2.10.2012
UN chief to Netanyahu: Israel must refrain from settlement construction Haaretz
Haaretz -
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon meets with PM Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, says peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians must continue.
Catholics Split Over Obama Contraceptive Order NPR
NPR -
They supported Al Gore in 2000, President George W. Bush in '04 and President Obama in '08. The GOP presidential hopefuls are certainly using this issue.
2.09.2012
Obama's Approval Numbers Climb Wall Street Journal
Wall Street Journal (blog) -
By Naftali Bendavid The recent run of positive economic news, modest though it may be, appears to be sinking in with voters and giving President Barack Obama his best approval numbers in a while. President Barack Obama gestures after speaking Thursday, ...
'OCCUPY DC REPORT CARD - Occupiers D-, Pk Police A- ' SL (vid, txt)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMwFdpW3zXU
Raw transcript with typos and errors......
''OCCUPY DC REPORT CARD - Occupiers D-, Pk Police A-
Quite unexpectedly I hit the mother load today in terms of getting to the bottom of what I think happened on Saturday at Occupy McPherson Square. As I arrived here at the park about noon today, two of the four officers I saw at the end of the park, and made a bee line to them all, to express my concern for the officer that had a bottle thrown into his eye, to find out how he was, and I think he's out of the hospital , and they're hoping for a full recovery, but I don't know yet; two of them are fellows that I've known now for years, from my work in front of the White House. One is from upstate NY, a farm boy I'd guess, if not by profession, certainly by demeanor. Just a straight, straight, straight shooter. My guess is, frankly, he probably doesn't know how to lie. Among his kindnesses, I remember one time that the unspeakably nasty Concepcion, had to admit his kindness. She's a biggot, she hates ever policeman. And yet in a horriffic wind storm, her huge umbarella and plastic was blown, and this fine young officer ran across the park to get it, and return it, despite all the nastiness she heeps on these guys. And then another fella, his wife is a high school teacher, inner city kids, although recently that's changed, recently married. Just two nice young guys, are among the ones that were on duty. And I expressed my concern that it appered to me that there was a flagrant, complete betrayal of the efforts by a young fella I have tremendous respect for, in the Occupy DC movement, who had thought that he negotiated that only tents with bedding, food, or health hazard would be removed. And it was my understanding that he felt totally, and completely, and immediately betrayed once he had gained the compliance of his comrades to free up the statue of McPherson on Saturday morning. Well, if I have any doubts they're far in the minority now. The fella from upstate NY was on the detail that went tent to tent. And the park police didn't make the decision on what tents were removed, he said. A medical doctor from health and human services, I think he said, was the one that made that determination. It's possible I'm not being told the truth, it's possible I'm lying to you, it's possible it's really raining right now. They didn't make the determination. The guy from HHS did. I even asked this fine young man, now, was this some red neck right winger doctor? He said, absolutely not. He was just a doctor from HHS. Some of the tents were known in advance as having been occupied by people with communicable diseases, severe communicable diseases. That was the minority of those removed, but some were removed simply based on that knowledge. Most were removed because of evidence of urine or feces, and that doesn't mean necessarily human feces. Before and during the occupation there are a lot of rats in this park, and they'd make their way into the tents, so be it human or unhuman feces, those were the reason for tents being removed. I'm told, and catagorically believe that the police did not decide what tents were removed, unless it was the case of bedding, and on that score I was correct. I couldn't believe that 60% of the tents had bedding left in them. It was largely most of the tents removed for health reasons, as determined by the doctor.
The other isssue that had concerned me hugely, was the two incident's, one in which I was almost trampled, and the other widely seen on tape, the standoff at the library in the middle of Occupy, where it seemed, it appeared, and probably happened that there was a sudden surge, a frightening surge of police energy, as the police with plexiglass helmets and shields, all of a sudden started pushing the crowd. But first of all, and this is my feeling as a citizen, human being, a pursuer of justice, and my knowledge of the law - if I receive an order, including a gesture from a police officer, that's a, if I don't comply with that I have just waved my rights to expecting no escalation. I've just invited on myself an escalation. If I don't like what police officer says, I can unviolently noncomply and accept the consequences, or I can resist and argue and expect consequences. Personally I don't want it to be any diffrent. I don't what for contests to take place on the street with the police. I'd rather see that take place in a court of law. Many, most, all of the folks at Occupy tragically, it's such a strategic mistake and it's so immature, can't seem to resist making that issue, the one that they wan't to fight. Oh, I resisted, but I didn't resist that hard, so the police shouldn't have reacted they way they did. A. it's not the law, B. it's not the way it works, and C. if that's what you're going to spend your time on, your're done. It is so far down' thke list of what you should be concerned with.
But relaitve to the library that I saw on tape and was concerned about, A. there were people pushing back against the shields. That's aggression, you don't get to do that, you don't get to put your hands on a cop, a cop doesn't get to put his hands on you unless you've crossed a boundary, and that' isn't what what happening. People were pushing back against the shields. You don't get to do that. That's an arrestable offense. But on top of that there were people behind the police officers being pushed, civilians that were sitting on the ground and the police were being pushed back on top of them and if they didn't surge forward then they were going to fall back on demonstartors. I"m not suggesting it's exactly that simple, it wasn't suggested to me it was exactly that simple, but that's the nature of what was going on.
The two-legged vermin many of whom identify as anarchists, black bloc maybe, these are people of hate, pure, unmitigated hate. They're my brothers and sisters, they don't know any better, but they are sucking down, they're pulling down these folks at Occupy. Hate is the status quo. Violence is the status quo. That's what what Occupy pretentds to be against, violence in its overt and subtile forms. Well the anarchists are about hate. The only alternative is unviolent waging of love, by whatever name. And that can be tough as hell. Nothing is off the table with that. But that's the only alternative, and, in a mistaken of inclusiveness, the better souls in Occupy are losing their clarity on that. However they may have understood it going forward, and wanting to not offent the anarchists, uh, no, actually folks, if your issue, if the issue you came to DC for of NYC or SF... is to have run-ins iwth the police, well, you're hopeless friends. Enjoy your rant. But if you're better than that, and some of you are, then stop getting sucked into these battles, you're on the wrong side of, and even when you're on the right side, you're taking your attention off of the 1%, off the issues that are worth your life.
