The Historical Facts: there was an
DRASTIC ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AROUND 10,000 YEARS AGO which brought about
a NEED to seek new conditions BY WHICH and IN WHICH to live. The
agrarian age began 10,000 years ago: FOR SOME. People in certain areas
could no longer survive and therefore either abandoned those areas or
abandoned their old ways. The old ways are what, without a doubt,
allowed humans to biologically evolve into the H. Sapiens they were at
this time. Modern humans are no different from these early H. sapiens -
biologically speaking. Those seeking conditions IN WHICH to live
biologically adapted but culturally have stayed the same or stable since
the old ways worked (hunter gatherers still on the planet to this day).
But those seeking conditions BY WHICH to
live culturally evolved but biologically degenerated into a "norm" of
unhealthiness (mental and physical), malnutrition, allergies such as to
gluten, tooth decay, back deformities and arthritic joints due to the
backbreaking work, and of sick sexualities, fear of such desires and
supreme repression finally with there coming into being a state of
gender WAR common to them and even the demonification of the female
gender, i.e., monotheistic religion and patriarchy. Overpopulation,
health problems, hygiene problems and diseases, massive sewage and all
the rest of the ills which amount to a public health disaster resulted
from the agrarian way of life. The prime directive is to mate and make
more of the self. Those who cannot do this (for WHATEVER reason,
including "free choice" or "preference") are genetically dead. This is
highly unusual.
Genders can not remain at war too long
and a species thrive. What happens when the electrical field around the
ova REFUSES to let healthy sperm in for fertilization? We are now seeing
this strange phenomena. That's what I'd call "REALLY saying 'NO'!" LONG
is how long hominids were around and even this is short in real terms of
evolution. Hominids (not just H. sapiens) were around only about 2
million years. That's not long compared to other species. Long is NOT
measured by "civilizations" that rose and fell. It is "civilization" and
such cultural evolution that people (FROM them) hold so high and
consider so important. This is definitely akin to trying to analyze
patriarchy and feminism when you are FROM such patriarchal people and
living IN such a society yourself. It is as if you are a fish - INSIDE
the fish tank. You can not ask "what is a NOT-fish" from outside the
tank where you never go or see. ONLY a NOT-fish, outside it, CAN TELL
YOU what is NOT IN that fish tank. Few not-fish talk or tell and almost
NONE have writing or ever needed it. THIS not-fish talks and writes
having been taught how to do such in the USA.
This article is about a tree, and to know
about trees, branches, leaves and fruit you must know what the SEED is
and next what the ROOTS are like to determine if it's viable, healthy,
etc. and see clearly WHAT IT REALLY IS. And this is how we think and
analyze: very unlike the fish! We think and see things synthetically.
That's what E.O. Wilson is calling for: a synthesis. He'll have to stop
analyzing modern humans teleologically, however, and see that SOMETHING
went very WRONG since agriculture. Stop focusing on the presumed
"intelligence" and wonder if it IS intelligent at all to doom one's own
species to extinction by poisoning it's own habitat. Bacteria did that
long ago: they poisoned their ecosystem with oxygen and it caused a
..... Revolution.....
This following is represented as a tree
with a seed and branches, growth AND development:
SEED: ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE. Need for
humans to change in some way, or perish. (The same do or die necessity
occurred which FORCED ape to eventually evolve into man; FORCED fish to
eventually evolve into amphibian. Keep in mind, all members of One
Species go their own ways when such is necessary and they SPECIATE into
more than one species.)
ROOT: AGRICULTURE chosen as means BY
WHICH to seek continuance as a means to survive. What was NOT chosen?
Physical, biological evolution. Agrarian life forced humans to eat
things they were not fully biologically evolved to eat. It forced humans
to work far more than they were evolved to work. CULTURAL evolution,
with all its ramifications, was chosen as they self-sang the praises of
their own ruination of life, their own drudge-filled lives (one group
even called agriculture, gender war and birth problems a CURSE and
imagined their god put it on their GENErations), and they praised it all
as they pushed out, absorbed or wiped out all of the others who were
nomadic.
THE ROOT THE RESULTS: ">" means "it became"
| Defense of land > walled in area > soldiers
| > nations > property and land owning.
Stationary | Labor division > castes > unequal distribution
settlers | replacing equal due to presence of soldiers now
doing | in power to demand more, better, higher > class
agriculture. | oppression: hierarchies.
| Priests and armies to keep classes in their place >
| imperialist godist patriarchy > man killing man.
LEADS TO: ->Need to move to newer lands due to land erosion from agriculture.
Need for more room, due to overpopulation fostered by any
agrarian society, always need more farm hands.
->The lowest classes always have larger families than higher
classes. Women are breeding property.
->Ends in the lowest classes knowing nothing or being kept
uneducated, give them education and they immediately seek to
"rise up" in the class system. Lowest classes are property
and slaves. Women and children are property.
COMBINE the these above: leads to humans
conquering other humans, the "might is right" mentality, and warlike
nations subduing anyone in the way by absorption or extermination.
Priestly dictates emerge with fairy tales about manifest destiny to
justify genocide. Of course there is oppression. Life in agrarian
societies is always so hellish for the average person that people are
constantly trying to find ways to live off the work of others! This can
take the form of classism or imperialism. Such societies run on
oppression and can't run any other way. Even if all members of one such
nation are free ("given" freedom by the rulers!), their freedom is
bought on the backs of some "other" nation that is exploited as a colony
of "inferiors." The only thing ever able to utterly defeat and replace
such a society was another identical society with more might; or one
such society split apart and became two such societies. Temporary
defeats occurred where the slaves rose up en masse and overthrew their
rulers. That didn't last long.
Doing an analysis of the current ethics
(from inside the fish tank, so to speak) and moralities and then trying
to find some justification for the "behavior" in the ancestral human, is
teleological. Ancestral humans behaved NOTHING like moderns; if they
did, they'd never have evolved! (See Cavalli-Sforza "The Great Human
Diasporas" for information on a modern-day primitive society that
retains ancestral ways: they are the first affluent society but they are
nothing like what civilized people imagine "jungle dwellers" to be
like.) Understanding that something WARPED the underlying
hunter/gatherer urges is a better idea. Trying to squeeze "religion,"
especially organized religion, into some kind of animist/shamanist
developmental phenomena is also wrong. It is FACTUALLY incorrect; the
two are not the same nor are they congruent.
There exist/ed/s genders in all sexually
dimorphic species, including man, long before this happened. Being
gendered is NOT the problem. Genders exist in nomadic communalistic
societies too. There was division of labor according to ability and the
fruits of all labors went back into the society to be shared equally.
There was no need to defend land because no one was stationary.
Overpopulation NEVER occurs in nomad societies. Such primitive societies
are all communalistic in one form or another, but the WHOLE FOUNDATION
of these societies is utterly unlike that of the agrarian societies.
Their entire way of thinking regarding relations to their labor and
relations with each other, are completely different. Agrarian societies
pushed out the nomad ones, they are almost all gone now. At the same
time agrarian societies have eaten up almost the entire planet. THEY
don't have anywhere to go, to find a new habitat. They now threaten to
"eat up" our air supply. They have rendered many rivers anoxic or
hypoxic and oxygen-based life as we know it is being replaced by other
life that is able to tolerate these new conditions. These new life forms
are in our food chain! This is the situation NOW. But this situation had
a ROOT back in time, and not all that long ago: 10,000 years ago is not
long ago.
