posted December 18, 2009 09:52 AM         

"I'm sorry but I don't want to be an Emperor - that's not my business - I don't want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible, Jew, gentile, black man, white. We all want to help one another, human beings are like that.
We all want to live by each other's happiness, not by each other's misery. We don't want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone and the earth is rich and can provide for everyone.
The way of life can be free and beautiful.
But we have lost the way.
Greed has poisoned men's souls -
has barricaded the world with hate;
has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.
We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in:
machinery that gives abundance has left us in want.
Our knowledge has made us cynical,
our cleverness hard and unkind.
We think too much and feel too little:
More than machinery we need humanity;
More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness.
Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.
The airplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me I say "Do not despair".
The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress: the hate of men will pass and dictators die and the power they took from the people , will return to the people and so long as men die [now] liberty will never perish. . .
Soldiers - don't give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you - who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel, who drill you, diet you, treat you as cattle, as cannon fodder.
Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines. You are not cattle. You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don't hate - only the unloved hate. Only the unloved and the unnatural. Soldiers - don't fight for slavery, fight for liberty.
In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written
"the kingdom of God is within man "
- not one man, nor a group of men - but in all men - in you, the people.
You the people have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness. You the people have the power to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let's use that power - let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfil their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfil that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men's happiness.
Soldiers - in the name of democracy, let us all unite!
. . .
Look up! Look up! The clouds are lifting - the sun is breaking through. We are coming out of the darkness into the light. We are coming into a new world. A kind new world where men will rise above their hate and brutality.
The soul of man has been given wings - and at last he is beginning to fly. He is flying into the rainbow - into the light of hope - into the future, that glorious future that belongs to you, to me and to all of us. Look up. Look up."

posted December 18, 2009 10:00 AM         

quote:

---

Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men,
machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts.

---

Oh, dear.

quote:

---

You are not machines. You are not cattle.
You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts.

---

posted December 18, 2009 10:16 AM         

So I've experienced a lot of situations and I can say I incline towards neither one nor the other - except when the need arises.

But another of the reasons why I've been able to do exactly what I want is because I have avoided having kids, getting mortgages etc... there was no way I ever wanted to get tangled up with all that. To my mind it doesn't make life easier. So I forgo having lots of family around for having friends, social life, time to do what I want more or less when I want.

But discipline of a sort is good too. And I think you're wrong about the goals, Valus. Some sort of goals need to be set to achieve some sort of standing in life. I actually think that if no goals are set that is a reflection of the person not valuing themselves very much - don't get angry with me here, that's just what I think. Now I know as well as you that ultimately in the big scheme of things it probably won't matter a scrap, and objectively speaking I am probably no more successful than you are. But we're all vain and every single one of us wants to succeed, the trick is finding the right way for whatever it is we are involved in. Gifts should be used to reach the largest number of people that one possibly can. Starting from the ground up.

My Scorpio ex was dreadfully bothered about the fact he never seemed to get anywhere with his music and the problem was he was just unmotivated. Curiously he does seem to be motivated now and the funny thing is - through talks and all that - I motivated him. It literally came to the point where we had to split up to get him motivated - times changed and things changed between us and all that - but it seems that at least he is doing something now - I hope!!

posted December 18, 2009 10:20 AM         

Magical moment when horses save oak trees Director Mark Carroll and produced by http://www.undercurrents.org http://www.undercurrents.org

What I'm trying to say is that work in itself is fine but I do not want to contribute toward the destruction of nature to create more things that we do not need, that are keeping us distracted and miserable. It is a terrible myth that we need to be working the hours that we are supposed to. We have been forced into such a system by those who control the financial structures, forced into slaving away to have the simple necesseties such as a roof and warmth (inventors of free energy always end up in mysterious deaths....coincidence?).

Humanity can never be happy until it begins to understand a reverance toward all life. To stop exploiting it and enslaving our fellow species as well as fellow man. Maybe it is true that the macrocosm reflects the microcosm....if that is the case then we must start with ourselves......

posted December 18, 2009 10:23 AM         

May I ask why you're not interested in a wider audience than Lindaland?

posted December 18, 2009 10:51 AM         

quote:

---

I admit, I've criticized
and generalized the average person,
without also indicating his good points,
and the exceptions to these rules,
in order to bring attention to another
type, whose contributions are
overwhelmingly underrated.

