#with humanistic values at its core

[metamorphesque]

tsk tsk ... so much for the cop of "peace" (source)

Just a reminder that only three months after completing the long-planned ethnic cleansing of Artsakh by forcing out Armenians, the indigenous population with a history of thousands of years, azerbaijan won the bid to host the United Nations' climate summit in November 2024. Rather than being held accountable for this atrocity — part of a multi-stage strategy of a second genocide of Armenians — azerbaijan has been rewarded.

[opencommunion]

one reason (white) queer people misuse the term homonationalism is that they see queerness (or whatever you want to call it) as naturally disaffiliated with the US empire. so they understand homonationalism as a divergence from a natural mutual antagonism between queerness and empire. they talk about homonationalism as if it's an exclusively "normie gay" project, and as if it's a divergence from, rather than a consequence of, the overall trajectory of western lgbtqia+ politics. ironically it’s that self-exceptionalization by the queer, on the basis of their queerness, that imbricates them in homonationalism. they produce themselves as a homonationalist subject, and reproduce homonationalism, every time they articulate their queerness as individualized freedom. and Puar actually anticipates all of this in her original theorization of homonationalism in Terrorist Assemblages, and that's why it really helps to go to the text instead of osmosing queer theory solely through tumblr posts (esp when tumblr is so white and the queer theorists are not): "Some may strenuously object to the suggestion that queer identities, like their 'less radical' counterparts, homosexual, gay, and lesbian identities, are also implicated in ascendant white American nationalist formations, preferring to see queerness as singularly transgressive of identity norms. This focus on transgression, however, is precisely the term by which queerness narrates its own sexual exceptionalism.

While we can point to the obvious problems with the emancipatory, missionary pulses of certain (U.S., western) feminisms and of gay and lesbian liberation, queerness has its own exceptionalist desires: exceptionalism is a founding impulse, indeed the very core of a queerness that claims itself as an anti-, trans-, or unidentity. The paradigm of gay liberation and emancipation has produced all sorts of troubling narratives: about the greater homophobia of immigrant communities and communities of color, about the stricter family values and mores in these communities, about a certain prerequisite migration from home, about coming-out teleologies. We have less understanding of queerness as a biopolitical project, one that both parallels and intersects with that of multiculturalism, the ascendancy of whiteness, and may collude with or collapse into liberationist paradigms. While liberal underpinnings serve to constantly recenter the normative gay or lesbian subject as exclusively liberatory, these same tendencies labor to insistently recenter the normative queer subject as an exclusively transgressive one. Queerness here is the modality through which 'freedom from norms' becomes a regulatory queer ideal that demarcates the ideal queer. ... I am thinking of queerness as exceptional in a way that is wedded to individualism and the rational, liberal humanist subject, what [Sara] Ahmed denotes as 'attachments' and what I would qualify as deep psychic registers of investment that we often cannot account for and are sometimes best seen by others rather than ourselves. 'Freedom from norms' resonates with liberal humanism’s authorization of the fully self-possessed speaking subject, untethered by hegemony or false consciousness, enabled by the life/stylization offerings of capitalism, rationally choosing modern individualism over the ensnaring bonds of family. In this problematic definition of queerness, individual agency is legible only as resistance to norms rather than complicity with them, thus equating resistance and agency.

... Queerness as automatically and inherently transgressive enacts specific forms of disciplining and control, erecting celebratory queer liberal subjects folded into life (queerness as subject) against the sexually pathological and deviant populations targeted for death (queerness as population). Within that orientation of regulatory transgression, queer operates as an alibi for complicity with all sorts of other identity norms, such as nation, race, class, and gender, unwittingly lured onto the ascent toward whiteness. ... To be excused from a critique of one’s own power manipulations is the appeal of white liberalism, the underpinnings of the ascendancy of whiteness, which is not a conservative, racist formation bent on extermination, but rather an insidious liberal one proffering an innocuous inclusion into life."

Jasbir K. Puar, Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times (2007)

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Authenticity

The concept of authenticity is deeply rooted in existentialist philosophy and has been a significant topic of discussion in various philosophical traditions. At its core, authenticity involves living a life that is true to one's self, values, and beliefs, rather than conforming to external pressures or societal expectations. This exploration delves into the philosophy of authenticity, its origins, key ideas, and its relevance in contemporary life.

Key Concepts in the Philosophy of Authenticity

Existentialism and Authenticity:

Origins: The notion of authenticity is most closely associated with existentialist philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre.

Kierkegaard: Kierkegaard emphasized the importance of individual faith and subjective experience, urging individuals to make authentic choices that reflect their true selves.

Heidegger: In "Being and Time," Heidegger discusses authenticity as being true to one's own existence (Dasein) and not succumbing to the "they-self," which represents societal norms and expectations.

Sartre: Sartre's existentialism posits that existence precedes essence, meaning individuals must create their own essence through authentic choices, taking full responsibility for their actions.

Authenticity and Self-Discovery:

Concept: Authenticity involves a continuous process of self-discovery and self-creation.

Argument: To be authentic, one must engage in introspection and recognize their own desires, values, and beliefs, distinguishing them from those imposed by society.

Authenticity vs. Inauthenticity:

Concept: Inauthenticity arises when individuals conform to external pressures and live in a way that is not true to themselves.

Argument: Heidegger describes inauthenticity as living according to the "they-self," where individuals adopt the roles, behaviors, and beliefs dictated by others rather than their own.

Freedom and Responsibility:

Concept: Authenticity is closely linked to the existentialist notion of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it.

Argument: Sartre asserts that individuals are "condemned to be free," meaning they must take responsibility for their choices and the authenticity of their lives, without blaming external factors.

Authenticity in Modern Life:

Concept: The pursuit of authenticity remains relevant in the context of modernity, where societal norms, technological advancements, and consumer culture often challenge individual authenticity.

Argument: In contemporary society, maintaining authenticity involves resisting the pressures of social media, consumerism, and other external influences that promote a superficial or conformist lifestyle.

Theoretical Perspectives on Authenticity

Existentialist Perspective:

View: Existentialists emphasize the importance of individual choice and responsibility in achieving authenticity.

Argument: Authenticity is achieved through existential freedom, where individuals define their own essence and live according to their true selves.

Humanistic Psychology:

View: Humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow highlight authenticity as a crucial aspect of self-actualization and personal growth.

Argument: Authentic living is necessary for psychological well-being and fulfillment, as it allows individuals to realize their true potential.

Postmodern Critique:

View: Postmodern thinkers critique the concept of authenticity, questioning the possibility of a true, stable self in a world of constant change and fluid identities.

Argument: Authenticity may be seen as a constructed ideal rather than an attainable state, with the self being a product of various social, cultural, and historical influences.

Cultural and Social Perspectives:

View: Cultural and social theorists examine how authenticity is influenced by cultural norms and social contexts.

Argument: The quest for authenticity must consider the diverse ways in which different cultures and societies understand and value authentic living.

The philosophy of authenticity centers on the pursuit of a life that is true to one's self, free from the constraints of external pressures and societal expectations. Rooted in existentialist thought, it emphasizes self-discovery, individual freedom, and responsibility. While authenticity remains a crucial concept in contemporary life, it is also subject to critique and reinterpretation, reflecting the complexities of modern existence.

[biblioflyer]

Rediscovering Discovery: just what was that show?

