our intelligence sources are not unanimous on this point, several say that George [H.W.; the one after whom the CIA HQ is named] Bush was included among the handful of people who knew about Nixon’s deal to bring the Fascist groups into the Republican party in 1972” (p. 370). The relevant chapter is called “The Age of Stupidity, 1974-1992”: thank heaven’s that’s over!

      Lerner’s essay is available online at I would be interested in your thoughts on that.

      PS I have mentioned here before that I felt insulted by Lerner when I met him at Ken Wilber’s place; a trivial slight which he would not remember and I should have forgotten almost as soon as it occurred. However, that I did not means that it could be a species thing: that I may have triggered similar reactions in others of which I am as unaware as Lerner doubtless is. Our egos can be really very silly. Aristotle said the source of all enmity is the feeling of being slighted. What a silly source.

      • Scott Preston says :

        Don’t know what to say about Lerner’s article. He seems as puzzled about how to stop the fascist tide and the politics of ressentiment as others are. So, the Ultras are planning another rally for Berkeley for August 27?That’s trouble brewing. They are definitely throwing down the guantlet.

        The Ultras are throwing a lot of energy into their “Summer of Hate”, and Lerner seems concerned that it will pay off for them, but it ain’t necessarily so. Again, it’s “propaganda of the deed” and how the residents of Berkeley will respond to that is pretty crucial.

        The Ultras have a fetish for shields. That’s part of the propaganda of the deed. They want to portray themselves as only being “defensive” against antifa aggression. If the only thing that gets hurled at the Ultras is jeers, that would probably make them look foolish and silly. That’s what we mean by “overplaying their hand”. However, if missiles are hurled, it does make them look like the non-aggressors. And that’s what they want. They’re trying to appeal to the “hearts of minds” of what they call “the normies”. And if they can twists the narrative in such a way as to make the antifa look like the real violent and the aggressors, they’ve succeeded in their propaganda of the deed.

        How to knock them off their narrative? Well, the residents of Berkeley have to assemble in large numbers, and make plain that they are defending their community, their streets, against unwelcome invaders and aggressors, and not “liberators” like the Ultras like to present themselves.

        Most of all, you have to give the Ultras every opportunity to overreach and overplay their hand. It throws them off balance, knocks them off their narrative, and makes them look supremely foolish, rather than “heroic” as they imagine themselves and as they try to project themselves.

        They also need a martyr, and they’ll be looking for that. The antifa shouldn’t give them one.

        • mikemackd says :

          A very thoughtful response. Thank you, Scott; I need to reflect in return.

        • InfiniteWarrior says :

          the residents of Berkeley have to assemble in large numbers, and make plain that they are defending their community, their streets, against unwelcome invaders and aggressors, and not “liberators” like the Ultras like to present themselves.

          You mean…go on the defensive? Isn’t that a recipe for enantiodromia?

          This reminder from Barack Obama yesterday seems appropriate.

          No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can [learn] to love. For love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite. ~ Nelson Mandela

          Human history might not seem to support such an assertion…but it’s true.

          • Scott Preston says :

            The National Post at least, would dispute your’s, Mandela’s and Obama’s truth. And, of course, so would the fascists.


            This might come as a bit of a shock to some, but Jesus wasn’t a pacifist. His ethics were situationist. His disciples went armed, as Peter demonstrated when he drew his sword when they came to arrest Jesus. And you might recall that Jesus attacked the money-changers. It always struck me as a bit contrary to the conventional narrative of Jesus always being the “Prince of Peace” if he allowed his disciples to bear arms (and in fact, Jesus on at least one occasion denied he had come to bring “Peace”, or that he was always “good”). Jesus was lion when appropriate, and lamb when appropriate. But he never taught a “creed” or acted according to a creed or blueprint, but always as most appropriate to the situation.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Pacifism is not the issue here. Enantiordormia is.

              Greenwald, for example, is not advocating pacificism, much less endorsement, but a serious, meaningful, thoughtful reflection on the following:

              The flaws and dangers in this anti-free speech mindset are manifest, but nonetheless always worth highlighting, especially when horrific violence causes people to want to abridge civil liberties in the name of stopping it.