---

Who are these people? Who are the people that are overrated? The worker ants? By who? For doing what? Providing for themselves and their families the only way they can at that time? Is there something wrong with them in their hearts that they don’t think about what they are doing in quite the same visceral way that others do? Who praises these people? The insurance companies that take their money? The government that takes their cut? The wealthy CEO’s that make money off the industries they work for that is in vast disproportion to what they get paid? I think wheels had a good point when she said that they are probably too tired and busy just surviving to give much more thought to it than that. And what, what exactly is this “thought” they should be having? This “other world” they should be giving their “inferior” mind over to? And in the same instance, how does anyone know they are not?

quote:

---

I'm glad everyone is using this occassion
to bolster their own value systems.

---

quote:

---

Thanks, listenstotrees.
Yin and Gypsee, thank you.
I think you hear me.

---

posted December 18, 2009 01:33 PM         

Do you think my energies are best utilized
in explaining myself to people who make assumptions,
and are determined to see me in a negative light?

Am I the only one put on trial,
or the only one accepting the challenge?

quote:

---

What is the right way? Honestly, I’m curious. Is there a “right” way? Who decides this? If you want to answer “God”, than point me to the place where God says that working for survival is a bad thing. Point me towards a solid answer as to who gets to “judge” what work is worthwhile or “holier” than other types of work or those that perform it.

---

Where do I begin?
I'm not even sure what you think I'm saying,
so how can I hope to correct it all?
I have said, repeatedly, that it's subjective;
that there is no right way, or, at least,
no way to objectively determine the right way,
and that we, each of us, individually,
have a responsibility to use our own gifts
in order to determine what, for us,
constitutes the right way.

I have said that we need to honor our own gifts,
and develop a worldview which honors our gifts,
ideally, without devaluing other's gifts.
I've said that this is extremely difficult,
and that it is almost inevitable that
the worldview of an artist will give less
importance to the work of scientists,
than to the work of artists.

This sort of thing interests me greatly.

And I have proposed my own vision of the world,
not with the intention of replacing other visions,
but with the awareness that my view may be
no more or less objective than any other,
and that it is mine only because it accords
with my own perspective and gifts.

It is useful and natural to me,
as another view would be to another man.

I'm not suggesting there's a way,
or that I myself can foresee a way,
to avoid conflict between our views, --
though I think it's best, where possible,
to mind our own business, and not try
too hard to make others see as we do,
or insist that our view is the "right" one.
We can and should share our points of view,
but, without compromising our principles,
tolerate and understand others' views, too.

I've tried my best to exhibit my views,
from as many sides as possible, and with
a knowing nod to their ultimate subjectivity.
Where possible, I try to sympathize with views
which contradict my own, but it is not my
business to make their case for them.

Ghani, I see the value in your arguments.
And I would make a number of them myself,
if they served my purposes, rather than
contradicted the way to my own destiny.
As it is, I must make the arguments that
have some use for myself, on my journey.
I see the truth in all things, but I can
only make use of truths which belong to me.

Manifesting their art or vision
in some tangible, distributable form
is very important to some artists.
For me, I'm mostly just interested in
the process of discovery and creation,
which happens in the mind and on the page.
I share my discoveries with people around me,
and I observe, analyze, and respond to their reactions.
So far, this has been sufficient for my purposes.

As for reaching a larger audience,
I just have a firm, intuitive conviction
that it will happen without my urging
when the time is right.

In the meantime,
I'll sweep up misunderstandings
and explain myself ad infinitum, lol.

quote:

---

Who are these people?

---

Often, they're the ones you call lazy,
or delusional, when they rebel against
a system you can't stand yourself.

They're also the ones who cannot speak
for themselves, because they've gone crazy.
Square pegs born into a circular world, and
expected from birth to be what they are not.