Once upon a time I set myself a task. A task that was actually kind of the original inspiration of this blog. Namely to rewatch and analyze Star Trek Picard in pursuit of an answer to the question: Did Picard turn the Federation into a Dystopia? A series of essays I intend to revisit now with the benefit of season three pointing the way to where the show was headed.

I didn't fully succeed at the rewatch. Its still a "bucket list" item but I got 6/10ths of the way through the first season and I felt comfortable saying "no." Its a darker show and one that emphasizes character arcs, character experiences, and the performance of emotion over the stoic, proceduralist, "competency porn" that marked the TNG era. There has definitely been a pulling back from some of the conceits of TNG: that 24th century humanity was radically altered in some core way, almost genetically from us (at the time) 20th century brutes, and that the Federation was almost supernaturally wise and virtuous.

Empirically speaking, both of these concepts were always memes. Oh to be sure, we were seeing a civilization that avowed a particular set of values that resonated very strongly with a particular sort of 1990s secular humanist and generally behaves relatively virtuously if your preferences are wired towards amiability over conflict. Yet it wasn't without its blindspots. My Roman Empire is that the Federation's superpower is not that it is perfectly just and wise at all times and places, its that it is a society whose acculturation process creates people who are somewhat less egotistical, more curious, and less impulsive under stress with the end result being that as a civilization, its superpower is responding to new information with openness and alacrity.

Thus, while there are judicious complaints about Picard: I am not a fan of using the Federation abdicating responsibility for a fellow sentient species, even one it has been hostile with for centuries, as a metaphor for disowning the victims of far flung conflicts and cataclysms in the real world. I'm okay with a flawed Federation that needs to confront its own failings, but this was pretty extreme. Well mostly extreme. There are at least two times Picard had to be talked into saving a prewarp civilization from certain doom because something something Prime Directive even though the Enterprise could do it with trivial effort and with minimal chance of overtly disrupting the society in question. Data's penpal and Worf's brother's preindustrial people.

Overall, I land that Picard doesn't alter the setting beyond recognition, beyond being a setting where justice ultimately prevails, or beyond being fairly labeled "Star Trek."

So what about Discovery?

Now that its over, its as good a time as any for a retrospective. My intent is to watch the first season over again, because its been a loooong time. I've always tried to watch the show in a charitable spirit, much as I have Picard. I try to be radically self aware in that I know my opinions are subjective, that my preferences are rooted in my own values and experiences, and that other people could read the same situation in different ways.

In addition, there are always at least two ways to analyze Star Trek. There's the literal way: which is what is happening and what that tells us about the people and the universe (sometimes called Watsonian) and the Doylist: the "meta" aspects. What is the show actually trying to do from a storytelling standpoint? What symbols is it invoking? What storytelling shorthands is it using? What messages or themes is it trying to convey and, if these really are the correct messages, how well is it actually selling those themes?

To be frank, I've often not been the biggest fan of Discovery from a technical standpoint. I've often felt that its internal logic is sloppy and that, like Picard, it frequently undercuts the messaging I believe it is trying to convey with that very same poor internal logic or by relying heavily on "telling" rather than "showing" us what to think.

Star Trek as a franchise loves to look straight at the camera and lecture us primitive 20th/21st century apes on our failures. Maybe its the nostalgia, but Discovery and Picard have generally both felt like they are less trusting of their audience to interpret the correct moral of the story. Of course I could be parroting a popular complaint about modern fiction that emphasizes "progressive" themes that is itself very likely a perpetual complaint about fiction that emphasizes "progressive" themes, and of course grandpa TOS was the victim of "OG cancel culture" in the form of various networks in various localities threatening to or even outright refusing to air the episode with the Kirk/Uhura kiss.

So in no particular order what I want to investigate is:

Is Discovery "pedantic"? Pedantic being highly subjective. One quirk about me is that it makes me irritable to feel like I'm being lectured on appropriate conduct and beliefs by someone who I share beliefs with, but is articulating those beliefs in a way that makes me feel pandered to (as in I'm not sure the source is as committed as I am) or feels superficial, flattening, or essentializing.

Is Discovery a deconstruction of Star Trek? As in it subverts core ideas in a way that would irk people who are committed to those themes. If so, which themes and is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Are the augmentations, contradictions, and retcons from "established canon" interesting and worthwhile story devices? I'm not anti-retcon and I'm not a canon purist, Star Trek by virtue of having many, many, many contributors is better interpreted as a mythology than a wholly coherent setting; but retcons can and should be judged on their merits.

Is Burnham a "Mary Sue?" This is an almost useless question because of its subjectivity. Its extra useless because in Star Trek, almost every Starfleet character is a polymath capable of inventing entire new fields of science on the spot out of rocks and vibes. There's also a layer of sexism and colorism to it. To the fullest extent possible, I want to frame this question in terms of what are the consequences to the story and worldbuilding from having a main character and less on whether or not that main character has merit.

To some extent this will also address whether Burnham's narrative arcs have robust narrative logic or if there are "too many cooks in the kitchen" resulting in a character who presents as incoherent from episode to episode and successful by fiat. This is definitely something that I think was smoothed over in seasons 4 and 5, starting with what I think was an intentional shift in her characterization as early as season 3.

Its possible my own preference for the more measured tone of network TV era Trek may lead me into the same minefields as the trolls in comment sections across the internet, but I'm hoping to keep my self awareness vivid.

My intent is to go for the full first season. I'm looking forward to it because my memories are extremely fuzzy and I authentically would be delighted to find delights that I had forgotten about.

[persianatpenn]

زرتشتی

Zoroastrianism, one of the earliest monotheistic religions in the world, has been embedded within Persian culture since its founding in ancient Iran around 1500 BCE. It was the official religion of the Persian Empire. Influencing modern religions today, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Zoroastrianism was founded by the prophet Zoroaster (Zarathustra), who received a vision from Ahura Mazda, who emphasized the importance of one god. Zoroaster believed his mission was to spread these teachings to others from Ahura Mazda. The forces of good and evil are heavily moralized concepts. Ahura Mazda, who existed eternally and was the creator of the universe, representing the good, created the world and knew Angra Mainyu, the forces of evil, would try to attack it, causing a longing fight between the two. Angra Mainyu was the darkness that sought to destroy Ahura Mazda and his creations, making the world constantly struggle. These dualistic views established the core beliefs of Zoroastrianism: the balance of good and evil. Zoroastrians believe evil is only temporary in our world, but through good thought, deeds, and words, Angra Mainyu can be defeated, and Ahura Mazda’s principles will triumph over evil forces. 

Maintaining the inevitable humanistic traits of good and evil within everyone. Zoroastrians emphasize the three principles اندیشه ، گفتار و کردار نیک در پیام زرتشت (good thoughts, words, and deeds) which reflect the holistic approach of life. Good thoughts align with Ahura Mazda’s teachings of displaying truth and wisdom, reflecting good words. When you think good thoughts, the words you utter will be positive and promote kindness. Through one’s good thoughts and words, a person’s actions follow, manifesting goodness and truthfulness in their deeds. These founding principles allow Zoroastrans to participate in their battle against evil. 

The four elements—earth, fire, water, air, and soil—are sacred and symbolize life’s essential forces. Fire and the sun expressly represent the light from Ahura Mazda, where Ahura Mazda is light itself. In many temples, this is why Zoroastrians pray towards the sun, light, and fire. A sacred fire in Zoroastrian temples is continuously burning to maintain the light and guidance of Ahura Mazda. The other elements, air, water, and soil, are also essential in their faith. Water symbolizes the purity and cleansing for all of life. While air is vital for living, it represents connecting with all living things. Soil supports growth and sustains life. These four elements are viewed as sacred, each representing life's meaning. Zoroastrians believe it is their responsibility to protect and preserve the earth’s natural resources, aligning with the principles of good thoughts, deeds, and words. 