I never asked directly about officer Beck who I've raised questions about, however, my feeling about the removal of tents, I have every reason to accept the word of these two young officers that I've known and seen every reason to trust - their humanity, versacity, professionalism for years, who say, we didn't make the call. And then moments ago I saw officer Reed, one of the commanding officers, and he independently corroborataed that. They took copius notes on everything they removed from the park because they know they're going to be sued. I've worked with these folks for years. They're professionals, they're nice folks, they've put on the uniform to defend the citizens, the constitution. And that's what they've been doing. And if they argument is that they haven't been doing everything perfectly, well my God, what an incredibly important thing to fight over; I'm being facetious.
And on the issue of the two explosively forceful explosions by the park police, the one in the evening where I almost got trampled, was to get the guy that had possibly blinded a fellow officer. It wasn't gratuitously violent. I felt that it could have or should have been communicated better, but I didn't realize at the time that there was an officer down, that there was an officer that had been possibly blinded by the fellow they were aprehending. They didn't trample any of us, they didn't hurt any of us. They didn't come out with any show of hatred. I was concerned they didn't show any more concern, but under the circumstances, that and the incident at the library, park police gets at least a B+, if not an A or an A- for their conduct the last 4 months. They're continuing to break the law, they're continuing to turn a blind eye to the law, to enable this encampment to continue. They're not coming on like heavies now, despite one of their men being serously injured. They're trying to keep their jobs, when they come through late at night, if anyone is asleep they say you've gotta sit up, no thei're not tolerating bedding, they'd be fools to, Issa would get them fired, he's that slime ball on the Hill, that democracy hater. These are good guys. They're damn good guys. And they were the first to come to the defense today in our discussion of many of the Occupiers. 'We know that most of those guys are good guys. We know that most of the troublemakers on Saturday came just to make trouble. We've been around Occupy. We knew that many of the troublemakers were faces we hadn't seen before. They jumped to that defense. I didn't have to bring it out of them.
Raw transcript with typos and errors......
''OCCUPY DC REPORT CARD - Occupiers D-, Pk Police A-
Quite unexpectedly I hit the mother load today in terms of getting to the bottom of what I think happened on Saturday at Occupy McPherson Square. As I arrived here at the park about noon today, two of the four officers I saw at the end of the park, and made a bee line to them all, to express my concern for the officer that had a bottle thrown into his eye, to find out how he was, and I think he's out of the hospital , and they're hoping for a full recovery, but I don't know yet; two of them are fellows that I've known now for years, from my work in front of the White House. One is from upstate NY, a farm boy I'd guess, if not by profession, certainly by demeanor. Just a straight, straight, straight shooter. My guess is, frankly, he probably doesn't know how to lie. Among his kindnesses, I remember one time that the unspeakably nasty Concepcion, had to admit his kindness. She's a biggot, she hates ever policeman. And yet in a horriffic wind storm, her huge umbarella and plastic was blown, and this fine young officer ran across the park to get it, and return it, despite all the nastiness she heeps on these guys. And then another fella, his wife is a high school teacher, inner city kids, although recently that's changed, recently married. Just two nice young guys, are among the ones that were on duty. And I expressed my concern that it appered to me that there was a flagrant, complete betrayal of the efforts by a young fella I have tremendous respect for, in the Occupy DC movement, who had thought that he negotiated that only tents with bedding, food, or health hazard would be removed. And it was my understanding that he felt totally, and completely, and immediately betrayed once he had gained the compliance of his comrades to free up the statue of McPherson on Saturday morning. Well, if I have any doubts they're far in the minority now. The fella from upstate NY was on the detail that went tent to tent. And the park police didn't make the decision on what tents were removed, he said. A medical doctor from health and human services, I think he said, was the one that made that determination. It's possible I'm not being told the truth, it's possible I'm lying to you, it's possible it's really raining right now. They didn't make the determination. The guy from HHS did. I even asked this fine young man, now, was this some red neck right winger doctor? He said, absolutely not. He was just a doctor from HHS. Some of the tents were known in advance as having been occupied by people with communicable diseases, severe communicable diseases. That was the minority of those removed, but some were removed simply based on that knowledge. Most were removed because of evidence of urine or feces, and that doesn't mean necessarily human feces. Before and during the occupation there are a lot of rats in this park, and they'd make their way into the tents, so be it human or unhuman feces, those were the reason for tents being removed. I'm told, and catagorically believe that the police did not decide what tents were removed, unless it was the case of bedding, and on that score I was correct. I couldn't believe that 60% of the tents had bedding left in them. It was largely most of the tents removed for health reasons, as determined by the doctor.
The other isssue that had concerned me hugely, was the two incident's, one in which I was almost trampled, and the other widely seen on tape, the standoff at the library in the middle of Occupy, where it seemed, it appeared, and probably happened that there was a sudden surge, a frightening surge of police energy, as the police with plexiglass helmets and shields, all of a sudden started pushing the crowd. But first of all, and this is my feeling as a citizen, human being, a pursuer of justice, and my knowledge of the law - if I receive an order, including a gesture from a police officer, that's a, if I don't comply with that I have just waved my rights to expecting no escalation. I've just invited on myself an escalation. If I don't like what police officer says, I can unviolently noncomply and accept the consequences, or I can resist and argue and expect consequences. Personally I don't want it to be any diffrent. I don't what for contests to take place on the street with the police. I'd rather see that take place in a court of law. Many, most, all of the folks at Occupy tragically, it's such a strategic mistake and it's so immature, can't seem to resist making that issue, the one that they wan't to fight. Oh, I resisted, but I didn't resist that hard, so the police shouldn't have reacted they way they did. A. it's not the law, B. it's not the way it works, and C. if that's what you're going to spend your time on, your're done. It is so far down' thke list of what you should be concerned with.
