To Blog or Not To Blog?
It’s been months since I’ve had the desire to write anything other than personal journal entries which are some hybrid vehicle of spiritual discipline and self-psychotherapy. I write in my journal to peel away layers of the culture- and family-of-origin plastered onion, to find the deeper, more authentic voice of self that emerges with that process. Its good, valuable activity. And it’s pretty intentionally self-absorbed most times.
To blog, on the other hand, is to reach out and share what I can of my journey, of insights that may be valuable to others. To publish into the blogosphere, I try to write things personal but beyond navel-gazing and self-absorption. I don’t think it really warrants telling you “What I’m doing this minute.” Sorry Facebook devotees, but is that real connection?
I want to blog, if I am going to, in a way that is at the very least clear and, at least on occasion, will be beautiful and moving. That takes effort and time.
My son, who spends way more time than I do scanning and reading online, recently encouraged me to blog less length with more frequency. He thinks people would like to know, and can benefit from reading how the daily grind of civilization’s last gasps now lands in my life, how I’m responding, what it’s like for me as someone who has anticipated for many years the very things that are unfolding at an alarming and sometimes frightening rate.
So I’m going to take a stab at it. Less length, more frequency. How’s it landing today, this week?
Recently, it landed hard: the facts, the media coverage, and the change of response in our neck of the woods.
We attended a community screening of What A Way to Go last week. Following the end credits Tim and I made our way to the front of the auditorium to host a discussion. Remarkably there was no applause. This has only happened once or twice before in almost fifty screenings. Instead of applause there was stunned silence. Stunned is not new. But there was something that was new. Both Tim and I commented later that the audience seemed angry.
And that was new. We’ve had less than appreciative individuals attend screenings, and we’ve certainly had fallout in our personal lives in the past from all of this. But this time it seemed like there was a pervasive, more generally combative mood present when what we would have expected was to be greeted by an appreciative and receptive crowd. Indeed, as the discussion unfolded, they referred to themselves as “the choir.” They said that we were preaching to “the choir.” But unlike times in the past, this crowd was not the happy choir. This was the very disgruntled choir that was ready to fire the preacher. We weren’t delivering a palatable message. Instead it seemed the movie was nailing in their darkest and most scary suspicions, those that lurk behind the veil of progressive optimism and fraying denial.
As I say, this angry mood in the audience is new. A year ago people, at least the people who stayed for the discussion after, were generally happy with us when we attended screenings. This week, the crowd was not happy with us. And I think we are witnessing the breakdown of denial amongst progressives, the denial that has kept a safe emotional distance between those of us who are privileged and well-clothed from the ravages of Empire. Upper-middle-class, educated, white folks, we have been able to stand on the sidelines and root for the underdogs: the environment, the indigenous cultures and peoples, the abused and afflicted, while we ourselves remained dry and warm and well dressed in our imported sweaters and insulated boots. Seems now that we are beginning to see the end of that insulation and our toes are starting to curl from the cold.
As Tim says at the end of the movie, “The waters are rising, it’s time to let go of the shore.” That letting go can be wrenching. That letting go of what’s been known, what’s been familiar, what’s felt safe, that is hard, scary, painful, and now…..angering. We can’t maintain emotional distance anymore from the catastrophe of Empire when we are witness to undeniable, widespread corruption and the inevitable collapse of an economic and banking system based on insane notions of unlimited growth and unending prosperity. When food becomes scarce in the large chain grocery stores, the veil of denial will fray and fall utterly. How will we respond then?
So I blog. I blog to reach out and say, “If you choose to, you can enter into this time with consciousness. You can courageously face into the challenges of letting go of the familiar and embrace the unknown. Tim and I have done that and continue to do that. You know what? As hard as that’s been, it’s getting easier and it’s feeling like we’re finding new meaning to the concept of “personal freedom.”
I’ll write more about that later. Less length. More frequency. Stay tuned.
And in case you hadn’t noticed, a new blog has appeared on the What A Way To Go website, Touching The Ground.
He’s not signing it, but from the poetry there, we know the author.
