If you go back and look at old documentary footage of the early fifties, the striking feature that jumps out at you is the overwhelming homogeneity of society. The entire range of sameness blanketed the American social scene from everything from fashion, to hair styles, to architecture, and remarkably, to human behavior. The overriding manner could reasonably be predicted according to its orthodox proclivity to conform. To be bland, meant to be accepted, it meant that you fit in, and that breeding (at least good breeding) according to this standard, meant you had good manners. It meant that you listened and obeyed the priest or the preacher of your church, or the police officer, or your employer, or the president, without asking too many questions. The authorities knew what we needed and they then announced what that was and everybody simply followed their training (one might even characterize it as their grooming) without too much objection from the electorate. Those in the “know” simply delivered the seminal word to the passive body of the congregation and things went on just as they had always been. You got up, went to work, went home and listened to the radio or the television (and if you were lucky, maybe shagged the wife) and then did it all over again the next day.
Off course, homogeneity cannot caste itself without some anomaly rearing itself against its narrowness; the reason is because authority can be oppressive to some courageous souls who simply cannot bear to shackle their souls to the status quo. In the fifties, it was the Beat Generation that threw off the restraints, went their own way, and tested various boundaries that others considered taboo and frightening.
Things really don’t change much over the years, at least at its core. Psychotherapists will tell you that anomalous behavior represents pathos. Like everything to do with power, conformity brings its blessing, and dissent brings its condemnation.
The counter cultural movement of the sixties followed on the heals of the homogeneity of the fifties. The rebels of the Sixties outdid their irreverent brothers and sisters of the beat generation in spades. Their repudiation of social norms touched every aspect of human culture. These pathological children had something to say and they had something to experience. They were simply suffocating under the tightening restraints of their less pathological parents who knew what was best for them. Just like the priests and preachers, along with the politicians, knew what was best for their enlightened parents. The social archetypes, the various ways expectations form around pre-established patterns of behavior, are deeply interconnected to the economic order, and to its continuation or maintenance as it is tied to consumption.
The problem with these petulant children of sixties was a matter of obedience. They simply refused to play the prescribed roles the status quo had ordained for them. They were under the pathological idea that their lives may hold something more spiritual and more challenging than identifying with some pre-established roles tied endlessly to the economic order their elders bequeathed them, and suffocated under!
The significant global issue of the sixties happened to coincide with the misplaced wisdom of the Vietnam War. How many walking wounded are still our there? I can speak for myself, of course, if not for anyone else. Whereas in the 1950’s, conformity being the sacred dogma of a generation, in the 1960’s, millions of young people invoked an evolutionary new consciousness (despite its excesses). They began to renounce their identification with a collective paradigm, which in their eyes was seen as insanity.
The movement finally burned itself out, but not before introducing a new type of consciousness never seen before in human history. The positive development of this consciousness was the cross/trans cultural movement of new ways of being into previously rigid structures of being. Although, depending on where you stand, even the counter cultural rebels might be characterized as rigid.
Now here we stand in another era. The counter cultural rebels have integrated into the mainstream and tied themselves, both to the old economic order of their elders, but also to the same insanity – speaking of the war in Iraq and environmental degradation. Despite the lip-service they pay to both issues.
If you are able to read the signs of the times, then those signals are telling us in very loud pronouncements that human life is growing inhospitable to the planet. The advertising gurus will subconsciously turn your behavior toward consumption; and even the liberal gurus, will use subliminal messaging of the positive features of the sixties consciousness to steer you into conformity with the status quo of a broken two party system.
Prophets and Cultural Creatives are telling us that we only have maybe four or five years to turn this around before we reach the point of no return. Does anybody really believe it is going to happen in time?
If I were you, I’d start looking for a way out of the approaching chaos.
Posts: 1110 | Location: Mountains | Registered: 28 November 2002
Matters of facts are in fact abstract. Things have already reached the point of no return and beyond.
If 'we' keep thinking in terms of: "We need to act before it's too late" all 'we' might do is create more fear, and fear could paralyse 'us'. If 'we' realise that it's gone far past the point of no return, 'we' can, instead of trying to prevent something that is inevitable, actually start rebuilding!
Furthermore: Would the end of human (Western) "civillisatiob" be such a bad thing?
Also: 'We' destroyed the planet so 'we' have the power to rebuild it. If 'we' come to terms with our polarised awareness 'we' would see that the aggressor side and victimised side are both in 'us'. Instead 'we' are aggressors but act like victims who are scared of the so-called inevitable.
The balance seems so far off but in truth is so close.
What will it take, not for mankind, but for one single person to take action? Are 'we' all just waiting around for someone else to stand up?
How are you (aka *me*) in relation to 'the approaching chaos'?
u
Posts: 1927 | Location: pending | Registered: 18 December 2004
... This was the first time I spotted this thread of yours... Very clearly stated... The sixties thing always intrigues me... Why did it begin?... Why did it petter out?... Why did it not re-blossom?... Why does Ken Wilber think so poorly of these 'ol hippies?...
... Speaking of Ken Wilber, Ren was asking me a few questions about Ken Wilber, and the Integral movement... Would you like to share some of your own perceptions?... There is much that he says that I like and agree with, and much that I do not... There is even much more that I do not even have a clue about...
... Personally, I have to believe that we 'will' pull our heads out of our collective asses... If only to take the next breath...
________________________ "... He who is swimming against the stream comes to the Source..." -Gottfried Muller
Posts: 901 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 17 June 2003
Lawerence, I think Wilber is right on the money when it comes to the next leap in human consciousness/development. Until the Green meme is able to make the next leap in consciousness, our problems will continue to spin out of control with nothing else to show for it other than the same blame game we now listen to endlessly over the air waves. It's already too late to reverse climate change. Life on planet earth is going to be hard for people with too much comfort; those that are able to adapt will thrieve and those that cannot will suffer.
Perhaps the positive thing in all of this will bring about the next leap Wilber is referring to.
Posts: 1110 | Location: Mountains | Registered: 28 November 2002
My guess is the sixties movement pettered out because they wanted to change the system of which they were part. The system (civilization) does not change, especially since even those who criticize it are/stay embedded in it and depend on it. But this is a system of destruction; a system which favors production over life. Civilization is one huge pathological condition - and the sixties movement did not shed the condition; it did not drop this system altogether.
It's not that civilization is not going to follow its own route to destruction: it will continue to rush towards the cliff's edge and over it.
It's not a bad thing, I think, although I imagine the fall of civilization will be accompanied by quite a bit of horror... Either way -good or bad- it's inescapable. Which does not mean that there is nothing to do in the meantime.
The meek, who shall (for purely practical reasons) inherit the Earth, are gathering information from what remains of ancient knowledge, from what history tells us, and from (un)common sense. And there's always instinctive survival skills, which will eventually pop back up in us as it does with domesticated cats who are left in the wild - except what with our techno-addicted minds and all it's going to take us a wee bit longer. However, while we have some time left, we can do it the easy way: incrementally.
Right now, there are lives to be saved, preparations to be made, and most of all: there is much stepping away to be done.
Usha is right: we should not be dealing with civilization's inevitable downfall and all of its petty symptoms; we should now be occupied with a new way of living. Now.
A suggestion, though: instead of "rebuilding" the planet, I emphatically advise that we leave it alone, for the reason that it will do perfectly at rebuilding itself. Of course, in the leaving, we are actually joining it in harmony.
What we must do is live sustainably, value life, be creative, and have fun. Then once again will we be where we belong - actually living as human beings, which (knowingly or not) we have been craving for so long.
We will be home again.
Posts: 2736 | Location: Andijvie | Registered: 25 June 2002
Usha, when one has nothing to begin with, one has nothing to lose. Elementary, my darling!
That is actually my point, my Sweet. I think you and I think more alike than we think...
quote:
A suggestion, though: instead of "rebuilding" the planet, I emphatically advise that we leave it alone, for the reason that it will do perfectly at rebuilding itself. Of course, in the leaving, we are actually joining it in harmony.
Absolutely agreed, Andger, and that's a great post. What I intended to say was (and please excuse my lack of required expression skills at this point ) we could emphasise on rebuilding our definition of being. And maybe with that, we will create (rebuild?) a world around us, and a universe to hold that world?
Personally I believe the planet will never seize to exist, even when it does, according to 'our' perception of it. It is Humanity that is presented with the choice to either define or redefine, or possibly even both, as I like to think in 'and-and' rather than 'either-or'
'And-and' and/or 'either-or':
The planet is destroying Mankind - Mankind is destroying the planet? Destructing - Creating?
Posts: 1927 | Location: pending | Registered: 18 December 2004
It's not a bad thing, I think, although I imagine the fall of civilization will be accompanied by quite a bit of horror... Either way -good or bad- it's inescapable. Which does not mean that there is nothing to do in the meantime.
