Leaders To Follow The People Toward a Common Vision

Regarding the article “Labor and Environmental Leaders Move Beyond Differences to a Common Vision” by James Gustave Speth and Joe Uehlein, the authors acknowledge that leaders in the two movements have found little common ground over the past several decades. The authors acknowledge the need to build common ground between these movements, and they cite progress made. They also list a set of goals that require solidarity between the two groups.

But I will describe here why there should be such a movement of these groups to a common vision, why it hadn’t happened in the past, how to predict their rate of progress, how members may or may not actually benefit from it, and how the movement could be springboarded to achieve a kind of people’s nirvana rarely conceived.

The labor and environmental movements in America over the past several decades existed in a socio-economic culture, like citizens always have, like other movements and organizations did. Socio-economic culture greatly influences people and organizations. Culture may be described as a set of prominent, popular, prevailing ideas. Ideas may prevail without being the best ideas for the people. Ideas are propagated by people with agendas, which may or may not be the best agendas for the people. Those movements were severely limited by a culture of greed in America over the past several decades.

But what is the best agenda for the people? Individualism, collectivism, or some hybrid of the two? We see that individualism breeds competition which discounts the contribution of all but the most talented, or motivated individuals. So as it marginalizes the great majority, we see that individualism doesn’t really stand by itself. Collectivism, on the other hand, is more easily lost on people because it requires more thought, and is easily diminished by primitive gratifications. This suggests that in the idea space, collectivism should be subsidized, if we presume that thoughtfuness will yield more than primitive gratifications.

Having established collectivism as the higher ideal, we now ask how the labor and environmental movements have supported this ideal. And we find both have extremely narrow agendas that barely start to reinforce collectivism. Organized labor is concerned almost exclusively with the primitive gratification of economic power. We will see that economic power is fundamental to the people but only as an integral element of a greater whole. Environmentalism accomplishes little at all toward any collectivist agenda.

Collectivism unites people around all of their better interests. There is little chance for error in this pursuit. Collectivism includes localism, because collectivism is concerned with the people’s collective interests, which localism addresses. Localism is a philosophy that much more clearly articulates the way the people can achieve their nirvana, so we will use the dichotomy of localism versus elitism in the rest of this article, in place of collectivism versus individualism.

To achieve their nirvana, the people need sustained fulfillment and this requires integration with nature, and it requires a culture of personal empowerment. Universal enlightenment, solidarity, equity and justice are the four pillars of the people’s nirvana, and integration with nature and personal empowerment are the means toward these. For example, a group of personally empowered people who can appreciate their vital connection with nature will naturally seek solidarity with each other, and the rest of the four pillars as well.

So when the labor and environmental movements collapse into the People’s Movement as they naturally should, nature will be taken care of automatically, as the people will appreciate nature for its vital role in their lives. And economic power will be the people’s, naturally, because the definition of a whole life, for everyone, will include active participation, by everyone, in nurturing the local economy. This is the People’s Movement, and environmental and labor leaders should yield wholly to the people, and get behind the people, and make sure they do not any longer distract the people, or hold the people back. There is no more excuse for infighting on the left. Infighting cannot be on the left. It amounts to elite sabotage of the people’s agenda. The people are coming to know this and a lot more, these days. Exciting times for the people ahead.


The Climate Movement Cannot Stand Apart From The People’s Movement

In retort to Paul Gilding’s recent article posted at Common Dreams, entitled “Victory at Hand for the Climate Movement?”, I must say that the Climate Movement cannot sand apart from the People’s Movement. Grotesque inefficiencies are created by divisions among the people, among movements, and will push stratospheric plunder of renewable energy as it does with fossil energy. If we truly want stability and sustainability, we have to seek the clarity and efficiencies sustained only via biospheric solidarity, solidarity among all the people in all of their initiatives, enterprises, and movements, and I will explain why, and how, in the following paragraphs.

Mr. Gilding summarized: “The science is clear, the technology is ready, significant sections of the elite are on side and the financial momentum is with us.” That’s a summary alright. But it’s terribly misguided. If a misguided message influences the people, it undermines the people’s agenda. In contrast to that summary, a summary that resonates with the people’s agenda goes like this: The science echoes common sense, as required by laws of nature. The technology has been ready for well over a century in proportion to real demands. And the support of elites is as undesirable and unnecessary today as ever, and the same for finance.