              The stage is set in America and elsewhere for an episode of Enantiodromia like we’ve never before seen in our lifetimes. It doesn’t mean people can’t assemble in counter-protest, if that’s what they’re they’re called to do. It does mean being aware of this fact and fully prepared for it.

              BTB, Nelson Mandela managed to lead South Africa out of Aparheid, though there’s still obviously much work to be done in getting our “leaders” to respond to us rather the Megamachine.

            • Scott Preston says :

              This isn’t about free speech. This isn’t about statues come a’tumbling down. This is about Dylan Roof. Greenwald is simply wrong about that. That’s the kind of mentality that got the German liberals liquidated.

              NOTE: there is no German Liberal Party today, and barely one in Britain. In fact, barely any left in Europe at all. There are historical reasons for that.

              Dylan Roof tested the very limits of liberal “free speech” and liberal “tolerance”, and it was found wanting or “deficient” as Gebser might say. If American liberals want to avoid the fate of European liberals (the “useful idiot” problem), they’d best pay attention to limits too.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Believe historical precedent, if you will. I know what I see. And I know that any and all “opposition” to the “Alt-Right” is now and will “nevermore” be characterized as “Alt-Left” by those supposedly in power over us (though a quick, cursory glance at the online “conversation” on this subject overwhelmingly disputes that).

              Something to ponder as we consider our options.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Oh, and further, BTB…talk about “Social Darwinism!” “Born racist?” You’ve got to be kidding me, Scott!

            • Scott Preston says :

              Well, you misunderstood that. What I was pointing out is that despite what you might consider divine Truth, there are people absolutely and utterly determined to resist and deny it, and hurling “liberal” memes at them won’t make the slightest bit of difference because, like the Urukhai in LOTR, they are very well armoured (except around the neck).

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              hurling “liberal” memes at them

              Know what I love about the notion that “love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite?”

              Agape has no “opposite.”

              I seem to recall having said rather recently that Man’s Law does not conform to Divine Law…or something along those lines, and that I have this theory that Divine Law is simply misunderstood.. Well, we can think of Mandela’s sentiment as a “liberal meme” or we can understand it in its proper context. It’s up to us.

              Fuck the bullshit. Enough is enough.

            • Scott Preston says :

              Come to think if it, the “antifa” could make a statement by going into battle the way the old Irish warriors did — stark bloody naked. No armour.

              Of course, they lost.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Not to worry. Someone without a preconceived agenda might actually get it.

            • Scott Preston says :

              Fuck the bullshit. Enough is enough.

              Now you’ve got it! Exactly what the antifa has decided.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Now… that’s bullshit.

            • Scott Preston says :

              There is no confusion here, IW. The contemporary stress is between those who support the individuation process and those who are resolutely against the individuation process (collectivism). That now just happens to be represented by the polarities of anarchist (or anarchistic) and the racialist (or fascistic), or what some presently describe in terms of “nativism” or “tribalism”, however much these dynamics might be distorted through the mentalistic or ideological framework.

              Gebser is quite clear in his preference for the individuation process and the responsibility of the individual, even though he takes this to a much higher level of understanding than in narrow terms of ideology. That’s the holographic principle at work in Gebser’s thought about individuation and the collective.. Gebser already saw these forces of individuation and collectivism headed for conflict, and nothing we say or do is going to turn that. Gebser’s own life is living proof — on the run from fascists most of his adult life.

              There’s no fence sitting here. It’s time to separate the wheat from the chaff, and that’s all there is to it.

    • InfiniteWarrior says :

      what the present antifascists are doing wrong

      The Rise of the Violent Left

      • Scott Preston says :

        The Atlantic has a paywall, so I can’t read that. But I can guess that it’s full of moralising liberal self-righteousness about violence, probably omitting to mention that conservative and liberal values were born also through violence, and in a crusible of fire and pain. If Lenin was a criminal, why not Luther, Robespierre, and Cromwell too? It’s a bit precious of liberals or conservatives to complain about violence.

