Friends,
I'm sad to report that no one has responded to Chapter 6. I
hope some of you will get around to it. Without feedback I'm
at a loss. The fact is I always like what I write...after all,
it's my "baby". I need others to point out the problems; if I
could see them I would have fixed them in the first place. If
anyone wants an MSWord version, let me know.
The previous version was very formal, with charter provisions,
discussion of "system constraints", etc. The current version
is much more like an informal discussion.
best regards,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:11:40 -0800
To: Richard K. Moore <•••@••.•••>
From: Tom Atlee <•••@••.•••>
Subject: flashback (thanks Marty Greenhut) [re: Iraqi "elections"]
From: Molly Johnson <•••@••.•••>
"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at
the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election
despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
According to reports from Saigon, 83 percent of the 5.85
million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many
of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong. A
successful election has long been seen as the keystone in
President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of
constitutional processes in South Vietnam."
- Peter Grose, in a page 2 New York Times article titled,
'U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote,' September 4, 1967.
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:27:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Private_MindSpace <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: "A Brief History of Humanity"
To: •••@••.•••
Greatly enjoyed this intro chapter and am looking forward to
more of the same... Can you tell me where I may get some info
on the Nicene Council, 325AD (Constantine)?
Katie
--------
Katie,
That's easy. Simply put "Nicene Council" into Google.
Glad you liked that chapter.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 11:44:47 +1300
To: •••@••.•••
From: Robert Gregory <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Ch 6: ENVISIONING A TRANSFORMATIONAL MOVEMENT
Hi Richard - I like this chapter - much much improved! One
idea is to add the ideas from The Hundredth Monkey about
synergy and effective change spreading rapidly. Another idea
would be to note the work of Alcoholics Anonymous and related
groups - for they are voluntary - face to face - provide
mutual support - lack hierarchy - and transform and empower
individuals. A third idea is that stress in a community can
be a valuable asset, in that stress increases the need for
change. Overall, exciting reading that enriches and opens up
opportunities - bob g
-------------
Bob - thanks, good stuff - rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 17:08:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Leo Klausmann <•••@••.•••>
Reply-To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: Ch 6: ENVISIONING A TRANSFORMATIONAL MOVEMENT
To: •••@••.•••
Greetings Richard. I really like this new version of
chapter 6. I can tell your talent as a writer is
getting better and better; I like the way you hint at
objections to some the controversial ideas you raise
and then proceed to elaborate on them at the right
pace. It certainly is fascinating to imagine what sort
of an example Cuba would be had it not been for the
constant terrorism against it. I think that examples of
success are very important in convincing large groups
of people to abandon old ideas and put real work into
a new system.
Happy Mardi Gras,
Leo Klausmann
-------------
Leo,
Glad you found that useful. I've had some doubt about
including the third world section. The rest of the book is
focused on the West, and the stuff about Cuba will alienate
some readers. Is it worth it? I'm still not sure, but your
comment puts some balance on the "include" side.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "John Lowry" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Transformation: the means are the ends
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 19:36:05 -0800
"Changing the political structure will be the final act of our revolution,
not the first." -Timothy Leary (1970ish)
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "David Lewit" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Transformation: the means are the ends
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 23:02:38 -0500
X-Priority: 3
Nicely said, Richard. Have you seen Jonathan Schell's "The
Unconquerable World"? (Did I tell you this before?...) He
argues that revolutions, e.g. the American Revolution, are
done before armed struggle begins to remove the occupying
imperials. The same I should think would apply in an unarmed
struggle---which is the civilian part, the majority part, of
many revolutions. Aloha---- Dave
--------------
Dave,
Sounds intriguing. Tell me more if you have time. I can't
really afford to buy any more books right now.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 19:11:02 EST
Subject: Re: Transformation: the means are the ends
To: •••@••.•••
that felt good, and necessary to have said it. To murder the
murders and then kill off the opposition is hardly a
revolution, more like like changing the heads on those bobbing
dolls.
cheers.
Thought for the day, "Let us not look back in anger, or
forward in fear, but around in awareness
James Thurber , l960.
jim
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:31:54 +0100
From: Bob <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: weekend dialog, 29 Jan 05
Hi Richard,
I agree with Dianna, that "America" is a state of mind, where
people recognize that "all man (mankind) were created equal,
with certain inalienable rights", and so forth. When I look
at the present situation I just don't see how it could change
to where it needs to go, that is, to a cooperation paradigm.
