Wednesday, December 21, 2005

13 LINK MISCELLANY Maine tribes meet with Venezuela for low cost heating oil
Brenda Norrell, 16.12.2005 20:38

Praising Venezuela President Hugo Chavez, Maine Indian tribes met with representatives of the Venezuelan Embassy to begin talks on the delivery of low cost heating oil to tribal members. The Biggest Land Grab Will Happen if Tribes Do Not File Claim by December 31!niishinikwe 14 Dec 2005 17:53 GMT pretty big collection on russia (panslavism, eurasianism and borders shifting). = dead, killed, you are allowed 0 guesses as to the reason. (splitcreen view)

"Could Darwinist be the new Marxist?" they asked...well, Marx was definitely a Darwinist, but confessedly not a Marxist.
Anyway, Gould wrote an essay about this issue, I remembered reading long ago...and now found at this website:

Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:>>...All in all, the film's attraction, like Christmas, is>pagan rather than Christian...
"...because it is only Christian men Guard even heathen things."
--Chesterton, Ballad of the White Horse

Original message ---->Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 10:22:27 -0600>From: Carrol Cox >Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Narnia >To: lbo-talk at>>

You might try his essay on Addison. (I disagree sharply withsome things>in it, but it expresses one possible perspective very well.)>Incidentally, though I've never read an account of it, Iunderstand from>secondhand sources that he was very into spanking (whether asspanker or>spankee or both I don't remember). Also his _Allegory ofLove_, which I>have never read either as a whole, but if I remembercorrectly his>history of "romantic love" is essentially the same as thehistory Engels>gives. His book on Milton is enraging but still enjoyable.>>Carrol

Eastabrook makes a rare appearance to respond:
His book on (roughly) the pre-modern world view, The DiscardedImage (inaugural lectures at Cambridge as I recall), is littleshort of brilliant. I've insisted that graduate studentsbeginning Renaissance/Reformation studies start with it. It goes a good towards saving them from what a quite different historian called "the enormous condescension of posterity." barely a page worth and only pretty complete booklist (online mail order catalog)


the lady running the prankquean yahoo group is taking up recording Joycean passages again.
as molliloque goes .. . .as molliloque goes .. . .
this is a very cocky version: .. which if you are still a lurker in my life, is entirely redundant info

Subject: Ideas... some great, some stinky
For the past week or so I've been browsing<> and there's some pretty amazing stuff there. (Some not so good also, but that's the web for ya.) They solicited ideas from the general (U.S.) public and the publicposted a lot of them. Some are quite in keeping with notions weassociate with ICs. Other ideas are frankly way whacked out. Earlynext month they're going to have the public vote on what they considerthe best ideas contributed. So you might want to get in on that. Butthere's about 22,000 posted there, so you might want to start readingon them pretty soon. The website has both a subject-browse page and asite search feature, so you can seek out the kind of contributions ofinterest to you. The website is also soliciting your comments on anyand all of these ideas. You can post them right there on the website.
The top twenty-one ideas are going to be published in some book and--who knows-- some of them might be implemented by governments or unionsor other organizations. Several people posted ideas relating toworker-owned businesses. There's a lot of ideas for nurturing the useof alternative energy sources too. And there's a lot more. Have alook and plug in your comments. Cut loose!
Merry non-PatRobertson, ken looong linklist to dig through, pr(ed)ominently features feminism scifi and reality find out what she's not; you'll save time (and it's pretty obvious too)

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

A world full of choice yet most are phony.

Here’s the fundamentally divergent and antagonistic ones: catalog patristic auto mutilations of others and selves or tally up and dole out whole earth permaculturations.

All races have their patriarchal aspects and most cultures do too. The greatest peace and prosperity happened in periods of gender balance, their differences respected and guarded agreeably enough to get them noticed pleasantly across the divide and in its own good hormone fired time to keep the multiplication stage kicking in just right and find that their cultural habits have softly nudged them along to help this hi-lite take and fall into place.

During such periods people understood gold and paper gold (versus tradable/ valued / current goods and services based contractual agreement validity) to be the low trust hi risk type of macho stuff that brought nothing but trouble, secrecy, anonymity and ‘freedom’, the type that reaches and teaches the point of arbitrary dominance (rather than responsive coalitions).

Luckily the latter, feminine, very measured and more malleable types of money were easy and readily available to work with if you had to at all (the old adam in the garden, homestead community and hippy dream gift economy with lotsa handwork and little standardization keeps dying and reviving).

This balance is gone, the males have so to speak, eaten all the females pol/econically speaking, life has been one big bureaucratic serial singularity, revolution and gay parade after another ever since, world wars with butches sending femmes to die for them in it (read about the manned rocket in Tom Pynchon’s ‘Gravity’s rainbow’ for instance).