        That change is best which is most peaceful. But even Rosenstock-Huessy realised that violence would have its way if social institutions didn’t remain fluid enough to transition. Maybe instead of complaining about violence they should ask themselves what they’ve done to inhibit peaceful change and to make it more difficult.

      • Scott Preston says :

        Kismet I guess. Although it has some flaws, I just read this article by Owen Jones in The Guardian about polarisation amidst the collapse of the liberal “centre”.

  3. Scott Preston says :

    I might mention, just as a matter of interest, that there was a Canadian contingent of ultras, representing Ezra Levant’s “Rebel Media”, at both Berkley and Charolottesville, which is one reason why I pay fairly close attention to these matters. There is a “fascist international” as it were.

  4. abdulmonem says :

    Good advice Scott. non-violence is the only tool to disarms wonder Jesus tools of loving your enemy and turning the cheek have atrophied the ugly mendacity of the time. The qualities which later christian have considered as signs of weakness while they are in reality the epitome of strength, thus they have thrown themselves in all the violence they are encountering. All prophets are instructed to face stringency with charity and hatred with love and to be in a state of wait for the real settler of disputes. This is why we read in the Koran that he who saves a life, as if he has saved all humanity and he who kills one self is equated with the who has killed all humanity and please do not challenge me by the perversion the Islamic world is living under, Abuse of truth is every where, that is why I do not think that the god of truth will wait any longer to show his rules in this oppressive world of ours.

  5. Scott Preston says :

    I note that some of the Nazi groups hold that the coincidence of the “Summer of Hate” with the coming “Black Sun” (the impending solar eclipse) is a kind of “sign from heaven” that their day has arrived. The “Black Sun” is an important symbol among fascists. There was even an occult “Black Sun Society” associated with fascism. The Black Sun is an alchemical symbol, or course, for Chaos. But recall what the sinister Peter Baelish said of that in Game of Thrones, in one of the most chilling dialogues between him and Varys. “Chaos is a ladder”.

    This Black Sun meme is superstition, but it also empowers them with a sense of mission. But it is further attestation that we are dealing with the Shadow and what Tolkien would describe as “orcery”, or what we call “the Dark Side”, and this is the current that is being “normalised”. When Bush Admin figures like Richard Perle could relish his image as “Prince of Darkness”, or Cheney relished his image as “Darth Vader” (and Bannon also), and no one protested, that was already “normalisation” of the Shadow. That’s what the “New Normal” is.

    Nietzsche would undoubtedly describe fascists as pathetic types — as “the apes of their ideals”, as he put it. But then, Satan was also described in such terms, as “the ape of God” too.

    You might think it highly improbable that people would willingly embrace the Shadow and the Dark Side, but in many ways they already have. They’ve become orcs who once were elves – creatures once allied with life but were turned or perverted.

    In a sense, those of us who are involved with the holonic awareness and integral consciousness are in a rescue operation now. That’s the only way to think of it because the “New Normal” is here.

    • Scott Preston says :

      The Anti-Defamation League has a brief description of the significance of the Black Sun for fascist groups. It’s not complete by far, but it gives you some indication of why the fascists feel emboldened by the coincidence of their Summer of Hate with the coming eclipse as “the Black Sun” sign.

      You may remember from earlier posts where I wrote about my own experience with the Shadow and my “days of the Black Sun” and the coldfire, and as part of the spiritual journey — the “dark night of the soul” as it were. I have some insight, I think, into the archetypal meaning of the Black Sun and “the valley of the Shadow of Death” and it isn’t what the fascists have made of it.

      Fascism is a disease of the Kali Yuga. This is the only way to understand it.

    • Scott Preston says :

      Actually, just read this article by Owen Jones in The Guardian that tries to put its finger on this “normalisation”, although it could have said more than it does.