View this (the following diagram below)
as a tree, not as separate categories, but as how one thing grew into
and developed into another at the same time AS all other parts of the
tree were growing. E.g., Walls around a protected area (i.e., with a
given set of protectors) necessitates a grouping of who is going to do
which chores. This simple division of labor with the fruits of ALL labor
pooling back into the whole group begins to change with certain groups
getting a bigger share than others. Warrior castes, which arise from
those chosen to be protectors, go hand in hand with unequal ownership,
now of privatized portions of land. Warriors are in a position to demand
more and claim patches of land simply by using brute force. These
protector/warriors continue to exist even when they are NO LONGER
REQUIRED to protect anything! Next, the castes become static, they
become set AS CLASSES and they'd vie for favoritism from the strongest
class, i.e., the warriors. This, in itself, would alter the gene pool:
warriors are usually quite dumb but smarter folks are usually not
warriors! Females choosing their mates would be replaced by rape. The
warriors would elect a King. The priests (wimpy and lazy, usually also
male, but cunning deceivers able to pull off a few tricks) would declare
him a God King or claim he ruled by Divine Decree since the warriors are
in a position to destroy these priests if they don't serve them. This is
how it starts and ends up every single time.
By the time this formerly small group
overpopulates and ruins the land, they are strong enough, as a nation
now, to conquer and/or push out all other people. Nomads were once the
majority. Now they are almost extinct or absorbed. The New World Order
is one HUGE Empire with the classes still in place, slaves and all. It's
just HUGE now. The revolt against Altar and Throne is a revolt against
THIS "TREE." (This is what is behind the anti-Adamite mythopoetry of
those [Masons, Hiram Rite] who regard this all as "The Assassins" who
regard "us" against it as Anti-Christs, THEIR Enemy.)
Prior to this agrarianism, there were a
few million years of human hunter gatherers living with a stable but
primitive communism. They were also nomads and spread themselves all
over the world prior to agriculture. The ENTIRETY of our physical,
biological, including neurological, evolution into H.sapiens happened
during those few million years - and it STOPPED COLD since agriculture.
The ESOTERIC implications of calling this
a Tree of Destruction is that it means these people divorced themselves
from a Tree of LIFE - which is what existed prior to their turning to
agriculture. Both the left and right captions shown on the ToD developed
simultaneously and these all fed into each other.
The ToD does not show a "revolutionary
vehicle" (as some Reds complain). It was never intended TO show that. It
simply shows how it all started and grew - and it shows WHAT we have to
fight against, now, in its almost final stage (the Tree is HUGE now,
it's not just somewhere in the Middle East or China or MesoAmerica!).
And I feel it's not so much "nations" or "some group" we have to fight
per se (defeat them and another nation or group arises and continues on
the same road), but this entire BALL that's just rolling like a
juggernaut needs to be stopped or it will doom us all and not too far
off in our future. It is as if humans are incapable of STOPPING. Why?
Because underlying their behaviors are ancestral instincts, drives,
urges even possibly hard-wired into our genes - and these biological
things, I feel, are WARPED due to the things we eat, the agricultural
base, perhaps the metabolism, parasites in us, viruses including
neurological viruses - the WHOLE THING we've been doing since
agriculture - it has warped the underlying hunter gatherer cooperative
nature of humans. It has turned the hunter into a cancer, a genocidal
(overt or covert, direct or indirect) monster, it has turned the
gatherer into a greed-filled thing that wants and wants when NOTHING is
ever enough! He hoards things he doesn't even need (like 30 cars, or 20
billion dollars and the insatiable desire to make one billion more).
When you read this chart, you have to
figure out yourself, the social relations, the relations of workers to
their labor, and the NEW modes of production, technologies and people's
relation TO that technology and the other people around them, that came
with growing food on static patches of land. You have to figure out
yourself, what happened when "area protectors" became "The Warrior
Caste" and how they related to the rest of the society. You'll have to
have a firm grasp of our ancestral nature, the Primate Nature which is
hard-wired into us (GENETICALLY!) (Look at the Bonobo, the primate
genetically closest to humans). Why they GOT religion (implied is that
they were mentally messed up enough to FALL FOR religion and WANT it
because it filled some sick "emotional" need) is explained by two
internet articles:
Akathartic
and Ophionic States explains, in neurologist Antonio Damasio's
words, what such skewed people are like: they are considered normal in
THIS society. No one can understand a living organism by looking at it
outside of its biological nature and environment. To do so would be
abiological. Humans, like any other animal, can be conditioned to BE
this way or that way within the LIMITS or "norms of" their biological
natures - i.e., they can't be conditioned to breathe water.
Reader: You'll need to print this page
out in order to SEE IT as it is meant to be seen.
SET COMPUTER L/R MARGINS TO 1-79 or
windows to 1" LR margins.
TREE OF DESTRUCTION: View this as a tree,
from bottom to top.
END RESULT
Empires, (NEED MORE SPACE, SPREAD OUT AND)
imperialism, (ENGULF THE WORLD, MORE STRIFE//WAR)
colonialism. See later diagram.
|| ...//
|| Manifest Destiny
||... God ordains it.
Might is right, Holy Wars and
take and push Elitism racism
out all others. //
|| ...//
||... EFFECT: Priestly caste
Need more room (OVERPOPULATION) supports military
powerful army can (LAND DEPLETION) & pacifies others.
war and take more (NEED TO SPREAD) //
|| (FIND MORE LAND) //
|| ...//
||... Classes, vying
Nation states against each
warrior caste other for more.
||... ...//
Walls around Unequal ownership.
protected area ...//
with protectors. Castes assigned to
|| specific chores.
||..................//
||....TREE ROOT...//
Stationary Settlers farming a patch of land CAUSE:
CAUSE:
CLIMATE CHANGE
Please note that ...// and ||... means that what came underneath
on the page, developed into and interacted with the next things
up on the page - these things grew like a tree grows.
The later trade routes were not developed
by these agrarians. For a long while, later in history, agrarians were
preyed on by roving nomads who were like bandits. Eventually, they
reached an agreement and the roving nomads became new, oftentimes
stationary, protectors against OTHER nomad-bandits (usually their own
related tribesmen; e.g., Jenghis Khan and the Tatars). It was THESE who
knew where this or that could be gotten and from whom; and who needed
this or that: THEY developed all the trade routes. Agrarians originally
drove nomads out (in Euro-Asia they ended up in the colder northern
regions where other humans already were), but they later came back as
the most fearsome warriors of all and RULED these agrarians from time to
time until they, too, got absorbed into the more populous agrarian
societies (Kublai Khan and China, good example of this). True to form,
as soon as they were absorbed into the societies they ruled, they set to
war against each other. See internet article
Turania
(http://www.geocities.com/redcomrades/turania.html) for an in depth look
and history of Turanian nomads and China at war with each other, which
includes some geographical facts about the USSR (the land of the
Turanians). When these agrarian lands were conquered by these nomads,
their knowledge was not destroyed but leapt ahead not just due to the
import of goods from nomad-held trade routes, but due to the initial
TOLERANCE of these nomads when it came to such war-making notions as
religion and race: Shah Jahan, Kublai, and the so-called "great" Arabian
civilization - were not Semitic or Arabian or even Chinese - these were
the products of people CONQUERED by Turanian peoples whose input and
organization (synthetic, diverse and cooperative) made them great. A lot
of knowledge from many places was gathered into their lands.