They are those same "everymen",
but with some difference or sensitivity,
for which "the world" has no understanding,
no sympathy, and no provisions.

See, most of us are forced
into situations that test us,
and expected to recognize obligations,
institutions, and authorities that we
had no part in creating.

But some people,
though not comfortably,
fit, while others don't.

And some people fit,
or make themselves fit,
by accepting those expectations.
Sometimes even making them their own,
and, without thinking, agreeing
to the superstitions responsible
for creating those expectations.

They made themselves fit,
when they were forced to fit,
and now they expect you to fit.
They don't believe you when you
tell them that you can't fit,
not even by squeezing yourself.

They don't know what it means
to be a person on the margins;
homeless, parasitic,
institutionalized.

But those people on the margins
often know what the everyman faces.
They absorb his "quiet desperation",
and reflect it in the chaos in their cries,
from the depths of their madness; from the
mad heart of the collective unconscious.

They are the recepticles,
the scapegoats and sacrificial lambs,
who hanged themselves on our loose threads;
who couldnt make sense of our nonsense;
and cared for what we couldn't save.

quote:

---

Who are the people that are overrated?

---

Just because some are underrated
doesn't mean anyone is overrated.

We can have diversity,
without competition.

quote:

---

The worker ants? By who? For doing what? Providing for themselves and their families the only way they can at that time? Is there something wrong with them in their hearts that they don’t think about what they are doing in quite the same visceral way that others do? Who praises these people? The insurance companies that take their money? The government that takes their cut? The wealthy CEO’s that make money off the industries they work for that is in vast disproportion to what they get paid? I think wheels had a good point when she said that they are probably too tired and busy just surviving to give much more thought to it than that. And what, what exactly is this “thought” they should be having? This “other world” they should be giving their “inferior” mind over to? And in the same instance, how does anyone know they are not?

---

I don't know anything, Ghani, but I base my opinions on what seems probable, from my own observations. I see a strong current of anti-intellectualism in the world, and especially America. I see "the average joe" being praised all over the place, on every channel, in every show. You don't see it? Practically every hero is a put-upon everyman who must rise to the occassion. Sometimes a genius is there, -- generally portrayed as a nervous egghead, for comic relief. Or an artist shows up, and he's made to look like a foolish and impractical screw-up. Along comes Joe with his "meat and potatoes" brand of Zen. He cuts through all the heady bullsh!t and does what needs to be done. LOL This stuff is so cliche, most people don't see the stereotypes as stereotypes anymore. It's all seen through the eyes of Joe Shmoe. It's on every channel. Every Billboard. Every ad. Either Joe Shmoe is being praised, or its some super-wealthy James Bond type of guy. How about the antihero? The super-sensitive, brainy guy with manic depression? Where's the pacifist? The anarchist? The guy who says that people should adopt, or not have kids, if they can help it? The psychonaut? The guy who feels just a little too deeply, and thinks just a little too far outside the box, and ends up having to play the role of a lifetime, in order to convince pychiatrists that he shouldnt be medicated and locked up? Where's that movie? Where's that show? Not since One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest have we seen anything close, and Nicholson's character was still very much a "regular guy"; that was sort of the point of the film.

If the things I'm thinking of are part of the common experience, why dont' we hear more about them? And why, when I bring them up, do people act so indignant and surprised?

quote:

---

I hope you are putting yourself into that “everyone”, V. From what you have said, you must be.

---

Do you think I missed that???
Yes, of course, I include myself in that.
The question is, do you?!?!

quote:

---

I think everyone else “hears” you. Is it that they don’t agree with you 100% that would make you say this?

---

Are you serious?
Do you have any idea
how biased you are?

Why dont you ask T why she
only gave hugs and kisses
to you and wheels.

Did I call her out for that?
No, I didn't.
I got it.

Just as I get it when
she shares a common vision
with certain people,
and not with others.

We warmly acknowledge the people
with whom we are closer to agreement
and with whom we feel rapport.

We feel "heard" by them
when they agree with us,
or seem to understand.

That's the most natural thing.

It's sharing love and connection.

