The Conversation: What the Integral Movement Needs Next


#101

Word

I think it’s also actually illegal to have more than a trace amount of insect in food.

A few months ago I was thinking about experimenting with raising a few rabbits for meat and then expanding the operation at a later time - but then when I thought about it realistically what that expansion would mean, and that it would mean killing an enormous amounts of cute fluffy bunny wabbits - like over 500 instead of just one wild pig or goat, for example. I imagined myself doing the early winter culling, covered in blood and surrounded by piles of bunny heads and realized that would be pretty dark. For some reason 500 chickens or duck heads doesn’t have such a savage imagery. I guess that’s why Watership Down was about rabbits, lol.

As for sources of protein - I think we’ve reached the technological state where this is a non-issue. But yes, it requires technology to crate many of the non-tofu plant-base proteins (I think). But then also, just beans and rice and many other basic low-tech combinations give a complete protein. I think meat is kind of like the car - people just want it but society could easily do a work around, but there is no desire to do so and so it won’t happen until the majority has already reached a certain stage.

One food source I’m looking at as well is mushrooms. They’re delicious and I think their actually enjoy being eaten. lol. Mushrooms also grow out of decaying organic matter. But they definitely require you you to get to know them very well first or you might eat one that can literally kill you. Mushrooming is not a lazy man’s hobby, lol.
On the subject of food that likes to be eaten … While not a protein source, I think fruit also enjoys being eaten. It’s part of their reproductive cycle to be eaten. Kind of a far out idea, but mammals are a kind of temporary host for a tree’s unborn offspring, lol.


#102

Here are various lists of Best Places to live in the World, based on a variety of criteria.
The United States doesn’t make the top 10 on any list I can find except when it comes to consumption or geopolitical power.

United Nations Human development Index (US is 17th)
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/best-countries-to-live-in

Just Happiness (US is 19th)
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-countries-in-the-world

According to CEO World as best places for a CEO to live (US is 14th):

US News - Ironically the “liberal rag” of the group places the USA higher overall (6th place)
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/overall-rankings

But in Quality of life, they place the USA 20th
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-rankings

According to the global expatriate community (who usually have actually lived in several countries and have first hand experience) USA is 34th. Notice that our Northern and Southern neighbors are in the top 10.


#103

@raybennett You sure do like your Western nations - all the very most Liberal Democracies on the planet. They do seemingly “deliver the goods” when compared to other basis cultures, religions, societies.
One very interesting note is there is not another large scale nation that even sniffs the US’s standings. Japan is the only +100M population club member to make the lists.
All of these lists (except the Expat) are devoid of the Eastern cultures/religions that our pop culture has latched on to.

Human Development Index (world pop review) - Interestingly the 16 countries ranked ahead of the US combined have less population than the US alone (303M vs 332M). All are coincidentally very Western nations.

Happiest Countries (world pop review) - Again, every ranking above the US is also very Western. Again, the US has a greater population the combined populations of every country ranked higher.

Quality of Life (CEOWorld) - Again, all countries ahead of the US have a combined population smaller than the US. And again, they are all either Western or the very most Western Asian nations (Japan, South Korea).

Overall Best Countries Ranking (USNews) - I know I know. Sounding like a broken record really. US has a larger population than all those ranked higher combined and all countries are very Western.

Quality of Life Rankings (USNews) - Finally the record skips a track. Total population of ranked higher is 528M vs 330M for the US. It’s still a listing of Western nations (EU, US,…) with addition of the most Westernized Asian nations of Japan, SKorea, and Singapore.

Best Places for Expats - Expats are a very small and unique demographic, but I do think this very interesting.


#104

This is a long and slightly old thread, so apologies if I’ve missed anything above covering this already, but I thought I’d put on my English Theorist hat and try to translate what Robb Smith said since that seemed to be causing some confusion (and understandably so – he should in no way, shape, or form be the public voice of the Integral Movement as he doesn’t exhibit understanding of how to simplify jargonized language). Hopefully I’ll do a good job since it’s commonly my task as a minister to try to break down complex ideas about consciousness into language that can be most broadly understood.

