It’s a single factor that affects EVERYONE.
So it’s not just some rare thing that only affects a portion of the population.
What you have done is just push it out of your sight because it offend your sensibilities about yourself.
The “Critical Theory OS” operating here is yours. The fact that you want to ignore the plight of tens of millions of people only reinforce your egoistic “America is the Greatest” only makes it worse from a moral perspective.
Beautiful write-up @russ.legear It also had me dig up Robb’s keynote “Never been better, Never felt worse.” (linked here) which is quite good.
In product development and marketing we always look to perform a market segmentation. Integral Theory on whole speaks primarily to a turbo geeky Left wing social science’ish audience with primary action mechanisms of politics or infusion into the administrative apparatus. I would hazard to guess that almost every community that uses terms like holons, meta, post meta also target these same audiences.
The world will continue flowing right on by the Integral Movement, with the Integralist’s conflating observation as influence, until the movement develops respectful dialogs with plumbers, independent business people, police, and yes, even the Right or Conservatives. Can an Integral Movement be intellectually and morally aligned with the fundamental tenets of Integral Theory if they don’t look to Include?
See? You just did it, taking the scarequote tactic of framing my comments as “Marxist derived Critical Theory OS”. Any effort to understand is “Marxist”. Any effort to solve is “socialist”. It’s downright Pavlovian.
There seems to be a deficit of understanding here. Do you think that, by saying “there are a whole lot of things that need improving”, I am therefore saying “everything sucks and I hate this country”?
Another version of Robb’s title, which he drew from, comes from Ken’s description of our current state: better and better, worse and worse, faster and faster. If we aren’t looking at all three simultaneously, well, then we’re not having an integral conversation.
Yes, there are betters and betters. If you look at anything I’ve written on this site over the last two decades (which is about 90% of the text on the site) you know I point to those “betters and betters” all the time. I even consider the emergence of integral itself among those betters. I even see Ken Wilber as a quintessentially American “melting pot” philosopher.
Could you not feel the pride, patriotism, and spirit of my last two posts up there? I freaking love this country, what we represent, and what we are capable of. That’s why I’m willing to take a hard (you might say “critical”) look at the systems that have become so dysfunctional, and why I am unwilling to hold the defeatist (and unpatriotic!) view that “well we just can’t have nice things, because we’re too big and government is always bad and improving public welfare is always socialist.”
Now, if you want to better understand Robb’s view, I suggest you give his eBooks The Great Divide and The Great Release a read.
This would only be a significant point if the militaristic expansion of the United States was not the exact problem with the United States. Instead, it shows my point - countries tend to be more happy when they are not established on a foundation of creating insurrections and revolutions in other countries in order to impose their military and economic power over those populations.
Nobody forced the USA to expand. That’s like the thief complaining that the reason he isn’t happy is because the food he stole gave him indigestion.
Yes - and it’s not based on lack of knowledge. Remember I am a former long-term (over 10 years) expat and am well keyed into what actually really sucks about different countries and I’ve shared many an alcoholic drink with that same crowd where they were comfortable saying exactly what they cannot say publicly.
Great comments Russ! I agree Robb’s language was a bit opaque here, but that just makes it more fun to unpack together 
Just a few notes:
When he speaks of us evolving to Stage 3, I’m not exactly sure where Stage 3 is referring
I think in this context he is talking about the stages of fusion -> differentiation -> integration. At least that’s my sense, based on the surrounding ideas.
Yeah, this is where I disagree. Maybe this was the “software solution” he talked about?
It’s a bit unclear what exactly he means by “software”, though I enact it in both a literal sense – we are all operating on a flat post-modern software platform which constricts our communication to narrow bandwidths and forces detrimental patterns of self-organization – and in a figurative sense, as in the general operating systems we are running our worldviews on.
As for blockchain, I think we can talk about the technology itself (which I agree is largely orange-green), or we can talk about possible applications of the technology, which can run pretty much all the way up and down the spiral, just as our fiat currency does. And I do think there are some very interesting “Web3” applications coming down the line that could fit very well with the general Teal sensibility, and where new teal deep features might get carved out. I think there is a greater possibility to harmonize certain fundamental polarities, such as centralization vs. decentralization (going too far in either direction tends to be dangerous).
Interesting, I enact that a bit differently — to me the analogy isn’t about relativism, but rather the wisdom and equanimity that comes from taking a longer view, avoiding the distractions and temptations of the short view, and understanding that our fortunes and misfortunes are always closely related, and in fact often co-create each other. I don’t think it’s saying “one man’s fortune is another man’s misfortune” which would be a relativistic way to deconstruct our very concepts of “fortune” and “misfortune”. So to me it isn’t “relativism” as much as “relatedness”
How do you just assume Integral people are not respectful to plumbers?
Independent business people is a bit more baffling.
Police as well. I think I’m the only outspoken FTP person on here - and I’m probably not Integral, lol.
You just constantly come up with these random accusations based on absolutely nothing except your confusion of unhealthy Green and Teal - you can’t see the difference.
If a blind man says the world is black - it doesn’t mean the world is actually black
Sorry if I misread you as saying “medical bankruptcy threat” equating to “moral bankruptcy”. I’m assuming this was at a societal/national level.
“The existence of medical bankruptcy is an obvious symptom of moral bankruptcy. In a society that many like to describe as a “Christian nation”, as if we have reimagined Jesus in the image of Ayn Rand.”
My understanding of the common usage today of Critical Theory is to find one issue, then use that to malign/condemn the entirety of the person, works, nation, society. Please bear with all of us “Conservatives” that are having to “learn the lingo” of the new revolution. Good news for Hyper Progressives is that we are learning the lingo, so perhaps we can share thoughts more freely.
The French have better cheese than the US, and awesome vacation benefits. Norway wallows in per capita natural resource exports. Iceland is essentially an extended family of 70,000. Singapore’s 5M wall street bankers all have private tutors educating their kids.
Where on the planet is holistically a “better” nation/society/culture for humans to live, work, raise a family, grow old in? And it it’s actually just a “noosphere” then that’s ok too.
I know you’re passionate on the issues you choose to take on. I’m not saying you aren’t patriotic or driven. But yes you are extremely “condemning” of Joe Plumber and Suzy Hairstylist - aka 100Ms of 'Mericans (see my reply to Russ on market segmentation…) I don’t think this really serves you well, nor IL. And as I’ve pointed out, this is a disconnect from one of the founding ideas of societal development that IT highlighted for us - “include and transform”. Condemnation will never be mistaken for “inclusion”.
I suppose you’ll define what “improve” means for each and every person, or do they get to maintain self-determination? Perhaps that’s a fad from a Red/Amber era?
Yes, we are large so what not compare us to “large” nations. On all the issues you are so passionate about, how do we stack up against Vietnam, Japan, Turkey, Indonesia, Russia, China, India, Nigeria,…? Why not start working on “fixing” these countries that have soooo much room for improvement?
Include and Transform Corey. Include and Transform… 
I think the quote you are going for is “transcend and include”, which is quite a bit different
When one holon transcends an includes the previous holon, it goes beyond the previous holons, while also regulating and governing them. That’s how you walk across the room without your entrails falling out. Because the highest holon exerts a downward governance on all previous holons, causing 100% of your atoms, molecules, cells, and organs to go along with it.
In fact, the only way to include something is to transcend it altogether. That goes for politics too.
How exactly? When have I ever been “condemning” of either of these imaginary people?
Because I am an American living in America. I choose to focus on improving those areas where I may actually have some tiny degree of influence. I choose to clean my own backyard before telling my neighbors how to live.
Is this another “if you don’t like things here, why don’t you leave” questions?
Yes, I think that other nations with single payer health systems still enjoy “self-determination”. As it turns out, social programs can improve social welfare without completely eradicating individualism as we know it. In fact, they can actually give individuals MORE freedom and more opportunities to express their individualism.
This is the Pavlovian response right here, that all programs that seek to improve public welfare automatically translate to “less self-determination”. When often the exact opposite is true. The millions of people who suffer medical bankruptcy enjoy LESS “self-determination”, not more.