Mr. Gilding’s summary communicates a false dependence of the people upon elites and elite enterprises. And my summary communicates the truth that the people need to rely only upon their very own personal selves, and the local enterprises in which they are personally involved. But how relevant is this idea of mass self-reliance, having virtually no precedent in mainstream discourse? The remainder of this article shall address this question, by taking the reader on an awakening trip from the gates of the wage-slave factory to the gates of the people’s nirvana.

Witness the wage-slavery factory, but at the same time, witness that we do not need mass production. Americans consume four times the world average, per capita, in resources. And that mind-boggling consumption keeps growing, and the factories keep expanding, and the lunacy keeps oozing. But instead of mass production, we need locally-demanded, locally-supplied production. This approach connects intimately into a holistic approach to life, a holistic lifestyle, where everything is known and makes sense to all. We make a tool because we need a tool. The demand drives the supply, not vice-versa. The people drive production, inspired by needs perceived personally. And so the civilization rises upon an organic foundation of mass wisdom, knowing, awareness.

When everything is in the hands of the people, where it should be, we do not need elites, or deities, or any of their monumental myths. At the gates of the slave factory stew those myths, such as resource scarcity and economic growth. At the gates of nirvana, there is obviously no scarcity and obviously no need for growth. It is obvious that the abundance of nature nourishes abundant wildlife, sustainably. That abundance is available to all. Surely human intellect can enhance that abundance, when people are immersed, in communities connected to nature. Modeling nature, we see that local initiatives and activities keep people connected to the source of life.

Where did we go wrong, then? There are a few examples of hierarchy in nature, but by and large, hierarchy is a human concoction. And some human concoctions we don’t want. Hierarchy is one of them. We went wrong on the tiers of hierarchy. This explains why Mr. Gilding’s summary of the energy situation today is terribly mistaken. Elites will enslave the people in the cages of hierarchy, if the people let them. No matte which sources of energy, no matter what you choose on any aisle in the plunder-market.

And this is why the climate movement isn’t going to solve the climate problem, much less the meta-problem. The way then to reach the solution to the meta-problem, and reach nirvana for the people, is for the people to assume ownership and control of production, and stewardship of the community, of the society, and of the whole biosphere. And the people are reaching for it. Despite the liberal dogma of division. Elites and their endless hierarchies, and their endless wars, and their endless plunder, are simply unneeded. And the people are beginning to see this, beyond the liberal fog machines.

These are the hows and whys that Mr. Gilding’s summary does not work for the people. So how do the people learn to recognize what does work for them? It’s a very simple thing to set a vision, and learn what works and doesn’t work toward realizing it. The vision is the people’s agenda of universal solidarity, enlightenment, equity, justice, through connection with our internal well-springs of wisdom, placing our faith and trust in our own selves, and assuming stewardship of the society and the whole biosphere, ourselves. This isn’t pie in the sky. This is the People’s Movement, and it’s happening NOW.

How Liberal Economists Deceive The People

Let’s look carefully at some very masterful liberal propaganda. Robert Reich, the liberal economist from Berkeley, has perfected a certain technique and he uses it over and over in his articles, religiously posted on sites such as Common Dreams.

First he devotes a couple of detailed paragraphs revealing that the elites are stealing from the people, which is true. Reich thereby gains the reader’s trust with such relevant truths. This is the “setup” in the classic liberal propaganda racket.

Then, inevitably, Reich says something like: “What looks like the start of a more buoyant recovery is a sham because the vast majority of Americans have neither the pay nor access to credit that allows them to buy enough to boost the economy.” Reich thereby jams his economic growth elixir down the people’s throats with the chaser of trust that he concocted in previous paragraphs.

But most people don’t want economic growth. And the only people who believe we need economic growth are those who defy their own common sense and genuflect at the alter of laissez-faire capitalism.

So how can the idea of economic growth be so problematic to negate Reich’s noble siding with the people in his previous paragraphs? Can’t we just let it slide that Reich is perennially obsessed with economic growth? At least he isn’t obsessed with military conquest. And with such a logic stream we rationalize the liberal racket. And we do so regularly, year after year, decade after decade, until we finally arrive at the monumental mess we are in today.

