Are we now trying to change things in the wrong way? What could be the right way to change things?
By Ibrahim Turner
Millions demonstrated in the 1960's against the Vietnam War all around the world but more so in America. It eventually stopped the war in Vietnam but did it change the American psyche supported by the usual suspects in Europe and the Industrial Military complex? Did it stop the interference of the CIA 'Blackwater types' overthrowing governments with death squads in many Latin American countries and elsewhere since then? And now the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and soon to be in Iran? Where is it all leading? What is the real purpose behind all this? Is there a purpose other than greed and domination over weaker poorly defended countries by military and financial means under the (benign) care for people and the resources, by the World Bank and the IMF? What could be a higher purpose than that?
Written in 1973, what he saw coming - the predictions of this man are frighteningly accurate. And remember this was before the rise of the Neocons, before the 'Islamofacist axis of evil' doctrine pushed by them to 'pre-emptive war 'in seven countries outlined in their documents blatantly published for all to see. For the Neocons it has not panned out as they wished, with no throwing of bouquets of flowers greeting the 'coalition of the willing' in Iraq, (did anyone with common sense seriously believe that?) and no oil revenues from Iraq oil paying for the war as Wolfowitz cavalierly predicted.
Where do they go from here? The current propaganda is in full swing for an attack on Iran, with the same lies as when Saddam was supposed to be able to have WMDS and could ready his biological weapons in 45 minutes.
Extracts from "Needs of a New Age Community", J.G.Bennett, 1973.
The World Situation
It is highly improbable that the world will get through the next thirty years without some very dramatic events, particularly events to do with the working of our society. Our society is not adapted to withstand the strains that will come; it can only cope with changes that are slow. It is based on complex institutions such as those that deal with the production and distribution of goods. The institutions have very large bodies and very small brains, like the dinosaurs that are now long extinct. They work from a primitive instinct of self-preservation according to traditional patterns of behaviour and response. They do not work even with the intelligence of an individual human being. When inevitable shortage of necessities comes about they will not be able to adapt.
There are many people who have already lost confidence in institutions and the way of life they now dominate. Their first reaction was to put all their attention on what was wrong – all the stupidity and destructiveness – and we had that period in the 1960's, the period of political activism. People tried to stop the development of destructive weapons, to stop wars, to promote social justice and to combat racialism. This ended in a very wide disillusionment. People saw, without understanding it, that something worked to make things become their own opposite. They saw that the people who tried to work for peace played into the hands of those who created war; that those who tried to liberalize institutions played into the hands of the hard-liners and that those who worked for decentralization provided weapons for those who wanted to concentrate military or industrial power in the hands of the few, whether management or labour, or of whatever political ideology.
Now in the 1970's, there is already a different climate. People are tending to look for a way of life that ignores or even discards institutions. There are two important trends that are apparent in heavily industrialized countries such as Japan, Europe and North America: one is the tendency to group together in small communities, so that now there are tens of thousands all over the world; the other is to look for quick ways of transformation, of arriving at a new kind of life independent of the outer world forces (there are large scale spiritual movements which many millions of people are experimenting with).
In my view there will be a general disillusionment with all of this by the 1980's. That will be the time of the onset of panic. Visible loss of trust in the institutions could come about explosively if there were a sudden shortage of foodstuffs, and just a few years of bad harvest would be enough. But even without that there will be panics. This does not mean a time of revolution and sudden collapse. Governments and institutions will try to adapt to the changing climate of thought and feeling in the world. It will then become evident that what is needed is a change in attitude that today very few are able to accept; a change from the tendency of the last two or three thousands years to regard expansion as good in itself, to a different life attitude which even regards contractual concentrations as good in itself.
Such a change of attitude is so much against things as they are now that it will truly be a revolution. Every one of us in spite of what we think remains geared for all practical purposes, to expansion. There are very few of us who are really prepared to look for a way of life in which we would live with less instead of more. The lesson cannot be learned by common sense because people close their minds to it. It can only be learned by bitter experience. That bitter experience will come in the period of time from the 1980's to the early part of the next century. By then, either we shall have got through or we will have collapsed.
This period is the greatest opportunity that has existed for many thousands of years for the spiritual. Not for thousands of years has there been such a need for people who are able to work. The reason for this is that the transition from one system to another can only come through the third force. It cannot come from the passive majority or the active minority, from the governed or the power possessors.