Specifically, WHAT did these stationary,
agrarian settlers with their own hierarchies DO when they were invaded
by these roving, unbeatable nomads? They did what proletarians do in
relation to the rich and powerful rulers in THEIR lands: they dealed!
They do what small nation rulers do when confronted by larger
imperialist nations making demands on them: they compromised! This, now,
is pretty much a separate cultural evolution showing HOW other kinds of
"classes" developed amidst Feudalism; a class that got for themselves
some BIG privileges, and the class of merchants. Not everyone got filthy
rich from the opened trade routes - only the privileged got rich and
they were WHOLLY dependent for about 1,500 years on these roving nomads!
Only VERY recently are they now independent of them - but now these
people themselves are AKIN to roving nomads. They are called
imperialists. :) Spelled out, well known example: Bill Gates was a
nobody but he roved around and found a little of this and borrowed a
little of that - he was a bandit of a type at times, too - then he
joined it all together and SOLD IT to buyers. Then he made it so that no
one can just share it, they have to go through him and HIS company and
PAY A TOLL to get it. That's EXACTLY what nomads did with trade routes
and/or passes from this place to that place, or rivers - made people pay
a toll. LIKE the nomad rulers of old, the imperialists have all the
leisure time in the world and everything in the world they want. Unlike
the agrarians, these cold-adapted evolved nomads were a tad more
predatory, BY NATURE. ALL animals and plants from that region ARE more
ferocious and predatory. If you doubt that the USA is a hunter gatherer
nation, just think of how they HUNT for markets and GATHER buyers, how
they HUNT for resources and get very predatory about getting them to
gather into their own nation. They have even learned the art of war,
Chinese expert style - they get groups within nations (that have
something they want) to kill EACH OTHER - then they come in and keep the
peace for them - and take what they want. Pure hunter gatherer. They
even preach the new religion - "humanism," to get the uninitiated
citizens in their own countries to back them up: "so and so is doing a
genocide; WE, the 'Moral Democracy' (chosen of god?) have to stop him
for the sake of those POOR people - so we have to BOMB them - it's our
moral duty... We have to do it 'for Democracy' (for God)." Few Americans
see clearly enough to predict that we will soon witness a "Drive to the
East for goodies" similar to the earlier Drive to the West, which wiped
out almost all the American Indians... Same show, different channel. The
trick to keeping the status quo is to make sure they keep the citizens
of their own nations HAPPY AND CONTENT (not overworked and underpaid!).
So, the underlying hunter instinct
becomes warped: produces genocide whether that genocide be by direct use
of weapons or by "normal capitalism" which preys on workers in other
places such as we see today. The underlying gatherer instinct becomes
warped: produces people seemingly empty of all compassion or feeling who
are insatiably greedy and who prey on the planet's resources as if they
are infinite, and who are unable to use reason when they SEE what this
is doing to the entire planet. The interaction results in a set up where
the norm is to step on fellow man, murder fellow man, rape the earth,
destroy habitats, etc. There is a definite in-built, hard-wired genetic
or ancestral predisposition for these behaviors. Scientists seem to
focus on MALES adapting, as if there are no females. It seems more as if
males were warped the most. What accounts for the distortion of the
sexual urge and obsession with unwholesome practices (a politically
incorrect idea but hell...whole pseudocultures for the genetically dead
are now built on one's sexual deviations). I think it's what people eat,
or centuries of people eating garbage which produced garbage cultures,
no matter how "great" people IN the system think these cultures are.
They are garbage. What accounts for religion? Is it extreme repression
due to a split in emotional input and disassociative state becoming
insanity when the repression breaks lose? Perhaps it is Borna virus! How
many slaves had to starve, suffer, die to make a tomb for a crazed
Pharaoh? And what for? So he could "rise from the dead? Wherefrom in
nature would any normal human get the notion that a dead thing could
wake up and walk around again? NOT from seeing people sleep. Primitives
would also see people "sleeping" then start to rot and stink. They'd
have a clear understanding of death. They, like any other animal, would
come to accept death as a normal part of life. THAT is rational! Why do
so many researchers justify irrationality by trying to find "good
things" that came of it? NOTHING good comes of it. Consider what H.
sapiens COULD HAVE BEEN, but never became. Animals are very practical.
Humans are not and have NOT BEEN since agriculture. Again, using some
kind of correlation or congruence to try to explain modern human
behavior by understanding the ancestral human design is teleological.
Animism is nothing like religion. Eg, attributing a "manitu" to all
objects animate or inanimate is sort of like having a rudimentary feel
for "what matter is." All these objects are atomic matter, all have
electrons, etc. Wind would be an object that was felt strongly, but
unseen. They'd call it by a name that would be sort of like calling it a
force. The sun would be worshipped or at least loved as an in-general
life giver, as would be rain. This is nothing like religion.
SET MARGINS L/R 1-79 or in MS Word 1" LR
margins
Print it out if necessary to see it all
as a tree that's growing.
MODERN TREE OF DESTRUCTION: THIS IS WHAT
IT IS NOW.
END RESULT:
END RESULT:
Empires, (NEED MORE SPACE, MORE RESOURCES, SPREAD OUT AND)
imperialism, (ENGULF THE WORLD, MORE STRIFE/WAR OVER RESOURCES)
colonialism.
Socialism tries its hand Socialism tries its hand when
with united labor BUT <<---WAR--->> workers unite in other places or
workers are bought off, etc. WITHIN the imperialist places.
Inter-imperialist rivalry, etc. ...//
|| Manifest Destiny.
||... Create dictatorships
Might is right: in small developing
protect the profits at countries:
ANY cost, by ANY means, disguised as "protecting
demonize any threat. democracy." Incite racism.
|| nationalism and conflict.
|| ...//
||... Priestly caste and ruling class
Need more and more supports military efforts
resources. Armies make & pacifies or silences others.
war and take more. Labor the slaves of ruling class.
|| //
|| ...//
||... Classes within the ruling nations
Ruling Nation States unite; vie against each other but unite
warrior caste: NATO etc. against all other nations.
||... ...//
Walls around Unequal ownership reigns supreme.
protected area ...//
with protectors. Castes assigned to specific chores. The
Protect PROFITS. oppressed make it all; oppressors benefit.
||...........Mental versus physical labor.
|| //
||...TREE ROOT...//
Incoming Settlers taking over a country, by any means.
Eliminating or enslaving indigenous population.
CAUSE*:
NEED MORE SPACE, NEED TO SPREAD OUT
*Note, this CAUSE here is what the
original tree grew into so long ago.
Is there a biological evolutionary
explanation for such horrendously AWFUL behavior? Well, I'll give that a
try: other primates are not genetically predisposed to this or that
static or fixed social system. They also can't be accused of having
priests, morals, ethics or books with rules in them, or written laws!
Other primates try various social systems; the social systems are
themselves subject to natural selection. The ones that work best IN THE
ENVIRONMENTAL NICHE THEY ARE IN are they ones they keep.
