Was: [toeslist] Sen Byrd: The truth will emerge. ... house of cards will fall (fwd) Now: Slavery.

This email is started out being to
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ourcultureourcapitol/
then grew to be relevant to
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/derrickjensen_discussion/
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sfbaintegralsalon/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/londonintegralcircle/
and http://yoism.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
and, why not: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/toeslist/

(Wilber specific: the most relevant questions / thoughts are
after the line of WWWWWWs)


I've stayed up too late, and it is not well written, but I
do think these things and am curious if these thoughts cause
others to react beyond hitting [delete].

I could not send this, and be silent. I would be better off
then(?). But I've chosen, for the time being, to live in a
way in which I have access to a lot of information, and I
react to what I read. Maybe I should change how I live.

--------------------------------------

Don't let these political-oriented emails distract you from
your more important work/play--


I send them on because perhaps things like the blatant
(mindless?) evil of the Bush administration are important in
forming "our culture," as it would appear the Vietnam War &
CIA ( http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/ST.html ) were
as well.

As George pointed out on the nyc-ish list- we do have
representatives of our culture poised to save us, perhaps.

http://www.kucinich.us/

The following speech by Byrd (D-WV) strikes me as optimistic
(I've been reading Derrick Jensen, and riding a bicycle in
the suburbs of northern virginia).

When all the amerikkkan flags are taken down and replaced
with earth flags, and all the g-d bless #$! / flag flower
arrangements are dug up from in front of city halls, then
_maybe_ I could be as optimistic as Byrd.

Sandrine pointed me to something forward-looking a while
ago:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0915972212/
(_planethood_)
and:
http://www.worldgovinst.org/



To some extent, all this is a distraction from the important
things?


Or is an awareness of this an important part of being a
"planetary villager"?


Or of developing an integral perspective on the events?
( http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/iraq.cfm -
actually, I don't think Ken is integral enough. )


Quite possibly, (following Derrick Jensen) the Majority in
the US tacitly favor US invasions and mass murder for the
purpose of securing oil fields / supporting a certain way of
life a bit longer (what if they had said from the get-go,
"We're going in because we've run out of oil."?).

( The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior--
if correct, what does that suggest? )

Quite possibly, we are entering the time where it is an
endgame (whether manufactured or avoidable), and where the
people of the US say, "to hell with the rest of the world-
the game is over- we need food, water, energy, and slaves to
continue to survive. We can no longer afford to work
together with the other people on this planet, it is them or
us."



Is it a simple issue of manipulation of public opinion?

Is, in fact, public opinion not being manipulated, but
simply ignored? (
http://michaelmoore.com/words/message/ )


Derrick Jensen points out that throughout history people
working for institutions of all kinds have lied and betrayed
to serve what they believed to be their interest.


The average American, in order to live how she lives, has
had to learn how to not see, how to lie to herself, how to
kill and enslave at a distance, while ignoring any
suggestion that her way of life is not upstanding-- why
should we expect that to change?


I think most of us will agree we cannot assume that humans
are incapable of acting in the interest of humanity-- but
are we (have we been) living in a pre-war Germany analog?

If so, what should we do?

Is it possible that all those supporting the US
military-industrial complex would ever prefer to starve
rather than support wrong?

Even if one is not paying taxes, is one still supporting the
country by living in it? Or is one really in a better
position to make a difference here than if one left
(Following A. Ray
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0518-01.htm )?

How does one decide whether to stay in Nazi Germany or
evacuate?


I've thought, and seen mentioned elsewhere, that if only,
collectively, the people refused to get on those trains (to
concentration camps--though they did not know that.),
forcing the Soldiers to kill them right there...


Someone on another list said, "simple living is the best
way..."

But when even the reporters of this tragedy (e.g. Quinn, A.
Ray, D. Jensen) further it by use of car, airplane, and so
on...  They are using these tools for what they believe to
be a good. They are optimistic that by staying in the
system, they can have some effect. Does T. Kaczynski have
the moral high ground? Only the people who make and spend no
money (in the form of world currencies) are the equivalent
of people who refuse to board trains to concentration camps?