Although the number of Zoroastrian followers has drastically decreased, the founding principles of maintaining good thoughts, deeds, and words remain deeply influential in Persian culture. As a young child, my family instilled these three principles in my life. Explaining the importance of having good thoughts because they create honesty and wisdom within oneself. The good words we spread to others allow us to have compassion and respect for one another. Good deeds, formulated from our good thoughts and words, show someone's character and values. On the last Wednesday of the year before Nowruz (Persian New Year), my family celebrates by jumping over fire (چهارشنبه سوری), an ancient Zoroastrian ritual. While jumping over the fire, we say,   

“زردی من از تو، سر خی تو از من”  which translates to “May my paleness be yours, and may your redness be mine.” This statement is said to transfer your troubles to the fire. As you enter the new year, the fire cleanses the body and spirit from the old year. Although I do not practice Zoroastrianism, I follow these teachings to honor my heritage and continue a tradition of living righteously. 

~aerisjoon

Iran Chamber Society: Religion in Iran: Zoroaster and Zoroastrians in Iran. (2024). Iranchamber.com. https://www.iranchamber.com/religions/articles/zoroaster_zoroastrians_in_iran.php

Zoroastrianism - Ahura Mazda, Dualism, Fire Worship | Britannica. (2024). Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Zoroastrianism/Beliefs-and-mythology#ref9194

[aronarchy]

Anarchy and Transhumanism

Transhumanism… challenges essentialist definitions of the “human” and is sometimes framed as part of a wider discourse in feminist and queer theory concerned with cyborg identities and “inhumanisms.” Transhumanism can be seen as either an aggressive critique of humanism, or alternatively as an extension of specific humanist values beyond the arbitrary species category of “human.” Transhumanism demands that we interrogate our desires and values beyond the happenstance of What Is, accepting neither the authority of arbitrary social constructs like gender nor a blind fealty to how our bodies presently function.

As one would expect, transgender issues have been at the core of transhumanism from the start. But transhumanism radically expands on trans liberation to situate it as part of a much wider array of struggles for freedom in the construction and operation of our bodies and the surrounding world. A number of anarcho-transhumanists work on immediately practical projects that give people more control over their bodies—the operation of abortion clinics, the distribution of naloxone, or the 3D printing of open-source prosthetics for children. But transhumanists also ask radical questions like: Why is it not only the case that our society is okay with the involuntary decay and death of the elderly but also that it moralizes in support of their perpetual extermination?

The struggle for life extension is certainly not the entirety of transhumanism, but it is an important example of the kind of campaign transhumanists initiated and continue, shockingly, to fight largely alone. The notion that an objectively “good life” extends to seventy or a hundred years but no further is clearly arbitrary, and yet the opinion that it does is both nearly universally held and violently defended. Many early transhumanists were shocked by this response, but it illustrates how people can easily become staunch defenders of existing catastrophes for fear of otherwise having to reconsider standing assumptions in their own lives. In the same way that people will defend mandatory military service or murdering animals for food, the arguments for death are clearly defensive rationalizations—and rational responses are easy to formulate:

“Death gives life its meaning.” Yet how is death at seventy years old more meaningful than death at five years old or at two hundred years old? If an eighty-year-old woman gets to live and work on her poetry for another five decades, does that really undermine your capacity to find meaning so badly that you’d prefer to see her murdered?

“We would get bored.” This seems nothing more than a call to build a world that isn’t boring! Never mind the wild possibilities embedded in both anarchism and transhumanism; it would take almost three hundred thousand years to read every book in existence today. There are already 100 million recorded songs in the world. There are thousands of languages with their own conceptual ecosystems and their own poetry. There are hundreds of fields of inquiry, rich and fascinating, in which to immerse yourself. There are vast arrays of experiences and novel kinds of relationships to explore. Surely we can do with a few more centuries at least.

“Old, static perspectives would clog up the world.” It’s a pretty absurd and horrifying to instinctively appeal to genocide as the best means to solve the problem of the rigidity of people’ perspectives or identities. Over a hundred billion humans have died since the arrival of Homo sapiens on the scene. At best they were only able to convey the tiniest sliver of their subjective experiences, their insights and dreams, before everything else inside them was abruptly snuffed out. People say that every time an elder dies it’s like a library’s being burned to the ground. We’ve already lost 100 billion libraries! There are no doubt infinite myriad ways we might live and change, but it would be strange indeed if the sharp binary of sudden, massive, and irreversible loss that is currently standard were universally ideal.

Life extension is an illustrative example that gets to the heart of what transhumanism offers as a continuation of anarchism’s radicalism: the capacity to demand that unexamined norms or conventions justify themselves, to challenge things otherwise accepted.

Anarcho-transhumanism breaks down many other common operating assumptions about the world, just as it seeks to expand and explore the scope of what is possible. Radicalism is all about pressing assumptions and models into alien contexts and seeing what breaks down in order to better clarify what dynamics are more fundamentally rooted. Anarcho-transhumanism seeks to advance anarchism through this kind of clarification—to get it into better fighting shape so it can deal more effectively with the future, to make it capable of fighting in all situations, not just those specific to particular contexts.

[cleoselene]

I think about The Good Place and how it ranks as one of my favorite shows of all time (and definitely my favorite comedy) and what was so appealing about it was not just the writing and the characters, but the concept was so... humanist? For a show about the afterlife.

Like there was never a focus on finding God. It was about finding the best version of yourself, and how you can find that best version of yourself by loving other people and embracing them with their flaws, but also realizing that working on your own flaws makes you happier.

It's an extremely secular show for something that tackles such big philosophical questions. The magical things are exciting at first but ultimately unimpressive to these characters unless they have something real to love and lose. It shows the value of experiencing the full spectrum of human emotions, because if all you feel all the time is uninterrupted bliss, you become numb.

It starts out with the premise that Hell is other people, and leaves with concluding that heaven is also other people, and that you should do good things for others because it's just the right thing to do, and never is their a God figure. There are people with authority, people who have been empowered, like Gen, but she is never treated as God despite having the most power. Even the most powerful beings are shown as fallible and having the capacity to learn from mistakes.

It's just fundamentally a show where people get better because they want to become better people, and they want to be better TO other people. Just really humanist at its core.

[lancrewizzard]

I think I can finally articulate why I feel that the superior Good Omens adaptation is the radio play (audiomens). It isn't that the tv show (showmens? nah, doesn't work) veered further away from the source material, even though it did, because I think Audiomens' greatest weakness is its attempt at cramming as many original book lines into it as possible. It's all about the use of the medium as much as it's about the changes to the core themes of the book.

Audiomens made a very fun decision to have everything in the story essentially "overheard" without a need for a narrator. It means that several characters are more emotionally and self aware than they were in the book, but it generally works well and helps the listener suspend their disbelief as they hear the characters work through the story. We sadly lost the "Baby A, Baby B, and Baby C the Adversary, Destroyer of Kings, Angel of the Bottomless Pit, Great Beast that is called Dragon, Prince of This World, Father of Lies, Spawn of Satan, and Lord of Darkness" part, but enough good lines were kept in places they didn't fully fit that I can accept this was probably for the best. It's not perfect by any means but the way the story is told is, I think, the perfect fit for radio.