Put any primate in an ecological niche
where there is scarcity and you'll end up, guaranteed, with alpha
dominant male structure as social strategy (culture) where they TAKE ALL
and no one can stop them, females that do not band together, and weaker
males and all females terrorized by the strongest brutes (whether they
wield fist, club or atomic bomb....). Most APE species have this social
strategy, including chimps.
Put any primate in an ecological niche
where there is abundance, but not of the long-lasting or permanent type,
and you'll end up with cliques of females dominating the foraging areas
and a kind of bartering between males and females for food/favors.
Bonobo chimps have this social strategy (culture). Note that they are
the SAME species as other chimps, they are cross-fertile, but they do
NOT choose to mate with them. (Is that racism?) The Bonobo is
genetically the closest to humans.
Put any primate in an ecological niche
where there is abundance and it lasts long or is renewable or permanent
(whether that be vegetation that doesn't rot fast, lots and various
kinds of eatable fruits, easily hunted animals to eat, or refrigerators
to store TV dinners and easy-access supermarkets with cheap food...) and
you'll end up with equalitarian social strategies (at least within each
tribe or nation), no gender-specific work duties and all-around harmony,
or at least a tendency to strive for that. Some monkeys have this. I
know of no APE species that has this. Some humans have it - I doubt they
want to give it up.
The trick, then, to "making a utopia" is
not to preach doctrines or dogmas, but to CHANGE THE
ENVIRONMENT/ECOLOGICAL NICHE. How can you do this when another group, a
TINY group, has all it needs for now and is also MEGA RICH, and is hell
bent on keeping what they have is against any efforts to FIX the world?
Have a revolution. THEN make things right. Can humans do that - just ONE
TIME? I don't have high hopes. There would have to be more than just a
balance of people to resources. There'd have to be a potential for
resources to outnumber people using them, for there to be MORE than
"just enough" for everyone in the niche. They'd have to control their
tendency to overpopulate. They'd have to consciously make up new rules
and laws, by "Divine Decree" if necessary. Would such content and happy
people even need religion anymore? Basically, humans would have to start
putting PEOPLE BEFORE PROFITS!
For agricultural problems check out
NEANDERTHIN on internet (http://neanderthin.com/).
Lots of literature exists on this, hard science references. See "Meat
Three Times a Day," a book by F.J. Schlink and M.C. Phillips. Humans are
able to eat 98% of all meat stuffs on the planet, but only about 2% of
vegetable stuffs. As humans changed the foods they planted, grew, bred
and ate, the plants changed humans - like co-evolution - it works TWO
ways. Metabolism can be said to be all: you ARE what you eat! Check on
some semi-classified neurological data (especially on neuro viruses and
toxins). Check on what parasites can do to you and MAKE YOU DO (despite
the notion that you have a free will!) It is also well known that many
American Indians went from being totally healthy hunter gatherers to
creating a public health disaster when they turned to agriculture.
Question is, why did they CONTINUE to do this and not stop? Perhaps they
lost the ability to "reason," which would have told them to STOP.
Perhaps they were infected with parasites that literally MADE THEM
continue. But aside from outside agents, what could cause humans to do
such a thing? Pain could, mental confusion could - lots of things could,
even addiction in some way, perhaps barely detectable (unlike with
opium).
A FEW COMMENTS:
Man "advanced" in a WRONG WAY, way back
about the time he had to start doing agriculture, due to a (presumed?)
climate change where he had to change the way he lived or perish. The
whole imperialist, theocratic, patriarchal (woman hating, woman
fearing), dung heap of history since then is one long stream of
occurrences where simple division of labor BECAME castes and then
classes (with the ultimate same end: revolution and overthrow with
another imperialist theocracy taking over). It is ONLY BECAUSE these
divisions of labor existed INSIDE OF boundaried and OVER POPULATED (key
event) nation-states, that came into being due to them living and
planting on a PATCH of land, that caste/class arose from division of
labor! In turn, nation-states needed armies of "the strongest" to
"protect" from "the others, out there" without realizing that armies of
bullies do not go away: they turn against those they were created to
protect in the first place. That's how it happens, simple as that: they
elect their Ruler, or "God King" as of old, and this Ruler has his army
and his Priests backing him (usually). Altar and throne!: something the
Founding Father MASONS of the USA were dead against, and something the
Bolsheviks were also against.
ALL of such societies went patriarchal,
and the OLDEST ones of this type, long standing and formerly Great
Civilizations, are all NOW called the Third World, with the WORST
anti-woman, outright sadism, practiced as the norm. One should draw the
line when people (half the gender) get tortured and mutilated and even
crippled for the sex pleasures of men. If such things were being done by
Islamics or Hindus - or by Christian Americans - on ANOTHER RACE you'd
see the U.N. having a shit-fit over it.....maybe.
A note on what amounts to politics and
imperialism and gender problems - and these are PROBLEMS and they need
to be addressed if our biological nature (or unnature) is to be
understood. If you are a prude or shy, don't read this paragraph: it's
BLUNT. What First World Feminism seems to REALLY WANT to say to men is:
"Hell no, there is no way in hell that
you males who want penis rule will EVER turn our U.S.A. into an Islamic
or Hindu or Chinese society where you cut off clitorises and sew up
vaginas, where you set women you are tired of on fire, or where you bind
the feet of women for your sexual pleasure; we are not masochists and we
will not allow you to be sadists - not with us. We don't need you men,
we can get pregnant from ANYONE and wander away with the man never even
knowing he is a father. Fuck fatherhood: motherhood is real. Mothers do
all the work and, as such, men have NO SAY in what we birth (or don't
birth). There is already something wrong when power of a NON-sexual type
focused on material objects, fetishes, or non-sexual acts are
eroticized, but there is no way in hell you will make us into
slaves/masochists, no way in hell. There is no way we will TOLERATE
sadism. It's NOT a 'dick thing' after all. No: it's WOMB thing! There is
NO WAY this society will become like that. And, oh yes, we can do that
job as well as any male can...... And we want equal pay..... And
housework is work and we should be paid for it....."
Does this speech sound wrong? These women
put the labor and wage issue in the forefront because that's all "clean
and white," it's all so proper; they bring blatant abuse to the
forefront but they shy away from being brutally graphic. But they settle
for unpleasureable sex, lie to their mates or husbands and do a LOT of
complaining to other women behind the backs of the men - usually about
how much they hate oral sex and how lousy the men are at sex, cum too
fast, not big enough, etc. etc. Elaine Morgan (the lady with the Aquatic
Ape Theory) found, in interviewing women who were brutally honest (and
wholly anonymous!), that she could forget about suggesting or finding
out how to make sex "more pleasurable" for them - they'd be happy if it
was "less disgusting." What's wrong here? LOTS. Fundamentalist "Jesus
freak" Christian women have found a way to keep the husband and avoid
the sex altogether; they say: "It's a sin to have sex unless we plan to
have a child - and we DO NOT plan to have a child." They are also
doctrinally against the "oral thing." Smart ladies! How do I know this?
I asked a whole bunch of them and when they felt they COULD be open with
me, they TOLD me. That the same reason why the first Nun, Melanie,
became a nun and why so many ladies joined her, long before men had any
juristiction over these Nunnish ladies. (One libertine male asked me:
"What's in Christianity for women that they can identify with or which
can aid them as women? There is only Jesus who is celibate and Mary who
is a Virgin -plus God." Answer: Yes. I explained it all to him. Silence.