Do we need Jesus-diet type extremism? (
http://www.rawhealth.net/jesusdiet.htm )

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Some people are fond of saying "one cannot destroy the
master's house with the master's tools." (Starhawk ?)

I think that is wrong. One destroys the master with the
master's tools, and some new tools. Or, one makes new tools
that subsume the former master (this following Wilber's
Integral view).


How can we make a system where it is not in the interest of
people in power to have access to cheap labor (slaves),
such that new systems can be developed where the
ecosystemic and human costs of all activities are
immediately apparent? Price is not working. (robots? AI?
http://www.kurzweilai.net/ )

Is the answer that we are already in such a system, it is
only a problem of getting more people to realize it ( this
plays into Wilber. ) ?

Then what do we do about powerful people who do not realize
slavery is not in their interest?

We create a culture of war-tax resisters, who do not drive
or fly, or seek to benefit from the slave system, except for
the cause of bringing about the transition to a system where
more realize slavery is not in their interest.

In that system:

  (1) human population decreases.

  (2) what is necessary for life comes from the local area.
(move, if necessary - following the jesus diet)


Unlike the jesus diet, we cannot be "fools for christ,"
people must see that our way is in fact more in their
interest, not foolish at all.


What uses of technology are in fact in our interest? It does
seem that some allowance for access to information and
communication will be necessary for an "integral" culture
(or at the least, for its emergence).

If "future primitive" is not in our interest, how can the
resources to maintain desired communication and information
be procured without slavery????????


I'm not sure I see an answer to that. Which means I'd better
head to the forest and give up what I cannot make myself? Or
just enjoy these dying days as best I can? (both?)


-------------------

I hope to send a more constructive email in a week or two,
based on some exciting things I've learned regarding
ecovillages and intentional communities.



Colin
http://j9k.org

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 21:09:03 -0400
From: Robert Pollard <ecology2001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: toeslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Toes List <toeslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [toeslist] Sen Byrd: The truth will emerge. ... house of cards
    will fall

Senator Byrd blasts Bush's 'reckless use of power,"
international law violation and false alarm on Iraq;
says war has encouraged terrorism and arms race

Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) delivered the following remarks
in the U.S. Senate on May 21, 2003.

TRUTH has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to
obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time.

No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or
delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the
cracks, eventually. But the danger is that at some point it may
no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the
truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is
easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever
distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in
politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have
believed -- right on this Senate floor.

Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this senator that
the American people may have been lured into accepting the
unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of
long-standing international law, under false premises.

There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11
have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama
Bin Laden and Al Queda, who masterminded the September 11th
attacks, to Saddam Hussein, who did not. The run-up to our
invasion of Iraq featured the president and members of his
cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from
mushroom clouds to buried caches of germ warfare to drones poised
to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated
to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein and
his direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to
provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a
combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after
the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a
placebo for the anger.

Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has seemed
to refute the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has
been brushed aside. Instead of addressing the contradictory
evidence, the White House deftly changes the subject. No weapons
of mass destruction have yet turned up, but we are told that they
will in time. Perhaps they yet will. But, our costly and
destructive bunker-busting attack on Iraq seems to have proven,
in the main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the
urgent reason to go in. It seems also to have, for the present,
verified the assertions of Hans Blix and the inspection team he
led, which President Bush and company so derided. As Blix always
said, a lot of time will be needed to find such weapons, if they
do indeed exist. Meanwhile Bin Laden is still on the loose and
Saddam Hussein has come up missing.

The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over
and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our
people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to
alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama
Bin Laden until they virtually became one.

What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that
Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. Ravaged by years of
sanctions, Iraq did not even lift an airplane against us. Iraq's
threatening death-dealing fleet of unmanned drones about which we
heard so much morphed into one prototype made of plywood and
string. Their missiles proved to be outdated and of limited
range. Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology and
our well trained troops.

Presently our loyal military personnel continue their mission of
diligently searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only
fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the
occasional buried swimming pool. They are misused on such a
mission and they continue to be at grave risk. But, the Bush
team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a
preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has
raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use
of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless
Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really
necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the
world?