But relaitve to the library that I saw on tape and was concerned about, A. there were people pushing back against the shields. That's aggression, you don't get to do that, you don't get to put your hands on a cop, a cop doesn't get to put his hands on you unless you've crossed a boundary, and that' isn't what what happening. People were pushing back against the shields. You don't get to do that. That's an arrestable offense. But on top of that there were people behind the police officers being pushed, civilians that were sitting on the ground and the police were being pushed back on top of them and if they didn't surge forward then they were going to fall back on demonstartors. I"m not suggesting it's exactly that simple, it wasn't suggested to me it was exactly that simple, but that's the nature of what was going on.
The two-legged vermin many of whom identify as anarchists, black bloc maybe, these are people of hate, pure, unmitigated hate. They're my brothers and sisters, they don't know any better, but they are sucking down, they're pulling down these folks at Occupy. Hate is the status quo. Violence is the status quo. That's what what Occupy pretentds to be against, violence in its overt and subtile forms. Well the anarchists are about hate. The only alternative is unviolent waging of love, by whatever name. And that can be tough as hell. Nothing is off the table with that. But that's the only alternative, and, in a mistaken of inclusiveness, the better souls in Occupy are losing their clarity on that. However they may have understood it going forward, and wanting to not offent the anarchists, uh, no, actually folks, if your issue, if the issue you came to DC for of NYC or SF... is to have run-ins iwth the police, well, you're hopeless friends. Enjoy your rant. But if you're better than that, and some of you are, then stop getting sucked into these battles, you're on the wrong side of, and even when you're on the right side, you're taking your attention off of the 1%, off the issues that are worth your life.
I never asked directly about officer Beck who I've raised questions about, however, my feeling about the removal of tents, I have every reason to accept the word of these two young officers that I've known and seen every reason to trust - their humanity, versacity, professionalism for years, who say, we didn't make the call. And then moments ago I saw officer Reed, one of the commanding officers, and he independently corroborataed that. They took copius notes on everything they removed from the park because they know they're going to be sued. I've worked with these folks for years. They're professionals, they're nice folks, they've put on the uniform to defend the citizens, the constitution. And that's what they've been doing. And if they argument is that they haven't been doing everything perfectly, well my God, what an incredibly important thing to fight over; I'm being facetious.
And on the issue of the two explosively forceful explosions by the park police, the one in the evening where I almost got trampled, was to get the guy that had possibly blinded a fellow officer. It wasn't gratuitously violent. I felt that it could have or should have been communicated better, but I didn't realize at the time that there was an officer down, that there was an officer that had been possibly blinded by the fellow they were aprehending. They didn't trample any of us, they didn't hurt any of us. They didn't come out with any show of hatred. I was concerned they didn't show any more concern, but under the circumstances, that and the incident at the library, park police gets at least a B+, if not an A or an A- for their conduct the last 4 months. They're continuing to break the law, they're continuing to turn a blind eye to the law, to enable this encampment to continue. They're not coming on like heavies now, despite one of their men being serously injured. They're trying to keep their jobs, when they come through late at night, if anyone is asleep they say you've gotta sit up, no thei're not tolerating bedding, they'd be fools to, Issa would get them fired, he's that slime ball on the Hill, that democracy hater. These are good guys. They're damn good guys. And they were the first to come to the defense today in our discussion of many of the Occupiers. 'We know that most of those guys are good guys. We know that most of the troublemakers on Saturday came just to make trouble. We've been around Occupy. We knew that many of the troublemakers were faces we hadn't seen before. They jumped to that defense. I didn't have to bring it out of them.
U.S. jobs gap between young and old is widest ever (article)
U.S. jobs gap between young and old is widest ever
Anderson Independent Mail - 2 hours ago
AP WASHINGTON, DC — Squeezed by a tight job market, young Americans are especially ... involved in the nationwide “Occupy” protests over economic disparity.
2.08.2012
'Occupy DC: Guide to Accelerated High Stakes Social Change.' SL (txt. vids))
TEXT, VIDEOS AND SLIDES BELOW -Handbook of Fundamental Social Change
View more documents from Start Loving.
Manual for achieving the high-stakes, high acceleration social change.
This outline is deliberately preliminary to help out some potential collaborators of a prospective teach-in; and it is deliberately off the top of my mind, because having spent a lifetime practicing and studying this, if it's not top of mind then I'm reaching for things that I don't use.
So this outline will cover these items: some introductory notes; change becomes possible when you've found what's so valuable you'd die for it; accurate diagnosis is 99% of the cure and necessitates a theory, an understanding of humanity; focus, clear objective, is a prerequisite of change, that is, any amount of force dissipated is ineffective; sufficient power, that is, creative tension, Dr. King's term, is a prerequisite change - millions of supporters unable to live without the change, unable to accept the status quo, has always correlated with any major progress for human beings; paying the price is the currency of change, now, who pays it is a crucial issue; becoming, being the cure is the entire hope; the only battlefield is the nervous system - external actions, best understood, always and only have the purpose of changing what's going on in enough people's nervous systems, their understandings, their perceptions, their sense of risk, of what they value, and what might make them cave, acquiesce, agree, change Heart…; and finally, the two types of warfare the two options - violent warfare which suicidally guarantees victory of the status quo, it's always the means by which the status quo maintains itself, even if it's clever morphing from one group being in oppressive domination to another group being in oppressive domination; and Unviolent warfare, the only possibility of defeating massive physical force in time, if history is any indication for us, with true, fundamental, sustainable change.
So first, introductory notes. This document and video log is nothing more or less than a documentation of what Start Loving has learned through lifelong study and practice of high-stakes change, highly accelerated change, specializing in turning around failing organizations in the computer industry for decades, and for the last 13 years, devoting it to high-stakes social change, which is an infinitely more difficult challenge.
