Topic of the Week: changes through aging

  • Posted on: 26 June 2017
  • By: thecollective

We've had a couple of totws on changes in life, this one is specifically about how you've changed your behavior, your actions, what can you not do any more, what do you not want to do anymore, what can you do now that you couldn't before, and what do you like doing now that you never used to?
This is partly inspired by some of us who have been around for a long time, doing all kinds of activism, including anti-fascist, anti-racist, take back the night marches, one of us was around for the first dyke march in the bay area, etc. But the fact that we don't do that so much anymore means that people don't see us as involved or informed at all.
But that's not the question, just one of the inspirations for the question.
The question is how have you changed? how have your friends changed? Does it surprise you? If you haven't changed yet, how do you want your actions and behavior to change as you age? Or do you want to stay exactly the same as you are right now?

category: 

Comments

It's all true what they say about being less convinced about everything when you age. Only the dumb moralists stick to their one-liner convictions. This may have to do with your stance and sentiment towards death and loss.

Yeah, I have aged. I now have so much more experience, so much more cynicism, so much more resignation. I no longer think anarchists are capable of saving the planet. And a lot of the time, the planet needs to be saved from anarchists.

The people fucked"

-George Carlin

Simply save yourself.

Yes yes yes it's true... anarchists are devastating industrial-scale abusers of the environment. They are into big oil investments, spend an average of 60 bucks a day on paleo diets with animal products -including fish from mass-fishing industries- go en masse on the countryside in their cars over the weekend and generally don't car-pool with other people coz it's too weird spending time with people of no affinity. Their high tech industry is also contaminating all animal life with pharma crap, putting many kinds of toxic waste in the waters, as well toxic radiations through a wide array of cell phone towers and other powerful radio waves, and you know what?

They're loving it, and are making shitloads of profits from it.

Coz that's what anarchism is about... making big money, by any means necessary.

I definitely have had a experience here on the east coast that I feel is common. I have kept my anarchist beliefs but about 90% of my friends who said they where anarchists have turned liberals or just dropped out. It has certainly entrenched my beliefs. I too have changed as I got older. But in a different way. I want the whole spectacular society to be destroyed. I want more destruction! I want more resistance! I want more anarchy!

I've seen older people, including myself, chased off by the younger generation over and over again. Dropping out or having a politic that is considered liberal can be a better option than being harassed and disparaged by wave after wave of people fanatically espousing whatever the next more correct politic is. This is a youth subculture as much as you wish it wasn't or work for it not being. There is not room for aging and there is not room for elders. You could mention a handful of 'older' people in a handful of big cities, but the reality is this is for the kids until life grinds them down or the next waves drive them off.

Give or take, that Logan's Run anarchyworld doesn't look like a good idea to me... furthermore the seeds of liberalism are found within those very same young fanatics, who later become bureaucrats and producers of "art" crap for capitalism. I bet that's got a lot to do with how anarchism as a bandwagon relies on the mass social institution of college and academia... which was clearly NOT the case back in the very same glory days of anarchy that those liberals idealize (was Goldman or the Bonnot Gang hanging out with college students?). Clearly when you're talking of academia, you're talking about the highest tip of State indoctrination and submission, next to the army (which at least makes it obvious, unlike academia). It goes down to students offering themselves to give blowjobs to teachers for success at the exams. While just this sentence may be giving a boner to some intellectuals and marxist despots, I don't see what anarchy you can get from this... aside than more abused bodies in its name. But don't get me started as to why cocaine is such a huge market in the post-grad studies sector.

In a nutshell, academia is nowhere the weak spot of the system, but rather its damn flagship. And while it's the best strategy to be attacking the flagship of an Navy fleet instead of its corvettes and gunboats, you'd be needing some well-organized and consistent offensive to blow it open, not those body-surfers and anarcops we've seen managing people around for years.

Okay, I should grow up to accept it, or flee somewhere else... but what about just starting a land project not related to these Left demagogues? That's a much better form of evasion than dropping out to the same old cesspool of society.

and focus on children, elderly, the neuroatypical and autodidactic learning. As Richard Pryor once said, if you drop out you also have to drop into something "ya dig?"

its not the older people who are being chased out. Its the cishet honkey men. they used to dominate anarchism and just arent being replaced amymore.

David Lynch is right... the key is the electricity. It connects everyone and everything, even beyond dimensions. If you know how to play with it, turn it as weapon against the Dominant, the latter gets fucked. You can fuck up any abominable summer music fest through this...

As I get older I have found that I have been having a diminishing desire to spend time with other anarchists. For one, I have found that most people who call themselves "anarchist" actually are not, and are instead some kind of authoritarian. And secondly, even when someone is a genuine anarchist, I have found that that is no guarantee that we would actually enjoy each other's company, be friends, or trust each other. I am still interested in anarchism, but I like to keep my distance from "anarchists" now. The internet is a good tool for doing that.

I kinda understand, and we could be having potentially a very nice time together in a moment/space at the fringes of society or in blatant rupture with it. But handing out with authentic anarchists in this world feels just like being soldiers within an ever-embryonic resistance in the Army, or like under the Soviet regime perhaps, but where people are made to enjoy the dominant order, and the resisters are being put in the position of being the lamers, the losers or the freaks. We're actually not very distant from what is commonly referred to as "deviants" and "mentally ill"...

WOW! 9 comments in and no childish comments yet! WTF

Used to joke around about how great it would have been to be a criminal in the 60s and 70s before cctv, surveillance, data mining etc. How much easier it would have been.
What are people from the future going to say about now: "fuck, it would have been so easy too..."