Let me try to handle this bit by bit. I’m probably going to break this into parts because I’m already an hour in and I would very much like to go hiking on my day off today :slight_smile:

"The main problem with Teal org community… inadequate knowledge transparency & coordination of interventions mechanism"

What I think he’s saying here is that Integral knowledge is challenging to communicate. This, I think, points back to one of the major shadow issues with Yellow / Teal, and that is the inability to communicate in language that prior rungs of the ladder can understand and digest. The biggest thing Integral leaders need to remember (and this is covered at length in Beck & Cowan’s Spiral Dynamics text) is that we are presenting not just a completely different paradigm to the Tier 1 worldviews, but a completely different paradigm of worldviews. IE, the whole idea that there are multiple valid worldviews that all offer truth (albeit partial) is not something Tier 1 is good at handling without extensive, simplified explanation. And, of course, the other shadow piece with Tier 2 is that I think we forget that Tier 1 worldviews need to be open to receiving that knowledge (another aspect that Spiral Dynamics teaches well, I think).

"This is a software problem…"

Honestly, not sure how this is a software problem. It’s actually a people problem. I don’t know if he was using software as a metaphor here or if he meant it literally. If he’s thinking about social media or something like it as a means for connecting disparate Integral communities and individual holons, that’s an admirable idea, but he needs to understand that software won’t solve every problem. This very forum is meant to be a place for Integralists to come together and discuss, but we have seen some of the very problems here as well that he is calling out. Forum software isn’t solving our problems (as evidenced by the increase of trolling and lack of a cohesive “Let’s all agree to work on this very important Integral task” mission), and I suspect that’s because a discussion forum (or any other text-focused platform) can’t cover all of AQAL. Our brains also process read text differently than face to face human interactions, and thus the work in a purely software space likely will be more partial than work that includes the human interaction space as well (unless the software could be designed in a way to better include the human side, which I’m not sure is fully possible with current technology).

"Not just a lesson on movements… they need to be downcoded for more simple & concrete enaction…"

I’m going to go into my ego a bit here: Robb needs to take his own advice. The jargon in this Tweet is almost border-lining on the “Hey, I’m erudite, look at my language mastery!”

Ego reactions aside, if I were to break this down (“downcode” it, in Robb’s words), I would say he’s telling us exactly what I mentioned in the previous breakdown – we need to de-jargon Integral and find ways to make it communicable and digestible for the masses that are still living in Tier 1.

"The other super hard problem is the epistemology of goodness… this problem is a monster… Chinese farmer"

Not as much translating needed here. This is, admittedly, a problem philosophy, religion, and the social sciences have been tackling for thousands of years. To assume that progress hasn’t been made, though, I think is a fallacy. The vast majority of people can agree that murder, is bad, for example, and so by inference, not murdering people is a good thing. That’s why most countries have laws making murder the highest crime one can commit.

When approaching “goodness,” I think the best we can do at Integral thinking is to do exactly that – the best we are able to, with the information we have at the Tier of thinking we’re at. Because Integral has a systems based approach to goodness, then that’s the tool we have to use. But flailing over what goodness is is likely going to be more of a distraction than an aid in our movement. Let’s make a map of goodness through an Integral lens and follow it, and bake in “continuous improvement” as a core feature of our map as we discover new aspects of reality.

"Chinese Farmer"
Here is a brief version of this, if my Googling was correct –

There is a Taoist story of an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. “Such bad luck,” they said sympathetically.

“Maybe,” the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. “How wonderful,” the neighbors exclaimed.

“Maybe,” replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy for what they called his “misfortune.”

“Maybe,” answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son’s leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.

“Maybe,” said the farmer.

This is postmodern relativism at its core. That’s not Tier 2, and this may be a shadow aspect of Integral in these leaders that hasn’t been dealt with yet. Ken covers how previous rungs of the ladder can fall into our shadow if we don’t evolve to the next rung properly in Religion of Tomorrow. It also ties into what I discussed above about how we seem to fall into analysis paralysis a lot. I especially witnessed this in my information technology work at Chicago Public Schools, where we most often worked at the Green level of flattened egalitarian collaboration, and where I often had to push hard for a decision… otherwise nothing would ever get done.

"Privately… Transformational Thesis… implicate TT [Transformational Thesis]… encourage them to explicate… etc"

So, he’s talking with Teal leaders and trying to get a solid plan. Admirable task, but not something that any one Teal leader is going to have, I think. What we need to understand at Teal is that no one person is going to have the master plan. Hence, the need for Integral leaders to come together and try to find the root paths that will make the biggest impact in the shortest amount of time (in my opinion).

He then goes on to say that he asks them to get into specificity given their Integral plans tend to be fuzzy, which is likely, I think, part of the problem with Teal and Tier 2 right now – there is so much to carry in one’s mind with systems thinking that I wonder how well a single human mind can cover it all. Some, like Ken Wilber, do very well (and understandably so, since Ken Wilber has done the most Integral thinking of anyone I know), but the majority of us at this level I think are going to struggle to hold it all in mind. Robb also talks about what seems to be the analysis-paralysis I see with Integral right now, where we’re stuck trying to systems-analyze the whole world in support of making the “Integral-correct” decision, when sometimes you just have to make a decision and see what happens. If the United States had fallen into analysis paralysis in World War 2, for example, we might all be speaking German right now. This is something where the impulsiveness of Red thinking can be good when cultivated in healthy ways, and so I sometimes think Tier 2 needs to be clear of whether or not it’s created an allergy to that aspect of Red.

"The power of them… when viewed through integral pluralism, is vast… precise hypothesized mechanisms of system/holon transformation (or new translation), allowing for prioritization of multifaceted, multilevel, multiquad integral strategies."

Yeah, lots of jargon here. Basically, he’s talking about the power of Integral Transformational Theses, or the idea of basic Integral plans to foster the needed transformation for worldview evolution to Tier 2. The latter half is basically covering AQAL but not calling it AQAL.

"This problem is also emblematic of a movement that has immense identity cohesion–indeed, its primary differentiable asset in a post-Amber world–but, due to the complexity of the worldspace, minimal social cohesion, little to no task cohesion, norcongruent incentive… [I assume it then moves on to the next Tweet as one paragraph… this is why Twitter should *never* be used to try to convey complex ideas, by the way!] …Many maps, many perspectives, many media drops into a Green infoscape… but little group theory-learning that becomes action-coordated interventions based on well-articulated & integrally metatheorized transformational theses."

I’m going to back and say that Robb really needs to learn to get to the root language of his ideas and convey them in a way that isn’t buried in jargon. That said, what I think he’s trying to say here is that because of the complexity of the world – which Integral will see much more clearly than Tier 1 worldviews – there is a danger that we can fall back into Green flat-landing where we can be tempted to homogenize all the various ideas we see in Integral, rather than identifying and prioritizing the ideas that will have the greatest impact in the shortest amount of time. It’s possible that he’s calling out that same Green shadow aspect of Tier 2 I mentioned above. In layman’s terms, he’s saying that we need to do our homework, not get caught up in false equanimity of ideas, and then make concrete plans that most (because we won’t all) agree on, and then act on them. He’s basically saying we need to make up our minds at the movement-holon-level and do something.

"In one sense this is understandable… predictable stage 2 (differentiation) of its own social maturation (after leaving stage 1 identity)… needs to move to stage 3… problem of diverse reintegration."

I’m actually quite fond of this analysis, even if it’s still steeped in jargon. What I believe he’s saying is that it’s a natural aspect of evolution from Tier 1 thinking to Tier 2 that we would focus on what makes us different. In many ways, that is exactly how Red ego development differentiates itself from the prior mythical/magical levels. Jacques Lacan, I think, offered some of the best work on the “mirror stage” of human development, most often taking place during early childhood development, where we as little humans start to separate “us” from “the world / the other”. What if this is true for a movement from Tier 1 to Tier 2, as well, and there is a sort of Red-like “mirror stage” where we now are differentiating “us-as-Tier 2-thinking” with “them-as-Tier 1-thinking”? I’ve been pondering this for a while, and it seems that Robb may also have been sensing this.

When he speaks of us evolving to Stage 3, I’m not exactly sure where Stage 3 is referring, but I suspect he’s saying that we need to fully integrate the prior Tier 1 worldviews for us to complete our transition out of analysis paralysis. It’s the idea of moving from differentiation of worldviews to actually choosing to employ the true and useful aspects of those worldviews in decision making. This is what I was talking about above when I said that we may benefit from healthy Red decisiveness and to examine any lingering shadow aspects from Red, Amber, Orange, Green, etc that could be influencing us without our knowledge.

"Instructive to compare to the speed… blockchain, which had high task cohesion…"

Yeah, this is where I disagree. Maybe this was the “software solution” he talked about? Blockchain isn’t really Integral in my mind; it’s a weird mesh of Orange and Green as software, in the sense that it’s only approaching things economically speaking. And not all blockchain development has been successful, or approached even in an Integral way. Some blockchain projects were created by a single person. Blockchain has been successful mainly due to the economic incentive, and doesn’t really do much at all in other quadrants of AQAL.

That said, I think he’s probably trying to communicate that there is an opportunity within the Integral community to get to the “core needs” for advancement. The needs themselves, I suspect, are rather simple (as most human and natural needs are), and where Integral can help best with them is by starting to put the larger puzzle together (rather than looking at all the pieces separately and then trying to analyze in our minds what the puzzle should look like, without actually starting to attach the pieces).

Phew. Okay, looks like I made it all the way through. I hope my analysis was good and my ego didn’t go too nuts on this. I think Robb is onto something here, even if I’m beating him up for trying to be far too overtly erudite in his communication.


#105

We are the third most populated country on the planet. Does that mean the only valid comparisons we should make are India or China?

The vast majority of nations our smaller than ours. Who cares? Why should we allow “American exceptionalism” be so diminished by scale?

The fact that we have many different nations — yes, different Western nations! — running so many different political experiments, and often getting results better than our own, means we still have plenty to learn from. But I’ve only heard conservatives say “no, we can’t do that. We’re different, because we’re too big, so we can’t have those sorts of nice things. But we are still number one, don’t even question it!” At which point our “exceptionalism” starts to sound something like the bragging of an unaccomplished middle-age man whose team won the regionals back in high school.

We are one of the only developed nations with something like “medical bankruptcy”. It pretty much does not exist outside of this country. People actually get pushed into poverty for getting sick, which everyone inevitably does. Hell, it costs $5k—10k just to have a baby. And conservatives say, “that’s just because we’re big. Nothing we can do, because socialism. Too bad so sad. By the way, we’re #1!”

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.


#106

Being large does not mean we are limited to small things. It means the opposite – it means we can do big things, things no other nation can, if we just get out of our own way.

We were the first to land on the moon not because we are small, but because we are big. We have the GDP, the resources, the manpower, the brain-hours to not only meet our present life conditions, but exceed them and improve the mental, physical, cultural, and systemic health of every member of this social holon.

America could solve the climate crisis pretty much overnight, if it actually wanted to. If we actually stepped into global leadership and were bold enough to bend our economic goals toward our ecological goals. If we were brave enough to remove the oligarchs from the levers of power. If we were compassionate enough to future generations to allow ourselves to generate the political will to do so.

America is a sleeping giant. It takes a lot to wake it up. But when we do awaken, we are capable of taking some very big steps.

The biggest problem as I see it is that one of our major political parties is doing everything possible to keep that giant sleeping – convincing us that we should either be scared of the giant altogether, or that it’s simply too big to get out of bed.


#107

Thank you for a very clear step by step breakdown in layman’s terms. I think I agree with everything (that’s strange) and you put into words some things I’ve been unable to formulate specifically.

I’d welcome any examples (from anyone) of how to accomplish this in our current real-world setting.
Bonus points on a practical implementation that does not require hundreds of hours of Integral Time investment in manhours to every reluctant Individual.
Where I see the real challenge are the unwilling “we” who are actively striving for a Red / Amber “we” while the Tier 2 “we” are in paralysis.


#108

@corey-devos I agree completely that medical bankruptcy is a travesty of our current system. But do I run my Marxist derived Critical Theory OS on the entirety of the US concluding the US is “morally bankrupt” due to a single factor? Can you see the religious zealotry with which you approach all of your quasi-intellectual analyses of the US?

You might want to give Robb’s keynote another listen - it might not be such a horrific world you perceive after all.


#109

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.


#110

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?


#111

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.


#112

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.


#113

Great comments Russ! I agree Robb’s language was a bit opaque here, but that just makes it more fun to unpack together :slight_smile:

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” :slight_smile:


#114

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


#115

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… :wink:


#116

I think the quote you are going for is “transcend and include”, which is quite a bit different :slight_smile:

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.


#117

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.


#118

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


#119

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.


#120

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)?