By contrast, TV Omens, despite the fact that they also had all the visual language of television at their disposal, chose to have a literally omniscient narrator. This immediately gave it the same weird moments as Audiomens where bits of the book are lifted wholecloth and delivered to the ears rather than finding a more elegant way to convey the information. Not only that but it undercuts the humanist message of the book, where God's existence is irrelevant, and what matter are the actions of normal* people. In the show, God is all knowing, watching events unfold, being involved in a way that seems completely at odds with the intentional separation even Aziraphale had to God in the book. In fact, in the radio play, it was Aziraphale who said the line about God being the dealer in the ineffable game of his own devising who won't tell you the rules and who smiles all the time.

I don't remember who revived the dove in Audiomens. I do remember that they remembered to include the random soldier who got disappeared by Aziraphale appearing back home in the US. I also remember that a minor demon got killed at Crowley's trial just to show the audience (us and the demons) the stakes. Life feels cheaper in the tv show, and I think that's terribly sad.

*for a given value of "normal" anyway

[yhwhrulz]

Morning and Evening with A.W. Tozer Devotional for October 19

Tozer in the Morning GOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL

When the eternal Son of God became the Son of Man and walked on this earth, He always called individuals to His side. Jesus did not come into the world to deal with statistics! He deals with individuals and that is why the Christian message is and always has been: "God loves the world! He loves the masses and throngs only because they are made up of individuals. He loves every individual person in the world!" In the great humanistic tide of our day, the individual is no longer the concern. We are pressed to think of the human race in a lump. We are schooled to think of the human race in terms of statistics. In many nations, the state is made to be everything and the individual means nothing at all. Into the very face and strength of this kind of humanism comes the Christian evangel, the good news of salvation, wondrously alight with the assurance for all who will listen: "You are an individual and you matter to God! His concern is not for genes and species but for the individuals He has created!"

Tozer in the Evening Man - The Dwelling Place of God - What Men Live By

HUMAN LIFE HAS ITS CENTRAL CORE where lie the things men live by. These things are constant. They change not from age to age, but are the same among all races throughout the world always.

Life also has its marginal zones where lie the things that are relatively unimportant. These change from generation to generation and vary from people to people.

It is at the central core that men are one, and it is on the marginal zones that they differ from each other. Yet the marginal things divide the peoples of the world radically and seriously. Most of the enmities of the earth have arisen from differences that did not matter basically; but because the people could not distinguish things men live by from things they live with these enmities arose between them, and often led to persecutions, murders and bloody wars.

Were men everywhere to ignore the things that matter little or not at all and give serious attention to the few really important things, most of the walls that divide men would be thrown down at once and a world of endless sufferings ended.

What does matter after all? What are the great facts that are good all the time everywhere among all men? What are the axiomatic truths upon which all human life may rest with confidence? Fortunately they are not many. Here are the chief ones:

Only God is great. Men have sought to place greatness elsewhere, in things, in events, in men; but the human soul is too great to attribute greatness to itself, and certainly too great to believe that things or events can possess true greatness.

The greatness that men seem to have is as the greatness of moonlight, which is but the glory of the sun reflected. Man's glory is borrowed. He shines in the light that never was on land or sea. He reflects God's greatness but has none of his own.

"Before Thy ever-blazing throne We ask no luster of our own."*

Only God is wise. Man's wisdom has ever been the badge of his superiority and the cause of his most arrogant pride; yet it fails him constantly. He cannot by his wisdom find the answer to the old questions concerning himself: Whence? What? Why? Whither? By it he cannot secure the blessings he wants most: to escape pain, to stay young and to stay alive.

Yet man boasts of his wisdom, God waits, the ages pass, and time and space and matter and motion and life and death join to tell us that only God is wise.

Apart from God nothing matters. We think that health matters, that freedom matters, or knowledge or art or civilization. And but for one insistent word they would matter indeed. That word is eternity.

Grant that men possess perpetual being and the preciousness of every earthly treasure is gone instantly. God is to our eternal being what our heart is to our body. The lungs, the liver, the kidneys have value as they relate to the heart. Let the heart stop and the rest of the organs promptly collapse. Apart from God, what is money, fame, education, civilization? Exactly nothing at all, for men must leave all these things behind them and one by one go to eternity. Let God hide His face and nothing thereafter is worth the effort.

Only what we do in God will remain to us at last.

Man is made in the image of his Creator and has an urge toward creative activity. When he left the Garden his creative urge did not leave him. He must build, always build; his materials may be brick, paint, musical notes, scientific data, systems of thought; but always he must build, from the boy that builds a toy to the man that builds an empire.

Yet time is against him, for it wears out everything it touches. Its grinding action makes dust of civilizations and cities and men. A lifetime of toil dies with the toiler. But God puts immortality in all our loving efforts for Him and shares His eternity with all who love and trust Him.

Human sin is real. Suspicion, hate, envy, power, lust and greed keep the world in a state of continual ferment, while bespectacled men stand unblinking and assure classes of eager students that the whole idea of sin is outmoded and sin itself non-existent.

In spite of all our smooth talk sin continues to ride the race of man. Until its heavy weight is lifted from the soul nothing else has any right to our attention, for sin shuts us out from the presence of the God whose favor alone gives life any satisfactory reason for being.

With God there is forgiveness. "The Lord God, merciful and gracious . . . keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." So says the Old Testament. *"The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins," says the New.

God's mercy heads up in the Man Christ Jesus who is God and man by the mystery of the Incarnation. He can and does forgive sin because the sin was committed against Him in the first place. The soul in Christ has found the One that matters. His heaviest problem is solved; his basic philosophy is sound; his eyes are open and he knows the true from the false.

Only what God protects is safe. All else perishes with the using or the hoarding. Paul knew this secret. He said, "He is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."***

Blessed Treasure. Blessed Keeper. Blessed Day.

Exodus 34:6 * * Matthew 9: 6 *** 2 Timothy 1:12

Copyright Statement This material is considered in the public domain.

[idigitizellp21]

Exploring Humanistic Psychotherapy: A Journey Of Self-Discovery

In the vast landscape of psychotherapy approaches, humanistic psychotherapy stands out as a deeply compassionate and client-centered approach to understanding and healing the human psyche. Developed in the mid-20th century by luminaries like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, humanistic psychotherapy places the individual at the center of their own therapeutic journey. This blog explores the key principles, techniques, and benefits of humanistic psychotherapy while referencing some influential works in the field.

The Humanistic Paradigm

Humanistic psychotherapy is rooted in the belief that every individual has an innate drive toward self-actualization — a desire to fulfill their potential and become the best version of themselves. This contrasts with other therapeutic approaches that may focus on pathology or symptom reduction. Two foundational figures in humanistic psychology, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, paved the way for this approach.

Carl Rogers and Client-Centered Therapy

Carl Rogers’ Client-Centered Therapy, outlined in his book “On Becoming a Person” (1961), emphasizes the importance of the therapeutic relationship. In this approach, the therapist provides an empathetic, non-judgmental, and unconditional positive regard for the client. This creates an environment where the client can explore their thoughts and emotions freely, fostering self-discovery and personal growth.

Abraham Maslow and Self-Actualization

Maslow’s “Motivation and Personality” (1954) introduced the hierarchy of needs, with self-actualization at its pinnacle. Humanistic therapists draw upon Maslow’s ideas to help clients move towards self-actualization by addressing basic needs like safety and belonging while also encouraging personal growth and creativity.