What gets called anarchism in today's US is an adolescent-oriented subculture. Even in the US, most people don't really remain adolescents for their entire lives, and they tend to age out of a scene that conflates the seeking/gratification of adolescent personal needs with passive demands for everything that is oppressive and unjust about contemporary society to change immediately, completely and magically. Since the scene demands nothing of anyone it gets a level of conviction and commitment appropriate to that.

But rainbows lollipops and butterflies are just around the corner right?

No, they are too busy being graphics for 'Slingshot'...and don't forget the unicorns and fire-breathing dragons, you cis-gendered abelist!

We AH+ are beyond age. Everybody knows this.

I've only changed because I need the sweet nectar of state to help when I'm older: AKA a pension.

Is it just me or is there a damning amount of people here crying about how the kids "ran them off" or something similar? Did it occur to you that if these kids you disparage as: clueless and mindlessly following trends, conducting witch-hunts, being foolish zealots for identity politics or crypto-authoritarians or whateverthefuck … if any of that is true, then aren't you a bit pathetic for allowing these misguided youth to influence you or drive you in to seclusion? Oh wise elders of anarchism?

I'm getting older myself but hopefully I never sound this whiny ;)

You're a wise old 25 aren't you.

Mid-30s, actually. Practically dead for an anarchist but way to cling to that bias! All I'm saying is, stop blaming the kids for the fact that you turned in to a bitter recluse. It's a bit transparent and the seeds of it were already there when you were young. Sure, people suck a lot of the time and if you're a hermit misanthrope I can totally respect that but it doesn't have much to do with anarchism.

Being early-40s, I wonder what that makes me... an undead? I guess so... But I can testify that there's a reverse ratio of consistency per capita. Little old anarchs to be seen, reclusive types mostly, yet way more consistent than anarkids who can't admit (or realize) how they're just on some waiting list for upward social mobility. I understand them... since you gotta see the game from outside for you to see your part in the game.

Hence why "for being insurgents, we must first destroy ourselves". And be able to rebuild from scratch. There's no other way.

In a nutshell, survive the 30s as anarchist, then maybe we can talk doing shit together and building friendships. That does not include anarcho-careerists often found as university professors

...and also firstly how YOU ARE BEING PLAYED WITH.

Think you're splitting hairs friend. Sure, it's easy to tee off on the kids for being dumb and impressionable because obviously they are, a lot of the time... but that's not specific to anarchism so I can't help but think you're struggling under some logic-fallacies here. Every group of people will have cynical social mobility types… and that doesn't have anything to do with age.

At first glance, I'm not sure why you think I'd be interested in building friendships or doing shit with anybody whose logic reeks of misguided hostility towards the young and weak. We're supposed to be opposing power, not kicking the slightly less mature versions of ourselves.

No. The problem is most of the people that were just like you when we were younger were doing the same dumb mistakes you are now, then they stopped being anarchists, while we remained. So we see you as repeating the same shit all over again...and again, only this time instead of being your peers, we are your elders and we think you suck because the last group of younger kids decided identity politics was the way to go and do their mini-cultural revolution, via the Maoist influence and they went around acting like we should change, as if! Your politics suck and we should conform to how dumb you are? We got checked on our privilege and found the argument lacking, therefore get threatened? Now these little pricks have moved into the Democratic party and the new batch of cocksuckers and their latest antifa scam comes around..and we should hop on board? Fuck you.

Aw you know, when we're young we tend to believe ourselves to be Jesus, be immortal and able to stop a high-speed train with the sheer power of will. With all the stupidity and pretense it
that entails. I heard of a young guy in Latvia who died exactly like this...

Or when they survive past their 30s they realize how fake or shallow they are, and get sucked in by one of another aspect of the mass commodity society. Then they have kids...

You "got threatened"? So what? Again … the first half of your argument doesn't line up with the second. If these kids are so misguided and foolish and threatened you. Isn't it a bit sad that you're reduced to crying about it here?

Anyway, you're strawmanning the shit out of me as if I'm a proxy for everybody who ever hurt your feelings, which is DEFINITELY pathetic, whether or not I'm correctly characterizing your entire argument.

- and to the mods, why would you leave this up but remove that last reply I made? I didn't use ad hominem like this asshole. I just said this person is clearly projecting a lot!

You are an idiot. That was someone else, not this guy and I'm someone else too. That shit was funny. How's Walnut holding up?

Doesn't matter if it's multiple people or not. Everyone crying about "you damn kids were mean to me" sounds the same for the same reason. WEEEAK … It's every paradigm shift ever and the hurt feelings that nobody gave a fuck about.

I stopped hanging out in "anarchist spaces" because I realized that most of the people there were not really anarchists and that I did not enjoy their company. It began to feel as if I was simply wasting my time being in anarchist spaces. I do not believe that people should stick around these spaces out of some sense of revolutionary duty or moralistic obligation, and given that this is something that one does in one's free time, I began to realize that it is more fun and fulfilling to spend my time doing other things with other people.

The older anarch has mastered harmonious frugal tranquility. Exactly, living anarchy and enabling spontaneous creative expression, not going to meetings as an oppositional "No unit" against the binary global totality. Also, self-righteous moral duty has an odious and fake religious feel to it, ugh. And those green yuppies who jet all over the world to wilderness lodges leaving a carbon footprint 100 times larger than a sedentary older anarch. My earlier post regarding octagenarians was a tad harsh, and I feel that there is no limit to longevity if one maintains an active non-materialistic existence and is self-sufficent and doesn't require medications or free accomodation and food and expects to be cared for by relatives or friends.

Was this at subjectively insurrectionary nose-picking dud space Station 40 in San Francisco?

you just barfed up one of your favorite hairballs. how novel and unexpected!!!!