Email This Post To A Friend
This entry was posted
on Thursday, March 26th, 2009 at 10:52 am and is filed under Sally's Blog.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 26th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Thanks to you both for blogging again. I like to hear what you’re thinking and feeling.
I’ve noticed the anger in the choir, too.
March 26th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
Dear Sally,
Sounds like that audience wanted to shoot the messenger. I’ve been feeling that phenomenon a lot lately, especially from progressive friends, ever since Obama was (s)elected. In fact, one of my very best long-time friends seems to somehow have reverted back to blue-pill world. I didn’t think that was possible once a person had been awakened. But I think that after 8 long years of BushCo horror, many people had had enough, and Obama’s message of “hope” and “change” resonated or at least offered a reprieve from the ongoing bad news.
There seems to be a breaking point — a line, or an abyss, or a rabbit hole — where once reached or viewed, almost seems to repel the onlooker backwards into the comfortable closet of denial where dreams can still come true, where we become children again and let the grownups solve the big problems. Fairyland, if you will. And isn’t that how we’ve been conditioned to think?
So I think my friend reached that breaking point, was offered the kool-aid, and drank it to escape back to that fantasy world. And I think he is highly representative of what’s going on with progressives in general. They’re being manipulated and lied to, of course, and they might even realize that to a degree, but it’s far more appealing than having to radically change their lives, their attitudes, their perceptions. Yes, denial can be a powerful tranquilizer. Dangerous as hell too, now that collapse is actually in progress.
And like your audience, I’m angry too — at THEM — for embracing the lies all over again, and becoming complacent when there’s so much work to be done. It’s so damn disheartening to watch, because these are the people I had hoped would be awakening, building lifeboats, and working to move forward with a renewed purpose — to embrace options instead of hope, as Carolyn Baker explained so eloquently a few years ago.
I know there are still people who understand, who see reality clearly, and who are responding. Sally, you and Tim are certainly in that seemingly smaller-than-ever group, and I wholeheartedly applaud your decision to blog more. If anything is needed right now and as we move forwards, it’s more people willing to speak the truth — and more solidarity amongst those of us willing to listen, willing to grow up.
My fondest regards to you both,
Kit
March 26th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Sally, I think that many of us have seen the logical manifestations of unrestrained growth for many decades now. For those of us who have taken it into our moral hearts, we realize that having children today is like renting rooms in a burning building, with no exits, and to our children no less.
I personally think the biggest fear and discomfort in most folks arises from having to admit to themselves, and to their own children that they messed up.. big-time! The illusions of prosperity have now become the mass hangover.. and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Freedom, resources and everything of value upon this planet has dimished as the baby drunk primates have propogated indiscriminately.
Those who have choosen to remain childfree more readily accept the inevitable coming social upheavals and dramatic population correction. Parental attachments, regrets and denial protracts the neccessary cleansing processes which now need to occur. Change comes through revolution, not evolution.. The longer we hold on to the myths, the harder we all will fall, upon the backs of all Earth’s children..
Thank you all for not breeding and considering adoption of children and for choosing our families in this lifetime, and for not creating more of us.
Zimba - Baby not on board (celebrating preservation of our planet and responsible non-reproduction)
———————————————
Why Real Anarchists Don’t Breed
By Les U. Knight - www.vhemt.org
We anarchists have many reasons to avoid procreation today. Our redundant breeding feeds the very forces we are trying to counter, and prevents us from living as freely as we might.
Capitalism is dependent on a growing population and an expendable work force. Labor gains power when the need for workers is higher. As demands for supplies are reduced, and markets cease to grow, economic changes we aspire toward will more easily be achieved. Sustainable economic systems could replace out-dated “slash and burn” methods when consumers are fewer in number.
Society’s institutions are dependent on our producing families. Churches, schools, and social services, all need fresh supplies of human bodies to exist.
Business applauds births. As if to celebrate each new North American life, a multi-passenger vehicle rolls off the assembly line to join it.
Anarchists generally oppose the culture of work, production and consumption. Breeding increases participation in these institutions. Workers with children are more dependent on their jobs and less likely to strike. Anarchists take risks which parents can’t.