Nicely stated. So, what are your plans in the meantime?
Posts: 1110 | Location: Mountains | Registered: 28 November 2002
That is actually my point, my Sweet. I think you and I think more alike than we think...
Yes, we are very much alike. Now, if we can just convince a few billion more to love their mother, and take one small step away from consumption and toward respect...
Posts: 1110 | Location: Mountains | Registered: 28 November 2002
What if people got “involved” by not buying vehicles that are not fuel efficient… What if people learned to recycle all their waste and learned to compost… What if people began to experiment with public transportation: one or two days per week… What if people began to ride their bike to work instead of drive a car… What if people gave up jobs that are harming their psyche and the earth, and instead did the work of their heart… What if people started volunteering with organizations that serve the earth and the poor… What if people started to challenge politicians to a higher standard of accountability… What if people got off the grid and lived self reliant lives… What if people considered joining or starting Intentional Communities based on earth centered principles and values… What if every one took the time to do a Vision Quest and found the courage to live their vision out in the world… What if people got off the “me” plan and got on the “earth” plan… What if a grass roots movement could make modern politics totally irrelevant… What if people discovered that their interruptions were their work… What if people gave up their “toys” and tried to deepen the quality of their relationships… What if got over their addictions… What if people learned alternative uses of sustainable energy and integrated that into their homes, transportation, and energy expenditures… What if people accessed their creativity for the benefit of the earth and not for their bank account… What if people stopped buying newspapers and read them online… What if people started growing their own food or supported local organic farmers… What if people revision the meaning of their lives and created something else… What if people did an inventory of their waste and developed a strategy to downsize… What if people stopped going in debt… What if people picked up garbage in their wild places, parks, and neighborhoods… What if people learned to be naturalists and herbalists and learned the local indigenous plants and trees in their own bioregion… What if people started gardening by pulling out the grass and using it for organic gardens and medicinal plants… What if everyone planted 20 trees in their life… What if everyone donated twenty percent of their income to authentic organizations working on behalf of the earth… What if people learned some type of healing modality… What if the greed suddenly came to an end… What if the most important concern in a person’s life turned to others instead of their selves… What if people stopped watching inane television programming… What if people who hate corporations stopped funding them… What if people learned to live in harmony with the earth… What if people stopped blaming everyone else for their problems and changed their lives so completely that the POWERS were unable to reach into their lives again…
Overcoming corporate control is easy: stop buying their garbage and their influence would diminish and eventually disappear…
Hey Mark, how you doing?
Posts: 1110 | Location: Mountains | Registered: 28 November 2002
The world itself changes and adapts to what she is given, she has room for all and shares with all as needed; she is the quintessential Mother of Unconditional Love. Modern human ‘civilization’¹, though – who needs her and is indebted to her for its very own existence – attacks her recklessly and relentlessly; why?
The human creature is cursed with consciousness and intellect, he can perceive a ‘problem’ and take action to correct it; he sees himself as cold and hungry so he does what he is capable of: he builds shelter and fire, hunts, and raises crops to bring himself comfort. And like all things with the essence we may call ‘life’, he harbors an instinctual urge for preservation of the species, which manifests itself within the individual as a preservation of self, and the psychological self – an integral part of human consciousness – helps to protect the individual’s physical being by use of the primal emotion of Fear.
All life manipulates its environment to make it more ‘comfortable’ for itself, this is part of its survival – its ‘preservation of self’ – and humanity is certainly no exception there as we all are well aware. So humankind sets out, with his intellect and consciousness of being, to manipulate his environment to improve his comfort to ensure the survival of species; some man-made changes in his surroundings is the natural course of events. Our host here at these forums, Thom Hartmann, claims that somewhere around the dawn of agriculture humanity diverged from what he calls the ‘Older Culture’ perception of its place in the world to a ‘Younger Culture’ perception/outlook²; I fully agree with this assessment, and believe the changes were/are of a psychological nature affecting the sociological outlook of the human communities.