Why twist it into something dark?

posted December 18, 2009 01:57 PM         

Valus, I love you. Most of your arguments are my arguments. I have come to see things through your eyes for which I have nothing but appreciation for.

I see everybody else's points also - some I agree with more, some - less, some - not at all.

Oh yeah, before anybody throws bias in my face - I get it. I am biased. So what? Thinking for oneself when oneself has enough brains to do that independently is not that hard. Speaking up is harder. Finding like-minded people is the hardest.

posted December 18, 2009 02:04 PM         

I never understood that bias argument.
They think you only agree with me
because you're in a relationship with me.
But, doesnt it make far more sense to
suppose that we're in a relationship
because we're in agreement?

Nietzsche was right:
People are always mistaking the cause for the effect.

-------------------

"When we chatter for the sake of chatting, I make silly remarks or stupid replies, unworthy of a child; or, ruder and clumsier still, I lapse into obdurate silence. I have a pensive turn that withdraws me into myself, and... a monumental and childish ignorance of many ordinary things. My difficult nature has therefore rendered me rather particular in my association with men. I have to sift my company, and am unfit for general society."

"There ought to be more strength in the bearer than weight in the burden. Knowledge is a thing of great weight... it can serve none but strong natures, and these are rare."

posted December 18, 2009 02:23 PM         

quote:

---

But, doesnt it make far more sense to
suppose that we're in a relationship
because we're in agreement?

---

posted December 18, 2009 02:58 PM         

quote:

---

For one thing, you believe in free will. And not just free will, but absolute free will, if I'm not mistaken. So, for you, criticism can't be distinguished from blame

---

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted December 18, 2009 09:51 PM         

quote:

---

Do you think my energies are best utilized
in explaining myself to people who make assumptions,
and are determined to see me in a negative light?

---

If you are referring to me as "people who make assumption and are determined to see me in a negative light", I'd like to ask you where you get that from. I am not making assumptions about you, Valus. I am questing after answers from a poster I have been reading for over 6 years. You don't assume anything about their intentions at that point, it becomes a second nature of what to expect. And I am certainly not trying to see you negatively, I always let you know when I agree with you, disagree with you, and at which point I am questioning your actual meaning, or the way you go about trying to make your point. We've been down this road before in threads, I don't believe it's unreasonable for me to find the good in what you are saying yet still have questions on your delivery.

quote:

---

Am I the only one put on trial,
or the only one accepting the challenge?

---

Of course not. There really is no trial, this is more of an educational or instructional exercise. I asked things that popped into my mind in reading your words, so your input will be best, but anyone is always welcome to share their interpretations.

quote:

---

I have said, repeatedly, that it's subjective;
that there is no right way, or, at least,
no way to objectively determine the right way,
and that we, each of us, individually,
have a responsibility to use our own gifts
in order to determine what, for us,
constitutes the right way.

---

Then why continue to argue your points? I'm sorry if I'm failing to see where you actually say "so that's my point, oh, that's your point, okay, cool"... unless you mean here:

quote:

---

We all agree that sh-t is f---ed up,
but some of us can cope with it,
or exploit it, better than others.

---

because there seems to be a "last word" issue with you and a passive agressive hint that the issue is not settled for the other person, you've just made them think it is. My brother has the same thing. Also a Scorpio, and after a round with him, I'm always left feeling like I'm the bad guy or as if I've done something wrong. He's good, much the same way you are. I'm still unsure if it's a conscious or unconscious effort. Maybe I'm totally projecting and looking into it too much, but I know I'm not the only person who notices things like this and you already know I will continue to call you on them.

quote:

---

Why twist it into something dark?