He was one of those guys who could NEVER manage to keep a girlfriend
after she experienced sex with him - he had no idea why. Well? Now he
knew why. And the Truth does not always set people free.) :( In this
society where women can work for themselves and can easily get divorced,
THEY DO. The first chance they get, THEY DO. HALF of all American
marriages fail within their first four years.
Making up a "reason," after the fact, to
"justify" the behavior-as-it-is, eg, "he who has the best car gets the
women and has offspring, this is the GENES at work" is BULLSHIT, it's
teleological pseudo-science!
First World Feminism! They set up abuse
centers, rally, and even rally men and the law, to harsher treatment
against abusers and so forth. They divorce the men and get the First
World courts to force these men to PAY for it and to PAY for children
that happen to be around. But what many women do not realize is that the
crime, lousy education, all of the CRAP out there is forcing a grass
roots white-Christian movement to arise in one of the MAJOR political
parties. What these First World Christian women and most of their
enemies (left-wing feminists) do not realize is that these right-wing
Christian people are acting out of immediate necessity (just like it was
done long ago) and they are setting up the SAME EXACT CONDITIONS for the
SAME EXACT patriarchal theocracy.
History shows that such patriarchal
theocracies were ancient and very long standing, big, "Great
Civilizations," long ago when Europe was a nothing place with nothing
there and long before Christianity existed. If you grade or rank
patriarchal practices in terms of brutality against women, sadistic or
degrading perversion, and the age of the civilization, you find that the
OLDEST patriarchal societies, India, China, and the Afro-Semitic Middle
East, are the WORST patriarchies and theocracies even though they are no
longer powerful or big (or civilized in some cases)! Next oldest are
Greece and Rome. Their patriarchy and theocracy is less, but more than
in the NEWEST imperialist societies. The latest imperialists are the
English (British Empire) and Americans (New World Order); one can't even
really say Germany ever had a real imperial empire, although they tried
it a few times, Hitler being the last try. However the most primitive
peoples and the latest to get civilization are the Scandinavians and
then the Slavs (real Slavs, not Slavic-speaking Europeans). They are the
LEAST patriarchal, some groups of them are STILL MATRILINEAL and they
are the most peaceful, and what theology they have is little more than
shamanism - even E. Slavic Christianity is mother goddess worship akin
to shamanism as they practice it.
I don't have to explain that the
Afro-Semitic Middle East, Hindu India or China (at least, before Mao put
a forced end to it) are the most sadistic and degrading toward women
(See Marilyn French: "War Against Women" for details. And consider and
understand - when these men see what would probably make an American man
puke in disgust and flee in terror, THEY get HARD ONS!).
In post Maoist China, if a man merely
talks to a woman in a grocery store, asking her the price of an item,
she is ruined, considered a whore. Don't these people have any
revolutionary rebelliousness in them to say "FUCK YOU, we guys and gals
are going to congregate?" No, it took Mao to enforce this and outlaw
male practices against women. But Mao is gone and so are the bans and no
sooner were his wife and the Communists deposed and male rule reinstated
that they called Mrs. Mao a WITCH! Small wonder so many feminists are
into witchcraft! So: women who wield power are WITCHES. They are evil,
of Satan. Same old shit! Obviously, forcing males and females to wear
the same clothing didn't do anything (no kidding) and this "outer
change" amounts to people dressing up like clowns and then imagining
they'll BE funny and give birth to funny kids.
One would have to get at the INNER to
cure this gender war. What do I mean by INNER? Evolutionary biology,
neurology, brain development especially inutero and during first 7 or 8
years of life, maybe genes too. Inner: the HIDDEN stuff that MAKES
things what they are - the stuff that's not obvious immediately on
sight. Attributing this to Confucius or whoever is nonsense. WHY would
they CHOOSE Confucius and not Lao Tse? For the same reason that certain
TYPES of people would CHOOSE Protestantism over Catholicism.
In India the only time the men hold back
and stop their brutality against a whole gender is when some Western
news reporter is there to watch. In the Afro-Semitic Middle East they
don't seem to give a shit who's watching when they throw acid on women
without veils or mutilate their genitals.
Are these people human beings? I could
easily be persuaded to think they are NOT human beings. I could be
persuaded to treat them as if they are mad dogs and BOMB them. In fact:
I'm already persuaded. They are pretas, klippoths, bhutas, MONSTERS,
things out of control, destroyers, etc. etc. Now, I FEEL this. I feel it
first - then I think it. I feel it STRONGLY.
But in Greece and less in Italy (and
Greece is older than Italy as far as civilization/culture is concerned)
there is the sexual double standard where a woman is either a virgin or
a whore. This is very Catholic. This double standard is slightly in the
Anglo-American lands, but it hardly exists in Germany and does not exist
in Scandinavia or the Slavic lands. If spreading genes around is the
prime directive, why would males "think up" such ideas and label females
"bad" when they obviously had DESIRE for them (which is supposed to be
positive)? When a female gives a male an erection, the male is supposed
to LIKE the female, at least feel some kind of positive thing toward the
female: friendship, even love. These men have sex with what they HATE?
That's SICK! FINDING some possible ancestral biological trait that is
possibly "transformed" to explain this behavior is BULLSHIT - it's
teleological! Let's LOOK at other primates then. THERE IS the ancestral
behavior! Other primates are not demented!
That the sperm itself has types - some
seek ova, some attack OTHER sperm!, and some block OTHER sperm, proves
that females were MEANT to be "sexually free" (a cultural word). Well -
like chimp females! Chimp females are that way due to biology and genes
- that's for sure. Humans are not pair-bonding animals. Pair-bonding is
a biological term. Monogamy is a non-scientific word.
There is inequality in equality just as
there is difference within sameness - even within the SAME "THING."
Also, you can NOT take out one human trait or behavior (even if it's BIG
- a "Culture") and look at it - it's not possible since all of life, our
niches and our evolution (biological), the ancestral urges - all of it,
is INTERWOVEN into a picture: is it "normal" or not? THAT humans DO a
"human" behavior doesn't necessarily mean that it evolved AND that it IS
ALSO determined by HUMAN biology. Parasites can make animals alter their
thinking and behavior and do things that are entirely UNnatural!
(Discovery August, 2000 "Do parasites rule the world?" and Science News,
August 12, 2000, p 109 "Parasite deludes rats into liking cats." "Wasp
redesigns web of doomed spider")
Sometimes, people's biology gets WARPED
AND BENT! The instinct to hunt animals becomes the behavior of hunting
humans for slaves. Kin bonds in tribes becomes xenophobia and
demonization of "all others" with attendant genocide. The Aryan Nation
perceived the Jewish segment of the Semite Nation as a demonic evil:
that wasn't rational! That was LUNACY, yet a whole technological nation
of civilized people believed it (see Goldhagan, "Hitler's Willing
Executioners" for proof.) Environment, which is the ecological NICHE an
animal (human) is in, plus genetic heritage (Primate in our case) is
CO-evolved. All this involves a two-way (dialectical)
interchange/interaction in specific ways. But something went WRONG!
OBVIOUSLY so. Or else we are a species biologically determined to go
extinct!? What you see today are broken people, and heaps of broken
people make a broken society, a broken nation. Observing the abnormal
and finding a correlation with NORMAL ancestral urges, and then saying
"it's all OK" is a teleological error and a pretty pathetic excuse.