    • InfiniteWarrior says :

      When Bush Admin figures like Richard Perle could relish his image as “Prince of Darkness”, or Cheney relished his image as “Darth Vader” (and Bannon also), and no one protested

      Ah, but they did. It just had no effect on the “glass ceiling.” As long as we’re being allowed to ruminate, the corruption of the concept of the three wise monkeys comes to mind as appropriate to the circumstances of this “normalization.”

      (Interesting to note: there is a fourth wise monkey. I’ve never heard of him before. His name is Shizaru.)

  6. abdulmonem says :

    In a cosmos surging with dynamic antagonistic forces that know no rest and a wise intelligence that runs everything, together with humans that carry the same antagonistic forces, that have been instructed to understand the nature of the psyche that carries in its structure these forces that pull up or down, meaning that humans are not sitting on this earth without test, without strife and difficult task to know how to deal with these forces. This is the purpose of all the prophetic messages that have been sent to this denying humanity. The choice is never between two evils as the fable of scylla and charybdis likes to stipulate. The choice is between the ego that carries the negative forces ( The abode of ooom )and the higher self that represents the higher qualities( the abode of valor ). It is the chasm that we have to transverse either to the plane of the ego or that of the higher self, while some remain unfortunately in the grey erea of indecision. It is the paradoxical bed of our self ,our cosmos and our god. It is a journey to find our way without knowing when the light of the above shines the way of our journey to make it successful. It is a play between his ordination and our ordination running in an uncertan ambiance, that is why mystics remain in a state of fear unknowing what the antagonistic forces may bring aroundt. It is a journey after the substantial, in a sea of benign and malign waves knowing that our innate awareness that is connected to the original sea of awareness is our navigating tool in this tumult sea. Let us fix ourselves before trying to fix the world. It is a problem of leadership that is ruling over a system that has been built on wrong premises. No wonder system can not be changed by the same system. The Koran states that no system can be changed without changing the human psyche that running that system. We are all in a state of wait because no one knows how the multivaried forces of our cosmos are going to develop, the only thing I can do is to change myself for the better mindful of god and his forces, including the concepts we use to communicate with him and others. The the osphere that encompasses everything that runs these everything with purpose including the humans that have not been created in vain but to accomplish ( truth, compassion, goodness) or fall in the abyss and return burdened with his gains. It is sad that most people have been misled to think that there is no other journey but this one.

    • mikemackd says :

      > the only thing I can do is to change myself for the better mindful of god and his forces, including the concepts we use to communicate with him and others.

      Again I will try to explain the framing about this supplied by Tweedy, which in turn was heavily influenced by McGilchrist, Blake, and Eckhart Tolle. The fact that none of those persons appear to have been familiar with the works of Lewis Mumford should come as no surprise, as all of them are, I consider, tapping into something universal in the human condition, expressed by countless others over the millennia from many different cultures, because we all have minds, however well-or-malfunctioning they may be.

      Let’s start from what this Blake-Tweedy frame calls the Satanic State. According to Tweedy, that State “is often easy to detect, in oneself or in others, precisely because of its ‘hardened’ character, simultaneously both judgmental and defensive” (p. 239).

      I suggest that that is typified by the intending stoners of the woman caught in adultery that Jesus saved, and in those who called for his crucifixion. “This hardening process, or “damnation” as Milton calls it” (Tweedy), Satan revered as the “tough guy”, with the ego rush that the neo-cons Scott mentioned exulted in.

      This Satanic State “can no more escape ‘hell’ than he can evade the psychological mechanisms binding him ever more securely and compulsively into egoic self-damnation” (pp. 240-241). However, Lucifer, our light-bringing power that descends into that State, may be so able.

      Here’s how.

      QUOTE (extracts from pp. 287-288):

      Urizen begins to realise that it actually wants to be alive: this is what it actually and always “wants”, and this had been the motivation to set itself up in contradistinction to “eternity” but it now starts to see that its methods for achieving this (by abstracting itself from being, by dividing reality into manipulatable bits, by identifying itself with evaluative processes and then becoming dogmatic and petrifying judgemental programs of morality) actually only push it deeper into its prison.