---

quote:

---

They don't know what it means
to be a person on the margins;
homeless, parasitic,
institutionalized

---

I feel that maybe the "everyman" is not getting enough credit. Again, as you know by now, I am an extreme idealist that really does try to see the good in everyone and wishes with all her heart that everyone would find common ground and get along. (sometimes it may not seem like it when I get on you over every little thing, but I am illustrating a point, standing up for the underdog to your "intellectual antihero") It seems as though you are suggesting that only the "pacifist antihero" types understand what is in your own view "real". I have personally had some of the most meaningful conversations and stark realizations with people I did not expect. I admit to being a bit of an intellectual snob at times, I live in my damn head so much I'm surprised I don't charge myself rent. I have also had some of the most draining, boring waste of time conversations with people I thought I could learn from because I looked up to things they had said or the way I percieved them to be by the way they presented themselves. Like I said before, you never know what's beneath the surface. Just because the surface wears a grease smeared jumpsuit doesn't mean they know motors and nothing else, and just because they have a "Harvard" plaque on their wall doesn't mean they have earned more respect from me either just for having it. There is a beauty to be found in everyone. I don't doubt that you know that, I can just not stress it enough. Everybody's got their something.

quote:

---

Do you think I missed that???
Yes, of course, I include myself in that.
The question is, do you?!?!

---

Yes. Obviously. I am getting down to things on a personal level which would be one sure fire way to tell that I am displaying my own personal value system. I don't mind it being picked at. I can take it because I know a lot about who I am and I love that person. It took me a lot to forgive myself on many accounts (which you do know about) and to finally be able to say that. I am a self-deprecating fool like many, but I am trying, desperately at times, to get over myself and face me, naked and full frontal, and accept what I see. I felt very unworthy of love for a long time. Even after my daughter was born I thought "why would she choose me? I do not deserve this gift!!" But I know now, she's not a gift for me. I am not a gift for her. She is a person, as all other living humans are, and if I am entrusted with her well being and happiness, I damn sure am going to give it my all to make her life the very best that it can be. As she deserves love, so do all other creatures deserve love. She will be taught the same and if I am lucky enough, she will practice unconditional love, compassion, kindness and have a trust in her heart and bear her truth on her sleeve.

(Sorry if I got off topic, I tend to ramble when I talk about my daughter. It is my passion, after all, to be a mother. Finally, I see!)

quote:

---

Ghani, I see the value in your arguments.
And I would make a number of them myself,
if they served my purposes, rather than
contradicted the way to my own destiny.
As it is, I must make the arguments that
have some use for myself, on my journey.
I see the truth in all things, but I can
only make use of truths which belong to me.

---

I have already agreed with the ultimate intent of this thread. I completely agree that in the world as we know it, things have "gotten away from us" and we are so far in one direction of competition, advancement and control (be it by government or fear, sometimes one and the same) that it may take lightyears to make sense of the situation and try to repair it. This is serious decoding and recoding you are suggesting, if you will. A complete upheaveal of what we now know into what we once understood and will (i do believe) will know again. This will take generations. This will take diligence and patience. I am a firm believer in lists. Yeah, anal retentive and regimented, but in the chaos that is life, lists to me make sense. You started this thought, lets make it roll. Where to begin? What steps should be taken besides riling up a few LL posters in order to make a real change and proceed towards a real difference?

There you see the beauty of the dreamers, and the DOERS.

posted December 18, 2009 11:03 PM         

as in the assumption that being on the fringe means you have to be at the mercy of those NOT on the fringe, the above quote strikes me as self-justification pure and simple.

MOST of the great poets had JOBS - at least until enough of their poetry sold to make THAT their job.

shakespeare, for a start. da vinci and most of the renaissance geniuses were WORKERS. that they rose above the crowd was due to AMBITION and HARD WORK and a lot of DESIRE to succeed. yet they were also fringe-dwellers, by virtue of their vision and talent. they answered to the princes and the church and they got PAID to do the work they did. if they were REALLY AMBITIOUS they also had their OWN stuff on the side.

artists and poets making a living at same are a fairly recent phenomenon in history, unless they were lucky enough to find a patron whose wishes they could fulfill.