Ages of unbridled expansion and unsustainable practices like a tad too heavy a footfall caused compaction, erosion, coercion and hierarchy (and I haven’t even mentioned any mono- words yet), but we can distinguish 2 basic strategies, the contingent solid front empire and the spotty network Trojan guerrilla behind enemy lines, pioneering, laying low and doubling agendas, inching closer to the floodgates.

Learn to see the subtle ways patrism chronically seeds the characteristics of coming to harm and keeps things ‘going’ the ancient way or study the industry build up and tension raising ‘economic’ growth spirals which are less local and regional; they come to harm too but alas, halt and start waves of more and more feverish frenzy as they come to arm themselves first, then climax with waste and carnage, curious how the chips will shake out this time.

Sperm principle personified.
“… somebody stop me with the damn prepositions!”

Look, what do prepos have to do with mostly? Location location location and secondarily (pending on more information), direction direction direction; seems like they are properly gendered something money is sorely lacking but that story is for another day.*

Gravity is what 99% of life on earth overcomes to one extent or another. Wannabe extropians and would be planet miners or even colonizers, strong AI believers and all them folks who give me the creeps have got one thing right, we best get our feet off the ground again (study erosion you idiots!!!!), just don’t go too far with it, a canopy is good enough. And that’s where objectification comes in, it ain’t shit and certainly not real unless rooted. And that anchor is what I miss. Go to and see its former dictratress (Alzheimer now), a lady with feline looks in fine fettle or full of herself right? After her humiliation in court, the apocalyptic gathering her flock on- and into the bunker episode, her little empire has shrunk to half the size, ‘only’ 6.000 acres now.
The context is the collective side; the bigger picture, the effort to stop patrism. The whore and Elizabeth Clare Prophet, proud and regal, independent but as we put it, not objective enough, too individualistic … .. of course everything else, the former, crystallizes around the latter.
You'd have to wannabe equally unpopular to stop populism.

And by the way, you did misunderstand, I referred to the pic atop Damien’s blog (at the time), using that old (esquire type) trick of cutting away all background attempting to emphasize contour and keep focus superficial (the bane of all ((too extremely gendered*)) specialisms and rote shit).
So, till next time we play .. .. .

I’ve done a post trying to delve into the * called:
A world full of choice yet most are phony.

Friday, December 09, 2005

please send me your panoramic depictions of the moral landscape

this will get you started:

please send me your morality panoramas,

paintings of the moral spectrum

picturing quite the range of races

in, away from and for all ways and walks of life

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Excerpts from a recent interview with Ward Churchill (by Josh Frank)

Reciprocation of the dehumanizing treatment They have accustomed Themselves to visiting quite universally upon valueless Others is often --perhaps always -- requisite to penetrating the veil of Their delusion so deeply that They, some of Them, will be jarred into conceding that the realm of meaning might perhaps not be reserved unto Them alone, that the Other can never be consigned-was never in fact consignable-to a terrain “outside of history,” that s/he or “it”, too, is endowed with a fully human face.

