Originally published at: https://integrallife.com/on-the-front-line-of-the-culture-war-give-me-some-real-examples-not-just-theories/
Watch as Ken and Corey offer their views on some of the most controversial policy debates of our time, each of which has become a battle line in our constantly escalating culture wars.
Hi everyone, we want to hear your own views about these incredibly complex and controversial issues. Let us know what you think of the discussion here!
Hi, Corey - Today I posted a comment about Ken’s theory of the rights of holons. You will see it on the master list. I plan to post at least one more about your conversation with Ken about abortion.
Thanks to you and Ken for the great series on politics and culture.
Charles
Hi Corey,
I was very interested to hear your discussion with Ken about vaccines, but I felt like not much was said. You expressed you position clearly, but Ken didn’t really say anything much except that he agreed with the separate schools concept. Do you think you might have a more detailed discussion about this in the future? It is so high stakes and raises so many interesting questions, I think it deserves more attention. What do you think?
@corey-devos, is there a reason climate change wasn’t included in that list? It seems to me that all the other issues in the list should be secondary; after all, if Earth is uninhabitable, none of those issues really matter. If there is any current world-wide problem in need of Integral solutions, it’s climate change. And climate change is absolutely subject to the “culture wars” given the same Amber groups that are anti-abortion are also likely to be climate deniers. It’s the same cognitive dissonance that’s being triggered, psychologically speaking.
I thought this Ken Show fulfilled its promise well–going beyond theory to the nitty-gritty of actual position-taking on these select issues. I was glad to see that Ken and Corey agreed with me on these issues 
and was a little surprised about at least one of them–I thought I was the last hold-out being anti- the death penalty.
Perhaps the topic that most caught me unaware was National Service; I haven’t been tuned in to this, but I am now.
I appreciated the wide-ranging discussion on abortion; from Bible to feminism to viability, it covered a lot in a relatively short amount of time, and came to conclusions that, whether one agrees with them or not, were arrived at in a holistic way.
When I’m not learning something new during these shows (and I usually am), I’m always learning more about my own thinking; that is, sometimes I have just an intuitive “stance” on something, but haven’t systematically worked through all the actual thoughts and nuance of thought that support that intuition. This show always helps me do that.
Ken mentioned at the end of the show a piece of writing he had done on the “politics of consciousness.” I know I’ve read that, but I don’t remember where. This would be a good topic for a future Ken Show, addressing not just drugs and entheogens, but an array of subjects–e.g. hatha yoga and mindfulness practice are pretty mainstream and yet they are often divorced from any spiritual ‘root.’ I think there is a politics around shamanic spirits as well as vision experience. Ditto, OOBs and NDEs. The recent Daily Evolver episode on “taking aliens seriously” brings other topics to mind as well, some of which I already had on my “list”–crop circle phenomena, abductions, ghosts, and such. Of course, separating out what is politics from what is unclear validation of some of these phenomena would have to be figured in.
Finally, at some point in the future if it seems appropriate and there’s a readiness to (temporarily) leave the culture wars behind, a program on 3rd Tier structures/stages would be welcome. Thanks!
Dear Ken and Corey,
I would love to see a deeper dive into the vaccine issue with an analysis that utilizes the quadrants? Corey offered his summary position which mirrors the conventional meme found in popular media and introduced us to the very dangerous yet popular position of herd immunity as reasoning for everyone being vaccinated. A deeper dive would require a more weighted understanding of the risks and benefits as well as an actual appreciation for the individual as an inviolable holon with respect to the injection of anything into our bodies. Thanks.
Hey Robert, yeah I would like to see that too. I have read widely enough to know that the good or bad binary option is really a very archaic way of seeing the issue. Of course it mirrors the approach to many other issues, esp the most conventionally “controversial” - such as climate change, abortion, gun rights and so on. In particular with the vaccine, Big Pharma issue we have at the potential for the public debate to the very much biased by entrenched institutional interests, as independent researchers (such as Jon Rappaport) claim.
Hey Russ, yeah I also find it fascinating that Ken doesn’t more directly address the climate change issue. Personally I’ve looked at many aspects of the issue, and much like I said about vaccination issue, the meta-structure of the debate has been overtaken by MGM or something like this. As Thomas Sowell has explained it for more than 2 decades, the mainstream conversation begins with a moral presumption, and then proceeds to simply pick and choose facts that fit that presumption, with ad hominen attacks, conventional thinking, institutional bias, and shoot-the-messenger tactics being rife.
If I can point out the wording “client denier” - is a good example. It presumes the answer to the question and divides people into “good” = “client scientist”, “bad” = “climate denier”.