Thinking about not producing more offspring is difficult for most of us. It’s a freedom that we guard fiercely, even though, with the exception of China’s government, no one is trying to take it away. The establishment is certainly not trying to talk us out of reproducing. Governments have traditionally been natalist and often subsidize procreation. Disorganized masses are easier to control than small unified groups.
If each of us produces one less pupil for the schools, one less soldier for the military, one less wage slave for industrial exploitation, one less consumer, and one less pawn in the government subsistence trap, we will help the old system fall. And when it does fall, it won’t be landing on any children we chose not to create.
Anarchy includes taking responsibility for our own lives. Creating a dependent which “takes a village” to raise, forces others to share responsibility for a couple’s free choice. Breeding. especially insisting on extra services for breeding, shirks personal responsibility.
Anarchists eschew hierarchy, favoring interactions among equals. Parent-child relationships are hierarchical, not consensual. Children don’t choose to be born, but parents do choose to breed. Creating a dependent child also creates an authority figure for many years. Couples who breed “accidentally,” have not taken responsibility for their fertility.
Anarchists and environmentalists understand the biosphere is in danger, and that six billion of us is far too many. Taking personal responsibility, we eschew breeding for the sake of both humankind and the Earth. Earth’s biosphere will benefit as every demand humans place on Nature is reduced. Human society will benefit from an improved birth rate, as shortages of food, housing, and resources are potentially lessened. Existing children could be better cared for in the coming weird times if there are fewer of them. By not breeding, we’ll have more time and energy for promoting social change.
Anarchists seek neither security nor stability, understanding these states of illusion are not compatible with real social change. Parents seek both security and stability, for the sake of their children. Good parents make bad anarchists.
When thinking about improving our density, many see death as the only means of achieving it. Actually, death has had little effect on global population. A million deaths are compensated for in less than a week. High death rates cause high birth rates.
Giving up the fantasy of raising children which are biologically ours can feel like a major sacrifice to many people. However, if we are willing to risk our social status, jobs, and sometimes our freedom, surely we can consider giving up something that doesn’t exist yet.
Some say we need to breed more anarchists, but how many of us come from anarchist parents? You cannot make someone an anarchist: it’s up to them to decide. We’ll likely have more luck influencing other people’s children. Anyway, this would be expecting our children to do what we should be doing, with a 15 to 20 year delay. Anarchy happens right now, if we choose it.
Voluntarily choosing to not add another human to the existing billions is the greatest gift we can give the planet and the most severe blow we can strike against the New World Order.
Real anarchists don’t breed.
________________________________________
Fascism and Anarchy: Our Density Factor
One major factor limiting our freedom often gets ignored: the sheer number of us sharing a space.
As the number of people living together increases, restrictions on activities must increase for the sake of fairness and order.
The number of possible interactions determines the level of anarchy possible, or the degree of fascism necessary to maintain order.*
When we live alone, few if any rules are required. Peaceful anarchy reigns. With two, simple agreements are sufficient. However, when more than a few share a kitchen and bathroom, some well-defined rules must be established and adhered to — voluntarily or not.
This is also true on a larger scale. Archeological evidence from around the globe and throughout our existence reveals that the lower a society’s population density, the more equally members are treated. As egalitarian tribes grow into chiefdoms, hierarchies develop. Cities evolve into empires, subjugating more and more people, enlarging the gap between top and bottom.
As our density increases, regulations are becoming more plentiful and more strictly enforced. In denser areas, we can’t even cross the street until a signal light gives permission.
China has about the same land mass as the United States and four times the population. Their society has to be more than four times as repressive just to keep order.
A future of peace and freedom in a more equal society may be possible if enough of us accept responsibility for our growing numbers, and voluntarily avoid adding more of us.
*Formula for finding number of interactions: n(n-1) over 2. n = number of people. As n increases arithmetically, the number of interactions increases exponentially, as does the need for control.
________________________________________
Natalism vs. Freedom
Out of the mouths of babes come some of society’s strongest indoctrinations.
First comes love,
Then comes marriage,
Then comes (your name here),
With a baby carriage
Maybe if we question everything we learned in kindergarten, we’ll get to the roots of all that prevents an anarchistic society from emerging.