Most will quickly and aggressively dismiss what's presented here as unproven, unpopular, unknown. I wish them well. But I'd suggest that there are virtually none, including the masses that will dismiss it, that if they took the time to consider it in the depths of their Heart, what some of his history's wise have considered the eyes of the soul, the highest intelligence, few if any will find it easily dismissed. I have infinite time to explore this information with the Truth seeker and zero time, not a nanosecond, to defend it. People are dying, they have rights my time, and no one else does.
I will not apologize for what will seem like absolutist stances here. I make no absolutist claims but I've found through, well, a 60 year lifetime that there are in fact things that I can depend upon, that I’ve found through study and practice. I'll not communicate to you doubt, or interest in arguing, when I have none. You can make your own conclusions. There's an expression - The exception proves the rule; the fact that there is an exception proves that there is a rule or suggests that there is a rule. If anyone, my brothers and sisters all, finds that they are not interested in, or reject this information, they go on their way with my goodwill.
Yes a valid strategy can be based on defying all history, all precedent, all logic, but the responsible warrior, the responsible fighter, does so only when they have damn good reason to do so. That can happen, but only when they have damn good reason to do so, that they probably can articulate to others, not just themselves. The serious fighter greedily learns all she can from prior successes and failures in any domain that might apply. Gandhi usefully said – ‘learn as though you were going to live forever, but live as though you were going to die tomorrow,’ and more importantly, live as though 26,000 children are going to die tomorrow because we haven't figured out how to overcome our genocidal selfishness to keep them from dying, because they are, 26,000 children will die tomorrow because that, as 26,000 died today.
Specific to Occupy - some introductory notes, there are three fundamentally new elements in Occupy's situation, as I can best understand it: first this is the first ever revolution within a democracy, isn't it? Has there been another? And is this really a democracy? Zinn would argue no. He would further say this democracy's been co-opted, that the United States ‘democracy, is the greatest absorber of energy that otherwise would change the status quo, that has ever been; that US ‘democracy’ is the agent of the status quo. I think he’s wrong, that it is affloholism that is the problem, taken advantage of by the ‘pushers,’ the wolves. Second, the existential threat to humanity, let alone those in Occupy whether they realize it or not, is the clock ticking on the end of reasonable life-support on planet Earth. Please, if someone realizes why this shouldn't be the central, pivotal issue of everyone on earth, let alone Occupy, please take a moment to try to enlighten me, because as I see it, if you lose life-support and in eight years the battle will be lost, too late, if you don't start the efforts now, what else matters if you lose basic life support? And, third, the physical manifestation of your existential threat, it's a colorless, odorless gas, co2. So, should Occupy take on this sane, major thrust of opposition to environmental Armageddon, which oh by the way addresses war, addresses inequalities in income, and on and on, it's a the perfect strategic issue, for hitting many, many issues. It's a colorless, odorless gas. So it's extremely difficult to get people to focus on. And finally, maybe most importantly of all, your major opposition is not the 1%. Your major opposition is the societal-wide affloholism, the societal wide clinical addiction to stuff. The insanity, the denial that comes with addiction, the delusion that comes with addiction. Clinical addiction is not only triggered by external substances, we've triggered it with a culture that worships stuff. You included are of that addiction, and I, tho I’ve devoted more than a decade to getting clean, and have made near-total progress.
Change only becomes possible when you've found what is so valuable you'd die for it. Because I SL want it to be this way? Because that's the way it's been throughout history; and that’s how we are wired. An activist is not equipped to fight until she knows what she would die for, to paraphrase Dr. King. Why is this the case? Because you know for sure that the status quo, those of the status quo, will always kill to defend the status quo - they'll kill careers, they'll kill comfort, they'll kill safety, and they'll kill bodies if those initial efforts don't suffice. What exceptions are there friends to disprove this rule? Not the Arab spring, not women suffragists, not the civil rights movement, not ending the Vietnam War, not ending apartheid; they all were successful efforts of people that had found what they were willing to die for. They found death preferable to accepting the status quo, their own death, incidentally.
Specific to Occupy? Knowing what you're willing to joust against is never enough. And frankly, my brothers and sisters, that's all I've seen among you so far, and you're to be credited for that, no hope is possible when people don't act. But unless they learn along the way there's also no hope, and you should have learned by now that just wanting to act is like way not enough. If you haven't found what you'd die for there's no reason to wait to see who’s going to win. You can know right now, the status quo will win.
1ST RULE OF REPLACING THE STATUS QUO: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER [DID I SAY NEVER?] EVER, HOLD ANYONE ELSE TO A HIGHER STANDARD THAN YOU HOLD YOURSELF. EVER. NEVER DO IT. 'Be the change you want to see in the world,' Gandhi said, not, 'Whine, insult, cajole, litigtate... until OTHERS are the change.' This is school-yard whining, tattletale kind of stuff. BS. STOP IT, NOW. STOP IT. STOP IT. STOP IT. Look in the frickin mirror. You'll be ashamed, and then manybe, you'll start to become the inspiring change you were meant to be. 'Example is NOT the major thing in influencing people. It is the only thing.' Albert Schweitzer, Nobel Peace Prize 1952.
It is a widely held platitude isn't it, and more than that - that 99% of the cure is correct, accurate diagnosis, is knowing what's wrong? In the correct diagnosis is the information that one needs to figure out the cure. Occupy's work necessitates an understanding of how humanity works. What our DNA has basically wired us to do, and from what I’ve seen, hey call me blind, I'm unhappy to have to point it out, but I see no indication that you're holding yourselves responsible yet for a reasonable working theory of how people work, and how change is brought about.