      Urizen is in every human brain, and in every human brain it is up to the same tricks.

      Blake repeatedly identifies Urizen with the basic program of all religions, whether sacred or profane. “I am right! And you are stupid! And I will kill you or dismiss you for your stupidity!” This is the “priest” or “high priestess” within each human psyche, the delusion of possessing special “knowledge” that makes the priest better, or higher, or more intelligent than the uninitiated and the profane. Its basis, Blake suggests, is egoic rationality, and its religion is of superiority and intelligence (“gnosis”). And this religion is “a deceit so detestable” that Albion would rather let go of it completely than have it continue to pollute the way it experiences reality, the present moment. Albion can threaten this because ultimately (as he is beginning to awaken and realise) he is in control of Urizen (and indeed all of the Zoas), and not the other way around. Albion is beginning to realise that Urizen and all the other orthodox “Gods” are programs and powers within his own brain and being, and therefore are subject to his humanity.


      So then Albion – the whole being – calls, and Urizen complies!

      QUOTE (extracts from pp 284-285):

      What regenerates Urizen is his act of self-perception. He realises that it is his own attitude, his own stance and mode of interpreting the world (as object and object-ting), that has been the problem and the root cause of the misery and oppressiveness which had constrained and weighed down not only Albion but also ossified his own processes. He had become an old thought. Wrapped up in “aged mantles”, bundled in the rags of ego, and the ageing dogmas of priestly superiority, he had become unrecognisable even to himself, and a perversion of his original program. As Albion had called out to him, just before his moment of realization:

      O Prince of Light where art thou I behold thee not as once

      Come forth from slumbers of thy cold abstraction come forth
      Arise to Eternal births shake off thy cold repose
      Schoolmaster of souls great opposer of change arise
      That the Eternal worlds may see thy face in peace & joy
      That thou dread form of Certainty maist sit in town & village
      While little children play around thy feet in gentle awe
      Fearing thy frown loving thy smile O Urizen Prince of light
      [FZ, ix: 124-125, p. 389].

      Reason does not quite recognise itself from this description, or see this role for itself. “See you not all this wracking furious confusion”, admonishes Albion. Albion, the total psyche, is furious at what the Prince of Light’s kingdom has turned out to be: warring, bloody, unconscious, and devitalised. This is the world dissociated rationality brings into being, not because it is evil and makes everything chaotic, but, paradoxically, because it seeks to be “good”, to be pure, completely ordered, completely organised, rational, self-consistent, and unchanging. It forgets that this is just a useful program in some situations, but cannot be applied to life, to being itself. Life is change and Urizen has become the “great opposer of change”, because change is uncertain, and rationality craves certainty, just as it clings to rocks and stones, and worships light as its salvation ….

      The “God” of the Urizenic left hemisphere has been transmuted in this process [of revising his self-perception] and once again becomes angelic (from Greek γγελος or angelos, meaning messenger or emissary), and as soon as he does this, in Blake’s poem, he immediately resumes his former brilliance.

      So Urizen spoke he shook his snows from off his Shoulders & arose
      As on a Pyramid of mist his white robes scattering
      The fleecy white renewd he shook his aged mantles off
      Into the fires Then glorious bright Exulting in his joy
      He sounding rose into the heavens in naked majesty
      In radiant Youth.
      [FZ, ix: 188-193, p, 391]


      That is, he is born again, and, with Urizen’s integration, Albion becomes whole.

      QUOTES (from pp. 292-293):

      Once reason understands itself – once these unconscious processes and programs understand that it is they themselves which are causing the suffering and the alienation from being – then “apocalypse – the revelation of the non-temporal and non-linear – happens. This is what apocalypse means – “un-covering”, the lifting or removing of the veil of unconsciousness. … the patina of egoic rationality which is preventing humanity from recognising its own divinity. As we have seen, for Blake divinity is not ban attribute or a “thing”, it is a mode of perception …


      I wonder how many will be like Rosenberg was when he read that quote of Krishnamurti. Or like those clerics who refused to look through Galileo’s telescope. But my core business isn’t that: my own Urizen is; removing the plank from my own eye before attempting to remove a speck from others’.

