Piss on you politics
I ought to be a Machiavellian in my political leanings. Left or right, true power throws the teddy bears and babies out the window, ignores what "OUGHT TO BE" and takes what IS.
It's just so easy to follow the naive road of "Let's make the world a better place." The FLAW of this path of course is when you actually try to do something, you'll be at best patted on that head for a pretty thought, and usually ignored.
Why worry about (1) Nuclear war (2) Global warming (3) Energy crisis (4) Debt (5) Murdered unborn babies? Or whatever cause that works for you. The BEST you can hope to do is become a "special interest group" that scared politicians enough to smile and nod at your cause, and finally if you're lucky they'll co-opt your language and say it back as if they really care.
REAL politics is life stuff they're facing in Iraq today - fear of suicide bombers - the cost of corruption - brute hatred and murder of those that don't think like you.
Okay, maybe not, but at least when you have to deal with "other people's shit" on a daily basis, your interest in politics rises quickly, at least if you have any hope things could be better someday.
Well, basically I'm sort of thinking "Secret society" sort of politics is more interesting than the overt expressions of power. I mean we've got a government that allows us to keep more money than almost every other country. If we'd just buy a few less cabins up north or cruises to the Carabean, we'd have some serious cash to stick to gether and make something.
Ultimately I accept true power comes through wealth and the opportunity to buy access to "representatives of the people", but even that power is somewhat useless.
My Machiavellian Manifesto goes something like this:
(1) People are fools. This is bad.
(2) There's too many damned people - many must die. This is good.
(3) Some of them can be saved, but make sure its the useful ones who can serve your interests. This is called artificial selection.
(4) Greedy rich bastards are also thinking like you. They have MORE money and power than you. They believe 1-3 above. If you can't hide from them, play along with #3 and make yourself useful to them.
(5) Build up your own secret terrorist cell, less than 20 people, those you can trust who think like you, and have something to offer.
Ooops, did I say terrorist? Well, it was just a figure of speech. The POINT is individuals alone are too weak, so you gotta get some people together. Large groups are too unwieldy to action. Groups of 10-20 people can get something done when the shit hits the fan.
While things are still doing well, the most important thing for every cell is to focus its energy on building economic strength. This means paying down debt, accumulating land, buildings, and equipment that can offer a productive use when external employment is not available.
Well, I think I'm going to have to stop, mainly because I don't exactly know how to build a terrorist cell. I mean "Who do you trust?" And what the fuck is your mission anyway?
Okay, I can do a mission statement. The good thing about a secret society is you can still have a slightly naive mission:
Our mission is collect together hard working people who know the future will be harder than the past, who know they're screwed if they are limited to their own resources, who would rather spend their time and energy building an ark than trying to convince anyone that a storm is coming.
Our mission is to build a collective trust that will allow our individual security to be protected, AND share resources for common goals, and work together to define those goals.
Overall, I guess this is "Mission Ark". Each group is forming a lifeboat, and networking with other groups allows a vision for a larger Ark to be defined and promoted.
I wonder how much it needs to be a "secret society". I'm not sure. I suppose a best bet is to do BOTH - have a public image AND a private one. The funny thing is on the surface I imagine my ideas are worthy in public. So my only guess is that I recognize even if the goals are worthy, the MEANS and POWER we may wield may be less pretty. PLUS, a public organization is more likely to attract attention of scum suckers, criminals who will see our wealth as a target.
Overall fun thoughts. I think mostly delusional, but only because it seems so hard to imagine power when fully dependent upon a doomed empire. And most delusional since however romantic is seems to play secrets, it wastes a lot of TIME, and even if I think things will get bad sooner than later, thinks could muddle along another 10 years before serious survival issues are at hand.
It is just difficult to imagine any other life, other circumstances. I mean EVEN if I KNOW there's such lawlessness in Iraq, and that MILLIONS of people are already suffering through poverty, fear of violence, injustice, and lack of opportunity.
How much of my own selfish time am I really willing to throw away for "a game"?
I think of the funny "Polyamory" world out there, not my game, but it offers a learning environment - how to reach out, how to judge common ground, how to trust, how to build something together beyond what you could do apart.
I think politics is as useful as anything for learning too, for larger groups, perhaps even the opposite scale of empowerment.
I think of the "lifeboat" cell much closer to the polyamory, maybe WILL be considered the nuclear family for most people, and just reach out to see how much farther it can be extended.
Lifeboat is an interestesting image, suggesting its purpose is to save a small group of people, while perhaps surrounded by a larger group which it can't all help. Resources are limited.