Someone needs to take biological
evolution, merge that with neurology (see Antonio Damasio especially:
"Descartes' Error"), merge that with neurovirology and parasitology and
then merge that with the PUBLIC HEALTH DISASTER that agricultural living
brought on, the WORK people had to endure, the overpopulation way out of
balance with resources, and come to the RIGHT conclusion: that the
dogmatic types of woman hating patriarchy and religion we have had since
then is NOT a normal thing at all. We are hunter gatherers at base: what
do we hunt and gather now? Someone needs to understand what some
"esoteric" doctrines have been saying - which is SPELLED OUT in Wilhelm
Reich's works - and merge that with Antonio Damasio's work. It seems
that E. O. Wilson, an expert entomologist, is suggesting this too. He
has done a lot of it already or at least hinted at some of it in a book
"Consilience" - BUT - he has failed to mention the public health
disaster brought on by agrarian life - there is FORENSIC PROOF of that
statement; he has failed to reason what humans would BECOME and what
they'd "think up" when they felt pain all day long from back breaking
agrarian work, when their lives became constant drudgery; or what some
of those people would do to GET OUT OF the drudgery - at the expense of
all others of course! He has failed to reason PENT UP instinct,
upbringing designed to bury instinct and condition the child to IGNORE
the 5 senses, sensual impacts, somatic markers. He has failed to
conclude that such a human is NOT CAPABLE of logic - but neurologists
could explain it - Damasio has explained it: they are anosognosic -
alexithymic. He has failed to factor in the fact that we are DOOMING
ourselves and there is NOTHING "animal" about this - nothing "normal"
about it - it's insane. Humans are SUPPOSED TO have logic and the
ability to STOP DOING such things to themselves and each other: do they
have logic? Can they stop? I think NOT.) Perhaps one should look into
something other than humans: WHAT BENEFITS in the animal world from the
actions of humans destroying a human habitat? Let us look THERE for the
answer.
Also, one has to fully understand that
animism and shamanism are NOTHING LIKE monotheism, and monotheism is NOT
some mental advancement at all. It is either the con job work of
ruthless rulers, or heaps of morons believing in the delusional ravings
of schizophrenics or humans with a viral infection of the brain (such as
Borna). In this, Richard Dawkins is 100% right when he says: religion is
a DISEASE. But he is 100% wrong on selfish genes, for if genes were as
he said, we'd be walking tumors: oncogenes are the ONLY genes that
behave as he claims. Animism is NOT religion, not at all. Animism is a
wrong explanation of why things in nature work - or it's right but
Westerners can't understand what's being said. After all, Australian
Aborigines can MAKE boomerangs and hit moving targets with them. They
never studied Newton. Why do THEY say the weapon works that way; what
made THEM "think of" making it in that particular shape? Who can
understand their words? FACT: they make them and use them! It took an
aerodynamics expert to figure out HOW these boomerangs worked! Are the
Aborigines aerodynamics experts? NO? They make boomerangs and use them!
Knowing what Newton knew, could Newton use one as efficiently? There is
knowing with the head and then there is KNOWING with the body. Without
the direct input of healthy somatic markers that have been allowed to
grow and develop, guided by the instinct, there is NO logic possible!
That is a fact Damasio proved. (It's a fact some of us KNEW by mere
observation of the FRUITS of actions).
Imperialism and its attendant colonialism
is new to the Europeans. Egyptians did it long ago, they colonized
people. So did the Romans. So did the Chinese. They all had slavery,
too, nothing has changed. But in the West there have been violent
revolutions: American, French, Bolshevik (Russian, Communist). China had
revolutions when bands of Turanians (Ural-Altaic, North and Central
Asian peoples) had enough of Chinese colonialization and went into China
and kicked their royal butts - and then took them over. So there was a
big change in China for a very short while until it reverted back; as it
has done post- Mao. Similar incursions of Turanians into Mid-East Semite
lands resulted in the same things with some BIG civilizations resulting
from it and mass migrations of people INTO Europe resulting from it.
Incursions of barbarian Germanic tribes, allied with Turanian Huns, into
Rome caused chaos, but the Holy Roman Empire (The First Reich in
Germany) came from these actions.
It doesn't matter what items get produced
or mass produced. That's not the issue except in terms of labor,
capital, slave-wages, etc. It's also an issue that now the First World
exploits the hell out of the Third World - but it used to be the other
way around with the peoples of the Third World having the power when the
peoples of the First World mere barbarian savages, primitive as ever.
(How did the Anglos get to England? The Huns came and pushed populations
West and these peoples bumped into the Anglos who also got pushed. Why
did the Anglos come to America? Because Tamerlane cut the East-West
trade route and the East, at the time, was BIG CIVILIZATION while Europe
was a cess pool.) So the Crown of Imperialism has changed many hands in
history: now the Anglo Americans have it, they have it ALL and they are
having a party at the expense of the Third World which they exploit to
have their party. But things are NOT O.K. There is trouble in the Realm.
But it's the same old trouble: are humans incapable of learning from
history?
The Empire (I mean the U.S.A.) is in BIG
trouble with warring nations inside of it (ethnic groups, including gays
since they seem like a big ethnic group). There has to be a way to fix
this. What the right-wing Republicans want to do sounds VERY GOOD, even
to some hard-line Reds. ISOLATION - IGNORE the world, PULL OUT of the
world - USA FOR USA. US FIRST. Like: SOCIALISM IN ONE COUNTRY? Oh, they
can call it capitalism but Roosevelt, whom everyone loved and who was
elected 4 terms in a row, put into policy 8 of Marx's points and called
it "The New Deal." Also if the rulers in the USA continue to overwork
and underpay their own workers, or trash them out of jobs, and erode the
New Deal benefits, there is only so long that the masses of Americans
will stand for it! So, if the Christians took over, there'd have to be a
kind of socialism mixed with some capitalism, probably not
mega-mega-profit capitalism, with Christian values stuck in it.
Christian values can go both ways: warlike fascism or peaceful
communalism. They might not go for the New Deal or any of that "Leftist"
stuff because the social programs were abused, predominantly by a very
noticeably different ethnic group/race. In this case corporations will
rule and they WILL NOT CARE which nation they get workers from - the
cheaper the better. The profits will continue to be made, for real, by
the toiling hands that slave away while the owners of these corporations
will move the goods around: provided anyone can afford to buy them! Do
they ever learn? Everyone praises human intelligence. I ask: where is
it? SHOW ME REAL intelligence - with FORESIGHT. Hindsight is too late,
buster!
But still, this is how the Third World
BECAME the Third World: through imperial empires that became
simultaneously more patriarchal and theocratic, with a closed-unit kind
of theocratic self-help rule, at first with an army (male warriors) to
defend the realm. Women have the RIGHT to vote. Who gave them the right?
MEN! Armed men could just as easily take the rights away and they ARE
bigger and stronger than women. The most brutal of them would end up
being in power because what they want to do, aside from "to hell with
the world, USA FOR USA, isolation" is GET RID of gays, blacks, and
others they regard as a parasitic danger to their safety or way of life,
to their QUALITY of life (which they want to keep high)! This is no
news; they are open about the gay issue and not all that secretive on
the blacks; just read their "Bell Curve" book or Michael Levin to see.
So, the type of man who could wipe people out or enslave/imprison them
would be in power, be in their army, but who'd put them in power and
want them there to keep them safe? THE WOMEN!! And it's a checkmate
situation here. Blacks can protest this idea because what I'm saying has
been VOICED lately in "respectable Republican-type" books! Gays can
protest it, too. The checkmate is that the more they protest, and with
big shows of numbers, the more of a THREAT they appear to be, as seen by
these right-wing Republicans whose numbers are growing bigger every
single day. All the paper wasted on the IQ issue, notice it? Who cares
what a person's IQ is - is the person a good citizen, nice person and
good at SOME job? If all stupid people are prone to criminality, why are
there no Down's syndromes in the jails? Jeffrey Dahmer was smart, not a
moron. He was a criminal. Smart criminals are smart enough not to get
caught, or they are very hard to catch! All this paper wasted is nothing
but a preparatory justification for what AGENDA someone plans to
implement! (Warning: do you smell gas?)
Why would such methods sound good to a
Red? Well, what would STALIN or MAO do to, example: blacks having a riot
and tearing up a city, ruining property that was built FOR them by
taxpayer's money, ruining a neighborhood forcing everyone non-black to
flee out of there and then struggle to make a life all over again, in
some other niche, or making public school a hell hole? What would Stalin
or Mao do to gays going to bath-houses and spreading deadly diseases
around? What would Stalin or Mao do to solve the drug problem that's
poisoning our youth who, in turn, grow up to commit crimes and destroy
neighborhoods (ecological niches of a type) and then get jailed where
"we have to PAY for the upkeep."?? I KNOW what they'd do. SOLVE IT.
CLEAN HOUSE! Who is paying for the upkeep of all those babies born with
crack brain damage? Surely, not THEIR FATHERS and not THEIR MOTHERS
either. Well: I don't want to be their GUARDIAN, I don't want to be a
collective guardian of such babies who will grow up to be WHAT? (I don't
like cuckoo birds... give that some thought as analogy.) I don't mind
being part of a collective guardianship of all babies whose parents are
also WORKING PEOPLE and who also pay into the tax-base for social
programs we can ALL use, for children, for the elderly, for health care
etc. But I EMPHATICALLY DO NOT want to let people literally eat the food
out of my refrigerator or take the medicine from me when I'm sick when
the ONLY THING they give me back in return is TROUBLE, when the ONLY
thing they give back to tax-paying society that builds houses for them
is destroyed houses and ruined neighborhoods. I would be willing to JOIN
ANY group and have a revolution, genocidal if necessary, over this
issue! Now: that's not hunter or gatherer. That's just refusing to be
PREY! PREYED UPON. Not only preyed upon, but PAYING to be preyed upon! I
refuse to have vampires drink my blood and then say "thank you" to them.
Or pay for baby vampires to grow up strong so that they can drink MORE
of my blood. Think about that analogy. It is true that these people
ancestors were once preyed upon in the past and feel rage over it: GET
OVER IT.
But all of this, to really understand it
without blaming this or that group, takes long thinking and
understanding of a large and conflicting group of conditions and a
multifaceted situation; it takes a LOT to figure out how the place GOT
so messed up starting from scratch and not just from the industrial
revolution onwards. And solving it would take a lot of thinking too, a
lot of really exact "hard" science. Theories aren't going to solve it
nor are political ideas which merely predict or legislate behavior. Take
away the laws and cops and the situation starts up all over again. I
don't think that our ancestors, prior to agriculture, had cops or jails.
They had behaviors or, to be exact: WORKABLE social strategies.
Right-wing republican methods, like
similar methods used long ago by others, are simple but IMMEDIATE
solutions to problems they see and FEEL plaguing them RIGHT NOW; the
problem is that they utterly lack foresight, they ARE simpleton. They
want simple jobs, example. They manage to see foreign speaking people
taking the jobs. They don't care if Big Companies brings them here as
slave-wage workers; that's too abstract and they can't see an immediate
way to stop Big Companies from doing this especially if these American
companies aren't IN the USA. They see these people, and these people
WILL NOT learn English and more, they are making demands these days
about language. This makes the right-wing Republicans grow in numbers
daily and it also ticks off other ethnics who DID learn English. This is
what they see and, more immediate and importantly, what they FEEL: "He
takes the jobs from me and also wants me to speak his language?" They
see crime, black inner cities, their solution is to build more jails and
lock them up - throw out the key. What happens when taxpaying workers
don't want to pay for prison inmate upkeep anymore? The prisoners will
find Big Companies building plants near the jails - where they'll "work"
for their upkeep. That's slavery all over again.
On the other hand, some other more
permanent solution will be arrived at which eliminates the criminals
altogether and "solves the overpopulation problem" at the same time. It
would be presented as "moral" to the American dupes. Genocide. Oh
horrors! Oh shock! HA! Do you know how EASY it is to GET humans to go
and do such a thing? We already have, hard-wired into our GENES, the
tribal instinct - and it IS an instinct! The only thing stopping it is
some moral injunction that halts what people feel, the "civilized
veneer" that can vanish in a second - just let the going get REALLY
tough and see. This bracing and pausing to "feel guilty about such
thoughts" - pents people up if conditions in society exist that stress
people out. Eventually, pent-up dams break. If you don't believe this,
then you are a pipe-dreaming, wishful thinker living in fantasyland, who
knows NOTHING of human nature (or HISTORY).
What one must grasp is this: MOST human
beings can't think and/or will not bother to think when their emotions
get in a boil against an IMMEDIATE THING that they can concretely see;
especially if the flames are fanned. They can SEE, example, the Hispanic
speaking newcomer, legal or illegal, on a job, crossing a border, etc.
They can not easily see the Company. Most folks are DUMB. But then
humans were evolved to respond to a situation of threat IMMEDIATELY and
history shows they do it in a predictable way: they get the strongest
men to be their warriors, they get the warriors to hunt and kill or
exile "the others" and then they END UP with a patriarchy with
repressive penis-laws and anti-female theocracies to back up the men. If
this happened in the USA, the USA would be on the sure road to being
just one more Third World country. After all, those male warriors
"fought and died" FOR the women and their children. That's how the men
SEE this.
Well, maybe there wouldn't be anything so
wrong about all this if it weren't for the fact that most of these men
are BROKEN beings, they are twisted and sexually sick; they don't have
animal-power of the kind that would make women tend to CHOOSE MATES
along more carnal/animal lines as Wilhelm Reich and many others
suggested, as we suggest and even as honest sexology studies show.
I.e.,: "if he can't fuck, if there's no pleasure, then DUMP him." What
if 99% of the men "can't fuck?" Well then the white Christian Western
women will be back to the days when they had to be married, had to open
their legs on demand and had to put up with this without having any
pleasure of their own: which is why they are so neurotic today and don't
even KNOW how to find a mate that can get them off (except those few who
DO find one and then abandon husband and kids to BE with that man - it's
common!). But then, this would still be just more Third World without
the physical torture or mutilation, at least NOT YET. Two very important
words: NOT YET. So goes gender war.
Another real problem is that this "mess"
goes on BECAUSE the modern First World has been exploiting the hell out
of that modern Third World! But people tend to get selective amnesia
about such technicalities. They tune that statement out and override it
with their "might makes right" rhetoric as if this will make the "mess"
go way. They are also unable to see that these now large groups of
dissatisfied ethnics, having BEEN exploited, ARE BECOMING a might. Some
of their Third World countries even have nuclear bombs now. Doesn't
their might make right too? Result: WAR WAR WAR, more war. Predictable.