      • Scott Preston says :

        I believe Blake’s “States” correspond to the meaning of “Yugas” (Ages), or rather, vice versa. This becomes highly relevant in relation to St. Augustine’s “time is of the soul” and to Gebser’s “presentiation”. Ages are not time blocs or epochs so much as soul states, corresponding to one of the Zoas.

        If you look again at Rosenstock-Huessy’s “cross of reality” or the Sacred Hoop, you can imagine each of the four quadrants as Yugas, or “States”. Integral Consciousness is to be at the “vital centre” (therefore “Eternal Now”) in which all States or Yugas are “presentiated”. This is Albion or “Universal Humanity” (or what Blake just calls “the Humanity”), and which he associated with Christ Consciousness. Why? Because it is the image of the “god on the cross”. All Ages or States in him are integrated or “presentiated” as the “New Adam”. This is what underscores Blake’s “fourfold vision”.

        So, in those terms, we aren’t doomed to follow the circumference of the circle forever, as “eternal recurrence of same” — the cyclic or ouroboric round, but to become the centre of this process. The circumference is time and (for Blake) “reason”, but the centre is “eternity” or Eternal Now. This is why Gebser speaks of “time-freedom” and “vital centre” and “ever-present origin” and diaphainon as coincident. And this is also Rosenstock-Huessy’s notion of “man on the cross”. The cross is the cosmos considered in terms of these states or yugas, all “presentiated” and therefore, this is “cosmic consciousness”, which is the same as “integral”.

        Blake becomes much more accessible when considered in those same terms.

        • mikemackd says :

          On p 291 Tweedy quotes Eckhart Tolle:

          “Here is the key: End the delusion of time. Time and mind are inseparable. Remove time from the mind and it stops – unless you choose to use it. To be identified with your mind is to be trapped in time” (Tolle 1999, p. 40).

          I hadn’t quoted that because he doesn’t say which mind, or which time. Tolle may well mean both, that is, staying with the Ever Present Origin, as Krishnamurti had referred to long before, and Taoism millennia before Krishnamurti . As regards which time, Mumford distinguishes between time as in days, seasons, ageing et al. and the time of the clock, which he considers triggered the rebirth of the western megamachine via the Benedictines. For me, the archetypal image of the megamachine is goose-stepping military – left right, left right, tick tock, tick tock – so well executed these days by Chinese and North Korean troops.

          In my distinction that started me back here after a few days of, I started with “the distance is one thing; the measure / means of communication quite another”, and applied that more broadly, by which I included time. The Tolle to Tao EPO approach would precede both – that is, enfold my distinction. Tweedy continued after the Tolle quote: “Realising that life lives you” [rather than the other way around] “ means letting go of the ego, as well as letting go of the fictional construct of linear time. Entering the now is the immensely simple but unfamiliar experience that Blake’s poetry both encourages and evokes, and itself transmits. The figure of Urizen plays a crucial role in this process …” Tweedy, then goes on towards the claim that this uncovering is the apocalypse, as quoted from p. 292 above.

          (BTW, as I write this, the a radio program is analysing the departure of Steve Bannon. Bannon said he was defending the nationalist who elected him against the globalists in Trumps team. While they didn’t say it, this would include Kuchner; the anti-Semitic right will go even crazier).

          • mikemackd says :

            I just remembered this comment of mine in the string following your The Concretion of the Spiritual last April:

            I have been mulling over the dimension/s of time for decades, and your comment about it has rekindled that interest. I think I have mentioned J.T. Fraser’s 1999 Time Conflict and Human Values here before, But I’ve been digging through my books to find another work to inform any comment I make to that post of yours. It’s Yourgrau’s. 2005. A World Without Time, London, Penguin, which describes discussions between Einstein and Godel concerning the existence or non-existence of time. Peter Barbour does, too, in his 1999 The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Our Understanding of the Universe, London, Phoenix.

