The question of where we need to be tomorrow is best
answered by understanding who we are today.
Kropotkin
“Make it new”
Ezra Pound dictum that is the heart of Modernism…….
But as anyone “knows”, everything we see or say or hear or touch
as been done before, what can be new after a million years of
human history? Recall your art history……. You have art from the middle
ages which was religious art up till 1880’s which was your basic portrait art,
the art that sits in museums like the Mona Lisa or you have landscape paintings…
pretty pictures of cities or the mountains…….
but Art beginning in about 1880 started to become something different……
you begin to have your various ism’s in art like Dadaism and surrealism
and art Nouveau and symbolism and fauvism and Die Brucke….
there are many different types of Art ism’s that existed after 1880…
You have to begin to historically understand, that by 1880 a new
medical approach was beginning in Europe which we now call
psychoanalysis……. This new method was beginning to make its
way into the conscious of people everywhere and it made it
home in the place where it made the most sense, Artists……
for Artist, the unconscious was where art is created and formed…
Art exists in the realm of the unconscious and Artists use
their unconscious to create that art. “To make it new”
was about taking the unconscious and making it manifest…….
Every great artist uses the unconscious but to “make it new”
the Artist began to show us the unconscious in many different platforms.
Music, painting, sculpture, architecture, literature…………
look at the art created after 1880 and you can see how the
Artist would try to show us the unconscious at work in their art.
For one example, stream of conscious writing in literature…
the act of putting down words without “editing” as in James Joyce
“Ulysses” for example. This form of writing would have been impossible
before 1900……….People did not have the “ears” to hear such
“babbling”… but because of the new “age” that we are in, the Modern age,
we now have ears to hear such “Babbling”… but can you also see the results
of the use of the unconscious in history? We have several events like
the “Two World Wars” and the Holocaust and the cold war…
There does seem to be a connection between this new process of
seeking the unconscious and the horror of the 20th century.
Perhaps this is the reason that the “Frankenstein” mythos is so
compelling in the 20th century. We have released the monster
and it is our unconscious. So the question of the release of
the terror and horror of the “Modern” age is the result of
the understanding that we “must make it new” and we pursued
this attempt to “make it new” into our unconscious and we made
the unconscious visible in our paintings and literature and poems
and architecture among the platforms made conscious.
This age has done something no other age has done, which is make
the unconscious visible. But once again we must ask ourselves,
why this age? Why now? What has changed that made it possible,
even necessary for us to explore the unconscious mind?
what event or event’s has forced us to engage in an understanding
of not only our physical bodies, but our unconscious mind?
The history of the 20th century is a direct result of this emphasis on
making the unconscious visible from the two world wars to the holocaust
to the nihilism and despair of the world of 2018.
For what must we do to free ourselves of our unleashing our
unconscious unto the world?
Doubt me? then ask yourself this, why do we have such an emphasis
to heal our minds? We have thousands who job is to heal our mental state,
to heal our minds, our unconscious minds. Why is psychology such a big business
nowadays? Why are we so mentally fucked up? This is beyond the normal state
of people who are mentally ill which has existed since the beginning of time to
the point where have a crisis in mental illness that exists in our “Modern” times
and to what can you attribute this crisis to? What has changed that has increased
mental illness to become perhaps the leading medical issue of our times?
We see mental illness existing even in the White House where clearly we
have a mentally unbalanced president. Why this increase in mental
illness? Answer this question and you have the answer to one of the question
of the “modern” age. What the hell is wrong with us?
Kropotkin
In an earlier post, I asked why are we so “soul” sick?
You can see this in both the serial killer phenomena and
the various mass murders that occurred in America.
In fact I would say that America is the place where the
soul is the most in need of healing and the vast number
of soul healers exists here, known as psychologist or therapist.
But why here and why now? The answer seems evident. This is the place
where the nihilism of capitalism is the most evident and where it is most evident
that workers are devalued, negated the most. What does it cost the human soul
when it is evident that we are valued less then profits/money?
Human beings must feel as if they have value and in the modern society
where profits/money are given the highest priority, we see this damaging
the human soul. Personal worth is not just a number in a bank account,
but personal worth lies in the value we offer to the world and to ourselves.
If we have no value to offer the world, then our soul suffers… It might
be thought of as a basic human condition that we must feel like we are
part of and value to and contributing to ourselves, our family, our group
and our society. Then and only then can we feel ourselves to be of value.
The nihilism of the modern age has denied us our opportunity to feel we
are of some value to the world besides some abstract notion of contributing
to the GDP. That doesn’t give us any real or first hand knowledge of how
we are contributing and how we are of value to society. This notion
of feeling that we have something to contribute is of prime value
to humans and if we don’t feel we are making some sort of contribution
we become “soul” sick. It is ingrained in human beings to feel valued
and wanted and we need to feel like we have contributed in some fashion.
The modern world has denied us this as it practices nihilism on an ever larger
scale. Nihilism: the denial and negation of human beings and their values.
It is society with its emphasis on profits/money that has created the soul
sickness of its citizens. We are victims of a society that has no time or concern
for the human being and their values. Our society doesn’t value the citizens
who exist within our society and that, that creates the soul sickness that
has so become epidemic within society and why we have so many healers
of the soul, psychologists. Here we begin to see how the drug epidemic of
our modern times has began. With the members of society trying to escape
the fact that society doesn’t value them or their values……. Drugs, alcohol,
opioids, reckless behavior, addictions, mass murder and serial killers, are all symptoms
of citizens in a society that doesn’t value them. Want to end these problems of
drug use and addictions and mass murders, then you must stop the nihilism that
denies and negates the human being and their values.
Kropotkin
Upon what do we build our “certainty” of the world?
We are and have been searching for some certainty in the world for
centuries, since the days of Descartes. This need of and for certainty
is quite clear to anyone who looks at how people live their lives.
Part of our human certainty lies in the ground level of the society/
civilization in which we live in………For example, we can not really feel
certain in a society where the our basic human needs of a secure society
and where we are loved and where we can depend on our fundamental needs
are to be meet. If on a daily basis, we are unsure if we are going to
have our fundamental needs like food, water, shelter, clothing, then
that uncertainty affects us both mentally and physically. Part of the
certainty of a human being lies not only mentally, but physically, emotionally.