Solution? Some new way has to be found,
some NEW MEANS OF PRODUCTION of FOOD (since a food issue is what caused
the snowballing of this mess 10,000 years ago), has to be invented or
discovered to STOP that snowball once and for all. We have to find new
energy sources because fossil fuels won't last forever and nuclear
energy is a non-feasible method. We have to do a LOT and FAST because
right now two people work in a family and it's never enough, they're
always in debt. Cars are polluters and money eaters. More fossil fuel
crap. Ecological issues, you know the story... Some alternate form of
fuel and MASSIVE public transit would do, but we can't have the public
transportation end up being dangerous to ride on. That has to stop, one
way or the other some one is going to come to power to MAKE it stop.
Right now, the only ones out to do this are the right-wing Christians.
Also, J. Sakai, author of "Settlers, Myth of the White Proletariat,"
pointed out how the left-wing and Communist Parties in the USA have
gotten workers rights and all that good stuff, but ended up being First
World Parties not exactly out to help the Hispanic non-English speakers
or Chinese coolies, or the blacks who were also HERE and working HERE.
Right now we need labor unions and we need to stop those companies from
moving out of here and from hiring slave-wage foreign labor which
exploits the Third World AND messes us up here. But how? More and more,
battle lines are being drawn; you'd have to be BLIND not to know this.
And there is overpopulation - too many people are even denying this!
Some think violent armed revolution is
the answer either like the American one or the Bolshevik (Russian) one,
but we already tried that and it failed. Also the CIA wrecked every
single non-capitalist government that got legally VOTED in, such as
Allende's in Chile. Of course, no one knows the CIA is doing this at the
time; they know it on hindsight after the CIA members admit it on
documentaries or evidence comes forth. Whenever someone, anyone, comes
forth with some GOOD idea for freedom and prosperity, the nay-sayers
manage to mess it up, obstruct it, sabotage it or corporations buy it
out and bury it. WHY? I think they do it because they are schizoid,
alexithymic, unable to REASON. Perhaps the answer is that they LOVE
STRIFE and hate the world and their own inner beings so much that strife
feels better to them than peace and quiet. It's hard to fathom this. Big
Capital, oil companies and such aren't going to do anything to allow us
to STOP using fossil fuel and perhaps try fuel-cell technology (non
combustion engines, non polluting - fuel is hydrogen) - Big Capital
might try to stop it from being done. But it HAS TO BE done. And it WILL
BE done and not too far off - humans will have NO choice in this.
(Update BALLARD FUEL CELL: IT IS HERE! WE HAVE the technology NOW, FDA
approved! CHECK THIS OUT!)
Wouldn't it be nice if the Earth had Gene
Roddenberry's dream of a Star Trek society as he conceived of the Earth,
people living on the Earth, in that time period? Wouldn't it be nice (to
break this down to the naked reality), if humans eating and
overpopulating out of balance and shitting didn't cause such strife and
trouble? Yes it would; but society as it is now would have to be turned
back RIGHT-SIDE UP; the "house" has been upside-down for far too long.
Gender conflicts can not be solved, or
even objectively looked at, WITHIN patriarchy. Certainly, using the
teleological argument to explain "that our noses are the way they are so
that we can hold eye-glasses up" is rubbish. By the same token, the
"means of food production" cannot be looked at within a world
subsistent, for the most part, on agriculture. Communal Nomadic
populations are very SPARSELY populated and they NEVER overpopulate!
They remain in balance. When an animal (say, agrarian man) eats up his
own habitat and ends up with ruined land and TEN TIMES the numbers of
people, he has to migrate and take over another, bigger habitat. That is
how, by the way, those still-nomadic ice-dwellers got to where they are
now: PUSHED OUT by agrarians long ago. (See: Cavalli-Sforza "The Great
Human Diasporas") Example: China is agrarian and has been for centuries
now, their patriarchal imperialism is stamped in tight now. What if they
DID NOT control birth by putting restrictions on it? They'd soon
overpopulate the whole planet. Well, the numbers of hungry mouths are
growing and the amount of land available is decreased: agriculture is in
its end game (Cf. Smithsonian information by Robert McC Adams). The
problems ahead of us are SO BIG that even the best analysts tend to
"fuzz out" over it save to say they think the human species is finished.
And sure, there are the "immediate solutions" to the problems that sound
like the "final solution" of the Nazis: just wipe out a few billion
people and end their starvation! Then there will be LOTS of land and
fossil fuel to last "the survivors" a bit longer - a BIT longer. It WILL
run out! And while this is not a solution in the long term: IT IS A
SOLUTION FOR THE SHORT TERM - and consider that the most powerful
countries surely have figured that out!
Experiments need to be done with balance
in ecological niches in terms of population numbers. Does something
happen to animals (humans) when the population is too high? Something
"hidden" - maybe pheromonal? That would change their behavior in a very
direct way. Do they get crazy?
The problems of class and labor can be
solved easily enough: pay everyone the same wage across the board.
Socialism would solve the problems of "services for the people" but we'd
have to find a "closed system" method of doing socialism or it WILL NOT
last. Everyone pooling into it would have to benefit from it - and NO
ONE ELSE. We'd have to either have nation isolationism or the whole
planet (which would be ideal!) would have to be involved in this. Right
now, we are nowhere near that dream. We have not even overcome war.
Globalization is going to spread and FORCE capitalism, the brutal kind,
on everyone: dog eat dog; don't cooperate; step on anyone to get ahead;
trust no one; feel nothing when you see the freezing and starving, even
babies: that's a definition of HELL! We'd have to find a way to keep the
system in balance: we can't keep MAKING hungry mouths and expanding when
the land is finite and subject to ruination so that there is LESS land
to work with. That "people expansion, land erosion and lessening"
started with agriculture 10,000 years ago. Even the method of animal
husbandry in agrarian society is a land-gobbler. It's fine if you can
move to another habitat, but there is nowhere to go anymore - humans
have eaten up the whole planet and are now entering into DANGEROUS
territory: the rain forests. The problems are mind-boggling. Capitalist
imperialists are SO STUPID that they fight a war over who controls the
oil but they don't lift a finger against those destroying our future air
supply! Many humans would survive without electricity and other
oil-petroleum-based life-supports and technology, but we will ALL perish
without air. The CPUSA has a good Environmental plan but we would have
to put people BEFORE profits. The problem is not for those that would
benefit from this: the problem is for those that would LOSE something
they have right now. No one is going to do that if they WOULD have to
live in hardship when they don't have TOO MUCH hardship NOW. Something
is always better than nothing! MORE is always better than LESS. No one
will do it, if they have SOME THING to lose.
Fuzz over that. No one REALLY hears it
enough to DO something about it. In one ear, out the other - go eat some
dinner, go watch TV, go take a shit. Go to sleep and forget you read
this and the heaps of other similar warnings. This is not an insult.
This is exactly what people do when they have to WORRY about next
month's rent. And if they are no longer worrying about the rent they
will surely never do something that makes them have to worry about it!
And what do I do about this situation? I write this article. I go to
work by driving a car, I watch TV, and so forth. Nothing. Such is life:
FOR NOW.