But honestly the reason I think KW doesn’t go public with it is that he doesn’t buy the mainstream narrative about climate change, and that he knows that this “disobedience” will not wash with the establishment - corporate, scientific or otherwise., and fears that Integral Life or associated organisations will be lumped in with “climate deniers.”
1 Like
Hold the phone…
Two recent talks from I-life about Climate Change. Notably, again, KW was not involved in either discussion.
Agreed Mark. Fallacy of scientism. We want certainty and are willing to surrender complex issues to the simplification of one variable categories in the case of vaccines to antibody titers as being determinant of successful treatment. If only it were so simple. It’s why I think a four quadrant analysis of vaccines can guide our decision making to be as comprehensive as possible in a risk benefit equation.
Very well said @Robert_Koagedal, I agree.
In my experience, if we do a four quadrant analysis, a lot of what is commonly seen as fact, belonging to the upper right quadrant, is actually coming from other quadrants.
Living here in Seattle and being in a “working-class” demographic it seems to me that the “Front Line of the Culture Wars” is more than a perspective it’s realtime tension and sometimes life threatening danger. One of the things that I’ve been noticing in the Integral community is a lot of great ideas but not a lot of examples coming from people in my situation. I don’t have the luxury of working in Academia or a NGO in which I’m surrounded by higher level thinkers I’m dealing with lots of Red and Amber with Orange and Green mixed in every day.
For years I’ve been shifting my language with people depending on the level they’re at(which is easy for me to see very quickly) and I was relatively comfortable doing that. Today the tension is so high and people are on the verge of snapping it seems like. I admit that my tolerance is being challenged by all different levels when I perceive that they are expressing views that are contributing to this dangerous potential for violence. I’m sure most have seen on the news what’s going on here in the North Western US. There’s a “Mean-green” colliding with “Red-driven Amber & Orange” and it’s scary.
I’ve found myself regressing to a Mean-green when I encounter Red & Amber Trumpeters. My tolerance for the Trump phenomenon is at an all-time low right now. I think that’s because I have personal history of life threatening violence being thrust upon me and my fight/flight mechanism can be stimulated when I’m seeing things being expressed by people that are dangerous to others or myself.
I guess what I’m saying here is that I wish there were more examples in the Integral community from people that are on “the actual front lines” and not just the comfortable bubble of philosophical circles or Academia. There must be others out there like myself. Everyday I will deal with everyone from Construction workers to Restaurant workers to general laborers,etc. This is where the “Rubber meets the road” and it’s putting my Integral understanding to a real difficult test. Any suggestions would be truly appreciated!
1 Like
I don’t know what is an integral approach to the culture war. But I would note that the American majority has been far left and going further left for a long time, often to the left of the DNC elite. On a culture war issue, most Americans supported same sex marriage before Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama stated support. And this is seen on economic issues as well, such as even a majority of Republicans wanting healthcare reform to the left of Obamacare. I’m not sure where that leaves integral advocates in seeking to promote positive change.
I’m with you on this one. There is a need for Academia. Whilst we all have our own journey, without Academia clearing some of the path for us, we would all be taking much longer to make our progress. So Academia has real value for me when I, who profess to understand the Integral Path, make use of that knowledge in my day to day life.
I am a family solicitor/mediator who works in deprived areas with deprived families in the North of England. I meet and deal with the whole 1st Tier of the spectrum. I work with the abused mother who has no self-identity, who is simply the object of abuse of the person who has fathered some of her children, with the parents who believe that “spare the rod and spoil the child” administered on their egoic basis is the safest way to raise a child. I deal with parents at odds with each other, believing that physical, emotional and verbal attacks are the way to show the other parent that their way of parenting is the one true way. (So many parents at green in respect of their understanding of parenting and at red when they try to resolve their differences with each other.)
So where does Integral help here? I remember that red will laugh at and run right over green where green tries to help red with green tools. I remember that blue will see red behaviour as criminal. An easy example: the power of the state to take a child away from its family is a simple exercise of red. The justification may be blue or above, but the exercise of the power is simply red. So, if a child is at risk of harm, I have no issue with the state behaving at a red level here and removing the child whatever the child or family may think.
More nuanced is where there are two parents at blue, but with different beliefs. Here the child is not suffering from either style of parenting but is suffering from the conflict between the two parents. Here my work will be first to see whether there is any common understanding at blue which the parents can access - let’s explore the parents’ stage of parenting. These discussions, where successful, can lead to long term solutions as the area within which the parents need to accept change is a comfortable place for them. Sometimes it can be helpful to bring a little orange into the mix (let’s forget what is right and wrong and look at what might work for you…) but for this to be a long term solution - that is, for it to last beyond the parent’s first conversation outside my office - there needs to be a change in the stage that the parents are parenting at. For this to stick outside of the support of my office is not so regular. However we do what we can…
2 Likes