          • mikemackd says :

            And here’s another I made to your Janus II post last New Year’s Day:

            BTW, the best book I have read on time (at least, I thought so at the time) was J.T. Fraser’s “Time, Conflict and Human Values” (1999, University of Illinois Press). Another germane to your essay was Yourgrau’s 2005 “A World without Time” (Penguin), which was about conversations on the subject between Godel and Einstein. From the Amazon blurb:

            In 1942, the logician Kurt Godel and Albert Einstein became close friends; they walked to and from their offices every day, exchanging ideas about science, philosophy, politics, and the lost world of German science. By 1949, Godel had produced a remarkable proof: In any universe described by the Theory of Relativity, time cannot exist. Einstein endorsed this result reluctantly but he could find no way to refute it, since then, neither has anyone else. Yet cosmologists and philosophers alike have proceeded as if this discovery was never made. In A World Without Time, Palle Yourgrau sets out to restore Godel to his rightful place in history, telling the story of two magnificent minds put on the shelf by the scientific fashions of their day, and attempts to rescue the brilliant work they did together.

          • Scott Preston says :

            What Tolle describes is also what Buddhists call “Stopping the Wheel of Space and Time”, and we find the same in Castaneda as “Stopping the World”. Blake describes it similarly, so there’s a consensus about Gebser’s “time freedom” in that sense.

            I have some of the books you refer to about Time, such as Fraser’s. Just haven’t got around to reading them yet.

            Re: Bannon’s departure. That was a surprise. There’s some ironies because Saskatchewan’s premier, Brad Wall, also surprisingly resigned a few days ago (my home province), and the Charlottesville knock off effect seems to be very much affecting events in Canada (Rebel Media, which is Canada’s equivalent of Breitbart News, is in trouble as its employees and Conservatives abandon it and denounce it. It was prominent in the “alt-right” rallies in Berkeley and Charlottesville as supposedly “reporters” but who were propagandists and mouthpieces for the rallies. This is really weird because the founder of Rebel Media, Ezra Levant — a clownish type really — is a right-wing Jew, which puzzles everyone about why he associates Rebel Media with Nazis and antisemites! Crazy, crazy times.

            • InfiniteWarrior says :

              Bannon’s departure. That was a surprise.

              Not so much from this end. Bannon thought Trump would return the sovereignity of “the People” to them (or, at least, his interpretation of “the People”), but didn’t get his way. (Chump.) So, he left.

              No big mystery.

  7. Scott Preston says :

    Very, very interesting article on neoliberalism by Stephen Metcalf. Leaves us with lots to ponder upon. One I’m going to have to read and reread many times.

    • InfiniteWarrior says :

      It does go into quite a bit of detail, but isn’t this…old news? {*ducks*}

      “Raworth points out that economics in the 20th century …aspired to be a science of human behaviour: a science based on a deeply flawed portrait of humanity. The dominant model – “rational economic man”, self-interested, isolated, calculating – says more about the nature of economists than it does about other humans.” From Finally, a breakthrough alternative to growth economics – the doughnut by George Monbiot

      Well, I don’t know that it “says more about the nature of economists” so much as it speaks volumes to the nature of uninterrupted, linear thinking.

      Thing is: we know this; we’d like to do something about it; precisely what to do about it hasn’t been fully articulated and, even if it were; “experts,” politicians and, especially single-minded businessmen turned politicians, aren’t particularly well-known either for listening or caring anyway….

      And we’re right back to the problem of Narcissism again.

      Indeed, one wonders why we stay in this vicious cycle (of thought) when “we can just stop.” {Boing!}

      • Scott Preston says :

        Metcalf’s article has a number of merits, but one that stands out for me is that it’s the first time I’ve read anyone make a clear and direct connection between neoliberalism and “post-rational/post-truth” society” or dumbing down, and explain fairly persuasively why that is so. A quite good description of “ironic reversal” or revenge effect in some ways.