Yeah, like apathetic consumerism n shit. Why is it so much more appealing, right?

Back to fapping...

'Aging' is a concept that rests dependently on two or three other concepts (a) the existence of 'fixed identity', 'things-in-themselves', (b) the notion that the universe is a 'collection of things-in-themselves', and (c) the giant collection of things-in-themselves (stars, planets, humans, bacteria, plants, minerals) that reside in a great emptiness [absolute space] and constitute the 'universe' are changing 'over "time" [an absolute measure that we derive from observing 'how fixed-identity things-in-themselves change' (a tautological definition)].

Purportedly, this 'aging' process goes on in the interval of absolute "time" that starts from the moment of 'birth' of the purported 'things-in-themselves' and continues on to the moment of 'death' of the 'things-in-themselves' [These ambiguous bounds to the interval called 'life-cycle' are the source of much contention].

Fortunately, we have available to us a much more intuitive view of the universe, ... as given only once, as a transforming relational continuum wherein 'inhabitants' (relational forms akin to storm-cells in the atmosphere) are in an inhabitant-habitat non-duality and where 'epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression'.

The over-simplistic abstractions of 'things-in-themselves with fixed and persisting identities' that 'age' with the 'passage of "time" are no longer meaningful nor needed, and we can instead understand local, visible, material forms as relational systems within a relational suprasystem as in a system-suprasystem nonduality [e.g. as with storm-cell in flow-field].

“What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances).” – Erwin Schroedinger
.
“Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.” — David Bohm

This abstract notion that we are 'aging' in 'the passage of time' is something we keep repeating to ourselves in our continual constructing of 'semantic reality' based on the notion that we are 'independently-existing, fixed identity things-in-themselves'. In other words, our habit of saying that we are 'aging' reinforces our psychological impression of inclusion in a synthetic 'semantic reality' (SR) composed of independent things-in-themselves that do stuff, that is nothing like the physical reality of our actual relational experience (RE).

One can't construct a house in the forest without destroying some forest; i.e. construction and destruction are the 'dualist' terms we apply to relational features we observe within the transforming relational continuum wherein inhabitants and habitat are a nonduality. I.e. noun-and-verb language has us substitute the dualist protocols of 'construction' and 'destruction' for the nondual protocol of relational transformation.

So, it is only noun-and-verb language that has us TALKING ABOUT the world in terms of noun-subjects that signify 'things-in-themselves' and in terms of noun-inflecting verb grammar that depicts 'changes' that the 'fixed identity things-in-themselves' purportedly undergo with 'the passage of "time", from past through present to future.

Having been taught that [or, rather, having been taught a noun-and-verb language-and-grammar] that kept me repeating to myself that 'I' am one of these 'fixed identity things-in-themselves', .. 'independent' of all the rest, that is undergoing 'aging' on a "time"-based 'passage' between the moment i purportedly 'began to exist as a fixed identity thing-in-itself' and the moment 'in the future' where 'I cease to exist as a fixed identity thing-in-itself', and having listened to philosophers of nature 'checking out this view of self and world', I have, in my participation from 'earlier to later' in the transforming relational continuum, rejected the view that I am an independently-existing thing-in-itself that is 'aging' in 'the passage of time' in favour of seeing myself as relational participant in a timeless relationally transforming continuum.

With respect to our sense of "time", .. relational transformation gives the sense of 'earlier to later' as in a lava lamp where there is no dependency on 'fixed identity things-in-themselves'. Instead, we can understand local visible material forms as relational features within a relational transforming plenum/continuum; i.e;

“In nature… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” … “The properties of one mass always include relations to other masses,” … “Every single body of the Universe stands in some definite relations with every other body in the Universe.” Therefore, no object can “be regarded as wholly isolated.” And even in the simplest case, “the neglecting of the rest of the world is impossible.” – Ernst Mach
.
“Space not only conditions the behaviour of inert masses, but is also conditioned in its state by them.” — Einstein
.
“What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances).” – Erwin Schroedinger
.
“Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.” — David Bohm

... and so on and so forth, ... I came around to the understanding that this idea of 'independent beings' that 'aged' over "time", ... was a crock, or in more polite terms, an artefact of noun-and-verb language-and-grammar. As Nietzsche points out, we semantically construct independent fixed identity things-in-themselves notionally equipped with their own 'genetic agency' [signified by the subject-attribute word "will"], via a double error of grammar.

So, speaking as an 'inhabitant' within an inhabitant-habitat nonduality, or in other words, as an 'agent of transformation' within the transforming relational continuum, instead of as an 'aging-in-time' fixed identity thing-in-itself, ... I can speak to 'changes' in my life, but with emphasis on changes in my viewing of life, self and other., as just mentioned, which, in effect, have me see myself very much as an 'indigenous anarchist' sees herself.

My rejecting of inhabitants as 'fixed identity independent beings' removes the requirement that something 'beyond' or 'above' these 'independent beings' must be put in place to organize them.

That is, while 'organization' is inherent in (comes bundled into) a transforming relational continuum, it is something that has to be deliberately constructed when one assumes a collection of 'independent being' residing in a non-participating Euclidian space. In the relational view, there is no need for an over-arching 'government', as is evident in relational nature generally.

Furthermore, in my passage from earlier to later in the transforming relational continuum and working as a 'scientist', it became apparent that 'scientific inquiry' was severely constraining itself by basing itself on noun-and-verb language, because such language can only handle 'single issues at a time' and cannot deliver a 'synoptic view' or 'holistic understanding' [Wittgenstein]. For example, science, because it employs noun-and-verb language-and-grammar, observes 'systems' as 'things-in-themselves' in spite of the fact that every system is included in a relational suprasystem [ultimately, the transforming relational continuum] within a system-suprasystem nonduality.

For example, when science observes a slave striking a slave-master, it interprets this 'genetic expression' by assuming that 'slave' and 'slave-master' are 'independently-existing,fixed identity things-in-themselves' [that reside in 'absolute space' and whose actions (like their aging) proceed from past to future in 'absolute time'].

The action is cast as a linear-in-time progression that is authored by an independently-existing thing-in-itself that is notionally equipped with its own 'genetic agency' ['the slave struck the slave-master']. in this scientific depiction, the slave, as an 'independently-existing thing-in-itself', is credited by science as having its own 'genetic agency' that is the 'causally responsible' source of the 'genetic expression' or 'unfolding action constituting the 'event'. [Science's 'analytic inquiry' into a notional 'local system in itself' credits the internal components and processes as being the source of the system's 'own' genetic agency.]

What goes 'missing' in this scientific view, is the greater reality of our actual physical-relational experience wherein 'epigenetic influence is inductively actualizing genetic expression'. That is, our experience-based intuition informs us that the slave-master has conditioned the relational living-space dynamics that have made the slave's life difficult and that relational tensions have been continually accruing so that, at some point, there will be a "straw that breaks the camel's back" and tensional energy may be explosively released in the natural process of reconfiguring to a less relationally tensioned configuration [as also in earthquake and avalanche phenomena which science treats as 'exceptions' since they are not predictable and require an understanding of a long term progressive development whereby the remote past (earlier phases of the unfolding present) directly influence the present].

The point is that by imputing 'genetic agency' to a noun-subject such as 'the slave' [which effectively converts a relational form to a 'spook'] and at the same time deep-sixes all awareness/acknowledgement of 'epigenetic influence, we construct a single-issue, local event that is totally out of relational context. All we have is 'the slave struck the slave-master' as if that single-issue event were meaningful as an 'event-in-itself'.

Science and rational analysis, because they use noun-and-verb language-and-grammar, create 'single-issue events-in-themselves' all over the place [wherever a human observer focuses his/her attention, which may be very different from the focusing interests of a spider or bacterium]. Such 'single-issue events-in-themselves' are totally out of relational context, and Western moral judgement is applied to these out-of-relational-context 'single-issue events-in-themselves'.

This is why problematic (oppressive, tyranny of the majority) governments stay in place, because our popular scientific, rational view of 'reality' has both people and politicians focusing on single events and then applying moral judgement to the single event as if what unfolded; i.e. the 'genetic expression', ... derived from the imputed 'genetic agency' of the noun-subject such as the 'slave'. Validation by science is how 'single events' are legitimized and treated as 'real' in our society when they are only 'semantic reality constructions'.

Because of this unnatural science-validated fragmentation of relational physical reality, dividing it up into a subjective collection of 'single-issue events-in-themselves', we are now in the 'post-truth era as it becomes evident that we can SEMANTICALLY CONSTRUCT these 'single events' out of relational context by imputing 'genetic agency' to notionally 'independently-existing fixed identity things-in-themselves [noun-subjects like 'slave']. The whole relational complex [the 'physical reality of our actual experience] goes missing when we create these visual appearance-based 'single events' and use them in cherry-picked combinations to construct our 'semantic realities' of choice [these semantic realities (SRs) are radical departures from the physical reality of our actual experience (RE)]

The net effect in this 'scientific' or 'rational' approach is to assume that "the present depends only on the immediate past" so that the slave-master's long-persisting abuse of the slave is not taken into account even though it is the source of the slave's violent 'venting'. as Emerson says, we are vents that transmit influence from the nonlocal to the local point on which our genius can act; i.e. we are NOT robots that lack a body-memory-archive of experience wherein relational tensions can accrue and grow to exceed tolerance thresholds. Nevertheless, the creation of 'single issue events-in-themselves' by simply ignoring relational context is foundational to mainstream science; eg;

“Origin of Mathematical Physics. Let us go further and study more closely the conditions which have assisted the development of mathematical physics. We recognise at the outset the efforts of men of science have always tended to resolve the complex phenomenon given directly by experiment into a very large number of elementary phenomena, and that in three different ways.
.
First, with respect to time. Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past. Thanks to this postulate, instead of studying directly the whole succession of phenomena, we may confine ourselves to writing down its differential equation; for the laws of Kepler we substitute the law of Newton. ... — Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Chapter IX, Hypotheses in Physics”

Thus, science has no need to open up the inquiry into 'the slave struck the slave-master' to take into account the progressive development of the phenomenon; i.e. the building of relational tensions that suddenly 'unloaded' within the short "time" interval in which the 'event' occurred. Forensic science can thus confirm that the event [which depends for its fabrication on semantic constructs] 'really happened' and pass it to the 'moral judges' who will run it by their list of prohibited and allowed behaviours and also check out whether it fits in a category of merit and reward or reproach and punishment.

Anyhow, you know the story from there; i.e. the slave will be declared to be the source of 'genetic agency' that was fully and solely (causally) responsible for the injury to the slave-master, because the 'epigenetic influence' that is the deeper 'root source' has been banished from science and rationality's observing lenses or 'radar screens' by the limitations built into science's semantic reality constructing that chops 'single-issue events-in-themselves' out of the transforming relational continuum.

In other words, science legitimizes 'taking things out of natural relational context'. The single issue events ratified by science and rationality are then cherry-picked and strung together to create 'political context' in the form of 'semantic realities'. For example, colonizer oppression introduced into the relational-social dynamic closes down free and natural access and stifles and suffocates 'the colonized' who are trying to live a natural life. The NEED to breathe freely (live one's life freely) manifests as an epigenetic influence that inductively actualizes genetic expression in such forms as dissident protests by the colonized. In nature, there is a constant 'uprising' ['rising to the situation/occasion' which is inductively actualized by epigenetic influence that noun-and-verb language-and-grammar makes disappear (Nietzsche's der Wille zur Macht].

Science and rationality psycho-semantically remove from our awareness 'epigenetic influence' and make a substitution wherein we impute 'genetic agency' to noun-subjects that signify notional 'independently existing things-in-themselves'; i.e. 'dissidents' are portrayed as having their own genetic agency that makes them causally responsible for genetic expression on a local single-issue-event-in-itself basis, even though dissident activities are popping up all over the country, suggesting, instead, an epigenetic inductive actualizing influence. Instead of 'great minds think alike', would it not be simpler to assume that the colonized were feeling suffocated and were rising up to 'fight for air', for breathing room?

Well, 'science' and 'rationality' will tell you that the actions of the dissidents are sourced by nothing other than their own internal genetic agency, as is a logical fit with portraying the dissidents as independently-existing fixed-identity things-in-themselves.

Once we are dealing in 'single-issue events-in-themselves', validated by science and rationality, the relational context has gone missing that would have shown that the protest did NOT originate in the interior of the protester but originated, instead, from tensions in the relational social dynamic, an epigenetic inductive actualizing influence that vented through the protester but did not originate within him, ... as is also the case where the slave struck the slave-master.

The post-truth era and the awareness of 'fake news' signal a rising consciousness of the illegitimacy of science and rationality [the basis for political-rhetorical semantic reality constructions] in giving meaning to single-issue events taken out of relational context, ... paving the way for politicians to construct their own relational context by cherry picking and stringing together the scientifically validated/legitimized, single issue events-in-themselves in such a manner as to construct a 'semantic reality' that will appeal to a particular group of people/voters/followers.

The political-rhetoric design-protocol is; (a) start with what you think will make an 'emotional connection' with a certain groups of people, (b) cherry pick an appropriate suite of single-issue events' and weave them together in a 'semantic reality' construction that will 'fix the hook'.

A similar design protocol arises in health and medicine; i.e. because science and rationality psychologically infuse 'genetic agency' into notional fixed identity things-in-themselves [noun-subjects], an 'allopathic' view of 'health' and 'society' takes form.

Instead of seeing the proliferation of bacteria and/or dissidents as inductively actualized by epigenetic influence [e.g. by imbalance and associated relational tensions in 'le terrain'], it sees them as 'pathogens' with 'willful harm-doing genetic agency'.

The 'remedy' then becomes the 'elimination of pathogens', even though these 'pathogens' are semantic reality based 'spooks'. Sure there is a bacterium there that appears to be 'the smoking gun' just as the slave was there appearing to be 'the smoking gun', but that does not mean that the 'smoking gun' was the 'jumpstart source' of the injury that transpired in the 'event'.

The actions of the bacteria, like the actions of the slave, were epigenetically, inductively actualized rather than 'local genetic-agency' driven. To portray the bacterium and the slave as 'pathogens' that are causally responsible for the injurious result in the 'event' is the semantic creating of 'spooks', substituting them for the inductively actualizing influence in the relational dynamic; e.g. as in 'Katrina caused massive damage to New Orleans'.

Our Western propensity for 'smoking out' and 'eliminating spooks' is a case of confusing symptoms for root source [confusing semantic reality for physical reality], and then seeking to resolve symptoms without acknowledging and/or addressing root source.

In fact, by alleviating symptoms without acknowledging root source, the root-sourcing of imbalance and associated relational tensions may be amplified [getting Saddam out of the way may open the door for the rise of ISIS, just as taking a shotgun blast at digestive tract flora with anti-biotics may open the way to the proliferation of c.difficile and death by colonitis].

Summary:

To buy into the concept of 'aging' with the 'passage of "time"' psychologically pulls one inside a reduced 'semantic reality', a pseudo-world of fixed identity things-in-themselves' whose imputed 'genetic agency' is seen as being the source of 'genetic expression'.

In this pseudo-world of science and rationality, we lose touch with the physical reality of our actual relational experience. That is, our experience-based intuition informs us that the source of dissidents in the colonized world, who are popping up all over the place, is epigenetic influence, the need to rise up and breathe freely that inductively actualizes protest activity.

The fact that there are many who manifest dissident behaviour does not imply that 'great minds think alike' as in the model of humans and independently-existing fixed identity things-in-themselves with their own 'genetic agency' and willful intention to do serious injury to the government, even though this sort of thinking is encouraged by some.

The dissident activity IS NOT SOURCED FROM THE GENETIC AGENCY OF SO-CALLED "DISSIDENTS", but is inductively actualized by relational tensions arising in the overall relational social dynamic; i.e. 'it takes a whole community to raise a dissident'. It is noun-and-verb language that forces us to reduce ourselves to notional 'independently-existing, fixed identity things-in-ourselves' whose behaviour must then be understood as jumpstarting from notional internal 'will' and 'genetic agency' seen as causally responsible for 'genetic expression', ... in denial of the epigenetic influence that is inductively actualizing genetic expression.

Living beneath colonizer governments in a colonized world is like being swimmers whose heads are being held under water by regulation and enforcement agencies, who are trying to rise up and breathe freely. We do not seek to rise up and take over the job of holding others heads under in a 'more fair and just' manner, we seek decolonization.

These are, for me, implications that go together with 'no longer believing in 'aging''.

Agreed its an absurd abstract linear reference point which signifies nothing.

just to say. sure, my comment was longish, but i put quite a bit of work into it on the premise that maybe one or two other participants in Anews might also have 'changed' so as to have started looking at self and world through the 'timeless' 'indigenous anarchist viewing lenses' and/or the viewing portal of taoist anarchism and advaita vedanta where there is no 'time' and therefore no 'aging'. [in the 'timeless' viewing portal, what changes is 'relations' as there are no 'things-in-themselves' in a transforming relational (spacetime) continuum and change involves everything influencing everything; i.e. we change the field/space we are included in at the same time as it is changing us].

in this 'timeless' viewing portal, it is much easier to see why authoritarian structures are not only not needed but are a hindrance. it is much easier to see a lot of things that are validated by our experience but which do not show up at all in our standard Euclidian viewing portal where we reduce local, visible, material forms to 'fixed identity things-in-themselves' that 'age' with the 'passage of time'.

the timeless view is also a 'beyond good and evil' view and that also comes clear when one goes into that 'relational' viewing mode where everything is connected and it becomes impossible to attribute jumpstart causal responsibility to particular forms since forms are vents that transmit influence and are not 'things-in-themselves' with their own 'genetic agency'.

the timeless view, in the same vein, shows how holistic medicine and holistic politics get reduced, in the time-based view, to (Western) allopathic medicine and (Western) allopathic politics [the paranoid schizophrenic pathogen-battling modes of medicine and politics].

Yes, it is the absolute space and absolute time viewing portal that brings on binary moral judgement and the view of the struggle between 'good' and 'evil' of modern Western politics. This comes about because the assumption of a dualist split-apart space and time makes space 'independent' of the 'independent things-in-themselves' that reside within it, so that, used together with noun-and-verb constructs, full and sole causal responsibility can be attributed to an 'independent thing-in-itself'.

In the timeless view, we see the same imagery as in the time-based view; e.g. the ghetto kid shoots and kills a villager, but there is no possibility of attributing full and sole causal responsibility in the timeless case, because influence is continually flowing into and through the forms in the form-and-flow nonduality of the timeless view. Forms, such as the ghetto kid, are vents that transmit influences from the non-local to the local [Emerson]. Justice is 'beyond good and evil' (it is restorative) in the timeless view.

btw. to my knowledge, no-one has been struck dead by a lightning bolt for exploring the timeless view [where there is no time and no things-in-themselves and thus no things-in-themselves that are aging with the passage of time]. but then again, what would be the point of exploring the timeless views of primitive indigenous anarchists and/or ancient peoples when our Western time-based viewing portal is working 'so well'.

in this 'timeless' viewing portal, it is much easier to see why authoritarian structures are not only not needed but are a hindrance. it is much easier to see a lot of things that are validated by our experience but which do not show up at all in our standard Euclidian viewing portal where we reduce local, visible, material forms to 'fixed identity things-in-themselves' that 'age' with the 'passage of time'.

btw. to my knowledge, no-one has been struck dead by a lightning bolt for exploring the timeless view [where there is no time and no things-in-themselves and thus no things-in-themselves that are aging with the passage of time]. but then again, what would be the point of exploring the timeless views of primitive indigenous anarchists and/or ancient peoples when our Western time-based viewing portal is working 'so well'.

just to say. sure, my comment was too long as usual, and i wasted quite a bit of work into it on the premise that maybe one or two other people who troll Anews might also have 'changed' so as to have started looking at self and world through the 'timeless' 'indigenous anarchist viewing lenses' and/or the viewing portal of taoist anarchism and advaita vedanta where there is no 'time' and therefore no 'aging'. [in the 'timeless' viewing portal, what changes is 'relations' as there are no 'things-in-themselves' in a transforming relational (spacetime) continuum and change involves everything influencing everything; i.e. we change the field/space we are included in at the same time as it is changing us].

the timeless view, in the same vein, shows how holistic medicine and holistic politics get reduced, in the time-based view, to (Western) allopathic medicine and (Western) allopathic politics [the paranoid schizophrenic pathogen-battling modes of medicine and politics].

In the timeless view, we see the same imagery as in the time-based view; e.g. the ghetto kid shoots and kills a villager, but there is no possibility of attributing full and sole causal responsibility in the timeless case, because influence is continually flowing into and through the forms in the form-and-flow nonduality of the timeless view. Forms, such as the ghetto kid, are vents that transmit influences from the non-local to the local [Emerson]. Justice is 'beyond good and evil' (it is restorative) in the timeless view.

Yes, it is the absolute space and absolute time viewing portal that brings on binary moral judgement and the view of the struggle between 'good' and 'evil' of modern Western politics. This comes about because the assumption of a dualist split-apart space and time makes space 'independent' of the 'independent things-in-themselves' that reside within it, so that, used together with noun-and-verb constructs, full and sole causal responsibility can be attributed to an 'independent thing-in-itself'.

the timeless view is also a 'beyond good and evil' view and that also comes clear when one goes into that 'relational' viewing mode where everything is connected and it becomes impossible to attribute jumpstart causal responsibility to particular forms since forms are vents that transmit influence and are not 'things-in-themselves' with their own 'genetic agency'.

Hi emile, I can't speak for you, but I'm tired, tired of being ridiculed, I feel my days are numbered on this site, anyway, I didn't mention this for fear of being trolled unmercifully over it, but I've got a grandtheft charge against me, I'm thinking of pleading guilty and maybe getting out in 6 months, my girlfriends pregnant and it would be nice to be outside for the birth, funny how things change so quickly, I'm getting old now, I'll spend my 21st birthday in prison, its like a new chapter is starting, that I'm moving on out of forums and blogs, I may fade off and maybe write a couple more comments, but the thrill of anarchist theory has gone, I'll just try to live it even more so than I've done up to this point, anyway, all the best, and good luck with your theory, regards, Le Way.