Core Principles of Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Holistic Approach: Humanistic therapy views individuals as whole beings, incorporating their thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and spiritual dimensions into the therapeutic process.

2. Self-Exploration: Clients are encouraged to explore their feelings, beliefs, and values, fostering self-awareness and personal insight.

3. Non-Directive: Therapists act as facilitators, not directors, allowing clients to guide the sessions in a direction that feels most relevant to their personal growth.

4. Unconditional Positive Regard: Therapists provide unwavering acceptance and support, creating a safe space for clients to express themselves authentically.

Techniques in Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Active Listening: Therapists practice empathetic listening to understand the client’s experiences without judgment or interpretation.

2. Reflection: Therapists reflect the client’s feelings and thoughts back to them, aiding self-awareness and deeper understanding.

3. Gestalt Therapy: Developed by Fritz Perls, this technique explores the integration of conflicting aspects of the self, often through role-playing or empty chair exercises.

Benefits of Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Self-Discovery: Clients gain a deeper understanding of themselves, their values, and their goals, leading to increased self-acceptance and authenticity.

2. Enhanced Relationships: Improved self-awareness and empathy cultivated during therapy can enhance personal and professional relationships.

3. Personal Growth: Humanistic psychotherapy fosters personal growth and the pursuit of one’s potential, promoting a fulfilling and meaningful life.

Conclusion

Humanistic psychotherapy offers a profound and transformative approach to mental health and personal development. Rooted in the belief in each person’s potential for growth and self-actualization, it provides a therapeutic journey focused on self-discovery, empowerment, and authenticity. As Carl Rogers eloquently stated, “The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change.” In the realm of humanistic psychotherapy, this acceptance forms the foundation for lasting personal transformation.

– Urveez Kakalia.

[maacwanowrie]

How to establish a recognisable visual style

Line, shape, colour, texture, type, space, and image are the seven foundational components of graphic design. Each has advantages and disadvantages of its own. You can advance your graphic design portfolio if you master these fundamental components. so short term graphic design courses in Pune have many opportunities to take on a range of new and exciting projects.

  1. Use your brand's identity

2. Identify your audience

3. Recognize the goal of your brand.

4. Adjust your resources

5. Be dependable

 1. Utilize your brand's identity in 

You may create a brand identity that unifies your mission, beliefs, and objectives in one place with the aid of a clearly defined brand strategy. You'll be able to anticipate your visual identity within this framework and maintain consistency throughout.

 Look at the athleisure clothing line LNDR, which, in the words of its creators, was developed for "the lifestyle we want to live, the items we want to wear, and the people we wanted to hang out with." The goods themselves have a straightforward design that prioritises durability and functionality. This viewpoint is suitably mirrored in LNDR's visual identity, which emphasises a clean design and a neutral colour scheme. Its graphic assets define the brand's identity and are instantly identifiable on everything from their website to their social media posts.

 2. Understand your audience

Consider that you need to choose what to dress as you prepare to attend a party. You should first think about where and who will be attending the soiree. Is it a sizable black-tie event or a casual outside cookout with a few friends? When you are aware of the party's setting, you can dress appropriately.

 When developing your visual identity, the same is valid. You may develop an acceptable visual language that effectively communicates with your goal audience if you have a thorough understanding of your target market.

 You must first create your buyer personas in order to better comprehend and connect with your target audience. By focusing on certain demographics like age, gender, income, education, values, views, and motives, you can establish precise criteria for who your brand should be targeting. This will then influence the visual identity decisions you make.

 3. Recognize the objective of your brand.

Your branding decisions will be influenced by your understanding of the motivation behind your company in every way. For instance, the cutting-edge mental wellness platform Real is transforming online counselling and de-stigmatizing mental illness. Each touchstone is impacted by the brand's purpose to "not just normalise mental health treatment, but celebrate it."

 Each visual element meticulously underscores the brand's mission to make therapy more approachable for a new generation, from Real's blue colour scheme—a colour associated with relaxation or serenity—to their use of hand-drawn artwork. Similar to their goods and aim, their design aesthetic is warm and humanistic.

 4. Adjust your resources

Understanding the intricacies of each medium can help you not only create better but also communicate better in order to maximise your visual identity. Even though your business may have a very explicit brand style guide, knowing how to apply it is just as crucial.

 Since several designers will work on various assets, they must comprehend the core visual identity in order to modify each asset appropriately. This can be as easy as making sure your logo design has the suitable size or resolution for use across various media or selecting the proper colour scheme for online documents as opposed to printed ones. To see this in action, look at some solid brand style guide examples.

 The visual identity of your brand will be stronger and more appealing to your audience if you pay attention to consumer behaviours, habits, and the reason behind each branding asset.

 05. Be dependable

Your visual identity requires consistency on two levels. Initially, as was already said, it serves as a guide for design decisions for your branding team. Consistency makes ensuring that every piece of branding collateral is uniform by directing the creative process with a purpose.

 Second, it has an impact on customers, stakeholders, and rivals on the outside. The only thing that keeps devoted customers coming back repeatedly is consistent branding. It's also important to remember that consistency doesn't have to mean rigidity: as a brand gains momentum and expands, it should develop. Simply put, brand consistency creates a solid foundation on which a brand can be built.

[funkymbtifiction]

27 Tritype Connections

By Karkino.

How the combinations interact and/or amplify each other.

1 + 2 Node (125, 126, 127) The Guide • Enhance the natural wings of 1 and 2; • Double compliant; • May secretly feel as if they are better than others; • Feel that they must help people grow; • Mix of warmth and cold attitude; • May push people too much; "I know you can do better"; • Easily frustrated with laziness, inattentive behavior; • Strong internal critic; "I must show the example, I must be nice and accepting, etc." • Extremely sensitive to ungratefulness.

1 + 3 Line (135, 136, 137) The Super Achiever • Double competent; • Strong work ethics and desire to perform; • Internal critic : "I must deliver and be the best yet be humble about it"; • Internal struggle between the needs to be correct/fair and to be praised/admired; • On of the most productive and efficient combinations; • Perfectionist and Critical about their work and image; • Very sensitive to social recognition, even if not dominant social instinct; • Can become workaholic; "My work is my worth" • Very cold, rigid personality. May be a bit less strong with a 2 wing.

1 + 4 Line (145, 146, 147) The Humanist • Enhances the natural line of 1/4; • Double frustration; • Ethical and spiritual traits of the 1 is highlighted; • Hard to please, critical of self and others; • "There's always something missing ; You don't understand"; • Conflicting relationship with their emotions : refrain from feeling, then let go; • May have religious/spiritual tendencies; • Can become a highly refined individual, with unique tastes and values; • Can look very NF (MBTI) even if not.

1 + 5 Line (154, 153, 152) The Rational • Highly cerebral; • Usually displays intellectual tastes and hunger for knowledge; • Not easily satisfied with the superficial answers; knows what and how to search for them; • Very structured mind; likes to organize information (MBTI can modify that); • Attentive and focused; Can easily dive into its mind; • Very curious; always want to know why you think this or that; • Very aloof and distant, even with a 2 wing or fix; • Can give extremely detailed and structured information; • May be awkward in social settings, not known for its spontaneity.

1 + 6 Line (162, 163, 164) The Guardian • Double Compliant; • Most structured-oriented of all combinations; • Usually likes to plan ahead and know where they going; • Trust is not only a concept, but a vital line of conduct; • May be a bit intolerant of innovative and counterculture ideas; • Can often take a leadership role and be sensitive to the underdog cause; • Can look very SJ (MBTI) even if not; • Critical outlook but still can be congenial and understanding (especially if dominant self-preservation instinct).