Procreation automatically entangles us in government bureaucracy. That fresh social security number is only the beginning. Required immunizations, mandatory education, and suspicion of child abuse or neglect may be used as excuses for interfering with our lives.
Fear of our children revealing confidential information at school may restrict our freedoms at home.
________________________________________
“One child can raze a whole village.” ~Anon
March 27th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Garrison Keillor recently wrote about books that we buy and don’t read. On the bible, he said “We buy a bible to read and try to find out the Will of God only to realize we already know what it is and we’d prefer not to.”
I have been angry at the “Progressives” for a long time. Perhaps it’s because I got into the Peak movement through a tangential connection to UFO’s and government secrecy. I see much more denial in the world than most people do, and I see it hanging by a thread. The recent election of Pres. Obama could break that fragile denial thread because of all the talk about Change and Hope is being pushed behind the business as usual of a bloated System of systems. People are angry, but they don’t really know why. Your dark picture is a lightning rod for angst and the sorry realization of delusion that is represented by people with Hope in their hearts getting angry. The ‘progressives’ who led the privileged lives of petroleum are starting to find out that it is one thing to TALK about rooting for the underdog, but it is quite another to be up to their neck in the shit of life. Farmers like me know that our lives are all about two things: killing shit and cleaning shit up. Even now, I am just realizing that EVERYONE’s lives are dependent upon these two things, but the drudgery of actual living has been done by cheap energy up to this point. Billions of people are probably going to die because of this denial of reality, and you are informing people of this fact.
Maybe you should visit the PeakShrink for a while, too.
March 27th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Thanks for a most interesting and worthwhile post, Sally. And I mean that about both parts of it, the one talking about your long-running inward turning toward self-directed writing *and* the one about the categorically new response from the recent WHAT A WAY TO GO audience.
Regarding the second part, I myself began noticing last August or September, right around the time the economic storm definitively broke for all to see, that an unprecedented level of seething resentment and anger was surging around among the general populace. My most prosaic and mainstream-minded family, friends, and acquaintances were all Mad as Hell and Not Going to Take It Anymore. I was surprised and fascinated to witness this attitude going mainstream. Obviously it is now reaching some sort of critical mass, although I can’t help speculating about the extent to which this is being orchestrated, after a fashion, by the mainstream media via what appears to me as the smoke-and-mirrors show of fury over the AIG bonuses.
Anyway, how very interesting it is to hear about your full frontal encounter with this phenomenon at the recent screening of the documentary. Good luck out there. I hope you and Tim can keep it up and remain safe while maintaining your very worthwhile provocateur/chronicler/prophet roles.
A recent online writing that you might find worth a read in light of these recent developments is J. Peder Zane’s “Are we enriched by hard times?” (http://www.newsobserver.com/2730/story/1324264.html), in which Zane observes that all the reports of supposedly repentant and transformed uber-consumers should be taken with a grain of salt since all it will take is a perceived return to the faux-normality of recent years for these supposedly Awakened Ones to gleefully dive back into the Matrix. (I’m using my own specific vocabulary here, not his.)
On the other hand, Zane comments: “Still, something is different: not change, but possibility. For the moment, the deafening drumbeat of consumer culture has diminished; no longer a sonic boom, it is now just an earsplitting whine. New voices have leapt into that suddenly available aural space, questioning our choices. They can be heard in the news reports of transformed Americans as well as inside our own heads. As we close our wallets, they move us to open ourselves more fully to finding purpose and joy outside the mall. This is the opportunity offered by hard times. It pulls us out of the white-water of consumer culture and lets us sit a spell on the side of that river. If we choose to, it allows us to think, to take stock, to reconnect with the idea of the person we want to be.”
Regarding the first part of your post, I can tell you that I have faced the very same issue in my own writer’s life as I have attempted to navigate the exigencies of a very slow creative and inspirational process, on the one hand, and a Web culture that craves and even demands a more regular and frequent flow of writings on the other. I wish you the best and will look forward to your future posts, regardless of their schedue.