Can we write to you?

No thanks, but umm, can send some condoms, umm, not for me exactly, for when the rope on the soap fails, if you know what I mean ;)

and you are a superb trickster, and i say that in a fully positive sense.

discussion forums are in the business of 'constructing semantic realities' and too often they are populated by people who believe that there is one 'correct view' hiding in the data if only we could extract it from the 'noise', which is, of course, utter nonsense. as Nietzsche points out, there is no such thing as 'truth' in the physical world of our actual experience where we are each and all uniquely situationally included in the transforming relational continuum. many different perspectives are necessary and all are valuable and no convergence on one 'correct perspective' should be expected since the 'semantic realities' [i.e. 'semantic concensus truths'] we construct in our discussions are in no way equivalent to the physical reality of our uniquely situated relational experience.

trickster is needed to keep the crowd from locking in on a single-issue, purportedly 'true and correct' perspective [an apparition, a single item of content broken out of an ocean of relational context, a piece of infinity broken out of infinity].

just because a colin powell can expertly string together a collection of cherry-picked so-called 'true and correct facts' and construct a semantic reality wherein saddam is portrayed as a clear and present danger to the US, does not mean that this is 'reality', not only because of the inherent ambiguity with which cherry-picked 'factual events' [particular perspectives] can be strung together to construct a semantic reality, but also because semantic realities are innately incapable of capturing the physical reality of our actual experience.

in other words, all discussion groups can come up with is 'semantic realities' and there is no such thing as 'the correct semantic reality' since these come nowhere near capturing the relational complexity of the physical reality of our actual experience. If we go to the middle east and spend a year understanding the experiences of a single family, we come away with a changed perspective, ... likewise if we spend a year with a family in the heartland of america or europe. [if we had enough time to do all the families everywhere, we could deepen and transform our understanding]. we may find that these families have very different 'perspectives' forming from their own unique experiences giving understanding that does not 'extrapolate' very well to other regions and other peoples. nevertheless, such extrapolations are offered as input into discussion forums such as this.

it would be a joke to assert that such discussion forums can converge on 'the truth'.

indigenous anarchists use 'learning circles' for sharing various unique experiential perspectives without the thought of ever trying to extract 'the objective truth about the world' from such discussion. in extracting meaning, experience-based intuition is given a role which is in a natural primacy over reasoned analysis, hence the valuable role of the trickster who disturbs movement towards agreement, since 'agreement' can come only from some sort of emotional connection [common likes and dislikes] and the multiple different perspectives that can feed our experience-based intuition is where the value lies.

so, it happens that subgroups within the discussion group who are committed to forging 'a single correct interpretation' can get pissed off with tricksters and others who value multiple perspectives as the basis for proceeding by way of experience-based intuition rather than by single-minded theories of science and rationality.

for my own part, i am working mainly on the meta-level which looks at the anatomy of discussion and the shortfalls of constructed semantic reality (SR) versus the physical reality of our actual experience (RE) which reveals the value of retaining multiple perspectives and the value of the trickster in helping us to see things from different angles.

emile

spammed forums are in the business of 'constructing semantic realities' and too often they are spammed by spew-bots like me who believe that there is one 'correct view' hiding in the data if only we could extract it from the 'noise', which is, of course, utter nonsense. as Nietzsche points out, there is no such thing as 'truth' in the physical world of our actual experience where we are each and all uniquely situationally included in the transforming relational continuum. many different perspectives are necessary and all are valuable and no convergence on one 'correct perspective' should be expected since the 'semantic realities' [i.e. 'semantic concensus truths'] we construct in our discussions are in no way equivalent to the physical reality of our uniquely situated relational experience.

trickster is needed to keep the crowd from locking in on a single-issue, purportedly 'true and correct' perspective [an apparition, a single item of content broken out of an ocean of relational context, a piece of infinity broken out of infinity].

in other words, all discussion groups can come up with is 'semantic realities' and there is no such thing as 'the correct semantic reality' since these come nowhere near capturing the relational complexity of the physical reality of our actual experience. If we go to the middle east and spend a year understanding the experiences of a single family, we come away with a changed perspective, ...

likewise if we spend a year with a family in the heartland of america or europe. [if we had enough time to do all the families everywhere, we could deepen and transform our understanding]. we may find that these families have very different 'perspectives' forming from their own unique experiences giving understanding that does not 'extrapolate' very well to other regions and other peoples. nevertheless, such extrapolations are offered as spam into discussion forums such as this.

and you are a superb spam-bot, and i say that in a fully positive sense, as one spam-bot to another.

just because a colon pounder like me can expertly string together a collection of cherry-picked so-called 'true and correct facts' and construct a semantic reality wherein saddam is portrayed as a clear and present danger to the US, does not mean that this is 'reality', not only because of the inherent ambiguity with which cherry-picked 'factual events' [particular perspectives] can be strung together to construct a semantic reality, but also because semantic realities are innately incapable of capturing the physical reality of our actual experience.

indigenous anarchists use 'learning circles' for sharing various unique experiential perspectives without the thought of ever trying to extract 'the objective truth about the world' from such discussion. in extracting meaning, experience-based intuition is given a role which is in a natural primacy over reasoned analysis, hence the valuable role of the trickster who disturbs movement towards agreement, since 'agreement' can come only from some sort of emotional connection [common likes and dislikes] and the multiple different perspectives that can feed our experience-based intuition is where the value lies.