A longer quote that includes the above: In his Benevolent Assimilation -- a truly excellent book -- the historian Stuart Creighton Miller chronicles a very similar assertion of "radical innocence" by mainstream Americans immediately following revelation of the genocide perpetrated by the U.S. during its conquest of the Philippines at the turn of the last century. This is from one example. From there, you can -- as I have in A Little Matter of Genocide, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens and elsewhere -- trace the record of comparably self-serving denials of reality all the way back to the inception of the Republic, or forward into the present moment. What you encounter adds up to a seamless whole. In this sense, the history of the Euroamerican mainstream has been undeviatingly consistent. As Susan Griffin observes in A Chorus of Stones, "there are whole disciplines, institutions, rubrics in our culture which serve as categories of denial." Put another way, denial is not just integral to but definitive of what Griffin, writing as a white woman, perceives as being the "American Character." And, coming as it does from an explicitly Euroamerican perspective, her perception is both entirely accurate and commendably honest. But here's the catch. Who does Griffin mean by "our" when she refers to "our culture," the one she describes as being so pathologically afflicted with denial? Black folk? Brown? Those of Asian or Polynesian descent? How about American Indians? You see? Even as she critiques the American Character to devastating effect, she frames it -- or perhaps even conceives of it -- exclusively and not very subtly, in terms of her own whiteness. That which is white thus equals "America," for Susan Griffin no less than for crudest of aging Mississippi Klansmen. Here, it seems to me, we find the pulsating heart of white racism. In its essence, it consists of the presumption that anyone Other than white holds meaning -- hence, value -- only in relation to whiteness, a dominion in which, in and of themselves, unwhite "others" possess no meaning or value at all. Often, as I suspect is the case with Griffin, the attitude is so deep-set as to operate well below the level of awareness, and is therefore intractable. So subliminal is the mindset at its core that, confronted with evidence of her own display of it, Griffin would no doubt seek to deny it, thereby consummating the very pathos she herself has explicated with utmost eloquence. I've been working on an analytical essay developing this theme for the past couple of months. Let me read a bit of it into the record, so to speak, because doing so will probably get us to where I want to end up faster-and, hopefully, more clearly-than whatever I might spin off the top of my head at this point. Okay by you? JF: Sure. WC: Okay, here goes: In its most discernable manifestation, white racist presumption appears in its carriers’ assertion of a unilateral entitlement to define -- that is, to “name” -- the Other in terms constructed entirely of utility and convenience to themselves. For those cast as Other, the true measure of white racist imposition is encountered first, foremost and always in this perpetual process of naming: They, and They alone, are positioned to determine who you are, are not, might be, what each station denotes, and why. This is because, so They continuously declaim, that which is knowable is truly “Known” only to Them, or in ways devised and sanctioned by Them, for purposes They themselves approve. Hence, They not only “know you better than you know yourself” but “what's best for you” as well. Predictably, the latter turns upon the perceptions of Those who Know as to what might at any given moment be of most benefit to Them. For the Other, this entails an existence captioned in the language of intrinsic inferiority at best, or, in the worst case, out-and-out existential negation (figuratively, literally, often both). Within a perception of “reality” based in the strata of such presumption, the wielding of white supremacist prerogatives becomes so familiar as to go unnoticed by Those who enjoy them, seeming natural, therefore inevitable, and thus both right and just. Wherein lies the potential for culpability? White supremacism, speaking in its emic voice, admits to none. It is in fact incapable of such admission. Guilt cannot be reasonably said to inhere in being and doing that which is right and natural, irrespective of how it might effect essentially irrelevant Others. Within the psychoconceptual parameters by which they are established, whiteness and its attendant privileges comprise their own justification. By the terms of its very existence, then, the cognitive structure of white racism denies even the possibility that genuine empathy, less still such sentiments as regret or remorse, might be extended beyond the pale of itself. Only the most forceful of etic intrusions are sufficient to disrupt the fantasies of innate superiority and concomitant entitlement to possession of all and everything entertained at the most primal level as a conception of Self by Those infected with the mass psychosis of white racism. Reciprocation of the dehumanizing treatment They have accustomed Themselves to visiting quite universally upon valueless Others is often --perhaps always -- requisite to penetrating the veil of Their delusion so deeply that They, some of Them, will be jarred into conceding that the realm of meaning might perhaps not be reserved unto Them alone, that the Other can never be consigned-was never in fact consignable-to a terrain “outside of history,” that s/he or “it”, too, is endowed with a fully human face. The jolt of such cognition, however momentary, produces a series of aftershocks: recognition that the life and fulfillment of a brown-skinned child is just as “important” --which is to say “worth” every bit as much -- as that of a white-skinned child, for instance. Thence, it will be all but invariably admitted that the Other is, or might yet become, “just as good as We are.” Promising on its face, this supposedly “enlightened acknowledgement” is actually the most cynical of white supremacist ruses, evading as it does the very possibility that whiteness might reduce to the signification of anything other than “goodness”, thereby reasserting its station as the condition to which all Others can/should/must aspire. It is thus no more than a reaffirmation of white supremacism, albeit in a form clad in the soft trappings of liberal sophistry rather than the fundamentalist armor of “conservatism”. For the instant of cognition generated by an exemplary act of reciprocation to produce a different result, it is necessary that the intervention be continued with equal force, but in another manner, one expressly designed to increase rather than alleviate cognitive dissonance within the status quo. This is to say that the Other must seize the moment of Their greatest cognitive disarray to (re)claim the all-important power of definition; that is, to call what has just happened by its right rather than Their preferred name and, in the process, bestow the correct name upon Them. To clarify: The Other cannot be content with liberal concessions as to her/his/their basic humanity; it is essential that They be forced to confront and ultimately confess the implications of what They, in their whiteness, have done-are in fact still doing-to fully human but unwhite Others.

. It's worth mentioning that Richard Oxman immediately responded with a line-by-line demolition of Albert's attempt at extending blanket exoneration to those I've referred to as "little Eichmanns." The same basic formula has been employed by so many pundits on the white left over the past few months that it's become seriously boring. Dare I call it "hackneyed"? Now, contrast this sort of "support" to that articulated by Mumia Abu Jamal when he wrote that I not only have the right to say what I've said, but that I've been analytically correct in saying it. Or Yuri Kochiyama's public statements repeatedly comparing my circumstances to those of Malcolm X. Or the Seneca writer Scott Richard Lyons' powerful affirmation of my work -- and of me personally, for that matter -- in Indian Country Today. Or the sheer force of Haunani-Kay Trask's and Kathleen Cleaver's declarations in my behalf. Or Rafael Renteria's commentary, "Ward Churchill and White America," in which he advises those signified by Albert and Shapiro to "look in the mirror" for a full-face view of racial chauvinism at play. I could keep going, but I think you get the drift.