I got involved in a very interesting discussion on facebook, and I am now going to write about what I have learnt from it. I would suggest that it is the sort of rational dialogue that Gavin might like – although this blog is a result of sorts. The discussion was with Greg Samples who I have discovered is standing for congress in Tennessee. So thank you, Greg, for taking time out when you are so busy, and good luck.
Although I never said, my main interest in discussion was to try to come to an understanding of the section of the Republican party that is Ron Paul, Alex Jones and Greg. Then I find Greg is an independent, so that is scuppered. They believe in the Founding Fathers as genuine people, and advocate stringent acceptance of the constitution and Greg’s congress platform is about constitutional violations.
From the discussion there was much agreement. What is so interesting about that agreement is the diversity of backgrounds, and it saddens me that such divisions exist in the 99% so easily exploited by the 1%. I consider this substantively true even with the boarish Alex Jones and maybe even Ron Paul, but their political and celebrity status requires sponsorship and that sponsorship creates divisions intentionally. With Alex Jones his interest is himself and not the people, as for Ron Paul he might genuinely be fighting for an end of war but the platform he is being sponsored for is deregulation – unfettering the 1%. I doubt if in office he would be able to do anything about the wars.
OK, what have I learnt? (I have just found an earlier blog that touches on this blog.) In many ways I don’t believe in freedom per se yet freedom is fundamental and is inextricably linked with compassion which is also fundamental. Compassion is described as free from suffering, and when we feel free we are at one with that expression of compassion. But freedom that is not based on compassion is dangerous, because such freedom might well be appropriated by the ego. Freedom without compassion is just egotism, self-interest, and egotism is so dangerous. I have in total spent months on my stool, and yet my lack of humility can lead me to be crass. The mind is such a dangerous thing, it is a powerful weapon for misguiding us if there is no control. Look at the harm the minds of the 1% are doing.
Nirvana is a state of freedom, free from desire, free from concepts, if that is the freedom that is being strived for then that freedom would be truly wonderful. Integral to an understanding of this genuine freedom is an understanding of Nature, this Nature that I have called ONE planet. It is worth reiterating ONE planet again. Life is ONE, not separate entities, Bill, Greg, Gavin, fish, trees, water – even the 1%. We are ONE, compassion simply means that we are working with that ONE trying to return to Unity. And what prevents that return – ego, the demand for individual freedom as a separate entity, this is basically what egotism is. Freedom as compassion is what we are fighting for, freedom as egotism is what we are fighting against. So fighting for freedom is actually a fight that goes nowhere, and this is the problem. Creating freedom without compassion (without ONE planet as guideline) is the same as creating freedom for the prevailing power, so in our current society fighting for freedom simply enables the 1%. There has been recent evidence for this. Deregulation of the finance sector occurred under Reagan-Thatcher, and as a consequence we have the current financial crisis that could not have occurred prior to Reagan because amongst others there would have been the regulations that would have prevented the exploitation of debt that underlay the crisis.
The next thing I learnt was the lack of importance of the need for governance. Greg said he was minarchist, and when I looked at it I thought why should we need all that government. This lack of need for government stems from an understanding of what is the source of government, and that quite simply is the prevailing power within the community. When I grew up it was Tory and Labour. Whilst they were still both 1%-controlled, the actual Labour movement – the people – still had some input into what the party did, but over the years that waned until along came the war criminal with his smile and lies that crushed any vestige of peoples’ interest. A clear example of this was the NHS. Post-war there were few people left and people sick of war needed a government response – the NHS, comprehensive education etc. But then BigPharma saw what was happening over the pond and saw that a huge amount of money was being lost, there was so much more profit in privatisation. They still will get the money from the NHS but can charge more for private patients through insurance. British medical treatment is being increasingly Americanised as are the foods which create the disease.
Seeing government much more clearly as an organ of the prevailing power was important. If that power was people – democracy, then we have a democratic government. But we don’t. The 1% have sold us a line – one person one vote. This sounds good but by creating representation what do we do – we give away our power. This is something I learned from Occupy (discussed many times eg here), representation dilutes the power. We empower our representatives, they go into government or negotiation, become an exposed target, and are bought off one way or another. And if they are not bought off they become exposed and vulnerable, requiring commitment from the people they represent to fight for them. But when people have given away their power they have given away their fight.