1ST RULE OF REPLACING THE STATUS QUO: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER [DID I SAY NEVER?] EVER, HOLD ANYONE ELSE TO A HIGHER STANDARD THAN YOU HOLD YOURSELF. EVER. NEVER DO IT. 'Be the change you want to see in the world,' Gandhi said, not, 'Whine, insult, cajole, litigtate... until OTHERS are the change.' This is school-yard whining, tattletale kind of stuff. BS. STOP IT, NOW. STOP IT. STOP IT. STOP IT. Look in the frickin mirror. You'll be ashamed, and then manybe, you'll start to become the inspiring change you were meant to be. 'Example is NOT the major thing in influencing people. It is the only thing.' Albert Schweitzer, Nobel Peace Prize 1952.
The battlefield is the human nervous system; the battlefield of World War II was the human nervous system, acting on the collective nervous systems; on the adversary in such a way that they would finally agree to the desired change. Napoleon said, and I paraphrase – ‘you know what amazes me? That spirit, that spirit always triumphs over the sword in the end.’ Whoever controls the nervous system controls the behavior.
Occupy specific - The problem is true, fundamental, mass insanity within the collective Western nervous system. It is insane for us to be living 'normal lives' while the final weeks tic by on making this year 2012 the moonshot moment for saving habitable life-support on planet Earth for all creation, forever, let alone any other issues you're concerned with. Its clinical insanity. If you think that's silly then it's time for you to stop wasting your time on what I have to say. This is not a 'V' situation. This is not were a few people have manipulated and imposed their will. This is much more, by way of analogy, a part of the city that is addicted to crack; that is, they are willing and in fact demanding participants - they want the crack. Can we hate pushing that's going on? We can, but if you get rid of the pusher and people are addicted to stuff, they're simply going to find another pusher. That's where we are as a society. Unless you can bring about a mass curing of that, you will not win. In 'V' there was an oppressed population, in Arab spring there was an oppressed population. You have an infinitely more difficult situation than that. It's much more like 1930s Germany were a tiny minority of sane people, some sane Germans, saw the hell that Germans were bringing on themselves only a dozen years hence, and they failed in waking up their brothers sisters. That was another addictive situation where society-wide selfishness of people prevailed over heart, over humanity, over solidarity. That's your situation. This is a mass problem of affloholism, addiction to affluence, by whatever name.
Friends, so far Occupy it seems to me has without I think intentionally doing so tried to defy all experience with a tragically mistaken notion of inclusiveness, of issues, of people. Focus is necessary for any measure of force to bring about change. Flatten the head of a nail and it's not going to effectively penetrate. Take away the sharp edge of a knife and it's not going to effectively cut, or the tip of the spear, or the focus of the magnifying glass attempting to burn a leaf. Without focus it doesn't matter how much force you bring to bear. You've got to decide both strategically and in your Heart's what you're willing to die for and it's probably not a dozen things. It's probably one thing, and if you can't discover that, you don't have to wait to see if you're going to win or not. You're not.
sufficient power is a prerequisite for change. If you think of any analogues throughout history that apply to the type of social change you're looking to bring about, it requires, ultimately requires millions of supporters unable to live without change to the status quo. It doesn't start with millions. It probably started with one and then went to several, and then went to dozens and then went to hundreds, then thousands. A school of fish looks like thousands of fish change direction simultaneously. They don't. It starts with one and then two, and then five. It can happen very quickly but doesn't start with the thousands or millions, it starts with the few.
Without deadlines, without a sense that the status quo is intolerable for one more day it's impossible to build the creative energy within someone, let alone within a group, so we're taught to have denial of such things. If you deny, if you don't find within yourself something you can't live with for one more day, you're not going to be able to unleash the energy within yourself, and therefore you're not going to be able to be the catalyst within others.
If you aren't living 'failure is not an option' you will not be able to develop the creative tension in yourself and therefore not in others.
Oddly enough creative tension only builds sufficiently when the warrior is willing to fail but they're unwilling to not try. Think of that final scene in Lord of the Rings, the final battle, when Aragorn, they're surrounded by hundreds of times more people than they can survive, they know they're going to fail, but they realize they are unwilling not to fight. None of the major changes in history have happened with people that knew they were going to succeed. Folks of the Arab spring three days into it last year, said, no we’re not going to win, we just aren't willing to sit on the sidelines anymore. Without that willingness to fail, but unwillingness to not attempt, you can't unleash sufficient tension.
Creative tension - human power happens in the heart. The Hearth’s the highest form of human intelligence. I'm talking about the part of the nervous system associated with wisdom, compassion vision, conscience, empathy, solidarity, compassion, creativity. This is the 80% of the nervous system that Einstein said we didn't use. This is, is what you have to unleash in this society, this is what's been harnessed, ignited, unleashed in all the previous successful change movements. It's the highest form of human motivation. We're talking about the love of the mother for her child. This is what Gandhi put all his confidence in, it's called soul force, he meant, heart force. Humans are the most powerful creatures that we know of the universe. The Heart is the ultimate controller of the human being when it's tapped and unleashed, therefore the heart is the most powerful force in the universe which you need to unleash to achieve your change.
The heart has never been so dead as is the Western, US Heart. That's the core competence of Western civilization, our deadly c’risto capitalism, that has enabled such rape and plunder of our fellow human beings and all creation, to so deaden the heart so as to enable the two other major components of our nervous system, the head and the flesh to dominate, subordinate, virtually crucify the heart in each of us. Your challenge Occupy, is greater than anyone's ever faced because you’ve got less to work with, less heart in you and your countrymen. We can pray there is a shred of Heart left in most of our fellow Westerners but boy it has been tortured and atrophied into a bare shell of itself. That's your only hope is to rekindle that.
Paying the price is the currency of change. I mean there's no, there is no free lunch. Please try to hear this as more than some cliché. This is absolute physical truth; physics ultimately. So the question that you have to ask is - with the 2 options there are, where's the price going to come from- you bludgeoning and torturing and harassing and abusing it out of others? That’s what the 1% does. Or is it paying the price oneself, Unviolent action? The radical root cause of almost everything you're concerned with, probably all of it, is mass insanity, mass selfishness, mass inhumanity - affloholism. That's a disease. No one wishes to be insane. No one really wishes to be an addict, it's an error; they can come to see the error of their ways. Do you hate the addict? Do you hate the drunk? You might, but you're not proud of yourself for it. The drunk is to be pitied, and if we're creatures of love, sane, then our task, for them and for us is to work to bring about a cure. That's your task, to move people en masse, into their right minds, starting with yourself.
Be the change you wish to see in the world - this is what Gandhi meant. Become the antidote, become the healthy human being. Become the human being whose quality of life, although it may look like hell, is actually the quality of life that any sane person would die to have. The alcoholic by and large doesn't envy those who are sober until she comes to her senses, and then she wants it with all her heart. This is your task. The highest motivator, health, morality in the individual or collective nervous system is Love, humanity, solidarity, dignity, by whatever name. This is what the greatest leaders have been willing to die for. Don't take my word for it, find it in your heart or find that this video or writing is no longer worth spending any more of your time on.
The psychological battlefield is the nervous system. I shared with you a quote from Napoleon before, ‘spirit triumphs in the end,’ tho that doesn't prove the point, it illustrates it. But again search your heart you find that that's the case. Everyone's individual and the collective body is controlled by the individual and collective nervous system. So all external efforts are to bring about a change in the nervous system; it's eminently important for you to keep that central in your thinking as you devise strategy and tactics.
I'm a lifelong student of psychology formally and informally and I suggest to you that far and away the most useful model of the nervous system is the it's of two alternative domains, two opposing domains really: the Head and the Flesh which are the domain of entropy, small-mindedness, small heartedness, selfishness, disconnection, alienation, oppression - the 1% as you target them; and the Heart which is the domain of solidarity, humanity, wisdom, compassion, empathy, conscience. I will always suggest to you till someone convinces me otherwise that your entire success depends upon ultimately moving enough Americans from their head and the flesh which is what we worship in this society to the Insane Humanity of the heart.
So this leaves you with two possibilities - violent warfare and Unviolent warfare.
Violent warfare suicidally guarantees victory of the status quo because it empowers the head and the flesh, and they're insane, they don't know the sanity of conscience, compassion, of feeling of human connection. They think they know, they have ideas about it, but can’t actually experience it. Violence for you is kicking the can down the road. It can bring about short-term change, it can't bring about long-term change.
You're out of road. You have eight years to get the job done of reducing coal and oil 80%, by the year 2020. Your out of road. It will be irreversible unless you make 2012 your moon-shot moment, except for the insane Russian roulette fall-back of trying to bring about geo-engineering, which the best scientists are terrified of because it could just as likely bring about global mass destruction.
You don't have any more road, you've gotta get it right now. Violent warfare is immoral, unethical, I don't mean in some abstract sense. I mean in the sense that use of violence is un-adaptive for the well-being of the species. It's the way of cancer. It's the way of diseases, it’s the way of parasites.
That leaves you with Unviolent warfare. If you want more than the gratification of a violent rant that feels good, then your option is Unviolent warfare. It's the only possibility of defeating massive, overwhelming physical force in time. Your task is to sufficiently and rapidly increase the ranks of those ready to die for the change. You need to understand and use force Field analysis. What is it that is causing people to stay on the side of Head and Flesh, the side of status quo? What is it that can cause them to come over out of greed, out of selfishness for the joy of exercising the heart?
Side note: don't get distracted by what people want, oh, people want an end to war, for example. It's irrelevant. What are they willing to pay the price for, what are they willing to stand for? Today, the answer is selfishness, status quo, or, nothing. How do you change that?
The only possible, final victor, is Unviolent warfare; is appealing to, and bring online, the hearts of millions. This is true, clinically, biologically, physically, psychologically, historically.... Unless you want the final victory of total destruction. Unviolent warfare is indisputably history's choice for defeating overwhelming violent powers. Think of the leading social progress movements throughout history. Unviolent warfare is history's choice of the moral giants. That doesn't mean you have to comply. But why would you? If you diverge from history's giants of change, you owe it to yourself that you have a pretty damn good reason. Please share it with me when you come up with it.
Unviolent warfare reestablishes what it means to be a healthy life form, a healthy human being, not insane, not affloholic. I'm not speaking morality here. Is it some hideous morality to pity your drunk uncle, or your friend that you see curled up in a drugged stupor? No, it's wired in our DNA. It's adaptive.
All of this may come down to remembering, finding why we’re here, at Occupy. 'A human being is not equipped to live until they know what they would die for,' to paraphrase MLK Jr. Meaning is what a healthy human being most needs in their life. It's why the mother will run into a burning building almost certainly knowing it's her death, to save her child. Meaning is the ultimate value, meaning to the well-being of others. We are taught the opposite in this society and hence are bringing doom on ourselves.
No, you need to keep the 26,000 children will die tomorrow of easily preventable poverty, and their families, in the room with you; Arm them with AK-47s, like I do, so that you know that if you trigger their rage you know that their rage will blow you away, if they see you squandering the time you have, the limited time to save them, and to save yourselves. Seems crazy until you do it, and then you realize it will bring you alive. Always keep them in the room with you, watching and knowing everything you do. All power, and focus comes from there.
If there were to be a facilitation, a teach-in on this, I expect it would be preceded by a fleshed out text version of this. That would serve the purpose of preparing people for time to be productively spent in the group. It would enable people to decide that they didn't want to be involved. It would enable some fine tuning before they became involved. If that were to happen, I suspect this would've gone through several revisions spearheaded by myself with considerable input by the few that might have an interest and willingness to aid in the facilitation.
2.07.2012
'Occupy DC: Blinding How Many Officers Warrants a Crackdown?' SL (text, vid)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2LsG6sSexM
So blinding how many police officers on Saturday would warrant a police crackdown? How many hours, days, weeks, months are the police obligated to break the law for folks in Occupy? It would seem from Occupy's standpoint that any enforcement of the law is an inhumane, attackable offense if done by the Park police.
This was an eventful night for me. At 5:30, back at McPherson Park for my evening ration of homeless food, there was a Park Police officer, early 30s, nice-looking fella, African-American man, who I'd never seen before. He seemed to know me or know of me. I approached him nonthreateningly, of course, said I was disturbed about Saturday, wanted to share some observations, was expecting nothing from him in return. Would that be okay? He said yes and in a way that suggested he meant it. I told him, as I've described in posts earlier today, that it appeared to me that what had been a stellar, stunning, display of respect, for free speech and the Constitution by the Park police for three or four months now, stunning, staggering, breathtaking to anyone with eyes, which is almost no one, was thrown out the window, trashed, as near as I can tell, by blatantly bad-faith negotiation by officer Beck, the commanding officer, that by all reasonable appearances, professed to have a good faith, binding discussion with Occupiers, including a young man who I have tremendous respect for, for clearing the statue, getting off of the statue, and the then police agreed to remove only the tents that had bedding, food or were a health hazard. And based on my observations of the end of this negotiation at which point I went to recharge my laptop and upload some video, and my return several hours later, it appeared the police flagrantly, totally lied in that negotiation, and were removing, indiscriminately, all but a few token tents.
And I still don't know that that isn't exactly the case. But I'm mightily impressed with the conversation with the officer and a subsequent conversation I had.
The officer told me, he was an extremely genuine individual, as so many of the officers are, I can hardly think of an exception in years, stunning people. He said, I don't know the exact timing of what you're describing. I wasn't there. I didn't see it, he wasn’t the slightest defensive, but he said - what I do know is that everyone on the force was called to duty in preparation for that morning and we were clearly told that the Park police intended to continue to work with the demonstrators, as they had, unless and until there was any violence, at which point the orders were clear, they would quickly and totally empty the Park of people and then all of the tents and another demonstration material would be taken away; as has been demanded by the law, and I'm adding this part, as is demanded by the law, clear as day, and has not been enforced by the Park police, bending over backward to support free speech, this is categorically clear, against the wishes of the mayor, against the wishes of the vile refuse, that today calls itself the Republican party on Capitol Hill, those inhumane, two-legged rodents, vile creatures. The Park police have been taking all of that pressure. And this fine young officer went on to say - I don't know the exact timing, but I do know that one officer is in the process of losing his eyesight due to a bottle filled with liquid or rocks thrown at his eye, and that another was clubbed with a pole, two acts of violence, either of which was sufficient to trigger my orders, he said.
That's not a definitive answer for me. I am now stepping out of our conversation. I thanked the officer and tried to impress upon him how useful I thought our dialogue was, and that I would, as strongly as I could, voice when he shared back to any sane ears I could find.
Moments later, two African-American men that I've become significantly fond of, that had been associated with Occupy, very clean cut, well spoken, obviously responsible in every respect, appearance, demeanor probably late 30s early 40s, one a vet. I saw them and out of a mutual affection said hi and chose to share the conversation I just had with the police.
They were instantly on the side of the police. I've not spoken with either of them enough to have anticipated that at all. They were incensed by how the police had been berated for hours and hours and hours by a relatively small cadre of the Occupy contingent, the ones that one of the two fellows I'm now mentioning was one of the eighth of us planning to stand with me as human shields protecting the police against the feces and mustard gas bombs from these anarchist trash. They were incensed by a the way the police were treated by this horrifically vocal cadre, some of which I captured on tape and is on my youtube channel, more than a 1000 views on one, 500 on the other.
At this point a third gentleman who I had not observed before, early to mid 30s, extremely fine looking African-American man, extremely professional looking, not a business suit but very well groomed. He was utterly outraged about how one of the individuals was treating the officers. He made it clear that he had been taunting officers, but within boundaries he thought were appropriate to the situation, and how he became aware of a fellow he was next to, who was using language and sexual innuendo, and this guy made a point, for six hours this guy was firing it at police, the most vulgar, the most personal the most sexual, about their mothers, about their wives, and it just spilled out of him, so apparently this offending fellow is the fellow whose elbow was broken, or he has cuts on his head now his lawyer says, and I won't use the exact language, but this extremely well spoken, extremely well-kept man said, the police wound up tearing this guy apart, and one of the other gentleman was expressing concern, and this guy said, they had to do that! Did you hear how he was speaking to them?! He was outraged.
And my point, my major point to them, my major point to the few sane heads I've seen at Occupy over months is, 'you guys don't stand for anything if you don't stand against all abuse, including abusive of the police, and tragically, I saw no one except for me stand against the abuse of the police on Saturday.
My point isn't to condemn anyone, but I was correct then and I'm correct now, his movement is nothing, it's no different, it's no different than the 1%, just has different targets. Brotherhood is universal or it's not brotherhood, standing for justice is universal or it's not standing for justice, standing for what's right is universal or it's not standing for what's right. And then and now my hope is that some people will find the better part of themselves and begin to stand up for what's right.
My guess remains that officer Beck is a throwback, or the equivalent thereof, to the thugs Park police used to be. I don't know that, he may be a very fine man. But if the more police favorable view of this is true, he needs to come forth with that explanation and he needs to come forth with it to the people in Occupy, whether or not they're man or woman enough to hear it and respect it is not his responsibility. But it's his responsibility to justice, it's his responsibility to taxpayers to make a clear rendering of extremely reasonable perceptions of betrayal, and lies, that Occupy has.
And more importantly to the nation, and to the world, is that the better souls in Occupy look at themselves in the mirror and ask what level of standards they're really holding themselves to, because they're holding these officers to infinitely higher standard than they're holding themselves, and that's morally bankrupt, and it's totally hopeless.
So blinding how many police officers on Saturday would warrant a police crackdown? How many hours, days, weeks, months are the police obligated to break the law for folks in Occupy? It would seem from Occupy's standpoint that any enforcement of the law is an inhumane, attackable offense if done by the Park police.