1 + 7 Line (127, 137, 147) The Catalyst • Enhances the natural line of 1/7; • Very internally conflicted : wants structure and freedom; • May let go of the pressure of the internal critic more easily than the other 1 combinations; • Can look serious and enthusiastic at the same time; • Can implement order and morals in a fun and colorful way; • Perfectionist, even in their creative side; • May be hard to follow with their high ideals; • Unpredictable emotional demonstrations, mostly anger and frustration (especially if dominant sexual instinct); • Often a strong connection to their intuitive function (MBTI).

2 + 5 Line (125, 258, 259) The Advisor • Double rejection; • Emotionally guarded but appears amiable; • Often strong observational skills, especially for people; • Good listeners; • Sociable, but need time for themselves; • Help people by giving out advice, tips and personal knowledge; • Often express their anger in an indirect fashion, even if core 8; • Can spend a long time of their day observing and analyzing people; • Often hidden intentions, not truly open with what they want.

2 + 6 Line (126, 268, 269) The Helper • Double compliant; • Most service-oriented combination; • Attentive to others' needs; • Likes to be part of a team or be with people in general; • Values comes from being helpful and trustworthy; • Both energies combine well : 2's pride with 6's fear makes an overall great friend; • Fear to be excluded, outside of the social circle, even if not dominant social instinct; • Anxious to be of service, may create opportunities to help; • May be clingy and dependent.

2 + 7 Line (127, 278, 279) The Jovialist • Double positive outlook; • Very sociable and gregarious; • Natural entertainer, likes to laugh; • Possess natural charm and humor to entice people; • Bored and anxious when alone, needs the crowd to be stimulated; • 2w3 are often paired with this fix; • Looks SP or Extroverted Feeling (MBTI) even if not; • Doesn't like negativity at all; • Could help being a little more realistic about facing their problems.

2 + 8 Line (258, 268, 278) The Protector • Enhances the natural 2/8 line; • Double rejection; • Help people in a forceful, direct approach; • Very sensitive to being ignored or rejected; • "I know what's better for you than you do, so lemme help!"; • Most protective combination of all; • Can get very angry quickly, then apologize in fear of being unloved; • Mama/papa bear archetype.

2 + 9 Line (259, 269, 279) The Benevolent • Double positive outlook; • Soft, healing quality; • Dreamy, yet also focused on others; • Quiet presence but often ready to comfort with positive words; • Unassertive, may not know how to deal with negativity; • If core 2, softens a lot of the pride edges and may be blind to it; • If self-preservation dominant, may show their love with practical tasks (cooking, chores, etc.); • Very humble combination; • If sexual dominant, may become the supportive wife or husband, fusing with their mate.

3 + 5 Line (135, 358, 359) The Professional • Double competent; • Like to be known for their technical expertise; • Assumed image of a know-it-all, the game trivia nightmare; • Gives a core 5 more versatility and confidence to show what they're made of; • Productive, yet work at their own pace, may be procrastinator (especially with 359); • May run the risk of becoming robotic and unemotional; • See feelings ask inconsequential and a lack of time (less apparent with dominant sexual instinct or 4 wing); • Conceal their true identity, shapeshifters; • Very often Thinking types in MBTI.

3 + 6 Line (136, 368, 369) The Dutiful • Enhances the natural 3/6 line; • Double Attachment; • Very loyal and productive; • They often act for the greater good of their community or partner(s); • Like to show their loyalty and love through concrete actions; • Anxious if the authority question their value or their work; • Can become competitive in order to please the thing that gives them security (bosses, parents, partners, etc.); • Can adapt their speech and mannerism in order to conform better to their surroundings; • May question authority behind its back but support and perform in front of them.

3 + 7 Line (137, 378, 379) The Persuader • Double assertive; • Very positive combination; • Charming but a bit pushy in their demeanor; • Combine efficiency with entertainment : life is a game; • Like to promote the image of a successful, happy person; • May look fake and trying too much; • Like to submit innovative and original ideas to problems; • May follow rules, but prefer to make a colorful impact; • Don't have time for negativity or dealing with psychological problems.

3 + 8 Line (358, 368, 378) The Challenger • Double assertive; • Very competitive and aggressive; • "There's nothing I can't do, just watch me" • A Fighter archetype, don't give up easily; • May show an image of invulnerability at all times; • "No, you got a problem, no me!" • Hard to let things go and let their emotions speak; • May have an overwhelming presence; • Absolutely hates to lose; very strong egotistical stance.

3 + 9 Line (359, 369, 379) The Stabilizer • Enhances the natural 3/9 line; • Double attachment; • "Yeah, no worries, I can do that"; "Let me handle this"; • Steady, productive presence; • Very adaptable and accommodating; • Are efficient but don't usually push themselves further than what's expected of them; • Can pride themselves in being tolerant, uncomplicated and agreeable; • Unemotional, dry personality; • Hide their stubbornness by only adapting in surface and doing superficial changes.

4 + 5 Node (145, 458, 459) The Introspective • Enhances the natural wings of 4 and 5; • Deep thinker and feeler; • Very introverted and private; • Feel tired quickly when they in unfamiliar events; low energy overall; • Slow to commit to new habits and persons; • Generally prefer written communication to spoken one; • Great capacity to pursue their passions and interests; • Dislike changes in environment; • They have a hard time communicating their feelings to people (a little less if dominant social instinct);

4 + 6 Line (146, 468, 469) The Sensitive Soul • Double reactive; • Take a great deal of time analyzing and sorting out their feelings and thoughts; • Anxious about their identity, about what to trust; • Most emotionally sensitive and reactive combination; • Conflict between external security and maintaining personal identity; • "Can I trust him/her?"; "I feel so vulnerable"; • When they engage into something, they always have doubts ("Is this for me?", "Will I be able to do it?") • Creative, but need reassurance in their abilities and support from others; • Can be very volatile and explosive is they feel threatened.

4 + 7 Line (147, 478, 479) The Whimsical • Double frustration; • Very idealistic but with unstable energy; • Want significance and playfulness in their work; • Very creative and imaginative, dreamy personality; • Capricious and a bit of a brat; wants this done their way; • Sadness in hidden behind impish or childlike behavior; • Bipolar/dysthymic mind; oscillate between sadness and joy; • Often easily bored; • See things that are missing in order for the situation to be magical and original.

4 + 8 Line (458, 468, 478) The Maskless • Double reactive; • Very intense character regardless of the dominant instinct; • Reject inauthentic behavior; • Feel things strongly and express them in a powerful way (especially 468); • Protect the vulnerable, the rejected, the abandoned (especially with dominant social instinct); • Often provocative and defying taboos; • Likes to dig deep into emotional traumas (especially 458); • With core 8, gives an incentive to look into their vulnerable side; • With core 4, pushes them to act upon what they believe.

4 + 9 Line (459, 469, 479) The Receptive • Double withdrawn; • Hide their sadness with a smile; • The 9 fix erodes the melancholic side of 4, making it less jarring; • The 4 fix encourages the core 9 to look into their emotional side; • Ghostly, wispy demeanor; • Very passive and often unassuming; • Good listener, but may focus too much on the sad/emotional part of the conversation; • Very sensitive to painful experiences, retreat when feeling hurt; • Can be critical, but hide their comments from the public eye.