So let me refute that erroneous logic stream. Again, most people don’t want economic growth. They want economic stability and fairness. And it doesn’t take long to show that people simply don’t need economic growth, but rather, we need stability and fairness, biospheric sustainability and economic justice, to maximize well-being.

But why is economic growth so wrong? A number of people have written articles lately presenting strong arguments for halting economic growth but let me just present two items for you to ponder: First, Americans consume four times the world average per capita in resources. Economic growth will only increase that further. Second, it’s abundantly evident that what Americans need is not more commerce, commercialism, or material wealth, but more cooperation and solidarity with all people, and the whole biosphere.

So I think my calling Reich’s articles a propaganda racket is highly relevant to the people, in pursuing their agenda, the People’s Agenda.

Now why would Reich even want to deceive the people? Well, the American status quo is a sure-fire way to achieve personal “success”. And aren’t Americans taught, nay, battery-rammed with, the idea that personal “success” enhances life for everyone else? Yes, so it’s easy, in this society, to rationalize such a racket as Reich’s. People who work at ivy-league institutions have more than a few elite friends, it’s safe to say. Reich is not shunned by elites, except for maybe a few rightwing extremists. Instead, the bulk of elites know how his racket works, and support him in jamming ideas that work for them, down the throats of the wage-slaves. The elites know that Reich must criticize elites to gain the people’s trust, after which he may tell them any lie, every lie, but most definitely the lie that maximizes elite privilege.

It’s a liberal racket. Distinct from conservative rackets. But still a racket.

Instead of that, the people want to cooperate, share, and work together to achieve their own vision, their own hands-on stewardship of the economy, of the whole society, of the whole biosphere. The people don’t want economic growth. The people want stability. The People’s Agenda is universal equity, solidarity, enlightenment and justice. And the people are reaching for it, and achieving it, despite elite interference. Exciting times for the people.

Mental Association: Boring, Familiar, Crucial

This is an article on an unfamiliar topic:  Mental Association.  Such a topic can make our eyes glaze over with monumental boredom, if we were seeking more instinctual gratifications.

But this topic of mental association rings a loud bell when we realize that our ability to rise above basic instincts, to build civilization, rests on our association of good things with good things, and bad things with bad things.  Or, in other words, our ability to keep the good and the bad separated.

When we ask ourselves if something is good we attempt to associate it with other good things.  Through this process we identify and collect together the motivational building blocks that drive our agenda, toward realizing our dreams, or vision.   Our associations become the mortar connecting the elements of our vision.  If we connect a lot of good things together, through our mental associations, we form a broad, stable foundation on which to build a more positive reality.  But if instead we connect a mixture of good and bad things, the result is a flimsy foundation on which not much can be safely built.

Our vision is of course our ideal, or what we expect to benefit us most.  But what if many elements in our vision benefit us, while many elements in that very same vision also hurt us?  It means we’ve mis-associated elements that do not mesh well.  They do not belong in the same set.  And yet they share a common status in our minds.

This mis-association is perhaps the single greatest problem in 21st Century Merka.  The good and the bad sharing a status, together, in our minds.  They are familiar to us because people raise these things in discussion, so we believe them to be relevant, valuable, even crucial toward achieving our goals. But they cannot form a strong foundation, or whole, because they don’t really fit together.  They don’t truly advance the same goals.  As our subconscious minds realize that the good and the bad do not wok together, our confidence and assurance breaks down.  We then lose our motivation and ambition.

And this occurs mostly beyond our awareness.  And the result of this is Merkans actively pursue a collection of goals that conflict with advanced ideals.  As long as the petro-opiates keep flowing, this sub-optimal situation suffices.

Re: A Conversation with Idle No More’s Leanne Simpson

“With Idle No More, there was this moment in December and January where there was the beginning of an attempt to articulate an alternative agenda for the country that was rooted in a different relationship with nature.” *

Big news.  Bigger than other news.  The biggest news, I’m telling you.

Choose for yourself.  The big lesson for the day is learning the importance of choosing for yourself what is the biggest news, for you.