Logically, it can't get there from here.
But like Dianna says, there IS a revolution going on, even
when our organs of perception fail to see it. It has to do
with individuals learning what we need to do. It has to do
with the female aspect of humanity gaining power in our
perceptions. Your book is part of it. Actual techniques of
conflict solving is part of it Just like the "best minds" in
the CIA, or anyone else for that matter, were not able to see
the Soviet empire crumbling, there is crumbling going on at
present.
I just recently ran across this web page that explains the
predictions in the Maya calendar and it says pretty much the
same thing.
http://www.calleman.com/Engpages/Articles/A%20new%20Phase.html
Keep up the good work.
Bob
----------
Bob,
Don't believe for a second that the CIA didn't see the USSR crumbling.
After all, they engineered it. I find it strange that "revelations" about
the CIA in mainstream sources are given credence. Such revelations
are part of the propaganda matrix.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "tyom stiobhairt" <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: RE: weekend dialog, 29 Jan 05
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:51:20 +0000
i presume the specifics to the single-symbiot plant-insect is
the orchid variants?
------------
Tyom,
Thanks! I did a google search on "orchid insect symbiotic", and came up
with "Angreacum Sesquipidales" and the "Predicta Moth".
cheers,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "Fred Burks" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: a brief comment re: Psychology of Christian Fundamentalism
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:44:12 -0800
Dear Richard,
Thank you for that wonderful, vulnerable request. I do believe
that each of us is co-responsible for everything that is
happening in this world. By simply pointing the finger of
blame outward, we miss the incredible growth opportunities
that lie within. You might appreciate a two-page summary I've
written on the big picture at
www.WantToKnow.info/brighterfuture which goes into this. You
take care and thanks for your great work!
Explore these empowering websites:
http://www.momentoflove.org - Every person in the world has a
heart
http://www.WantToKnow.info - Revealing major cover-ups &
working together for the good of all
http://www.gcforall.org - Building a Global Community for All
http://www.weboflove.org - Strengthening the Web of Love that
interconnects us all
Subscribe to my email list of inspiration and education
(one email per week) by sending an email to
•••@••.••• with "subscribe 1" in the subject
line. Subscribe to his list of insider information on deep
cover-ups (one email every other day) by typing "subscribe
deep" in the subject line.
Best wishes,
Fred
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: weekend dialog, 29 Jan 05
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:15:38 -0600
rkm > Liberals believe in progress; they think the
government can solve problems; they think we live in
democracies. I find these beliefs more dangerous
than those of fundamentalists.
I think we're in agreement. Belief in salvation, whether it be
by God or government, is anathema to Liberty. Both believe men
must be saved from themselves since we are "essentially bad"
in nature. What I would like to know is just exactly who the
fuck is supposed to save us.
------------
Tom,
If you can convince people that they are inherently bad, then
they become vulnerable to the false promises of salvation offered
by religions.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 23:12:06 EST
Subject: Re: a brief comment re: Psychology of Christian Fundamentalism
To: •••@••.•••
Richard,
The crux of Walter Davis' article about Christian
fundamentalists is not that they are neurotic as individuals,
but that their religion is a manifestation of neuroses, a
sublimation. So when you say: "If anyone can find one, I'd
like to post a balancing article, revealing the "grand
neuroses" of the liberal," this sounds like a poor match. Of
course liberals have neuroses. The question is: "Is their
liberalism a manifestation and sublimation of their neuroses?"
Perhaps your use of the word "grand" meant to imply as much,
but it's not clear.
Bill
--------
Hi Bill,
Yes that is what I was implying. The grand neurosis has to do
with believing in a system which is obviously little more than
a dictatorship. As for what personal neurosis that is a
sublimation for, I have no answer. That's why I was hoping for
a balancing article. Some suggestions have been sent in, but
I've found them to be inadequate.
cheers,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:50:30 -0500
From: •••@••.•••
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: RE: a brief comment [Davis' flawed essay]
Davis' piece was not scientific. He makes no reference to the
scientific literature, although he does refer to some
quasi-scienfific ideas (Freudianism, etc.).