The uncertainty of the modern age not only exists from the physical needs
that must be met, but the mental and emotional needs being met,
and that extends into our ideologies and ism’s. Conservatism is
a human need being met. The need to have security is one of the prime
reasons of people being conservatives. Conservatism as an ism is a means to
create certainty in the world. The attempt to gain certainty is not just mental,
but is physical and emotional. We as human beings must have certainty
as a basic condition to lead our lives. And what happens if we don’t have
certainty in our lives? We become “soul” sick and turn to other means to
gain certainty in our lives, be it drugs or complete belief in an ism or ideology.
In other words, those who are “born again Christians” become born again
because they lacked belief in the certainty of the world. To become born again
is to create certainty in ones life. To become born again is an attempt to heal
the soul by an ism/ideology. But the ism/ideology doesn’t address the real reason
one became soul sick in the first place hence needing to be born again.
No, the reason why someone becomes a born again Christian is to create
certainty in ones life and the reason why they didn’t have certainty is because
of society’s nihilism which has denied and negated us as humans and denied
and negated our values that we have as human beings. This is the root cause
of born again Christians. There either in values or personally, have been denied
and negated and they are attempting to find the much needed certainty we must
all have in being born again.
This example of trying to create certainty by an ism/ideology is commonplace
in society today. The culture wars of the last 40 years can be simply an attempt
to create certainty by one side or another. The vast right/left battle of the last
many years is also an attempt to create certainty in the world by means of
using ism’s/ideologies as a means to create certainty. In fact, one could
rewrite the history of the last century as the search for certainty.
Part of this search for certainty is also including in the search for meaning.
If we find certainty, we might find meaning in our lives which is another
form of finding certainty in our lives.
Kropotkin
Now there are a listing of issues that reside in our world,
we have among them, what might be called “social” issues.
That are problems within the social order like poverty, social change,
pollution, income inequality, bigotry like racism and sexism to name a few…
these issues are the result of social actions and beliefs and doings that
the human being has done individually or collectively.
These named problems are the result of our actions and thus we have created
the problems and we can solve the problem with our actions and beliefs and
doings, both individually and collectively.
The question arises in how important do we consider these problems in
the midst of our affairs. In other words, how do we rate poverty in the midst
of our other issues, which are also socially created by human beings.
The so called “welfare state” is one possible solution to the problems created
by our actions or inaction, as the case may be. The “welfare state” is a perfectly reasonable
response to the problems that have been created by human actions or inactions.
In other words, if we create the problem, then we must find the solution.
If our ism’s and ideologies have created the problems/issues, then we can
find a solution within other ism’s and ideologies that are meant to solve
the problems created by the guilty ism/isms and ideologies.
If Capitalism has made poverty a permanent issue in society today, then
we must find a solution to that problem. But why, one may ask?
And therein lies one of the many issues that exists within society today.
We have failed to take responsibility for our actions even if the actions were
taken by our grandfathers and fathers………
If our collective actions taken hundreds of years ago has created a permanent
class of underemployed or unemployed people, we must be held responsible for
that collective actions. But why? Why am I to be held responsible for actions taken
hundreds of years ago? Ask yourself, then why we are being held to be guilty
of the actions of Adam/Eve, in the matter of the original sin, disobedience?
If the sins of the father can be passed on to the children, then we are
responsible for the actions of our father and grandfather. If we are not responsible
for the sins/actions of our father/grandfather, then we are not accountable for
the actions/sins of Adam/Eve.
You can’t have it both ways. Either we are guilty in both counts or we are
innocent in both counts, you can’t have us guilty in one instance and
innocent in another instance.
But I can’t have it both ways either, I don’t believe in original sin, of
disobedience to god and yet, I believe we are accountable for the actions
of our father and grandfather in their actions or inactions that has created
the issues and problems of today.
How do I solve this dilemma?
By noting the context. We have social issues like poverty which
damage people, socially, economically, politically, emotionally,
and psychologically. It doesn’t matter if you believe or not,
you are still being damaged as a human being by ism’s and ideologies
that have led to these social issues, whereas you can overcome
the indoctrinations of your childhood which include religious
indoctrinations like Catholicism and belief in god.
By knowing thyself and overcoming those indoctrinations which
then lead us to becoming who we are. We can individually overcome
our indoctrinations whereas we cannot individually overcome collective permanent
poverty cycles. We must work together to overcome permanent poverty
whereas we can individually overcome our childhood indoctrinations.
Overcoming permanent poverty requires everyone in society to engage with,
and therein lies the difference. The belief in god and the idea of original sin
is an childhood indoctrination which affects us only if we allow it to,
whereas poverty damages regardless if we believe in capitalism or not.
The question of knowing thyself and then overcoming those childhood
indoctrinations and with that, becoming who you are. That path of
knowledge is essential in our individual engagement with the universe,
with reality. But we don’t need that engagement to overcome permanent
poverty. We need another level of engagement to overcome permanent
poverty… We must overcome permanent poverty by collective actions
of society, of everyone. So our engagement really has two levels,
first our engagement with ourselves to overcome our childhood indoctrinations
and the second level of engagement is with society and its issues and problems.
The first engagement is a private “battle” and the second engagement is about
our collective actions we must achieve together. That is the difference between
our being guilty by the actions of Adam/Eve and our being guilty of the actions
or inactions of our father and grandfather. We can solve one collectively
and we can solve one individually. It is important to understand that
engagement is both collective and individually.
Kropotkin
As we tend to find our meaning and salvation and certainty in
things outside of us, I might suggest we find things inside of us.
for example, we might find certainty not in matters outside of us, but
we could find certainty in that which is in us, and that is values.
We can find certainty in values such as justice and love and harmony
and the list of values we can base our certainty on is a rather long list.
Let us take Justice for example, we can use the value of Justice as
the centerpiece of our certainty in the universe. Let the winds of change
howl over us and try to loosen our bearings but if we hold tight to
values like Justice, we can survive and prosper if we hold tight to
the value of Justice. Even in our search for Justice can provide us with
a center and a Moring that allows us to withstand the trial and tribulations
of life. We don’t need to be center on matters outside of when we can
be centered in matters within us. We have lost this ability to become
centered with internal beliefs and values. We are so certain that we can
become centered with material goods or money or a title or fame but
these things are empty promises. They cannot deliver what we crave, which
is certainty. A title or money or fame are whispers in the night that fade
with the sunlight. They don’t amount to anything of value or of substance.
They promise of money or a title or fame is fleeting and short lived.
It is like eating Chinese food, it is filing for a short time, but within
the hour, you’re hungry again. The temporary promises of modern society
is short lived and leaves one feeling empty.
It is only in values can we find something that will sustain us into
the night. With values we have something that is durable and forever
because values like justice and love and honor are not something that
fades away during the day like fog and titles and fame.
We must hold onto that which gives our lives meaning and substance
and values are the only thing we have that gives lives meaning
and substance, values like Justice and Love and honor.
If you want to find certainty in your life, you must reject the temporary
and translucent like fame and money and titles.
Kropotkin
The question of Identity and the polis, city, is an interesting one.
The Greeks felt that a human being could not reach one full
identity without the polis, city. When the Greek person identified themselves,
the used their name and their city, Socrates of Athens.
The Greek person identity was tied up with the city of their birth.
Which meant they thought that their personal growth was tied up
in whatever city they were born in. It was not possible to become who you
are without a polis and in their eyes, a Greek polis. The question of identity
was tied into the possibilities that was the polis. A person could only find out
their possibilities in the context of the polis and no where else. Is the question
of possibilities for us tied into the context of the city? No, today a person’s identity
is not tied up within the city/polis. How do we find our possibilities today?
Today we use education instead of the polis and education is usually understood
to be the university/collage settings of today. That is where our possibilities are
understood to be found. Alternatives are offered up as places where our
possibilities are found, one alternative offered up is the Army, Be all that
you can be, is a slogan of the Army. But think about it… that slogan
is suggesting that you can become “all you can be” in an organization
that in the bottom line is a place where you learn to kill someone in
a wide variety of ways, on land, on sea and in the air. This returns us to
an earlier idea that the U.S. is basically a martial, military based
society. Not devoted to peace or searching for peace, but engaged
in a martial state, a continuous state of war. And given the longest
lasting war in American history has been the war in Iraq/Afghanistan war
that has been going on since 2003 and given the budget of the United States,
is a military budget with the vast majority of resources going to the “defense”
budget. As a moral document, the budget makes it clear that, we the people,
believe in security instead of freedom and the minimal amount of resources
we devote to the health, education and welfare of our citizens is
a failure on our part. If we take our budget as an understanding of possibilities,
then our possibilities are martial, warlike, become all you can be……
But our possibilities are much greater then simply learning to kill other human beings.
That is basic and simple, every animal alive must learn that trait… but we are
human beings and we are possessed with far greater abilities then just being
able to kill our fellow human beings. Let us stop taking the easy road to discovering
what our possibilities are which according to the budget of the United States,
is martial values, when we could really begin the process of becoming who we are,
which is rising to our full possibilities, instead of our lowest value/instinct which
is the simply killing of men. We must search for the positive instead of the negative
which is the another way of saying, the positive is to build and the negative is
to destroy… simple as that. We want to be positive and build and that is the
true way to find our possibilities…… to just ask man to kill is to deny that we
even have a positive value like the act of creation. To build, to create is positive
and to kill, to destroy is the negative………and until we as a country learn the
difference between the positive and the negative, we shall be forever lost
and confused as to what are our possibilities.
Kropotkin
existentialism = existence.
The question of existentialism is existence. What does it mean to exist?
What gives existence its meaning or purpose?
During our existence, what happens and what should happen?
Existence is past, present and future and the Kantian question
are questions of existence.
What can we know?
What should we do?
What can we hope for?
What should our values be?
What should we spend our energy on?
What do we express and how?
These Kantian/Kropotkin question and ask, in our existence, what can we know?
What should we do? What……………
Existence is such a brief and finite thing………
So we ask the another Kantian/Kropotkin question?
What are we certain about?
Kropotkin
Kantian/Kropotkin question:
I exists; what does that mean… what is the point, meaning, purpose
of existence?
I exist… in time and space…
I exist as matter… in a matter universe……
I exist……… without any guidance or guidebook……
I exist…as a biological being…
I exist… with a biological finite existence…
I exist…I exist with awareness…unlike other animals…
I exist… I can rise above my instincts/my programming… unlike other animals…
I exist… It is this rising above my instincts/programming… that makes me truly human…
I exist… as a creature that evoloved from something else…
I exist… it is this evolution from something else that defines us…
I exist…I don’t see myself as a set, uniform, final animal…
I exist… today because of the evolution of the human being…
I exist… and it is in that evolution we must understand ourselves…
I exist… as evolution goes from past to present to future…….
I exist… it is in the future that we must evolve to…
I exist… but we are always in the state of becoming something else…
I exist… and I am always in the state of becoming something else…
what are you becoming?
Kropotkin
We have created such forms as political institutions
and philosophy and history and economics and
and companies and transportation and microwaves and cell phones
and TV sets and hearing aids and …………
But we have mistaken those forms of existence for existence…
We are not political institutions or historical or economics
or transportation or cell phones……
we are human beings and all those other things we have created are not us…
they are simply extensions of us… we confused the things we have created
with who we are… when they are simply aids to us, not us……
When I was young and I created… it was a creation that was basic/plain/
uncomplicated……. as I grew older, my creations grew more complex,
more difficult, with more moving parts…… now that I am old,
my creations have simplified… less complex, less moving parts…
Look at the path of artists… they usually begin their creative process
with simple forms, basic/plain/uncomplicated, less moving parts…
artists in music, literature, sculpture, architecture, poetry…….
as they approach the middle stage of their creative process, their
art, in whatever form it took, became more complex, more difficult,
more moving parts…
and as Artists mature, they return to simple, less complex, less moving parts
art… regardless of the format of the art……
Today, we are in the middle stages of the creative process and we
are making our creations complicated, more difficult, with more moving parts…
soon, soon we shall return to a simpler, less complicated form of
creations……… our art, our understanding of history, economics,
science, philosophy, biology will begin to be less complicated,
less moving parts, less difficult…
that means as artist, and creations such as science and philosophy
and history and biology is an act of creation such as any artist would
do…we will come to a deeper understanding of what those disciplines
actually mean and we can state them in a simpler, less complicated
fashion…………. as we create, we find the lessons we learn can be
turned into simpler language…
Or as Einstein once stated, someone really knows his stuff if they
can simplify it to the point of making it plain to anyone… that is
when people really understand what they are talking about…
when they can make it plain and simple… if they are still using
complicate language to make something understandable, they really
don’t understand it………….So, do you understand something?
Can you make it plain and simple for anyone to understand it?
That is the goal of understanding… to make it simple enough
so we can explain it to anyone… understanding to the point as being able to
explain it to anyone…
do you understand?
Kropotkin
As an average person looking at the academic disciplines that we
depend upon such as history and economics and science and of course,
philosophy, we see a complete lack of understanding of those disciplines
and a disregard of those disciplines. In other words, the common man/women
might ask, what has those academic disciplines done for me? Do those
academic disciplines help my life in any, way, shape or form? The common
person most likely sees someone who engages in those disciplines as
not much more then a “egghead”, whatever that means, and they dismiss
anyone who engages in such matters as history and philosophy and political science
and economics and……….
The “average” person cannot make a connection with any of those
academic disciplines and see them as not much more then
intellectual masturbation. The common person has no engagement
or connection with such academic disciplines.
The common American is “practical” and they don’t see any of those
academic disciplines as being “practical”. Americans have always
disliked and distrusted “intellectuals”. In Europe and Asia, intellectuals
have a much higher level of respect then here in America.
Part of the slam against Clinton was, she was an intellectual who didn’t connect
with people. As if connecting with people was a prerequest for being president.
Anyway, how do we get the “average” person to reconnect with such academic
disciplines as political science and philosophy and history?
You have to connect the disciplines with what is happening in people’s lifes.
Why does philosophy matter? You have to show people why philosophy
matters in their life? The dry philosophy of deconstruction and analytical
philosophy doesn’t tell people what they want to know about how to live life.
Or to be more exact, people don’t see the issues in their life.
In their quest to be “Practical” people miss the fact that their
lives are an empty shell. People are simply going through the
motions in getting through life. Capitalism and democracy and the
western way of life has failed. The promise that life would be better
under this form of government and economics has failed…… but why
has capitalism and democracy failed? That is a question the common
people don’t grasp. They don’t see how capitalism and democracy
has failed. But the failure in both, stems from the same failure.
Both capitalism and democracy have money as it final judgment.
Both are judge by profits and losses where as we must judge
a political system and a economic system with a different
judgement values. But these matters don’t engage the average person,
the average person simply wants the system to work and they don’t care
how that happens or who is damaged in the rush to make the system work.
But that is the point, we should care not only if the system works,
but how it influences people, for better or worse. The failure is
not understanding that a system that works is still not the best system
to have. Success or failure is not just a matter of profits and losses,
it is about the effect that system has on its citizens or the people within
the system. We must make it clear that system understanding is really
in the best interest of people. We have said for decades, let the experts
do the thinking for you. And the experts have been in the pay of those
who make the decisions and thus the decisions have benefited those
who have paid for the “expert” opinions. The answer for me has always been
simple, the more people involved the better. Democracy or any political
system works best the more people you have involved in it. Any economic
system works best the more that the people benefit from it, not just the
1%. The answer is to increase participation in every area of our lives.
That is how we get engagement from people. We engage them by
getting them a voice, a place in the system. The academic disciplines
can become part of our engagement with people by bringing the disciplines
to the people, not just leave it in the hands of the “experts”. Make philosophy
part of peoples life by allowing them engagement with philosophy.
I believe in the wisdom of the people, the group more then I believe in
the wisdom of the few or the one.
Kropotkin
As usual, I return to existence for that is the basis
for any thought or philosophy that we have.
Existence is something we work through and discover about,
but existence also has an historical context that should be discussed.
Existence as punishment.
Now I don’t claim any of this is new or something different then what others
has thought of, but it is another attempt to make sense of it.
Buddhism and Christianity for example treat existence as punishment.
Recall the Buddha and his teachings. The point of existence as to escape
suffering and by becoming enlighten, we can escape the ongoing rebirth
and death of life, reincarnation. We are ever being born and reborn and
all the while, we suffer. We suffer as humans and we suffer as animals
and we suffer every time we return to this earth. To end the endless
cycle of being reborn, we must achieve Enlightenment. That will put an end
to the constant cycle of rebirth and suffering. That philosophy/religion
is anti-life. It is an attempt to end the suffering we have in life.
Christianity is also anti-life, but its opposition to life is of a different sort.
The goal of life is not life but to rejoin with god in heaven. To join at the right
hand of god and spend eternity in the reflection and contemplation of god.
(this idea of the point of heaven is a direct steal from the Greek philosophers.
They thought that life was best spent in the contemplation of existence and god)
Now recall the Medieval ages when man was anti-body and anti-life.
Recall that many in the church felt the need to punish the body in
various actions such as in flagellation of the body for religious
purposes. To deny the flesh was a major fixture of the medieval man
and this denial carried over to even our time. Recall the
programs directed to youth about abstentions. It worked until it didn’t work
and for the most part, abstention programs failed.
Today, we still have an feeling or idea that to deny the body pleasure
is an positive behavior and not a negative behavior.
This idea of abstention is still strong in conservatives but not so much
in liberals.
To deny the body and place primacy in the soul is still a fixture in our
modern society. Jesus said:
“What does it profit a man if he gains the world and yet loses his soul”
so existence has many different aspects. For the religious, the body means
less then the soul. But we are body, we cannot deny that simple fact.
to paraphrase Jesus: “What does it matter for you to gain your soul if
you lose your body”?
This entire debate hinges on one point, is the soul eternal?
If the soul is eternal, then the religious is right but, but
if the soul or what we think of as the soul, ends with death,
then those who engage with the body over the soul is right.
As of this moment, there is no evidence that the soul or what we think
of as the soul is eternal…….We have bodies, that much we know.
but do we have eternal souls? I cannot subscribe to that point of view.
For the simple reason, that I cannot discover anything that is eternal.
Even the universe is finite. It began and in billions of years, it will end.
Just as our solar system began at some point 14 billion years ago, it will
end. As we humans beings began at some point and at some point, we end.
I cannot find anything that last forever, is eternal.
And because we are finite beings, we must not only engage with the soul but
with the body. We must be in harmony and in moderation with both soul
and body.
So we return to the original point, that of existence being a punishment.
I cannot hold that point of view that existence is a punishment because
existence is not just a punishment but something that has
worthy pleasures and goals that make existence worth living.
Life is not about suffering, it has suffering in it, but the main
function of life is not to escape suffering, but life is to embrace
and overcome our suffering and pain and despair and unhappiness.
we can turn any negative aspect of our life which is suffering
and pain and despair and unhappiness into something positive and
worth remembering. For suffering and despair and pain and unhappiness
is part of this thing we call existence and it is a negative, a dark aspect
of life… but as in the two aspects of life, the light and the dark,
light needs the dark to reveal the how lifegiving and astonishing the what
the light shows us. For the dark needs the light to reveal that life is two parts,
that of light and that of dark. To make sense of our existence, we need both
light and dark. To understand our existence we must accept both the light
and the dark. The light part of existence which is beautiful and wonderful
and uplifting and the dark part of existence which is the pain and suffering
and despair that each of us feels at some point in our life. We must have both
parts to help us appreciate what our life is and what is possible for us.
The exuberance of life is tempered by the realization of the negative, dark
aspects of life which is the pain and suffering that accompanies life.
We cannot just have the light part of life, we must, must have the
dark side of life and that allows us to enjoy the beauty and
promise and possibilities of life all the more.
So existence has two sides, the positive and light side
and the dark, negative side and we must have both to
correctly understand what life is……
Kropotkin
Given the above post, where can certainty be found?
Certainty is found in the knowledge that life is both the
light and the dark… the positive and negative,
or as the eastern religions mark it, the yin and yang of life…
the “taichi” symbol… where opposite and often contrary forces
are often complementary, interconnected, interdependent.
It is not in the things, the material things that have certainty but in the
process of life is certainty and what that means is simple,
Life is a process. we are born, we live and we die…
Every human being goes through that process. Some days are in the light
and some days are in the dark… Yesterday was a really shitty day at work
and some days are like that, dark days and perhaps my next day at work will be good
and it will exist in the positive, in the light.
the pain and suffering and death of both the Buddha and Christianity exists
and the beauty and joy and wonder in life, also exists.
that is where the certainty of life exists, in the process of life…
I will someday, die. I cannot escape that fact. My material body, the body
that is called Kropotkin, will cease to exist. but my individual cells within my
body will go on and become part of something else. As my individual cells were
something else before they became part of the material body known as Kropotkin.
We are finite and we are infinite, once again depending on how you look at it.
If you just look at our current form of material being called a human being,
then we are finite and soon, this form will cease to exist. But my cells, atoms,
they last forever and were present at the begining of time and they will
be there at the end of time. Which Kropotkin do you look at? The finite one
or the infinite one? The positive one of the light or the negative one of the dark?
Or do you understand human beings as being part light and part dark?
We can find certainty in this universe, you just to stop thinking that certainty
exists in a material matter or form. Certainty is a process in how we view ourselves
and each other. That is where certainty exists, not in the material objects themselves,
but in the process that created the material objects.
Kropotkin
In thinking about the need for obedience, we must be obedient to
the state, to the church, to god, for the Jewish people, they must be
obedient to the religious laws of their forefathers.
If there was a trait to mark the modern age, it would be obedience.
But the question of obedience means we no longer “obey” or understand
the question of the Enlightenment which is basically a call for people to
think for themselves. As Kant said about the entire Enlightenment,
“Sapare aude”
which is a Latin phrase meaning, “Dare to know”. And that phrase did sum up
the entire Enlightenment thought and goals. Dare to know. But the modern
point of view of obedience at all cost, rejects these phrase and the thought
behind it… the modern world is about knowing exactly what the state wants
you to know and no more… if there was a modern phrase to match the entire
agenda of the modern age, it would be this,
“need to know basis”
that is the one phrase that is the modern version of “Sapere aude”…
everyone is on a “need to know” basis and the average citizen
doesn’t need to know anything outside of what the state tells them
and once again the greatest crime anyone can commit is to violate
this “need to know” order and reveal information that was a “need to know”…
This disobedience will get someone years in prison… to violate the State
agenda which is to hold and maintain all relevant and pertinent information
which the state decides is relevant and pertinent. In other words, in regards to
the “need to know” basis, the state is judge, jury and executioner…… the state
lays out the rules, the program and the punishment for any crimes of
“disobedience” of the state mandated by the “need to know” basis.
The enlightenment fight was just another version of the “need to know” fight
we are experiencing today. But their battle in regards to the “need to know”
was a battle against the authority of such institutions like the church, or
authorities like Aristotle or St. Augustine. The Enlightenment was
saying, don’t just accept the authority of church or Aristotle,
dare to know yourself. And the same can be said today, it is not enough
that we accept the authority of the state and simply bow down
to their “need to know” basis. Under the guise of authority of the state,
the state can and has limited our access to information and knowledge that
the state “claims” will somehow damage the state in some fashion…
but if this is a democracy, then as the people who govern, we have a right,
indeed a absolute right to access that information……
let us take an concrete example, the FBI investigation into Kavanaugh that
was done this last week is being held on a “need to know” basis and the American
people apparently don’t need to know……. but, but if information is being held
from the American people, then how are we to make “informed” decisions as
to our choices when we vote. In other words, a world that is a “need to know”
world is anti-democratic for it excludes the very people that are supposed to
be in charge, the people. The vital phrase is simply this,
“government of the people, for the people and by the people”
and if we operate with government done on a “need to know” basis and
the people don’t need to know, then we don’t have a democracy…
we have something else in which we don’t have
“government of the people, for the people, by the people”.
If actions are taken in the name of the people, such as military,
governmental, political and done with a “need to know” basis
then we have a dictatorship. For if the people have no say and no knowledge
of said actions taken in their name, those actions are not done in our name
and without our consent. Those actions are done by
the consent and knowledge of the “leadership” of our country but not the people
and thus are illegal. If the people do not have a say in or even knowledge of
actions taken in their name, then it is not done for the people. It is done
for the benefit of those who are in charge… The ones who “need to know”.
For example after 9/11, we “the people” were forced without our consent,
to have TSA examine our persons and go through our luggage and take off
our shoes, belt, and have all other material go through a screening machine…
if it is done without our consent, it is illegal. Does the safety of the people
override the fact that we still live in a democracy and we must, must, must
consent to actions taken in our name. For if actions are taken in my name,
then I am responsible for those actions because they were done in my name.
This same theory can be established for religion especially Christianity.
for I have not given my consent to god for actions taken in my name.
The concept of consent is suppose to be the basis of our modern world
and yet, what consent have you ever given to either government or the church
or even god? I submit that part of the “modern condition” that afflicts the modern age,
lies in this problem, the fact, that so much of our modern age is done without
consent or permission of the people in whose name the actions are taken.
If I have liability for my actions taken, then I must have some consent, some
say in accepting that liability… I cannot be forced to accept liability for
something I never accepted or consented to and yet, the modern state
and the church and god forces me to accept liability for actions taken
when I never accepted or agreed to or choose or consented to.
and one solution I would advocate is this, at 18 or 21 as the case maybe,
I would stand people in front of a judge or in a written statement,
to publicly give consent to, to voluntarily choose to become
members of our society and state. To allow people the option to
give consent to the actions taken in their name and by this consent,
they earn the right to become one of the “need to know” basis.
If we are a democracy, then we must actually begin to act like it.
We must make participation in society and the state part of being
a member of said society/state. the entire point of democracy is to
have people have a say in matters of concern to their lives, be it
politically or economically or socially. To be a democracy demands
participation by those people in whose name actions are taken.
If I am going to be liable to pay taxes for warships and bombs
and nuclear weapons, then I deserve a voice in the process
and I deserve to make consent to those actions…
Now one might say that that consent will create chaos and
confusion within society? but what is the point of democracy
if we have no voice or consent in actions taken in our name?
Either we have a democracy and we have a voice and give consent
to actions taken in our name or we don’t have a democracy, in
which case we don’t have a voice or give our consent to actions,
certainly not taken in our name, but taken by the leaders in their
name and their consent, for their benefit, not ours.
The bottom line is coming to a head. Do we have a democracy or don’t we?
That is the modern question. Do we have a real, live, operating democracy
that is
“of the people, for the people, by the people”
or don’t we?
Kropotkin
The question of our age is simple, freedom or security?
That is the primary question of the modern age.
The constitution and the declaration of independence were quite
clear in their answer, freedom. Regardless of the question, the
answer was, is and always will be, freedom. The reason seems to be
clear as to why. But let us take security first. As we know,
no matter how hard we try, we cannot ever be 100% secure.
There is no such thing as absolute security. As we know from
our understanding of systems, that no system is 100% anything.
An example of this is with energy. No matter how hard we try, we cannot
get an energy system to be 100% efficient. That in every system, we can only
have a percentage of the system use energy efficiently. There is and will always
be inefficiency in a engine for example. So what this means for example,
is the relationship between the total energy contained in the fuel
and the amount of energy used to perform useful work. Most gasoline
engines are only about 20% efficient. Which means that the engine “waste”
80% of the energy possible in gasoline. The human body is about 25% efficient
and a Iowa cornfield is only 1.5% percent efficient at converting incoming sunlight
into chemical storage.
So we understand that in systems, that they are not 100% efficient,
and this is true in any attempt of a system, a person trying to be secure,
that he/she cannot ever, regardless of the energy put into their security,
ever be 100% safe and secure. It is simply not possible.
So let us look at freedom. We cannot ever have 100% of freedom.
In other words, we do not have absolute freedom. We can have a
percentage of freedom, but never absolute freedom. Our actions
are limited by various limitations, we cannot have bodily freedom because
we are biological creatures and that creates limitations in our bodily
freedom. I can only run as fast as my body will allow me. I am limited
in that aspect. I am not free to fly by just flapping my arms. I am
limited by the rules/laws of the physical universe. I am not free to act
with impunity regarding the laws of the universe. I cannot escape the laws/rules
of physics and evolution and gravity. I cannot be free to grow wings
nor am I free to float upwards on the earth because gravity is holding me
down. Nor can I travel the speed of light. My range of actions is limited
by the rules/laws of the universe. I cannot have freedom of actions.
So we know that there are limitations to both security and freedom.
What else can we understand about security and freedom.
Security is trying to make us safe from something. Security is
going away from something. It is negative in nature. You are trying to
escape harm by making oneself “secure”. It is a fool’s attempt.
so, what is freedom? Freedom is not going from something, but is going
toward something. I want to be free to act in some fashion. It is positive.
There are limitations in what I can be free in and how I can be free, but still
it is striving toward something. I am trying to be free to……….
This is why we must engage in freedom over security. Freedom is about
going toward something and security is escaping from something.
The attempt to freedom causes chaos and violence and
upheaval. Oh, yes it does, but since we cannot ever become 100%
safe and secure, we should work toward the positive actions
and positive results. The search for freedom is a dance, a celebration
of what is possible and the search for security?
that is a reaction to fear and the opposite of the reason for
seeking freedom. The drive to seek freedom is far different then
the drive to find secuity…the drive toward freedom is far riskier
and far more dangerious and full of traps to ensnare the unsuspecting
human being, but, but the drive for freedom is a positive action in
our lives and the drive for security is a negative drive in our lives.
the young person wants freedom, the old person wants security.
Who do you want to be?
Kropotkin
Or perhaps said another way,
Security is the search for a certainty that does not exist,
freedom is the search for possibilities, not certainty.
in our search for freedom we sacrifice certainty,
and in our search for security, we sacrifice our possiblities of becoming.
In security, we no longer are overcoming, we are safe and set in the act
of security…we only seek to be safe in security, we no longer attempt to
become something more… we are done with what drives life and that
is the act of overcoming who we are. We accept the habits and biases
and myths and prejudices and superstitions of our society, our upbringing,
our indoctrinations. We no longer seek to overcome our childhood indoctrintations
because in our search for security, the only thing that matters is our safety and
security. Nothing else matters outside of those things that make us “safe” and “secure”.
It is by freedom that we engage with the overcoming of “who we are”
and the search “to know thyself”, and when I know myself, I can then
discover what values I have been indoctrinated with and then overcome
those values by accepting the values that are the real me, become who I am,
in regards to the values that really matter to me, not the values I was indoctrinated with,
but the values that are the “real” me. The search to be human is the search for
the values that are the real you, not the indoctrinated values of childhood.
the search for those values require, no demand, not security, but freedom.
To become who we are and to overcome our childhood indoctrinations,
means we must have freedom to engage with knowing ourselves.
Thus freedom is a more acceptable path then security because it allows
us the opportunity to become who we are.
Kropotkin
a look at our founding fathers, they didn’t emphasize safety or security,
they said, come to America for its freedom/liberty. You didn’t move to
the frontier to be safe and secure, you went to the wilderness to be
free. The very basis of America was in its freedom, not in its safety or
security. People left their homeland and traveled thousands of miles to find
freedom, not safety or security. We have lost what made America great
which was its promotion of the ideal of freedom, not the ideal of security.
to gain security, you must sacrifice freedom and I am not willing to sacrifice
the values that made America great to gain some vague hope of safety or security.
The risk to find freedom/liberty exists but the danger to surrender our
freedom to find security is far too great.
I am willing to follow the founding fathers and sacrifice some security in
return for greater freedom. It is in freedom that we find ourselves
and in security we lose ourselves.
Kropotkin
Nihilism: the negation of humans and/or their values.
That we live in a nihilistic culture and state cannot be denied,
for evidence see the nomination of Kavanaugh in congress.
From the start of the 20th century to today, has been a lesson in
Nihilism. The First world war, the Holocaust, the second world war…
each event is evidence of our nihilism, the negation of human beings
in the pursuit of money/profits, that is a perfect example of our current nihilism.
But it is not enough to say, no, the GOP is the party of no and the
extremist party of nihilism. We cannot just negate our way into better lives.
at some point, we must affirm, we must say yes. The negation and nihilism
of society cannot hold, the center cannot hold, the man said and why?
Because the center is the negation of humans and their values.
The core of modern society today is negation and nihilism and we cannot
mantain that and expect to excel or succeed in our lives.
But what do we affirm? To what do we say yes to?
It is not enough to pursue profit/money to the exclusion/negation
of humans and their values. We must affirm, say yes to those values
that make life worth living. It is in the yes/the affirmation of
the values of justice and peace and love and hope and charity…
it is in those values that we begin to see what it means to be human,
truly human. To negate, to deny is to say no to what it means to be human.
To accept those negative values of hate, anger, lust, greed, meanness,
is to negate, to deny what is best human beings.
To negate is nihilism. Another value we must say yes to is freedom.
And to seek freedom is to seek uncertainty and chaos and disorder,
but understand this, freedom is an antidote to nihilism. Seeking freedom
means saying yes instead of negation or denying.
There are some who call America, the Welfare state, but that is not true.
In reality, we are a “martial state”, we are a “nihilistic state”, we are the
“safe and secure state”. But we are clearly not a “freedom state”, for
in our pursuit of security, we have negated, denied freedom as being
antagonistic to security/safety.
I for one would eliminate the police state that we have today and
and I would eliminate the NSA and CIA and FBI. But Kropotkin,
you would open us to danger, my life would be in danger.
If you don’t have freedom, you don’t have a life anyway.
If you favor security over freedom, you are negating, participating
in nihilism. In a choice between freedom and security, there is no choice,
you must choose freedom, for otherwise you choose nihilism.
Kropotkin
Hegel early in his career wondered about a problem,
which may be instructive these days.
He often wrote about how to bring about a moral and spiritual
renewal and thus lead to social reform.
Hegel considered that is what Jesus did in the corrupt
Greco-Roman world of the 1st century. He felt that Jesus
brought about a moral and spiritual renewal that was needed because
the Greco-Roman world was the last stages of a long period of a civilization
that could be traced to the Egyptians and thus lasting for 3000 years and that
civilization was in dire need of renewal.
And what of us, do we after 500 years of the “modern” world, are
we in need of a moral and spiritual renewal? If we follow the GOP
and declare America a nihilistic zone in which the only values that matter
is money/profits, then yes, yes we are in need of moral and spiritual renewal.
If we follow the founding fathers and make the search to be about freedom,
then no, we are not in need of a moral/spiritual renewal. What values do
you make as your priority values, determine if we/you are in need of
a moral/spiritual renewal. If the values you fight for are values that negate
or deny humans or human values, then you are in need of a moral/spiritual
renewal. But the only way to know is to begin the process of knowing thyself.
Engage in self reflection about what values are important to you and are those
values that are important to you, are they your values or are they the values
that were indoctrinated into you as a child? If they are indoctrinated values as
I suspect most people values are values of indoctrination and not personally
discovered values. Then you must engage in a discovery of what values are really
your values. You must overcome the indoctrinated values of childhood
and discover what are your values and then the final step is to become
who you are by making those newly discovered values, your values.
when you are engaged with values that are your values and not indoctrinated
values then you have become who you are. But the only way to find out if
you need or if society needs to be morally and spiritually renewed, is by
reflection and awareness and understanding, what are the values that I have
and that my society has and are they really values worth holding?
It is this engagement that leads us to become truly human.
One might ask, Kropotkin, what about you? Does society need to be morally
and spiritually renewed? As I have made fairly clear, we live in a nihilistic
society because we hold money/profits above people and their values,
so yes, we most certainly need a moral and spiritual renewal.
And where should I, Kropotkin begin?
As always, I begin with me and I try to understand my values and
if the values I hold are indoctrinated values of my childhood or
are the values I hold really values I have discovered for myself?
As I have changed political views and philosophical views multiple
times, I can state with some degree of “certainty” that I have come
to my currently held views with a inner dialogue with myself.
A inner dialogue that must be honest and open and without fear.
And I have done that to the best of my abilities and I am calm
without fear and with hope because I am comfortable with my values
and with who I am. I have no need of crutches like religion or phony
values that are nihilistic like materialism and the modern pursuit of
and prayer to the god, Mammon.
Kropotkin
this question of moral and spiritual renewal requires
some understanding of what needs to be renewal.
In other words, what actions/behavior or beliefs do
we need to reform to accomplish some sort of
moral or spiritual renewal. What are we doing wrong
that needs to be reformed and nenewed?
That we must begin by understanding what we are doing.
As I have noted, we are a martial, warlike society whereas
our moral document of a government budget is directed to
defense and security. That we put so much emphasis on
military and defensive tells us what our priorities are.
that we spend our days working and promoting the religion
of materialism, the buying and selling of goods, gives us another
clue as to our priorities.
Remove those two aspects and what is left?
Actually, not much. So any understanding of what it means to
have a moral and spiritual renewal must come from these two
aspects of our life. The renewal must come from our staunch
and dedicated beliefs in making security and materialism
our guiding principles in life. This renewal comes about
because security denies/negates freedom for true security can only
come about with the denial of freedom. The aspect of materialism
denies that our happiness can come from anything but the buying and
selling of goods and money/profits.
The pursuit of happiness spoken by the enlightenment documents
like the Declaration of Independence,
…….“that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
And we take the pursuit of happiness to be the materialism, the buying
and selling of goods/money/profits.
But this enlightenment document is wrong. The pursuit should not be
after happiness, because that path leads us to the wrong goal.
The pursuit should be of values that give our live meaning and
purpose. Values like justice, dignity, tolerance, love, charity,
honor, freedom………… those values, these are the values we should pursue,
not materialism or the futile pursuit of safety or security.
So the pursuit of values that give life meaning is the moral and
spiritual renewal that we need. But we do not act or operate
in isolation, by ourselves. We exist within a society/culture,
a system as it were and only by existing within a society/culture
that we need or have use of morals or the spiritual aspect of life.
It is within a society that we need to be moral or spiritual,
individually we have no such need. Morality/spirituality
are collective aspects of our life. they must be shared within
the family, the state, the culture and the society.
It is because homo sapiens are social creatures that
we need morals or the spiritual. So any renewal must
occur both individually and, AND collectively. We must
think about this moral and spiritual renewal in terms
of the individual and society. We collectively must
engage in a moral/spiritual renewal.
So what values are values that we should individually
and collectively have? The same values I would think,
and the reason for that is simple, if we as individuals
have one set of values and society has another set of values,
that means we are alienated from society… For that
is what alienation really means, that the individual has
one set of values and society has another set of values.
If I am set upon freedom as my primary value and
society is set upon security or materialism as its set/primary
value, then I am alienated from my society. Alienation
is a question of values and the difference in values between the
individual and society.
As I have laid out the quest to become who you are individually,
this approach also exists for a society. the society must begin
by knowing itself. Knowing what values are inherited, indoctrinated
within society itself. then the society just as an individual finds out
as they begin the journey to understanding which always begin
by beginning the process of knowing thyself. Then the society
begins to understanding what values are really the values
that a society should hold, overcoming the values that
have been inherited or indoctrinated within society.
And then, then the society after overcoming itself,
can become who it is when its values match the reality
of that society. We are alienated from our society because
individually, we hold different values then the society holds.
and we must match our values, individually and collectively.
To become who we are… our values individually must match
our collective values. And here is where the conflict within
society has been in the modern age. In the modern age,
what have we been striving for? to be better citizens and
engaging in materialism, the buying and selling of goods/money/profits.
We have also adapted the universal commandment about
disobedience. That is the greatest crime in modern society,
to be disobedient to society, to our overlords, the modern corporation.
Therein lies the modern conflict between individual values and the collective
values of the modern dictatorship of the modern corporation.
The modern corporation is about the negation/denial of humans and their
values and the individual values are about justice or love or charity.
Values which have no value in the modern conception of what values are,
in other words, the values of the corporation are nihilistic values
and the values of the individual are positive/ lifegiving values
and this conflict is what the modern society has been fighting about
for almost 200 years.
so we now see that our moral and spiritual renewal really is about
making our societal/ cultural/ collective values match our individual
values. So how do we match our individual value of justice with
the societies values of obedience and materialism.
That is the question of our moral and spiritual renewal.
How do we match individual values with the collective
corporation values of nihilism? Recall that disobedience is the greatest
crime in modern society even by asking such questions, we are disobeying
society and the corporations that run our modern society.
Even by asking if materialism/capitalism is the value we should live
by is basic disobedience to modern society because the values of
materialism/capitalism is considered to be so fundamental to
society existence as to be unquestioned and unchallenged.
To doubt that materialism/capitalism is the value that we should pursue is
to commit heresy… and heresy in modern society for it is forbidden to hold
any disobedience to the cult of materialism/capitalism. For disobedience
to materialism/capitalism is really a religious crime because we are
suppose to accept the materialistic/capitalistic on faith, without question.
Our modern belief in materialism/ capitalism is really religious faith based
upon taking the faith upon the authorities who have given their blessing to
the faith/religion of materialism/capitalism.
So the question of a moral/spiritual renewal must begin with the religious
question of our faith in materialism/capitalism.
Kropotkin