This brings me to something I focussed on in the thread – participation. When people are participating in their lives they have their power. And when they are participating they are following their Paths. This brings me back to ONE planet and compassion again. Where do Paths come from? Nature! Their Paths are part of the ONE Path of Nature of ONE planet. Participation can come from two sources and I was interested in the primary source, the Path, the other source is ego, and for most politicians the second source is ego. This is why government is bought off, the politicians are there for their egos. In my own trade union representative case, I was bought off by the delusion that I could make a change; that change can only come when all the people stand up and fight, not by personal representation. Essential to this participation is an awareness of yourself and your Path, and where does this come from? In most cases, meditation. Where does the knowledge of one’s own egotism come from? Meditation. People who do not meditate and approach the corridors of power with ideals as weapons are often deluding themselves. Quite simply government cannot be changed internally, it is an instrument of the prevailing power – at present the 1%. So my view of Ron Paul hasn’t changed, whether he is aware of it or not he is being paid to deregulate so that the 1% will increase their accumulation of meaningless wealth.
That leads me to fiat currency – I never knew that the gold standard was removed by Nixon (the Nixon shock). Greg introduced me to this term, it’s good to have words for a concept it gives it some respectability. Through Nixon the 1% changed the currency from the gold standard and this started the rot. In the latest crisis money comes from nowhere. Bailout monies ostensibly given to provide jobs were actually the 1% paying these monies into their bank accounts through their government stooges. In Greece money that mysteriously appeared from Obama was given to stop the Euro crashing. Where did it come from? People usually say taxes, but all the bailouts are far more than government has from taxes. It is monopoly money, and the 1% are quite happy to keep creating it because it goes into their bank accounts. But what does that money mean? It has meaning when the economies exist based on the dollar and tied currencies, but when the currencies crash this money will be worthless – even a gold standard wouldn’t have helped. 1% have accumulated meaningless wealth, and in doing so are creating their own downfall and the downfall of the world with it.
Meanwhile, I believe, the only alternative is participation at the community level. Community groups generating their own wealth through organic farms, crafts, low-tech skills, anything that they make, do or trade themselves. If they trade in dollars, they will be tied to the inevitable crash, if they barter or trade in their own community currencies they have some chance of withstanding the crash. But these community organisations will be the basis of government. However strong they get they will get that equivalent governmental voice. At present they are weak so no politician sees gain in supporting them, but as they grow their voice will increase and this voice will transcend into government. Understanding this more completely came out of this discussion. I had always supported a socialist government assuming it would be based on peoples’ interests, the reality is that a socialist government would be flawed because representing people takes away their participation. Active participation will create the required structure having its own mission. It might still be called government but there will be no imposition, force or otherwise. Discussing government is a red herring. Whilst it is there participating in government might produce damage limitation, but seeking to change society through government as a solution is a delusion. Meaningful change works on the ground by people creating communities with as much independence from 1% control as possible. When I was younger withdrawing labour as a strike offered some respite, but now the 1% have control of that – so there is no powerful Labour movement. So now people need to withdraw their Labour from the wage-slave system. No easy options like being a teacher, will the system have collapsed by the time a young teacher reaches my age? How will they then live through retirement? People need skills that will give them a survival trade and independence. They need a trading network that is independent of the 1% system and hope this network survives the crash when it comes.
In the end I have no different understanding about how Paul/Jones work, nor in seeing how those that support Jones and Paul can see themselves aligning with the 99%. It is ego – deluded or otherwise. I am no nearer believing in the constitution or the law or the Founding Fathers. Whilst a constitution might be well-written and comprehensive it is still only paper, what matters is the power. Seeking a dismantling of the power through government is the same as the puppets trying to pull the strings of their masters – impossible. And as for Founding Fathers, were they all Gandhis or the guy from the Maldives? They were of British political descent, I don’t believe it.
I do have a clearer understanding between ONE planet, participation and its relation to government. Good discussion.
Discuss to participatePosted: 09/06/2012 in Democracy, Finance, Freedom, ONE planet
Tags: Corporatocracy, intellect