Davis' piece was marred by his extreme prejudice. For example,
we read that Mel Gibson is "a reactionary Catholic on the
warpath against Vatican II", and that he "accepts with
apparent indifference the belief that barring conversion to
Catholicism his own wife (mother of his 7 Catholic children)
will suffer eternal damnation." As "evidence" for the latter
assertion we are to accept his interpretation of a TV
interview. And yet, it is very difficult to believe that
Gibson would truly be indifferent about such a thing, however
well he may have retained his poise during a TV interview. And
as for the former assertion -- that Gibson is "reactionary" --
we are given nothing at all. It is a gratuitous insult that
Davis simply tosses in.
--<snip>--
Hence Davis' essay, with much more scholarly pretension than
substance, was deeply flawed. His extreme prejudice and nasty,
know-nothing asides, and (apparent) historical ignorance, make
it difficult not to simply dismiss everything he writes.
Though, with effort the flaws can be overlooked and one can
find nuggets of useful insight. He does, I admit, offer a fair
analysis of the pathologies of fundamentalist Protestantism.
Still in all hardly a "brilliant treatise" or a "defining
analysis"! And the fact that you would find it so tends to
call into question the quality of your thought, Richard.
Alan
-----------
Greetings Alan,
I have a quite different definition of "scientific" than you
do. To me, reference to the scientific literature is quite
irrelevant. My dictionary says for the word: "Of, relating to,
or employing the methodology of science." A child studying an
anthill can be quite scientific if he or she makes
observations over time and draws inferences from that. I see
little relationship between "scholarly" and "scientific".
Indeed, I find them to be mostly at odds with one another.
You concede that Davis offers "a fair analysis of the
pathologies of fundamentalist Protestantism". Since that was
the main purpose of his analysis, I find other criticisms more
or less irrelevant, bordering on the ad hominem.
I don't know whether you would consider yourself to be a
liberal or an academic but what you say is similar to what I
find most objectionable from both camps...the tendency to
dismiss ideas if the author associates with the wrong people,
or if a flaw can be found somewhere. Such tendencies drive one
toward acceptance of 'consensus reality' (i.e., the Matrix)
despite oneself. Quite unscientific.
best regards,
rkm
btw> If anyone wants to see Alan's full statement, contact him or me.
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 18:17:30 +0800
To: •••@••.•••
From: Betty Daly-King <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Turner Compares Fox's Popularity to Hitler
Without holding any brief for Rupert Murdoch obviously Ted
Turner would say anything against rival news medium!
Betty
------------
Betty,
Is that so? Can you point to any examples of Turner making
dubious statements about rival media? I see here the same
"urge to dismiss" that I noted just above. In fact, I see
Turner's comparisons to Hitler and Goebbels as being obvious
truths; the interesting thing about Turner's statement is that
he risked his reputation to speak radical truth in public, exposing
himself to ridicule for being radical, and as you point out, the
suspicion of being self-serving.
best regards,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: "Claudia Woodward-Rice" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: RE: weekend dialog, 29 Jan 05
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:57:27 -1000
Paul R. Bottis Sr. > The Bush administration is waging a war
however, it is not a war fought with bullets but with dollars.
The way to stop their war and to use the resources to wage
peace is to enact the Single Tax Proposal...
Sounds great until you figure those who spend $10,000,000
would pay $10,000 and Corps who spend $ 50 billion would pay
$50 million...wouldn't even pay the interest on the deficit we
have now <g>
Now about those roads and sewer systemsŠ
--------------------------------------------------------
--
============================================================
If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website
(http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email
list by sending a message to:
•••@••.•••
You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website,
provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and
this disclaimer.
Richard Moore (rkm)
Wexford, Ireland
"Escaping The Matrix -
Global Transformation:
WHY WE NEED IT, AND HOW WE CAN ACHIEVE IT ", somewhat current draft:
http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/rkmGlblTrans.html
_____________________________
"...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the
suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the
Reichstag fire."
- Srdja Trifkovic
There is not a problem with the system.
The system is the problem.
Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs.
_____________________________
cj list archives:
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj
newslog list archives:
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog
_____________________________
Informative links:
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
http://www.MiddleEast.org
http://www.rachel.org
http://www.truthout.org
http://www.williambowles.info/monthly_index/
http://www.zmag.org
http://www.co-intelligence.org
============================================================