        • InfiniteWarrior says :

          It must be for that reason I found it shareable. Excellent find, thank you.

          It takes some doing to get us all “on the same page,” as it were.

      • mikemackd says :

        > one wonders why we stay in this vicious cycle (of thought) when “we can just stop.” {Boing!}

        There is a joke about the Lone Ranger fleeing hostile Indians through a gulch. More hostile Indians then appear in front of them. They halt and the Lone Ranger looks around and cries, “Tonto, we’re surrounded!” Tonto calmly replies, “’we’, paleface?”

        I thought (!) we had already answered this here to the nth, I.W. We get stuck in – and addicted to – the vicious cycle because we are like the Lone Ranger, relying on ‘single vision’ silver bullets. We have also answered why Krishnamurti said that those who say they know, cannot know, and heard from others that true enlightenment, as distinct from the faux enlightenment of the monological gazers, involves a freeing from the idea that one is doing.

        As you have often said here, there’s lots going on now that doesn’t grab the headlines. I don’t think the boingless can assume that we are all boingless, any more than the boinged would that that we have all boinged. That would indicate the spiritual equivalent of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

  8. Abdulmunem Othman says :

    When one is present with the pig picture ( the divine origin ), navigation in the turbulent sea of life becomes easier than when the absence of such picture is present. We all exercise our activities between birth and death within a field of defined boundary. The first from whom we start and the last to whom we return. The invisible that tells us not to stay with the surface of the phenomenon because there is more and more beyond. It is the dynamic of the divine active names that never stop expressing their dynamic in all different types of manifestations including the human as one of the major creative forms in activating the cosmic field of information ( the creative and the destructive names ) . The framer who have filled his cosmos with frames and warned the humans through the messengers not to be consumed by single frame and forget the whole as the starting point of all the scattered parts. It is strange to start with one of the created frame and forget the creator of that frame. Averaging aggregation and general assertion is a misleading tools of a world of personal responsibility. No wonder quantification has reached a dead end and statistics prove being a major tool in catering to our post truth traumas. We all know the tragedy of the single frame that has taken the lens of the whole with all the associated maladies yet the maladies have never stopped from accumulating as if our people are being held in a state of trance. Propaganda, media, peers, advertisement and experts are our trance holders. Once we lose our independent thinking and consider it a luxury that we do not need, the calamity of conformity sets in as a sign of death, the Joes and the Josephine, Scott keeps citing. Lumping under a general label is not only unfair but it is incorrect, like the priests Mike mentioned in his comment as if there is no honest priests among the priests. Thinking we are talking and working in a void, expresses a lack of understanding and appreciation of this diversified cosmos with its billions of manifestations. Speaking without awe and wonder demonstrate the stupidity of our lot ,a stupidity that turns the wonder into shock like our American hero who decided to shock the Iraqi without mercy or consideration. Oh people do you think we are living in a civilized world , the shock which our new hero, repeated to use with North Korea. One of the evil axis Bush has innovated in this innovating world of destruction and death. What really keep me in a state of divine fear is this oblivion and heedlessness regard the negative reaction of this lively world whose creator has never stops expressing his abhorrence against the oppressors, saying that he will take them like those who he has taken in the past. Those who have forgotten the worship of the one and start worshipping what they have made only, thus losing themselves to be turned into things similar to what that have made. This is not new it is already being stipulated in the beautiful quotation Scott cited in his post “the living dead and the unlived life” that reads as follows:
    “The idols of the nations are but silver and gold, The work of man’s hands.
    They have mouths, but they do not speak; They have eyes, but they do not see
    They have ears, but they do not hear, Nor is there any breath at all in their mouths
    Those who make them will be like them, and so will all who trust in them. (Psalms 135: 16-18).”

    • Scott Preston says :

      I edited your comment, Abdulmonem, to remove the duplicate block that also began “When one is present” and ended in “stipulated in..”, since it was a repeat that began again in the middle of your comment (probably a double paste). Just to let you know.

  9. Abdulmunem Othman says :

    Thank you Scott, I felt something went wrong.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: