“What is an integral solution when presented with Red?"

It is not my question but it was brought up in another topic recently. Is it appropriate to use straw man arguments on this integral forum?

Concerning social media, I recommend this discussion:

I think unpacking BLM and Antifa were also brought up. Has the discussion already happened on these topics?

I also keep going back to KW’s “subsume and transform” model. If “integral” is to take off doesn’t it, by very definition need to “subsume and transform” as opposed to “ban/silence and move on”? Just a conundrum that has be scratching my head.

I believe - yes.
But we are dealing with humans and social interactions can be complex, and this is even more difficult in a text only medium.

The mind can only achieve what it can conceive. So in my judgement what I see some doing is envisioning their highest level they have achieved, and believing this to be Integral. Most commonly, If they are postmodern, they believe they are acting in Teal when in fact they are just Green, lol. Or another type might think Q-anon or being “Red Pilled” is the ultimate, and believe that is Integral.

It’s hardest for a person who is stuck in a particular paradigm to see that they are themselves stuck. Most people can’t see beyond what they know.

Let’s take Orange - a person stuck at Orange will try to regulate the hell out of everyone else. Even making random rules about how you can or cannot discuss a topic, or where you should discuss it. To them it is an offence to color outside of the lines of a coloring book.
So, how to deal with such a person when they intrude into your space?
A nice healthy red “Fuck You.” can be fun sometimes.
Amber appeal to authority might work - try to get an authority figure involved or find out if Ken said something and quote him
Engaging them on the level of Orange might work. Talk to them according to the rules they set up and try to convince them within that framework, but will probably just reinforce the Orange.
Postmodern Green has a lot of options. Pacing and leading “Oh wow, you have a lot of good things to say and I respect your masterful level of discourse, and have you also considered …” is one good Green method. Or just really respecting everything they are saying and realizing that they are not separate from you, but you are all one and the same - is another common Green way to deal with these things.

How to combine all these (subsume and transform) is pretty difficult.
I don’t have an answer for that.
Except perhaps my answer for myself is to really get in touch with each level and accept what it looks like within myself completely. So if I know within myself what Magenta, Red, Amber, Orange, and Green look like from various points of view - if someone comes along with something new and interesting that doesn’t fall into those - I myself peek out and curiously observe “Oh, what is this now?”
What happens when a person rejects that they operate at a “lower” level even though they do? Well, they manifest a shadow. In our example of Orange - it could be that a person just has certain rules and codes for behavior drummed into them by their entire culture from birth - but not being willing to see this in themselves, it comes out as a shadow.

Anyway, that’s my theory just off the top of my head.

1 Like


Now we’re breaking out of the Holier than Thou paradigm that’s oh so easy for each of us to embrace. Yes, each of us is made up of ALL of the altitudes (even 2nd tier hidden in the shadows that is oh so difficult to access…), have subsumed at some level of completeness each altitude, and can dynamically (we are human after all) react to stimulus causing a welling of any or multiple altitudes (aka triggered, enlightenment experience,…).
Case in point, if someone were to physically attack my family, say if we found ourselves trapped in an Antifa/BLM “protest” in Portland or Seattle, you wouldn’t be finding me logging in to an Integral blog site to sort out what to do in response to Red. Would we consider co-opting the concept of “how to respond to Red” in relation to a snarky blog response on an Integral site as a strawman tactic? Where’s are the Mod’s when you need them. :slight_smile:

I forget where I heard it, but it’s a great axiom to remember that if you are triggered, there is something for there for you to introspectively investigate (or not).

Back to your (grossly paraphrased) “we can’t see that we’re stuck at a certain level” thought. If we can get back to a context that “we are all in this together, we are one”, then perhaps we can accelerate our learning? Just a weird thought for the moment.

Just winging it here…

Just an interesting side note - your response would also differ if, while in a BLM protest, the violence came from Antifa or the Police. You would feel more justified in responding violently to Antifa Violence and perhaps also Alt Right masquerading as Antifa, but if you react in the same way to Police violence against your family because you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time and caught up in events, I predict you would hope for an Orange resolution at a later time and you would not engage the police in counter violence.

Yeah, so that is where I kind of popped up my head like a prairie dog and say “Oh, what is this now?” when Corey did respond to a call for moderator action.
Lots of people will strongly disagree with me on this - but my personal opinion is that “We are One” is firmly in Green. It’s very postmodern imo. I don’t dismiss it out of hand and I think it’s something in Green that is worth it to “subsume and transform”.

I changed the title to fit the current discussion. You’re welcome.

Yes perhaps some complaining, but also IMO a valid discussion. But touche’ on the revision - “you showed them”. LOL


Absolutely beautiful attempt to control the dialogue.

Do it again!

1 Like

Let’s just quote the OP before Chaos spins this discussion beyond anything recognizable.

@raybennett - Like we’ve been saying, we all have access to all the altitudes, some with some level of mastery at each level.

And I’ll restate that the “police are violent/killers” issue is, in my opinion, more of a narrative than a major issue. There are much greater fundamental issues that (again in my opinion) deserving of priority attention. But if you’ve taken up “the cause”, then go do you and make a difference!

@raybennett - It’s spelled KAOS. :slight_smile:

I’ll say I don’t know what the priorities are on a global scale, or especially in your particular neighborhood. But where I live it wasn’t that they were killers - but that a former Chief of Police and his County Prosecutor wife are serving time in jail for corruption. They used their powers to frame a personal enemy for a federal crime. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. When they tried to fire him from Police Chief, someone approved a $250,000 secret payment to him. So to me in my neck of the woods it’s an important 2021 issue to keep those in power accountable.

Now what were we talking about again? Someone changed the Title of the thread.
Oh yeah,
"What are integral ways to deal with Red?"
I agree that the urge could be stronger if certain groups like family or children are the target.

@raybennett Sorry to hear about your corrupt Police Chief. Sounds like the accountability is finally coming around.

I was going to say that police killings are almost zero, but decided to look up the actual numbers. This has been a good exercise.
On a police violence focus site, I found the following:

  • police killings of all kinds - 1.8 per Million
  • police killings of unarmed - 0.9 per Million
  • No mention of “resisting arrest” or “gunned down by police”.

Comparing other causes of death to Police killings

  • Death by Murder - 27 times more likely
  • Death by Auto crash - 555 times more likely
  • Death by Abortion - 10,555 times more likely (or 2 times more likely than even auto crash?)
  • Death by Suicide - 99 times more likely
  • Death by Drug Overdose - 1059 times more likely

I didn’t pull information on illnesses as I think these need to be highly age adjusted. i.e. If you’re really old, “something is very likely to get you”.

Just going by the numbers, a “help the greater good” priority order might look like: Abortion, Drugs, Auto crashes, Suicide, Murder, and likely a lot of other issues before hyper focusing on the “Killer Police”.

I’m not really all that concerned that I will be killed by the Police.
There is a certain level of corruption, abuse and brutality in many departments across the nation.
So long as you don’t challenge them, the odds that you will suffer are lower, and even lower if you are socioeconomically and socially separate from certain target groups.

The question is if this is a “slippery slope” argument or not.
Will this expand more and more, or not?
It was my observation that during COVID, it did expand. The Police in my city were out of control, not violently but in administrative corruption.
People in various cities can argue that their Police were out of control in Spring 2020. Lawsuits are being settled now that show their courts of law agree that the Police were abusive.

I think most importantly, killing is not the only way that a Police Officer can completely ruin a person’s life. Planting evidence (as in the case of my Police Chief) and other bogus charges like disorderly conduct or public indecency (taking a piss outside) will show up on criminal record checks every time a person applies for a job or rental apartment.

One thing I find interesting is that groups like the Oathkeepers used to be all about holding police accountable during the Obama years. I watched quite a bit of youtube videos between 2008 to 2012 or so documenting what Oathkeepers felt was Law Enforcement officers violating their oaths by demanding drivers’ documentation to harrass anyone they wanted to. I actually used to love watching their videos during that time. Then they morphed so much under Trump that finally in 2021 they sought to overthrow the constitution itself.

Yes I totally agree it was and is a valid discussion. I will change the title back to the original or a better one if someone has a suggestion. I was fooling around last night, had fun playing with my shadows, biases, fears and boundaries.

I love the way you both handled the chaos.

I don’t want to distract you further from the discussion. I will learn to better integrate my drive to control the conversation, or the conversation about the conversation.

Here’s a video you might find interesting.

This reminds me of the documentary series “The Confession Tapes” by Netflx that focuses on people who are possibly innocent but convicted after they confessed.

Naysayers might ask, “Why in the world would anyone confess to something they didn’t do?” It’s a valid question, and The Confession Tapes does a compelling job of answering it in a way that will leave a knot in your stomach. Episode after episode, you watch people enter a room confident that they didn’t do it, only to be beaten down by hours and hours of pressure, manipulation, intimidation, and outright deception on the parts of the police. The tapes capture police insisting that the suspects owe God and the murdered victim’s family an apology. It captures them asking questions like, “Could you have maybe done it in a dream? What would that have been like?” And it captures them flat-out lying about the evidence they have in order to convince the suspects they have no choice but to confess in order to secure a lesser sentence


I got the impression that these policemen really believed they were doing a good job following their “instincts” while they probably let the real murderers go free. In one case the real killers even confessed that he persons in custody didn’t had anything to do with it but the police stuck with their story based only on the confession they obtained that was retracted the next day.

1 Like

@raybennett [quote=“raybennett, post:14, topic:20246”]
One thing I find interesting is that groups like the Oathkeepers used to be all about holding police accountable during the Obama years. I watched quite a bit of youtube videos between 2008 to 2012 or so documenting what Oathkeepers felt was Law Enforcement officers violating their oaths by demanding drivers’ documentation to harrass anyone they wanted to. I actually used to love watching their videos during that time. Then they morphed so much under Trump that finally in 2021 they sought to overthrow the constitution itself.

Maybe the Oathkeeper’s use “Law Enforcement/Government Accountability” as their chosen topic to further their political aims? It might be that simple.

1 Like

I don’t know these Oathkeepers but it is interesting. What did they do to conclude they sought to overthrow the constitution?

They are one of the groups who organized to breach the capitol on Jan 6, 2021, with the stated intent of stopping the Vice President from fulfilling his duty to ratify the Electoral College votes as written in the constitution. Edit: add “violently”