MOST of the people i know are fringe dwellers. and almost every one has a home they pay rent or even mortgage on, food, appliances, etc. they don't necessarily answer to a slavemaster, but they have found a way to make their work support them and their families too.

housework is holy. so is daily work, impeccability, responsibility. and if it weren't for the way society is set up now, with jobs people could go to in return for a certain amount of daily bread, then the luxury of NOT working would be basically kaput! who is going to feed the one guy who lets everyone else do the farming, foraging, hunting, cooking, etc?

posted December 20, 2009 01:02 AM         

I think over fifty percent of the people here are quite aware that we are in something of a feudal system where there are "kings" and then "lords and ladies" and then the lowly "serfs". I think what continue to be said is that those who enjoy the benefits of the lord and lady class or "above" economically should use their "status" to uplift others... or at least refrain from looking at the "serfs" with disdain or kicking crap on them when they walk by.

Unfortunately, the entire point/opinion of this thread was that ALL who participate in "the system" are doing the world a disservice. I think Valus continues to try to expand on his idea of what "participating in the system" might be while others try to explain they already understand this, yet, as they have not yet met their Prince, they cannot escape this system and if they don't mop the palace floor, they will be beheaded and their children will suffer and starve. Many, from both the "serfs" and "nobility" describe the meaning and worthiness of their participation. In the average group of people who will do this, most are correct and some are deluded and some simply don't see why they should care at all about others... but most of the people at this site are among the group that truly does find meaning and worthiness in the parts they play in this earthly realm. Valus continues to say that he wants to address and wake up those who belong to the deluded and "doesn't care" group and he sees his part as being worthy and valuable while the members of that group do not see his part as worthy and valuable and instead try to stop him from speaking out against this great injustice. When people repeatedly act defensively or aggressively towards him (meaning over the years) he begins to think they are among those who are deluded or just don't care. He asks questions to provoke responses to see where people stand, but in the heat of debate he will often pick apart others' views rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt (which he is almost continually denied himself due to his arrogant and fiery demeanor, coupled with his Aquarian impulse to change the status quo with his Plutonic "at any cost" mentality... all of which I like, by the way). What remains is a battle of egos with some really good stuff mixed in from everyone, which creates a good exchange of ideas but also can create some hurt feelings.
That's how I see this anyway. I'm also not among those mentioned who have written to him in private to express how much I agree but cannot post my thoughts out of fear. I'm happy to express my thoughts. I've been working a lot of hours and spent a couple nights with some friends away from the computer.

posted December 20, 2009 10:37 AM         

rofl!

you are not so wise as you think you are if you see me this way! dude, I'm craaaaaaazy!

i've lost my mind. I'm not on the margin, I'm beyond it.

oh, btw, i'm not flattered by your assumption, too wise for it.

posted December 20, 2009 11:51 AM         

hmmmm hold the phone, pire

posted December 22, 2009 11:27 AM         

Thanks for clarifying.
I do understand your position,
as I understood it in the past,
but the contradictions threw me
(as they throw me whenever I try
to grasp my own position on this).
Particularly, I have difficulty
seeing where/why you disagreed with me,
or if you disagreed with me at all.
I can understand the reasoning
behind living as if you are free,
but don't you also hold others
accountable, as if they were free?
What is your take on the adab
concerning the accountability of others?

-------------------------------

katatonic,

"The historian looks backward.
In the end, he also believes backward."
- Friedrich Nietzsche

History is a rigged game. You can point to Shakespeare, or Goethe, or to anyone who has succeeded in making history, and see that they have had to conform to certain conventions, for the sake of achieving immortality, or even just to survive this life. What this argument makes clear, kat, is that a high degree of conformity was required of these people, and that, without having conformed as they did, we may never have heard the name Goethe, or Shakepeare, or Montaigne, etc. It does not, however, follow, that these qualities are necessary to genius, or that, had such worldy demands not been made, we would not have "Hamlet", or "Faust", etc. Sure, once such demands are made, they must be met, -- but what if they are not made in the first place? Perhaps we would have another Hamlet, or a better Faust? What your historical argument cannot elucidate, kat, are the many "Shakespeares" and "Goethes" whose names are not recorded, and who did not succeed in making history, because they could not, or did not wish to, meet the worldy demands placed on them. There are men and women whose thoughts and existences we may never know of, whom history has forgotten, and, yet, who were no less inspired with genius than Shakepeare or Goethe. These are the ones I am thinking of. The truly marginal. The lost Shakespeares. And, more than that, the lost Nietzsches.