5 + 8 Line (258, 358, 458) The Independent • Double rejection; • Enhances the natural 5/8 line; • Strategic thinking; • Can act behind-the-scenes in a surprising way; Almost ninja-like; • Silently watchful and ready to act in accordance to plan; • Mix of hot and cold energy; may be hard to follow and hard to know; • Often have a razor-sharp mind and are very good at problem-solving; • Have a difficult time connecting with others in a casual, superficial way; • Menacing presence even if unintentional (especially with core 8).

5 + 9 Line (259, 359, 459) The Observer • Double withdrawn; • Aloof and detached personality; • Like to take their time to understand things their own way; • Like their peace and quiet time in order to recharge; • Usually very intelligent, may have a hard time voicing up their opinions; • Can be very quiet, but also very talkative when talking about something they like; • When they not agree with something, they may become argumentative but often give up; • Very observant and curious about a plethora of things; • Almost always introverted MBTI type.

6 + 8 Line (268, 368, 468) The Fighter �� Double reactive; • Most confrontational combination (most aggressive tritype is 368); • Want to see the truth in all situation; • Often smell something fishy that others might not detect; • Very sensitive to power dynamics (personal and social); • Argumentative and emotional even in less dramatic situations; • May see problems where they aren't, a bit paranoiac; • Very protective about what they trust and believe into; • Like to know what they're going into.

6 + 9 Line (269, 369, 469) The Follower • Double attachment; • Often unassuming when alone, feel better in groups; • Feel harmony and contentment when in a familiar environment with their peers; • Unsure about their capacity to act alone, so they side with security; • Loyal and gentle with who they know and love; Aloof and anxious about the unknown; • The 9 fix helps the core 6 relax and being more tolerant and accepting of difference; • The 6 fix helps the core 9 being less indolent and more proactive when helping others; • Usually gentle and amiable, but can become secretive and anxious if they feel threatened; • Their biggest weakness is to act and think by themselves when necessary.

7 + 8 Node (278, 378, 478) The Conqueror • Double assertive; • Enhances the natural wings of 7 and 8; • Life is a playground; "I take what I want"; • Natural hedonistic and realistic approach to life; • May take for granted what others find offensive and obnoxious; • Good negotiator; Always find a way to win something; • Quick thinker and smooth talker; direct speech but in a funny, original way; • Hate limits and regulations, to the point of circumventing or breaking rules in order to get what they want; • Have a hard time to slow down and think about the consequences at first.

7 + 9 Line (279, 379, 479) The Optimist • Double positive outlook; • Gentle and ethereal; • May be a bit out of touch with reality; • Always have a alternate positive view of even bad or tragic events; • Soft, expansive energy, always dreaming about what could be; • Often have a lazy side that don't want to deal with boring or serious tasks; • Most prone to have symptoms of Attention Deficit Disorder of all the combinations; • Create their own rosy bubble when dreary times arise; • May run the risk of being too positive and unfocused on taking real action.

[sarkos]

Shortly before he died in 2007, the celebrated American novelist, iconoclast and second world war veteran Kurt Vonnegut gave a final interview. “My country is in ruins,” he said. “I’m a fish in a poisoned fishbowl.” Vonnegut was 84, and sounded razor sharp as he spoke about inequality and political shortsightedness, adding that in the history of the United States “one thing that no cabinet has ever had is a Secretary of the Future, and there are no plans at all for my children and grandchildren.” “Why should I care about future generations?” asked the comedian Groucho Marx. “What have they ever done for me?” “The Department of the Future would set in motion a realignment of priorities in all aspects of society,” proposes geology professor Marcia Bjornerud in her compelling book Timefulness. “Resource conservation would again become a core value and patriotic virtue. Tax incentives and subsidies would be rebalanced to reward long-term stewardship over short-term exploitation.” By encouraging higher education and imposing sensible regulations, a Department of the Future would help to incentivize a deeper morality than greed and a preoccupation with Now. Composed of scientists, humanists, historians and Indigenous elders, it would beckon us to climb a higher peak than the Mountain of More. It would end, or at least mitigate, what the author and activist Naomi Klein calls the “intergenerational theft” of anthropogenic climate change, and in its place blueprint a green energy revolution and regeneration that makes fossil fuels obsolete.

Why we need a Department of the Future | Kim Heacox | The Guardian

[chrisengel]

The Still Small Voice: Psychoanalytic Reflections on Guilt and Conscience

Donald L. Carveth

Whereas Freud himself viewed conscience as one of the functions of the superego, in The Still Small Voice: Psychoanalytic Reflections on Guilt and Conscience Carveth argues that superego and conscience are distinct mental functions and that, therefore, a fourth mental structure, the conscience, needs to be added to the psychoanalytic structural theory of the mind. He claims that while both conscience and superego originate in the so-called pre-oedipal phase of infant and child development, they are comprised of contrasting and often conflicting identifications. The primary object, still most often the mother, is inevitably experienced as, on the one hand, nurturing and soothing and, on the other, as frustrating and persecuting. Conscience is formed in identification with the nurturer; the superego in identification with the aggressor. There is a principle of reciprocity at work in the human psyche: for love received one seeks to return love; for hate, hate (the talion law). Like Franz Alexander and Sandor Ferenczi before him, Carveth views the therapeutic task as the disempowerment of the superego. But unlike his forebears he does not propose its replacement by the rational ego for, in his view, rationality cannot serve as the source of values. Following Jean-Jacques Rousseau, he finds the roots of morality not in reason but in feeling, in sympathetic identification or “pity.” With Pascal, he holds that “the heart has reasons reason cannot know.” Such “reasons of the heart” form the core of conscience. Unlike the torments inflicted by the demonic superego that merely uses transgression as an excuse to do what it wants―punish and torment the ego―the conscience, what Winnicott called “the capacity for concern,” is genuinely troubled by failures to love. The author claims we must face our bad conscience, acknowledge and bear genuine (depressive) guilt, and through contrition, repentance and reparation come to accept reconciliation and forgiveness, or be forced to suffer the torments of the damned―persecutory guilt inflicted by the sadistic internal persecutor and saboteur, the superego. It is the author’s view that in human history the damage done by id-driven psychopaths amounts to nothing compared to that brought about by superego-driven ideologists. Freud and subsequent psychoanalysis has largely whitewashed the superego while demonizing the id, the alleged “beast” in man, when in reality animals are seldom beastly, at least not in the ways humans often are. While aware of its destructiveness in the clinical realm, psychoanalysts have largely ignored the ideologies of domination―the sexism, racism, heterosexism, classism and childism―that are internalized from unconscionable societies into the unconscionable superego.In the penultimate chapter, drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt, Terry Eagleton and others, Carveth critically reviews the concepts of psychopathy and evil. In the final chapter, he advocates a demythologizing, deliteralizing or deconstructive approach to the Bible as metaphor, but one that escapes Freud’s derogation of this approach by acknowledging, with Hegel at his most honest, that its result is a humanistic ethic no longer to be equated with religion.