What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that we are
"liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we have
so euphemistically attached to ourselves. True, we have unseated
a brutal, despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow
up of freedom, self-determination and a better life for the
common people. In fact, if the situation in Iraq is the result of
"liberation," we may have set the cause of freedom back 200
years.

Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi
people, water is scarce, and often foul; electricity is a
sometime thing; food is in short supply; hospitals are stacked
with the wounded and maimed; historic treasures of the region and
of the Iraqi people have been looted; and nuclear material may
have been disseminated to heaven knows where, while U.S. troops,
on orders, looked on and guarded the oil supply.

Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure
and refurbish its oil industry are awarded to administration
cronies, without benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S.
steadfastly resists offers of U.N. assistance to participate. Is
there any wonder that the real motives of the U.S. government are
the subject of worldwide speculation and mistrust?

And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S.
appears to be pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government. Jay
Garner has been summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too
clear that the smiling face of the U.S. as liberator is quickly
assuming the scowl of an occupier. The image of the boot on the
throat has replaced the beckoning hand of freedom. Chaos and
rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S. soldiers try to
sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease. ?Regime
change? in Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an
occupying military force and a U.S. administrative presence that
is evasive about if and when it intends to depart.

Democracy and freedom cannot be force-fed at the point of an
occupier's gun. To think otherwise is folly. One has to stop and
ponder. How could we have been so impossibly naive? How could we
expect to easily plant a clone of U.S. culture, values, and
government in a country so riven with religious, territorial, and
tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S. motives, and so at odds
with the galloping materialism which drives the western-style
economies? As so many warned this administration before it
launched its misguided war on Iraq, there is evidence that our
crackdown in Iraq is likely to convince 1,000 new Bin Ladens to
plan other horrors of the type we have seen in the past several
days. Instead of damaging the terrorists, we have given them new
fuel for their fury. We did not complete our mission in
Afghanistan because we were so eager to attack Iraq. Now it
appears that Al Queda is back with a vengeance. We have returned
to orange alert in the U.S., and we may well have destabilized
the Mideast region, a region we have never fully understood. We
have alienated friends around the globe with our dissembling and
our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who may not
see things quite our way. The path of diplomacy and reason have
gone out the window to be replaced by force, unilateralism, and
punishment for transgressions. I read most recently with
amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our longtime friend
and strategic ally. It is astonishing that our government is
berating the new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in
accordance with its own constitution and its democratic
institutions.

Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as
countries move ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to
ward off a possible preemptive strike from a newly belligerent
U.S. which claims the right to hit where it wants. In fact, there
is little to constrain this president. This Congress, in what
will go down in history as its most unfortunate act, gave away
its power to declare war for the foreseeable future and empowered
this President to wage war at will.

As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are reluctant
to ask questions which are begging to be asked. How long will we
occupy Iraq? We have already heard disputes on the numbers of
troops which will be needed to retain order. What is the truth?
How costly will the occupation and rebuilding be? No one has
given a straight answer. How will we afford this long-term
massive commitment, fight terrorism at home, address a serious
crisis in domestic health care, afford behemoth military spending
and give away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has
climbed to over $340 billion for this year alone? If the
President's tax cut passes it will be $400 billion. We cower in
the shadows while false statements proliferate. We accept soft
answers and shaky explanations because to demand the truth is
hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.

But, I contend that, through it all, the people know. The
American people unfortunately are used to political shading,
spin, and the usual chicanery they hear from public officials.
They patiently tolerate it up to a point. But there is a line. It
may seem to be drawn in invisible ink for a time, but eventually
it will appear in dark colors, tinged with anger. When it comes
to shedding American blood -- when it comes to wreaking havoc on
civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous
dissembling is not acceptable. Nothing is worth that kind of lie
-- not oil, not revenge, not reelection, not somebody's grand
pipe dream of a democratic domino theory.

And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so
often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal
opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it
always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house
of cards, built of deceit, will fall.





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/.DlolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
OurCultureOurCapitol-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/