Do you have any idea how rare and amazing Nietzsche was -- mainly because he had what it took to "conform", while yet being as Uranian (and Plutonian and Neptunian) as it is possible to be without being forgotten, dismissed, and overlooked. How many Nietzsches have there been, before or since, who did not have that talent or drive to conform, and who have, consequently, been forgotten? How many thinkers have been forgotten because they could not, or would not, dissimulate, and cater to the prejudices of their age? Who were too honest, too direct, and too ahead of their time, to meet the criterea society had set for them. Perhaps it's only because of our inability to recognize greatness, that we have expected, and demanded, great minds to conform to standards which we can all recognize.

Do you suppose Nietzsche would have been able to publish such revolutionary and nonconformist thoughts, had he not been an acredited professor at Basel? Who would have taken him seriously? Who would have had the eyes to recognize his greatness, without first seeing his degrees on the wall? Who would have had the balls to put their faith in him or his work? And who would have welcomed his Uranian insight, if he had not exercised an equally powerful Mercury; capable of translating those nonlinear thoughts, and making them intelligible to his contemporaries? The same may be said of Picasso, whose brilliance was not believed by many who had not first satisfied themselves that he could paint standard portraits (if he wanted to). They couldn't see his art as art until they had seen his more conventional stuff. They couldnt even open their minds to the possibility that here was something original, beautiful, and true.

What history suggests to me, kat, is that many of the most original, progressive, and groundbreaking artists and thinkers the world has known, died poor, hungry, and unknown to the world. For every Shakespeare you can cite, who payed his dues (or payed what was required of him by history), I imagine, there must be dozens more. Dozens, and maybe hundreds, who we are deprived of knowing; because society required that every man of thought meet the demands made on every man of action; and because the demands made on every man of action were already well beyond reason.

To the rest of your post: I think there are better ways to manage our resources, at this point in history. Don't get me wrong -- I'm sure I would have made a pretty good Native American shaman, and been enthusiastic to fulfill the responsibilities of smoking marijuana, eating mushrooms and peyote, performing healing rituals, and dispensing words of wisdom. I'd welcome a role that "rigidly" defined, which did not require of me more than I am disposed, by temperament, to give. Today, though, with a few simple, albeit visionary, alterations, we have within our power the ability to create a veritable Utopia on earth. The first step is to relax our procreative urge, and decrease, not increase, the earth's population. With this step alone, we could, within one or two generations, solve most of the world's major issues. Secondly, we need to alter our values, so that abundance is measured by the heart, and not the bank account. When this happens, and natural resources are no longer sequestered into privately held commodities, we can feed everyone relatively effortlessly. We can plant fruit trees, and all kinds of vegetables, all over the place. Imagine, if we had not been determined to set a price tag on the necessities of life, so freely given by the natural world, how many fruits and vegetables would be growing everywhere, instead of just weeds, trees, and grass! All we need is to see things like food, water, and shelter, as god-given rights, and not "luxuries". I honestly believe that, with a few visionary changes, we could create, fairly easily, a society where people are sheltered and well fed, and where "luxury" is defined by things that exceed, and do not include, our most basic human survival needs.

-----------------------------------

PA,

Everyone is your teacher,
and everyone is in your way.
Aren't they both equally true?
Sometimes, the ones who are most
like us, are right in our way.
And the ones who have the most
to teach us, are on a path that
utterly contradicts our own.
It's so difficult to know where
our lessons begin and end;
in a lifetime, or in eternity.
If you are in a History class,
and someone walks in teaching Math,
what do you make of that teaching?
It's not what you're focussing on,
but does that mean it's for you,
or not for you?? Hmmm...

-------------------------------------

pire,

I'm sorry if you felt insulted.
I only meant that I have not seen
your art or intellectual writing(s).
I'm pretty self-absorbed, so, maybe
I'm overlooking your contributions.
Please forgive me for that.