And people with those nasty socialist medical systems enjoy MORE “self-determination” because of those systems. For example, being able to take an entrepreneurial risk without sacrificing your health care, or having your “pre-existing conditions” drive your already ridiculous health costs. Or not going into unsustainable credit card debt because your son broke his arm. Or being able to start a family without wiping out what little savings the average American has.
I think a plurality of this country has been sold a vision of “freedom” that is tremendously surface-level and short-sighted, allowing us to hand over our deeper, more long-view freedoms to oligarchs and plutocrats. It’s a phony populism that exists only to give transnational corporations maximum leverage, and minimal accountability.
Sounds like a wellspring of optimism. These morons lapping up phoney populism should be easy enough to sway, sway with the changing winds. Perhaps precipitation of a cleansing rain to wash our society of all those that refuse to bow to tyranny of authoritarian corruption. Seems Prez Demento is actually firing up an anti-authoritarian task force to stem the tidal wave of white Nationalist terrorists sweeping over the nation. Seems the apparatchik spinning up the task force was strikingly unknowing, claiming Supreme ignorance if you will, when testifying under oath to the Senate. He was under oath, and I do believe committee structures are likely to change in 2023.
Forsaking integrity and respect for our rule of law may have consequences.
If you want to sell authoritarianism at the cost of “surface level” freedoms, you’ll need bunches more intellectual bypassing to sway all those plumbers and cashiers and business owners.
PS I’ve got to say that at some point claiming “populism” is very contemptuous of our fellow Citizens. Why not just own that what you’re selling isn’t as attractive as you think it is. As a collectivist, this should be a trivial nut to crack without resorting to unconstitutional machinations. Woof
See, here is what I’m talking about - in a few paragraphs.
@FermentedAgave has sniffed out the green shadow and trolls @corey-devos with it.
Orange has no problem being contemptuous with that which deserves contempt. Logic dictated that if my plumber does a good plumbing job and sticks to plumbing, that is admirable. When the plumber doesn’t do a good job, wastes half the day making it worse - and also let’s out a constant stream of political ignorance - that is worthy of contempt.
The mean green meme is the liberal trying to be nice to such a terrible plumber but all the while resenting it.
In the same way - when populism goes down a path worthy of contempt, it’s only logical to give it contempt.
I dont think healthy Green is about treating the contempt worthy as special snowflakes either. I think that’s an unhealthy green.
With regards to the current voluntary tyranny populism has chosen - it can all be summed up in the word “addiction”. The populace is addicted to many things and give up their freedoms to feed them, and they are more susceptible to them because of the failure of modern culture, including religion, to nurture their basic universal human needs. So they turn to the addictions provided by corporate capitalism -who design their products to further hook the addict.
In such a culture, personal responsibility cannot be outsourced. @corey-devos cannot “fix” an unwilling @FermentedAgave. He can only provide the means, but if @FermentedAgave is unwilling to give up his addictions to unhealthy ideas and practices, that is completely on @FermentedAgave and not the responsibility of @corey-devos. When the addictive mindset of @FermentedAgave moves into the contemptible, it’s important to not fall into unhealthy green appeasement or responsibility.
From there we get into “what it his value”. What value should we place on educating the unwilling contemptible vs the willing contemptible. A person or organization only has limited time and resources, so again there has to be some Orange judgements made as to “worthiness” of spending time on an individual or group. This is difficult for Green’s basis “everyone is equal” to accept, but it’s necessary and not making these decisions is ultimately destructive for the whole.
I’m assuming there is at least a percentage those you disagree with can be considered worthy and honorable opposition. What are the signs of worthy and honorable in opponents that we might all learn from?
When does contempt ever serve your own mental well (inner individual) being or ability to achieve your goals in society (Exterior individual, exterior collective)?
It sometimes does have consequences. Like in Ohio, where the state Supreme Court just knocked down the Republicans’ recent redistricting map that highly favors them, disregarding the 2018 amendment to their constitution that disallows maps that favor or disfavor one party or the other. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/top-ohio-court-strikes-down-state-s-gerrymandered-congressional-map/ar-AASN0nq Wonder if this will have any related effect on AZ’s partisan map?
What “tyranny” or perhaps best viewed as encroachment on individual or groups rights was attempted under the Trump admin?