Going deeper away from delusion, or at least into thoughts of real people, I see there's so many issues in people's inner lives, as well as external demands. It really is hard to imagine ANY group of people any size that can devote a sizable portion of their energy into theoretical survival issues.
Even imagining marriage, one spouse is a bit loopy in the brain (like me, but single), and thinks things can't really continue, and the other spouse not really getting it, or at least not really believing there's anything to do. I mean it might be for most people, focusing on getting their kids grown up a bit more might be the best use of their time and love.
Well, and in loopiness, whatever's true, I accept my perceptions are limited to a strange inner world that things we ought to be worried and remembers things that support this concern, like any hypocondriac.
Okay, better end this. Piss-on-you politics is an attitude that says communication is useless when people don't want to hear the truth. Rather than fighting for common ground which doesn't exist, its better to LIVE YOUR CONVICTION rather than imposing it on others.
That's kind of backwards, piss-on-you politics, is mostly a sort of surrender to guilt. A person thinks he has special truth, and others won't listen. I suppose better to just say "Peace to you politics", live-and-let-live.
Not really true for change, but mainly about grass roots democracy. Until a critical mass understand an issue, or recognize it as a problem at least, there's little value in a public debate.
As always impatience is the biggest enemy. Religions at least have things right in some ways. They help worriers step back and believe in a higher power also aware and watching so you can know danger and just do what you can.
I just don't know about collective action. I believe in it, but it seems impossible. I mean just the idea of SHARING is difficult, accepting the needs of another exceed one's own. A fully compassionate person really could give up ALL POWER except to serve the needs of others.
I think to "intentional families" or "intentional households" again. I don't necessarily mean living in one house, but that's the starting point.
Anyway, if I was nice I'd change the title to "Peace to you politics", but it wouldn't be as fun.
Postscript - My most interesting reflection after writing this is the closeness of my soul to that of Scrooge of Dicken's A Christmas Carol. Fear of loss and weakness makes us all hide our compassion for the suffering of others. It is too easy to withdraw from believing you can help others, too easy to judge others as unworthy for compassion. Helping others is surrendering power to help yourself. A worthy fairy tale is Hansel and Gretel, a world where children can be sacrificed to the forest. I suppose I just have to accept the nature of my soul is to fear I don't have enough to give when the "greatest needs" come.
It's just so easy to follow the naive road of "Let's make the world a better place." The FLAW of this path of course is when you actually try to do something, you'll be at best patted on that head for a pretty thought, and usually ignored.
Why worry about (1) Nuclear war (2) Global warming (3) Energy crisis (4) Debt (5) Murdered unborn babies? Or whatever cause that works for you. The BEST you can hope to do is become a "special interest group" that scared politicians enough to smile and nod at your cause, and finally if you're lucky they'll co-opt your language and say it back as if they really care.
REAL politics is life stuff they're facing in Iraq today - fear of suicide bombers - the cost of corruption - brute hatred and murder of those that don't think like you.
Okay, maybe not, but at least when you have to deal with "other people's shit" on a daily basis, your interest in politics rises quickly, at least if you have any hope things could be better someday.
Well, basically I'm sort of thinking "Secret society" sort of politics is more interesting than the overt expressions of power. I mean we've got a government that allows us to keep more money than almost every other country. If we'd just buy a few less cabins up north or cruises to the Carabean, we'd have some serious cash to stick to gether and make something.
Ultimately I accept true power comes through wealth and the opportunity to buy access to "representatives of the people", but even that power is somewhat useless.
My Machiavellian Manifesto goes something like this:
(1) People are fools. This is bad.
(2) There's too many damned people - many must die. This is good.
(3) Some of them can be saved, but make sure its the useful ones who can serve your interests. This is called artificial selection.
(4) Greedy rich bastards are also thinking like you. They have MORE money and power than you. They believe 1-3 above. If you can't hide from them, play along with #3 and make yourself useful to them.
(5) Build up your own secret terrorist cell, less than 20 people, those you can trust who think like you, and have something to offer.
Ooops, did I say terrorist? Well, it was just a figure of speech. The POINT is individuals alone are too weak, so you gotta get some people together. Large groups are too unwieldy to action. Groups of 10-20 people can get something done when the shit hits the fan.
While things are still doing well, the most important thing for every cell is to focus its energy on building economic strength. This means paying down debt, accumulating land, buildings, and equipment that can offer a productive use when external employment is not available.