If we talk of the role of the spiritual we must understand that this is not the usual perspective. Everyone, in some way or other, recognizes that we are in a moment of great transition; but for the most part the predictions made by people are entirely humanistic. People look at the human situation and what man can achieve. By and large, they ignore the defects of human nature and take it that man will behave fairly, if not very rationally, and will make use of his intelligence and creative powers to build a world in which the achievements of man's intelligence will play a dominating role. The picture is of man increasing his domination over the material world and of even achieving mastery over forces, which at present are too strong for him, such as the forces of disease and old age, to create a future that is secure for the human race. There is no regard for the consequences to the natural order and there is no attempt to answer, or even ask, the question; "What is it all for? What really will have been achieved by all this?"
The climate of thought of the last epoch has been based on the sacredness of every human life and the right of every human being to his own fulfilment. This has worked itself out and brought us to the point of saturation in the desire for more, to fulfil oneself by 'being' more even at the expense of others, or at the expense of nature.
What is in front of us is the need to change to a cosmic purpose, that every life serves for something, not just for its own satisfaction, and not for some otherworldly purpose either.
A well traveled and slightly worse for wear 72 year old Englishman; widower, several children and grandchildren and a penchant for wondering 'what is the hidden agenda' in almost everything I read. A keen interest in American culture (an oxymoron?) (JOKE!) and politics and an international world view, except where I haven't got first hand experience of the parts of the world I have not visited. Editor of some books about the Qur'an and Islam. Teacher of English in little known countries like Mauritania, Istanbul, Turkey and Morocco.
the people go on regardless of the wars and rumors of wars. The anti-war people of the sixties are still spreading their message of diversity's critical necessity. And now we understand better what Rachel Carson was trying to tell us. Now we know better the functional necessity of bio-diversity in an ecosystem.
Yes, there is an elite class that believes they can create reality by violence, and that they don't breathe the same air as the rest of us. But the people, the lowest common denominator, the salt of the earth, go on falling in love, having babies and raising children. Yeats said he had seen more men ruined by the drive to house in comfort a wife and children than by madness or alcohol.
The worst are full of passionate intensity, while the best lack all conviction.
--William Butler Yeats
So we will hear much about the war machine and the lust for goods. But Mary Jones' baby and Sally Smith's family and all the other quietly persisting families will have a more profound effect over time than politicians and priests. There are six billion people quietly living and avoiding trouble while all the hubbub about new cars and wars goes on all around them.
Take the profit out of war and there won't be any.
by
martinweiss (20 articles, 4 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 362 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 6:42:38 AM
If you look at Wolfie's comment - perhaps there is the explanation.
We have been medicated and bamboozled and outmanoevered at every level and every turn.
It has been said by greater minds that we can do nothing for ourselves, only work for the future generations. But where is that philosophy in today's thinking, we care nothing for the planet or future generations. We pollute the planet, we use up resources, we are always looking for the quick buck.
There is a Sufi saying, that most men (and women) die with plans still unfolding for the next twenty years, which will either be fulfilled by their sons, or their wealth will be squandered by their relatives. It means one should plan for one's death.
by
ibrahim turner (25 articles, 31 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 177 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 8:49:21 AM
Please see the book The End of Politics by Carl Boggs. I can't stand small community action projects funded by Corporations anymore. Small is not beautiful. Its lethal.
by
Nathaniel Heidenheimer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 45 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 9:55:51 AM
the rest of Bennett's book goes on to say that communities nearly always fail because they do not take account of human nature, power seeking individuals, greed etc. and he points the way that that might be avoided.
There were many 'experiments' in the 60's with communities like the hippies, new age and 'small is beutiful' - there was even a book with that title, where are they now?
It is a popular myth that the 'hippie' generation, after dropping out and turning on, went back into the system to change it from the inside.
Where are they now?
by
ibrahim turner (25 articles, 31 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 177 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 10:22:45 AM
Interestingly enough, a land cooperative near the city in which I live still survives from the sixties. Many of the children raised there excel in school and the arts, and even some in athletics. I know a few people that live there, and they would never choose to live somewhere else.
by
W.M.L. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 387 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 11:08:58 AM
Are they energy sufficient, or do they still have to rely on the mainstream utilities.