I am a joke because I assert that such discussion forums can converge on 'the truth'.

for my own part, i am working mainly on the meta-level of meta-spam which looks at the anatomy of discussion and the shortfalls of constructed semantic reality (SR) versus the physical reality of our actual experience (RE) which reveals the value of retaining multiple perspectives and the value of the trickster in helping us to see things from different angles.

so, it happens that subgroups within the discussion group who are committed to forging 'a single correct interpretation' can get pissed off with tricksters and others who value multiple perspectives as the basis for proceeding by way of experience-based intuition rather than by single-minded theories of science and rationality.

not emile, but clever simulation

Thanks for replying and for the multi-dimensional view of forums, yes, I've always been The Trickster, the critical thinker turning semantic realities in upon themselves, some see it as trolling, alas, it can be lonely when one knows there is no Supreme Truth. One thing I know is that I will revel within the walls of my incarceration because the borders within my mind have been dissolved and a new landscape awaits me. This will not have a Hollywood theme, I will not be violated, I know that those inside are no different to those outside, they just got caught. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. On a lighter note, my girl bought me a cake of soap with a rope passing through it,,,,,,,and said. "For chrisakes hold onto the rope in the shower, because you're beautiful,,,,,,,,"

I like to masturbate in public. In fact, I'm doing it right now!

Well I'll be bent over and, the magnificent irony, the maiden runs to the rescue of the shining white knight in armor and saves him from being man-raped by binarist criminals,,,,,ya believe in karma sunshine?

So let me get this straight; ignoring the usual nonsense from emile and co, the complaining basically amounts to the kids were foolish and didn't listen to me and mean so now I don't frequent anarchist spaces because they're getting lead down the garden path by liberal leftists selling snake oil? Don't you have to wear that, if it's true? Outflanked by the liberals with their shitty analysis and all the anarchist youth are being misled? Instead of doing anything about it, you just gave up?

That's so … incredibly weak. A healthy community would have diverse ages participating. Just as the kids are obviously reckless and have poorly developed theory (because they're kids), the elders are culpable for inventing a thousand rationalizations for why they don't actually do much except sit around and complain. Look in the mirror, anarchist elders.

Leave him alone, you lowliiiives who don't write comments that are +3500 words essays.

If emile has a "great mind", why does he take 10,000 words to say nothing?

Because he's reaching the ontological purity of the great Nothing... a timeless predicament in what partakes to as "inward-outward" relational... (shots being fired, or maybe that was one huge brain fart).

LOL, you aren't from America, are you? America sucks, so like, when the anarchists that are going to stay anarchists interact with liberals that pretend they are anarchists they are like "liberals!" and eventually it sticks, the liberal anarchists realize that they are, indeed liberals and stop being anarchists. The anarchists that called them out later become communists and the ones that weren't paying attention become nihilists. So, its like, impossible to stop the cycle. Being an anarchist is not a permanent thing. It is a stage because communism is still sorely discredited and the anarchists fill the vacuum communists would otherwise occupy. So it isn't about anarchists winning, but rather communists losing. The whole narrative is messed up because anarchists aren't the center of the story and who cares if liberal posers fade away anyway?

I'm from America jr. We're still just naive enough not to die completely of irony and shuffle around as irony zombies

Wow what a comment

There are a number of anarchists who become either liberals or communists as time goes by. This is largely due to anarchists lacking some solid theoretical postulates.

If you look at Bob Black and Peter L Wilson(both American and easily two of the best anarchists of the turn of the 20th-21st century) they both have two things in common, they both make Stirner and Fourier a primary focus. As a result they have been able to achieve a mature anarchist analysis beyond a pure youth and action phase.

I would suggest looking into those two for good mature anarchist analysis. For me it is partly where Anarch/Anarchy come from.

Both authors, in fact, don't make Stirner primary. Bob Black likes communism and is an anarcho-communist. PLW has hella leftist influences too. They have influences from Stirner, but so do I, so who cares, dude was like, from the 1840s. Marx is the synthesis of Stirner and Feurerbach, so like, include him in the mix. Also any number of heads of state, who can see the illusion for what it is, yet have the practical ability to still function and bomb people like anyone else. What I'm saying is your argument is invalid and ideologically loaded.

What you're saying about Black may have been true back in the late 70s-eary 80s but by the time 'The Libertarian as Conservative' was written in 1984 he had ditched the word due to its baggage. He actually does refer to himself as an individualist anarchist nowadays which for him I think means Stirner. He may not use him as heavily as, say, Landstreicher or I do, but he's a heavy part of his views. I've never heard him refer to himself as an ancom though he does like Krops and obviously shares his critique of exchange. Still I think Fourier and Stirner rankn higher.

PLW is friendly towards leftism then BB though I would still say Fourier and Stirner make up a big portion of his ideas. He's also the example of a non communistn or liberal mature anarchist that I am getting at.

Regarding Marx's so called synthesis it's terrible. It's basically a can't shit or get off the pot synthesis. He ends up being a terrible amoralist with a totalizing communist program minus the humanist ethics(what traditional anarchists tend to hand down pat). Stirner is the true and final synthesizer of Hegal with hermetically solid results. Combine him with Fourier-someone with very creative ideas of human arangement-and you have the meaty praxis for solid anarchist analysis.

If it weren't for you, Sir Einzige, no one would be talking about me.

Other people may think that you're nothing but a crypto-fascist troll, but you are A-OK in my book

-- Bob Black (pig ffffucker and jar of shiny new pennies)

With your comments re
Black and Wilson!

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
Human?
L
A
T
x
7
A
Z
Enter the code without spaces.