A human being is generally capable, intellectually, of not only assessing his physical situation but of also taking action to make changes he thinks to be required. The human animal will attempt to control that which is around him because he has an instinctual desire for survival, his psyche is imbedded with a need for preservation of self. Yet with his increased level of consciousness and intellect, this ‘preservation of self’ also becomes a curse; the human creature – through his intellect – is capable of looking forward to realize that doing one thing will increase comfort (survival), and then that doing more things will further increase his comfort. As greater and greater ‘comfort’ is generated, the psyche itself remains insatiable; if a ‘comfort’ is threatened to be removed from the physical environment, the psyche manipulates the intellect through use of the emotion that controls the ‘instinctual’ need for the preservation of self: Fear. I find it to be quite a subtle manipulation, and easily rationalized by the ‘intellect’, but there nonetheless; I believe it is this manipulation of the intellect by the psyche, this irrational Fear for our individual and collective survival, that allows the human creature to rationalize its relentless attack on our environment, our Mother.
This is, yes, somewhat simple (and not fully satisfactory) explanations of complex psycho-sociological workings; and I’m sure to be questioned on it, but an in-depth discussion of this is beyond the scope of this thread. I believe it might be important, though, for myself to begin my participation in this thread with this, because this thread is about the state of the ‘human world’ and our interactions with what I like to think of as our ‘Mother’ – the world we live on; I hope we each take this thread seriously and look at what we are doing now and what our plans are for the coming years. I am quite interested in what others (you, my friends) are doing now and planning for the future.
Chris – the taste and touch and smell of life is truly amazing to me. You should drop me a line every now and again just to stay in touch…
-Mark.
== ¹which I believe to be several thousand years of age ²see “Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight”
------------------------------ "In a big country dreams stay with you like a lover's voice across the mountainside" - Big Country
Posts: 872 | Location: Western edge of the continent | Registered: 04 October 2003
Chris, I used the word ‘comfort’ to expand the reader’s perception on the human being’s minimal needs to survive on this planet; we don’t really need to build a shelter to survive the winter, we could get by with covering ourselves with snow, although only the most physically hardy of us, now, would likely live through it. Do you wear clothes to keep out the chill? Do you eat enough? Do you live in a covered building? Do you use energy? These are some of what I was alluding to with my specific and intentional use of the word ‘comfort’. I define ‘spirituality’ for myself as my connection (or relationship, if you will) to all that which is outside and inside the self; both the physical and emotional selves.
Miles, thank you for the compliment, but do you know why I posted that, in such a manner as I did? In order to correct what we might see as a problem, we must first try to understand the underlying mechanics of the difficulty – we must go to the very root, the absolute beginning of what is creating the problem. And, as I see it, the real root of the problem with the human creature overusing (and abusing) the natural resources of our Mother Earth is his misunderstanding of his Fear of Mortality (which is overemphasized due to his intellect. It can be really involved and I hope I don’t have to try to explain it in this thread, I really do have other things I want to get to). Once we truly understand where the problem originates we can then, perhaps, use appropriate language/communication with those needing instruction – language they can understand and accept – so that we might start rectifying the trouble. I’m probably being obtuse, but at least you understand that I’m keenly alive and exuberant!
-Mark.
------------------------------ "In a big country dreams stay with you like a lover's voice across the mountainside" - Big Country
Posts: 872 | Location: Western edge of the continent | Registered: 04 October 2003
what, according to you is our 'Morality'? Is it based on something absolute and eternal, like my discussion partner on the abortion thread is trying to argue, or is it an individual code? Doe we have an innate sense of empathy? And to what extent did civilization teach us about morality?
(sorry about the 'gay' thing, that's just my running gag for about 4 years now, to call random items 'gay'; little demonstration:
Miles, my good friend, I get the running gay joke/gag…it’s why I posted the link. Should’ve given you an annoyingly gay smilie face…
I never mentioned ‘morality’, and, although I do try to gauge everything I think and do through my moral filter (which is easy enough to do if you’ve written them down, and surprisingly, everyone I’ve ever tried to discuss morals with does not really have a definitive set of moral values and therefore are afloat on the sea of moral relativity…really…), I think morality does not need to come into play here; it may be beyond the scope of this thread.
I did, however, mention Fear of Mortality, which has its beginnings in the primal, instinctual fear of physical death but distorted by the human psyche.
-Mark.
Oh, did I ever mention that I have a niece who is gay?
------------------------------ "In a big country dreams stay with you like a lover's voice across the mountainside" - Big Country
Posts: 872 | Location: Western edge of the continent | Registered: 04 October 2003
I follow the gist of your ideas. With regard to energy expenditures, it was my hope to point out the extravagance use of energy consumption which is unconscious in the First World. Even those living in primitive conditions use energy. Life feeds off life, life cannot "survive" without using energy. A snake sunning itself on a hot boulder is using energy to warm itself, but its use of that energy is not contributing to climate change.
Read-Only Topic