This was an eventful night for me. At 5:30, back at McPherson Park for my evening ration of homeless food, there was a Park Police officer, early 30s, nice-looking fella, African-American man, who I'd never seen before. He seemed to know me or know of me. I approached him nonthreateningly, of course, said I was disturbed about Saturday, wanted to share some observations, was expecting nothing from him in return. Would that be okay? He said yes and in a way that suggested he meant it. I told him, as I've described in posts earlier today, that it appeared to me that what had been a stellar, stunning, display of respect, for free speech and the Constitution by the Park police for three or four months now, stunning, staggering, breathtaking to anyone with eyes, which is almost no one, was thrown out the window, trashed, as near as I can tell, by blatantly bad-faith negotiation by officer Beck, the commanding officer, that by all reasonable appearances, professed to have a good faith, binding discussion with Occupiers, including a young man who I have tremendous respect for, for clearing the statue, getting off of the statue, and the then police agreed to remove only the tents that had bedding, food or were a health hazard. And based on my observations of the end of this negotiation at which point I went to recharge my laptop and upload some video, and my return several hours later, it appeared the police flagrantly, totally lied in that negotiation, and were removing, indiscriminately, all but a few token tents.
And I still don't know that that isn't exactly the case. But I'm mightily impressed with the conversation with the officer and a subsequent conversation I had.
The officer told me, he was an extremely genuine individual, as so many of the officers are, I can hardly think of an exception in years, stunning people. He said, I don't know the exact timing of what you're describing. I wasn't there. I didn't see it, he wasn’t the slightest defensive, but he said - what I do know is that everyone on the force was called to duty in preparation for that morning and we were clearly told that the Park police intended to continue to work with the demonstrators, as they had, unless and until there was any violence, at which point the orders were clear, they would quickly and totally empty the Park of people and then all of the tents and another demonstration material would be taken away; as has been demanded by the law, and I'm adding this part, as is demanded by the law, clear as day, and has not been enforced by the Park police, bending over backward to support free speech, this is categorically clear, against the wishes of the mayor, against the wishes of the vile refuse, that today calls itself the Republican party on Capitol Hill, those inhumane, two-legged rodents, vile creatures. The Park police have been taking all of that pressure. And this fine young officer went on to say - I don't know the exact timing, but I do know that one officer is in the process of losing his eyesight due to a bottle filled with liquid or rocks thrown at his eye, and that another was clubbed with a pole, two acts of violence, either of which was sufficient to trigger my orders, he said.
That's not a definitive answer for me. I am now stepping out of our conversation. I thanked the officer and tried to impress upon him how useful I thought our dialogue was, and that I would, as strongly as I could, voice when he shared back to any sane ears I could find.
Moments later, two African-American men that I've become significantly fond of, that had been associated with Occupy, very clean cut, well spoken, obviously responsible in every respect, appearance, demeanor probably late 30s early 40s, one a vet. I saw them and out of a mutual affection said hi and chose to share the conversation I just had with the police.
They were instantly on the side of the police. I've not spoken with either of them enough to have anticipated that at all. They were incensed by how the police had been berated for hours and hours and hours by a relatively small cadre of the Occupy contingent, the ones that one of the two fellows I'm now mentioning was one of the eighth of us planning to stand with me as human shields protecting the police against the feces and mustard gas bombs from these anarchist trash. They were incensed by a the way the police were treated by this horrifically vocal cadre, some of which I captured on tape and is on my youtube channel, more than a 1000 views on one, 500 on the other.
At this point a third gentleman who I had not observed before, early to mid 30s, extremely fine looking African-American man, extremely professional looking, not a business suit but very well groomed. He was utterly outraged about how one of the individuals was treating the officers. He made it clear that he had been taunting officers, but within boundaries he thought were appropriate to the situation, and how he became aware of a fellow he was next to, who was using language and sexual innuendo, and this guy made a point, for six hours this guy was firing it at police, the most vulgar, the most personal the most sexual, about their mothers, about their wives, and it just spilled out of him, so apparently this offending fellow is the fellow whose elbow was broken, or he has cuts on his head now his lawyer says, and I won't use the exact language, but this extremely well spoken, extremely well-kept man said, the police wound up tearing this guy apart, and one of the other gentleman was expressing concern, and this guy said, they had to do that! Did you hear how he was speaking to them?! He was outraged.
And my point, my major point to them, my major point to the few sane heads I've seen at Occupy over months is, 'you guys don't stand for anything if you don't stand against all abuse, including abusive of the police, and tragically, I saw no one except for me stand against the abuse of the police on Saturday.
My point isn't to condemn anyone, but I was correct then and I'm correct now, his movement is nothing, it's no different, it's no different than the 1%, just has different targets. Brotherhood is universal or it's not brotherhood, standing for justice is universal or it's not standing for justice, standing for what's right is universal or it's not standing for what's right. And then and now my hope is that some people will find the better part of themselves and begin to stand up for what's right.
My guess remains that officer Beck is a throwback, or the equivalent thereof, to the thugs Park police used to be. I don't know that, he may be a very fine man. But if the more police favorable view of this is true, he needs to come forth with that explanation and he needs to come forth with it to the people in Occupy, whether or not they're man or woman enough to hear it and respect it is not his responsibility. But it's his responsibility to justice, it's his responsibility to taxpayers to make a clear rendering of extremely reasonable perceptions of betrayal, and lies, that Occupy has.
And more importantly to the nation, and to the world, is that the better souls in Occupy look at themselves in the mirror and ask what level of standards they're really holding themselves to, because they're holding these officers to infinitely higher standard than they're holding themselves, and that's morally bankrupt, and it's totally hopeless.
The global wind power market rose 6 percent to 41 gigawatts last year, led by China
The global wind power market rose 6 percent to 41 gigawatts last year, led by China, which captured more than two-fifths of the total, the Global Wind Energy Council said today in a report. [Businessweek]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)