Well, I think I'm going to have to stop, mainly because I don't exactly know how to build a terrorist cell. I mean "Who do you trust?" And what the fuck is your mission anyway?
Okay, I can do a mission statement. The good thing about a secret society is you can still have a slightly naive mission:
Our mission is collect together hard working people who know the future will be harder than the past, who know they're screwed if they are limited to their own resources, who would rather spend their time and energy building an ark than trying to convince anyone that a storm is coming.
Our mission is to build a collective trust that will allow our individual security to be protected, AND share resources for common goals, and work together to define those goals.
Overall, I guess this is "Mission Ark". Each group is forming a lifeboat, and networking with other groups allows a vision for a larger Ark to be defined and promoted.
I wonder how much it needs to be a "secret society". I'm not sure. I suppose a best bet is to do BOTH - have a public image AND a private one. The funny thing is on the surface I imagine my ideas are worthy in public. So my only guess is that I recognize even if the goals are worthy, the MEANS and POWER we may wield may be less pretty. PLUS, a public organization is more likely to attract attention of scum suckers, criminals who will see our wealth as a target.
Overall fun thoughts. I think mostly delusional, but only because it seems so hard to imagine power when fully dependent upon a doomed empire. And most delusional since however romantic is seems to play secrets, it wastes a lot of TIME, and even if I think things will get bad sooner than later, thinks could muddle along another 10 years before serious survival issues are at hand.
It is just difficult to imagine any other life, other circumstances. I mean EVEN if I KNOW there's such lawlessness in Iraq, and that MILLIONS of people are already suffering through poverty, fear of violence, injustice, and lack of opportunity.
How much of my own selfish time am I really willing to throw away for "a game"?
I think of the funny "Polyamory" world out there, not my game, but it offers a learning environment - how to reach out, how to judge common ground, how to trust, how to build something together beyond what you could do apart.
I think politics is as useful as anything for learning too, for larger groups, perhaps even the opposite scale of empowerment.
I think of the "lifeboat" cell much closer to the polyamory, maybe WILL be considered the nuclear family for most people, and just reach out to see how much farther it can be extended.
Lifeboat is an interestesting image, suggesting its purpose is to save a small group of people, while perhaps surrounded by a larger group which it can't all help. Resources are limited.
Going deeper away from delusion, or at least into thoughts of real people, I see there's so many issues in people's inner lives, as well as external demands. It really is hard to imagine ANY group of people any size that can devote a sizable portion of their energy into theoretical survival issues.
Even imagining marriage, one spouse is a bit loopy in the brain (like me, but single), and thinks things can't really continue, and the other spouse not really getting it, or at least not really believing there's anything to do. I mean it might be for most people, focusing on getting their kids grown up a bit more might be the best use of their time and love.
Well, and in loopiness, whatever's true, I accept my perceptions are limited to a strange inner world that things we ought to be worried and remembers things that support this concern, like any hypocondriac.
Okay, better end this. Piss-on-you politics is an attitude that says communication is useless when people don't want to hear the truth. Rather than fighting for common ground which doesn't exist, its better to LIVE YOUR CONVICTION rather than imposing it on others.
That's kind of backwards, piss-on-you politics, is mostly a sort of surrender to guilt. A person thinks he has special truth, and others won't listen. I suppose better to just say "Peace to you politics", live-and-let-live.
Not really true for change, but mainly about grass roots democracy. Until a critical mass understand an issue, or recognize it as a problem at least, there's little value in a public debate.
As always impatience is the biggest enemy. Religions at least have things right in some ways. They help worriers step back and believe in a higher power also aware and watching so you can know danger and just do what you can.
I just don't know about collective action. I believe in it, but it seems impossible. I mean just the idea of SHARING is difficult, accepting the needs of another exceed one's own. A fully compassionate person really could give up ALL POWER except to serve the needs of others.
I think to "intentional families" or "intentional households" again. I don't necessarily mean living in one house, but that's the starting point.
Anyway, if I was nice I'd change the title to "Peace to you politics", but it wouldn't be as fun.
Postscript - My most interesting reflection after writing this is the closeness of my soul to that of Scrooge of Dicken's A Christmas Carol. Fear of loss and weakness makes us all hide our compassion for the suffering of others. It is too easy to withdraw from believing you can help others, too easy to judge others as unworthy for compassion. Helping others is surrendering power to help yourself. A worthy fairy tale is Hansel and Gretel, a world where children can be sacrificed to the forest. I suppose I just have to accept the nature of my soul is to fear I don't have enough to give when the "greatest needs" come.
posted by Ares Olympus at 8:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home