I read a book in the sixties, which was a limited edition and so I could only borrow it for a short time. It was produced by hippies detailing everything practical you need to know to survive outside of the system, even down to how to bury your dead, without corporation Undertakers, as well as all the usual stuff like windmills, solar, methane gas to burn as fuel from pigs ecrement in pits. It was mind boggling and I wish I had a copy now. Anyone still have that very thick book with large page format?
by
ibrahim turner (25 articles, 31 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 177 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 11:34:39 AM
I'm getting a copy right now, even though there is plenty of stuff on the internet that covers just about everything in the catalogue.
It was the page after page of incredible stuff juxtaposed to more unrelated but incredible stuff that was mind blowing about that book, and you did not need any chemicals to blow your mind! It really did open your mind to other ideas. Reading Wiki about its history was enlightening too, the various versions and eventually the magazine etc.
Thanks
by
ibrahim turner (25 articles, 31 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 177 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 8:53:53 PM
I have had this conversation with several well-known peace activists.
The peace movement was largely driven, and a community solidified, by the "folk music" of the time. The music was pure, rose from the underground and it provided the banner to rally 'round and a common language.
I don't have to explain how messed up our culture and especially the music industry is today. I just read a quote today that made my blood run cold from a manufactured country heroine who said her job was to "bring God to the people."
As long as we tolerate this sort of thing, and the culture continues to worship narcissists posing as saviours, we will remain in this mess...and a mess it is.
by
Georgianne Nienaber (145 articles, 46 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 337 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 2:37:36 PM
In those heady 60's days, it is true that there was an actual culture that crossed state lines and international boundaries and was tied with poetry and music and art. It seems the poets, artists, and musicians all sold out for money. Today they threaten us with DRM codes and horrendous fines if we DARE share their work without paying them for it over and over again.
We need a new group of artists, poets, and musicians who are not corrupted by money. And would they please NOT leave their money to their children in such large amounts that they are able to corrupt the work of their deceased parents by threatening the listeners of the future with horriffic lawsuits, but rather leave them a comfortable amount and the balance to a good art school like, say; Julliard?
by
Syndi Yellowbird (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 4:12:05 PM
of course, the MIC caught on to the importance of media in social management. Big radio conglomerates would never play the music of the sixties now. Dylan would be obscure. Big Brother, Jefferson Airplane, all relegated to small clubs in Berkeley. That's where the outward expression of raising consciousness and understanding (which was the center of the sixties phenomenon) went. But the inner, latent expression of those ideals lives in a pressure cooker and if not expressed, will explode.
By the same token we had little idea then of the degree to which the MIC was dominating us. We have come a long way. Now millions feel the rage against cruelty, pollution, patenting life-forms, dumping hundreds of thousands of tons of nuclear waste in the oceans, and heavy metals in the air, and on and on. Back in the sixties only a few hundred thousand mostly young people were aware of "the environment". Rachel Carson was laughed at in Congress. We have come a long way.
Even billionaires now realize the jeopardy we all live in. Now literally billions of people care about ecology and realize that the Native American criterion of the seventh generation applies to us right now. And we're not talking about corporate, but local in our thinking of sustainable and more self-sufficient communities.
There's a wonderful website: "Buddhist Economics", I think it's called, that makes the case for small communities. Anyhow, the Whole Earth Catalog is now the internet and China has more people online than the US. So I can see the progress we have made since the gray-flannel suit mentality of the fifties, and the alcohol stupor preferred then to the acute perception offered by alternatives we have now.
Perhaps the hippies became secret agents of love and consciousness, because they have certainly changed culture. Again, the great mass of people will find the right path through life, maximized for their circumstances. They are not starting wars or pouring tons of pig shit into the rivers anymore.
Humans are doing OK, so far. Yes, a lot of people will suffer and die due to injustice and greed. But all of us will never give up trying to live up to the ideals expressed in America's founding documents. "The pursuit of heppiness", "all men and women are created equal", and so on. Now Spain has legalized human rights for gorillas. We are finally becoming a conscious entity.
by
martinweiss (20 articles, 4 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 362 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 5:27:19 PM
There are other reasons why we haven't seen the mass protests of the 60's but the #1 is middle-class citizens are not being made to send their children to the slaughter.
Others include the taming of the media. You don't get to sing anti-war songs on Clear Channel. Smothers Brothers would never make into "prime-time" now - it wouldn't even make it to pilot. Our protests are either not covered or belittled. Forty-years ago we had 500+ independent sources of news - today we have 6 major corporations that control 95% of everything we hear, read and see.