FYI, your self-revelation as a slow and inner-directed writer positively shouts to me that you would find much of value in the books put out by a small, independent publisher named Impassio Press. Look them up. They feature a substantial amount of material on their site (last I checked) about the literary value and place of “fragmentary” writing, defined as journals, short essays, letters, and the like. And the public establishing of these types of writings as a valid genre in and of themselves — the genre of fragmentary writing — is Impassio’s avowed mission. They have published a number of interesting journals by modern writers as well as two anthologies, DARKNESS AND LIGHT and IN PIECES: AN ANTHOLOGY OF FRAGMENTARY WRITING, consisting of journal entries and other fragmentary writings from a host of authors.
I really think you would find their output and overall vibe to be quite congenial to your personal authorial orientation. Their founder, editor, and publisher, a woman named Olivia Dresher, is really committed to what she does, and I have come to view her activities as falling in the line of the “new monasticism” that Morris Berman recommends in THE TWILIGHT OF AMERICAN CULTURE as the only viable response to mass civilizational declines like the one we’re presently experiencing.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Hi Sally - thanks for your post - and I’m glad you’re going to do short posts more often now.
My perception is best summarized by Chris C’s line as sung by Janice J “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose”. As I watch those around me face what’s going on, most (but not all) of the folks who still have “something” (lifestyle, house, car, money, etc.) will choose to go into denial. However those who have lost most everything or who realize they’re never going to get it are much more likely to acknowledge the deeper truth of the situation. So, even though the collapse we’re seeing around us is moving more folks to the denial stage, it’s also helping to create more folks who will really get it.
Always looking (and finding) the silver lining!
-Bob
March 27th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Trully, anger has been more seen in the last days, and it’s gonna pop up even more, I guess. I feel that anger is somewhat necessary to break old links (or chains)…
Best regards,
Felipe (São Paulo, Brazil)
March 28th, 2009 at 3:31 am
Hi Sally
So good to “hear your voice” here again, like others, I’ve missed you and Tim and your blog posts.
I choose! I choose to stand with you! WAWTG is a great tool for folks to de-colonise their minds, and open their hearts. And as the manure hits the windfarm, it’s going to get quite exciting!
As the pain shakes even the progressives awake, one of their grieving responces will be anger….and a lot of this is due to perceived entitlement, and WAWTG really erodes that.
I try to explain that getting angry at me as the messanger, is more about the person getting angry (how dare you pull the warm rug out from under my soft “civilised” bottom!!!) with the unsustainable position they find themselves in, and complete rage at being shown the emperor has no clothes. Unfortunately the messanger is usually the first to cop a bit of that anger.
What’s needed is for that anger to be channelled into a guerilla resistance movement rather than mindless rioting in the streets. With the militarisation of police forces globally, TPTB are ready for that rioting. What they can’t deal with is a new culture of resistance.
Will this happen in time? I don’t know, I think it may be too late. Too late for “civilised” humans, and too late for the 200+ species that went to extinction today…but never too late to speak up on their behalf, and on behalf of the remnants of indigenous people who have pointed out how insane “civilisation” is for a very long time…
Best regards
Ted
Nelson, NZ
March 30th, 2009 at 10:24 am
this is not an echo chamber. we can cradle and rock as we touch the ground and stretch to the stars. we love your sharing and respect your tentativeness. Give what feels right, when you feel led.
anger comes in griefing. this is new stage even for the choir. tonglen calls…
you ask, “how’s it landing?” tumultuous, course. opening space is the key and your words, your story contribute….mightily.
here’s some arc for a fragment of connection-albeit flat and glassy from my screen to yours-
We clasp the hands of those that go before us,
And the hands of those who come after us.
We enter the little circle
of each other’s arms
And the larger circle of lovers,
Whose hands are joined in a dance,
And the larger circle of all creatures,
Passing in and out of life,
Who move also in a dance,
To a music so subtle and vast that no ear hears it
Except in fragment
~Wendell Berry
sorry to see that comments are closed on “touching the ground.” i understand the need for monologue and the reticence for communion, but pass the word, please, we’re continuing the holistic “thrival” quest and welcome your companionship on the journey.
love,
“your not from around here, are you?” ‘07 hot springs nc
circle spokes…..