Last I remember Blue cities and states demanded that the Feds “stay out” to let the looting, burnings, violent attacks occur. Last I checked that overwhelming majority that did commit the crimes got off with slap on wrist at worse. And other than defending Fed buildings, Trump let the cities and states do what they wanted - Democracy in action…
I personally had no concerns on encroachment on my rights by a tyrannical government during Trumps Admin. Most of Trumps agenda actually worked for me.
Navy, Coast Guard, DEA, and CBP shutting down illegal entry unto US and drug flows. I think there were fewer illegals asking me for work with blood red eyes and maniacal grins than now.
Individual choice on vaccinations and masks.
Proposed no tax/permit gun suppressors.
Tighter leash on agencies terrorizing citizens.
Appointment of constitutional law judges as opposed to legislation from benchers. Man did Sotomayer and Breyer flub up their “facts”. Ouch…
12 out of 150M doesn’t seem like a tidal wave of white supremacy. I think we still see much more crime in deep Blue areas.
Yes I like McCarthy, but he’s hardly my go to for national sentiment metrics. Seems all the news whonks from Fox to CNN to MSNBC are all predicting a change in both House and Senate majorities. That precipitates committee leadership changes, which as we’ve seen this year has a dramatic impact on committee agendas. Good news is that regardless of majority party witness testimony is still under oath. Easy enough to replay what was said or provided to Congress.
That’s great for Ohio. Damnedable politicians trying to pull a fast one got caught it seems. Not sure a would call forcing a do-over much of a consequence. Hopefully it will be fair as can be.
I did just look at AZ current and 2013 district maps but don’t know enough about it to pass judgment.
Do you only feel this way when your preferred political party is being criticized, or do you also factor this into your daily contempt for the left? Just a consistency check!
Are you serious? Even if you dismissed half of the notations in the list at this link, there was still some pretty significant ‘encroachment’ going on: https://civilrights.org/trump-rollbacks/ (And if you don’t like this source, there are plenty of others).
You do realize that you just did DARVO as I described it? --Denied, Attacked, Reversed Victim and Offender.
“Crime” and “Seditious Conspiracy” are not synonyms.
I agree, not much of a consequence, but more of a consequence than we’ve seen previously, and a strong judicial ‘suggestion’ that indeed, they play fair and get it right the second go-around.
Here is something useful in deciding that:
https://community.integrallife.com/faq
Expressing contempt for a contemptuous idea is a short term sacrifice for a longer term good. Failure to challenge contemptuous ideas or behavior and describe them as contemptuous keeps the peace in the short term but fails in the long term.
Also there is a difference between expressing contempt for ideas, behavior and the person. All three are completely different. Anyone can have an idea. Behavior is only after the idea goes unchallenged. Identity as “I am” - again is much further along after both idea and behavior has gone unchallenged.
@LaWanna Thats a shockingly long list of grievances. I made it into Trumps first 2 months. It would appear every grievance is viewed through an Identity Politics/Woke lens. Trump was not Woke as people that voted for him were not Woke. Being anti Woke/anti Identity politics was essentially the mandate he was given.
I’m also a newbie and learning about all these psychological sociological jujitsu techniques and terms so will try to be cognizant of either myself or others DARVOing, intellectual bypassing, or mucking about.
I’m also somewhat familiar with how non profits/NGOs can be setup to market specific agendas and create narratives.
Since I view Woke/Identity politics as harmful to humanity and regressive to Civil Rights, I’m quite OK with most everything 45 did for the country.
If I stop here hopefully I won’t be guilty of DARVOing.
PS I would posit that there are much more Meta or Neo or Post lens on which to view the world.
Sorry, this is just bullshit you are spewing here.
Viewed through a Conservative or Moral or Spiritual or Fiscally Responsible lens. Hell even just a simple Honesty lens, or just not a thoroughly poor excuse as a human being lens - 45 is just as deplorable in just as many instances.
I knew you were full of it when you denied this a few months ago.
@raybennett I thought Trump was a rude, crass idiot in 2016 (and didn’t cote for him). But based on his effectiveness as President was very much in support of him. And he remained a divisive rude, crass mouthy man that made me often cringe. But he got lots of shit done that I thought important.