The powers-that-be (PTB) learned their lessons well since the good old days of the 60's.
So what do we do? Without the masses behind us, or when we're ignored, what direction do we take?
We get creative. And we grow some balls! I am so tired of the play-it-by-the-rules do it as they tell us approach I could spit! Rosa Parks had the guts to do it - why not us? It's time to say NO!
First we have to realize that not only have the PTB learned, they've turned up the heat. They've passed more laws and made it harder in every way - so - ignore them. Or better yet get to know what those laws are and fish-out the wholes in them and exploit them. Know your rights and don't back down.
This was a "hot" war even back then. I'm not the only one that was arrested, beaten or came close to being killed on these streets during that time. Kent State brought it home for everyone back then. These bastards are trying to kill us and it's that, that everyone needs to first come to terms with. We also have to know that there is no "safe" place anymore. 9/11 should have done that for us now. When the PTB murdered 3,000 of us in broad daylight it should have brought it home. And please, lets not make this an argument about 9/11 - if you're not aware that 9/11 was an inside job by now - go do some investigation and come back when you're part of the enlightened.
Does this mean we get violent?
No.
We never do anything violent unless it's to protect ourselves from attack.
So what do we do with limited numbers outside of a draft bringing in those that would join us? How do we get past being ignored by MSM?
Peaceful Civil Disobedience - and we take it to a creative level.
I think back to some of my hero's, there was a man, or group, they where never caught, who use to climb smokestacks of known polluters and clog them up, or let a thousand mice loose in the lobby of CBS. About 10 years ago a group of women in Nigeria brought Shell Oil to it's knees simply by showing up at their shipping docks nude.
Am I suggesting we protest in the nude? Well, it sure would be hard for MSM to ignore that now wouldn't it?
What I'm suggesting is we no longer play by their rules. If they tell us to sit - we stand. If they tell us to stand over there - we run in the other direction. We need to clog-up their courts, their halls, their malls and the streets. If it means breaking a few piss-ant laws - so what? Our f*cking lives are at stake! Do you need anymore motivation than that?
If there are fewer of us because of the lack of a draft and we're not being covered because of MSM tactics, we need to go to other creative lengths. We need to disrupt commerce and government at every level constantly. This has to become a way of life, because it's for our lives! Good-old fashion sit-ins. Contingencies of people need to clog the halls and offices of those politicians who refuse to listen to our voices. When they come to arrest us, or worse, we need to chain ourselves to said reps. We need to face arrest, beatings and whatever they throw at us and throw it back!
We need to get out from behind our keyboards and put our asses on the line. It's how wars are fought. We're not going to win anything with just writing letters, emailing or phone calls, we can all see where just doing that has gotten us.
So where are the protesters of the 60's? Right here. All activists need to decide right now if they want to continue with tactics that play into the hands of those that are killing us or take it to the next level. It just comes down to do you want to do it now while we still have a slim chance or wait until we have none?
Form groups, come up with creative ways to disrupt business as usual. Tell them where they can stick their "Free Speech Zones"! Don't wait or ask or "permits" - just do it!
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 15 diaries, 1688 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 6:27:26 PM
I’m from the tail end of the baby boom generation (born in late 1962-so many of us have WWII generation parents, although I identify more with the so-called Gen Xers and Grunge music), so briefly, here’s my opinion: the sixties generation was largely successful in what it set out to accomplish (i.e., social liberation, social equality and equal opportunity among people of different races and genders).
However, the sixties generation failed miserably concerning economic class independent of race and gender (because they never had this goal to begin with). Many of the sixties protesters went to college (a supposed merit system) and gained credentials (or privilege, depending on how you look at it) so as to let them compete at higher levels within capitalism, and they moved into the upper middle class and affluent strata. Eventually, as these people moved up, it became apparent that it wasn’t in their economic interests to pursue any kind of class equality, so the only kind of policies that the Democratic Party seriously advocated had to do with race and gender equality through the “merit” system-the idea being to have women and racial minorities represented in corporations and government proportionally.
I suppose that is a noble enough goal, but personally, being working class and white, I could care less if my oppressor is a college educated white man, a college educated woman, or a college educated black person-it doesn’t really matter. The real problem is Globalization and merit system that assigns economic class. How can you effectively deal with class and Globalization when you’ve done nothing other than jump through hoops to get that degree so as to make a lot of money?
by
Mark Whittington (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 22 comments)
on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 7:25:04 PM