If you see yourself as a marginal type,
then pay no mind to me or my assumptions.
I think truly marginal types are rare,
so it's only on the basis of probabilities
that I sometimes make "working assumptions".
If you are a marginal type, please,
accept my apologies,
and my sympathies.

------------------------------------

Melody,

The thread was not at all
about what you thought.
Please, read the first post
without projecting any
assumptions onto its meaning.
You'll find it clear enough.
I'm not taking sides nearly
as rigidly as you think.
Please, also, read the
"to whomever it may concern"
part of this post (below).

---------------------------------

Ghani,

I value the Doers so much,
I leave it entirely in their hands
to find workable means of enacting
the solutions I have dreamed up.

-----------------------------------

An attempt to clarify,
to whomever it may concern:

Ultimately, it is very hard to
clarify my own notion of what seems
to constitute a marginal type.

In some respect,
I am arguing that the categories
provided by our society are not real,
and, so, there is really no such thing
as a marginal or a "standard" type.

As I see it, we are all disenfranchised,
and those of us who are most comfortable
are generally the most unconscious of the
ways in which we've been disenfranchised.

I don't exactly know how to make clear
what I seem to be seeing in the world.
In a way, I think, we are all marginal.
The categories that exist are obsolete,
and don't really fit any of us comfortably.

But I tend to think of people as "standard"
when they defend the system as it stands.

Though they may feel that it is unfair,
they pride themselves on making it work,
and look down on those who can't, or won't.

These are the ones who say "life is unfair",
but still think it's a game with legitimate
winners and losers. It's not. It's rigged.

And managing to stay "in the game" when
the game is rigged, for or against you,
is not really a point of pride.

This is what bothers me most
about those who I see as standard:
They agree that it's not fair,
and that the rules are rigged, but,
whenever they make those rigged rules
work in their favor, they congratulate
themselves, and look down on the "losers".

When the rules are rigged against them,
they curse the rules, but only until they
bring their lives into accord with them.
Then they make use of those same rules to
curse those who don't accord with them, lol!

They see how the rules are rigged
against them, and in favor of the rich,
but not how the rules are rigged for them,
and at the expense of the truly marginal;
of people who are even less worldly.

When it doesnt work for them,
they say, "its rigged", but
when it does work for them,
they call it "the real world".

Also, a person becomes marginal,
often, not on account of being born
into a society where they cannot fit,
but, by being subject to more specific
conditions within that society.

In other words, some are marginal
because they were in the wrong place
at the wrong time, and, so, have
found themselves on the margins.
And they are no different from most,
but maybe just a bit more unlucky.
If they are more understanding of how
a person ends up in the margins, then
it is mainly on account of their experience,
which disproved their faith in the system.
Conversely, there are many who support the
system as it is, only because it supports them.

Also, there are some who
exist within the system,
and make it work for them, but,
who identify with the marginal,
and do not see them as different.
They are grateful for whatever
allowed them to succeed, and they
never lose sight of the part which
chance, birth, and/or breeding have
played in bringing them success;
or in keeping them off the street.

If they've worked harder than most,
they're still mindful of their luck in
having been born with a practical bent
into a society where a practical bent
has been made fairly imperative.

Genius, talent, originality;
all these things are expendable,
and if you are born without them,
the world will still offer a place
for you, as long as you have the
practical will to work for it.

But if you are not born with a
practical will, you had better
be born wealthy, or be willing
to live a stigmatized life,
somewhere on the margins.

I guess, if you find my position
difficult to understand, it might
help to know that I consider
practicality no less god-given
than genius, or talent, or
anything else you can think of.

The difference is that practicality
is considered to be a product of will,
and something which it is perfectly
alright to require of every person.
Hence, if someone ends up in the margins
for lack of practicality, people often say,
"Well, it serves him right. He wouldnt work."

According to my view,
this is like placing a person
with no artistic talent into a
society where it's a requirement.
Then, when they end up in the gutter,
you look down on them for lacking talent,
and think that's just the place for them.

Do I expect anyone to understand
or agree with this position?

No, probably not.

However, if any of you
believe "free will" isn't literal,
but merely a matter of adab,
you might find such a view
worthy of consideration.