Categories: Society, Politics & Philosophy - Anthropology Year: 2013 Publisher: Karnac Books Language: English Pages: 360 / 353 ISBN 10: 1780491689 ISBN 13: 9781780491684 File: PDF, 1.01 MB

[incurablehumanist]

Humanism and SPN: a match made...on Earth?

so i think it’s time i explained this blog’s whole idk theme. it’s raison d’etre, if you wanna get fancy abt it. like, it’s prolly pretty obvious (it’s literally in the name) but i still wanna break it down and make sure people really get where i’m coming from. this is also something i wanna talk abt a lot during my Great Rewatch so i think it would help to have something to refer back to when this topic inevitably comes up in future. let’s dive in, shall we?

despite Supernatural being a show about, obviously, the supernatural, I wholly believe that it is, at it’s core, a story about Humanism (the philosophy). or it’s a show based on the same foundations as Humanism (the philosophy). or it’s just very, very, Humanism (the philosophy) friendly. either way, as a humanist it gives me ALL the feels and I really, desperately want to talk about it, so that’s what i’m gonna do!

to get specific, I’m talking about modern Humanist philosophy, frequently referred to as “secular humanism”. you can find a good overview of what that means on the American Humanist Association’s website, especially their 3 Humanist Manifestos (available to read here, here, and here. the last of those is the current manifesto as accepted by the AHA, but all of them provide good context of what Humanism means as a whole). this is as opposed to Renaissance or Religious Humanism, which have notable differences, though tbh a case could be made for religious humanism bc of the whole “god is canonically real in SPN” thing. When I talk about Humanism though I’m almost always gonna be talking abt modern “secular” Humanism. also i can literally never decide whether humanism should be capitalized or not so expect lots of waffling on that. now tbh I'm not super educated on Humanism as a philosophy beyond the manifestos and what can be found with a cursory google search, so I'm gonna be learning more abt it as I go, but i understand it enough (and have considered myself a secular humanist for long enough) to have Opinions. I’m hoping that as I examine the show through this lens i’ll both gain a better understanding of Humanism as a philosophy as well as how supernatural relates to it. no promises that anything good or coherent will come of it but I'm excited to see where it leads me! also if you too have Opinions on this topic I would absolutely looooooooove to hear them. seriously. hit me up. finally, for context, i’m gonna include some quotes about Humanism which I think best exemplify its ideology and will hopefully give people unfamiliar with it an idea of where I'm coming from/why I think SPN is such a perfect representation of it. I also highly recommend reading the manifestos on AHA's website, since they’re basically the horse’s mouth when it comes to the modern (Western) Humanism movement. beyond it’s relevance to SPN as a narrative, it’s also just a beautiful perspective on life, and it always makes me happy to read about it. like you’re about to do right now! here we go: "While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves." – Humanist Manifesto II (1973) "Humanism is the light of my life and the fire in my soul. It is the deep felt conviction, in every fiber of my being that human love is a power far transcending the relentless, onward rush of our largely deterministic cosmos. All human life must seek a reason for existence within the bounds of an uncaring physical world, and it is love coupled with empathy, democracy, and a commitment to selfless service which undergirds the faith of a humanist." – Bette Chambers, former president of the AHA "Humanism is an approach to life which encourages ethical and fulfilling living on the basis of reason and humanity, and rejects superstition and religion. The most immediate impact of living as a Humanist is that we believe this life is all there is - so what we do and the choices we make really count." – Stephen Fry "Humanists recognize that it is only when people feel free to think for themselves, using reason as their guide, that they are best capable of developing values that succeed in satisfying human needs and serving human interests." – Isaac Asimov "Does religion fill a much needed gap? It is often said that there is a God-shaped gap in the brain which needs to be filled: we have a psychological need for God -- imaginary friend, father, big brother, confessor, confidant -- and the need has to be satisfied whether God really exists or not. But could it be that God clutters up a gap that we'd be better off filling with something else? Science, perhaps? Art? Human friendship? Humanism? Love of this life in the real world, giving no credence to other lives beyond the grave?" – Richard Dawkins "There is nothing new about humanism. It is the yielding to Satan's first temptation of Adam and Eve: "Ye shall be as gods." (Gen. 3:5)" – Billy Graham, Christian evangelist (lol)

[all-things-are-nothing-to-me]

An Obituary for Identity Politics

I began writing this text about a couple months before the uprising in response to George Floyd’s death. The uprising, which now has become a global event, has motivated me to share my perspective in this text. My experiences in Minneapolis from the 26th through the 31st of May have furthered my contempt for identity politics and so I have included additional critiques of it based on those experiences.

Rewind back to a time and place where people used pagers and pay phones. When front porches and public parks were the hang-out spots. A time when conflicts were resolved face-to-face and shit-talking came with real life consequences. These were the days before ‘call-out culture’, ‘troll-baiting’, and other internet-dominated social activities. Some say the internet and technological expansion have advanced the fight against oppression. My opinion? The internet is where all potential for social revolt goes to die. In addition to pointless petitions and endless memes, recognition as a rebel can be gained through pity parties and academic loyalty rather than hands-on direct action. While providing an excellent breeding ground for keyboard warriors and pretentious academics, the internet also allows for the stunted development of social skills necessary in navigating face-to-face communication. Conflict resolution takes the form of indefinite internet drama and at most an awkward in-real-life re-construction of judge, jury, and executioner. Face-to-face interaction is almost unnecessary in the techno-society where phones have become a personalized commodity seemingly fused to one’s hand. From a screen with adjustable dimming, a full spectrum of emotional expression can now be digitally represented from a cache of emoticons.

The internet is also a place where the lynch-mob mentality of “call-out culture” encourages people to view one another as one-dimensional beings – only defined by mistakes and imperfections. In the name of ‘social justice’ and ‘outing abusers’, a new statism emerges, utilizing fear and guilt to coerce allyship conformity. And similar to being charged by the State, once condemned on the internet, an individual may never escape that reputation. Instead, any or all personal growth and development remains trivial to the static nature of their past mistakes. Despite personal improvement, a convicted individual is sentenced to forever remain captive by the essence of their online portrayal.

In my experience as a ‘marginalized voice’ I’ve seen identity politics used by activists as a tool of social control aimed at anyone who fits the identity criteria of ‘oppressor’. The traditional power-struggle for equality has turned into an olympic sport for social leverage, inverting the same social hierarchy that should have been destroyed in the first place. Many identity politicians I’ve come across are more interested in exploiting “white guilt” for personal (and even capital) gain than physically confronting any organizational model of white supremacy. I’ve witnessed victimhood used to conceal blatant lies and bullying, motivated by personal revenge. All too often I have seen how identity politics creates a culture where personal experiences are trivialized to the point of passive silence. But this is all old news. Any experienced, self-identifying anarchist has seen or probably experienced some form of being ‘called-out’ or ‘cancelled’. So why do I bring it up? Because I still see this shit happening and I still see so many people lacking the courage to openly confront it.

I don’t expect this text to bring identity politics to a grinding halt. I am merely expressing my hostility for it and its authoritarian, anti-individualist nature. I still see self-proclaimed anarchists fussin’ over ‘white’ dreads (as well as seeing people cut their dreads under social pressure). I still see people justify voting like they did for Obama (this time it’s for Bernie). And I still see ‘allies’ mumbling frustration under their breath, too scared to confront the authoritarianism they see right in front of ‘em.

How many ‘white’ anarchists were called racist (or privileged) and shamed for refusing to vote this past 2020 election?

Imagine what anarchy would look like if people refused to obey the condescending demands of identity politicians. Would people feel more free to explore their lives beyond the narrow limitations of prescribed identity? Would they fearlessly reclaim their power to formulate their own opinions? Is there a joy to be experienced in the hysterical mockery of academic elitism?

Would this text be less valid if it wasn’t written by a queer person of color? What if I was a ‘white’, ‘cis’ ‘male’? Why would it matter?

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t. Because after all, this isn’t just about identity. This is about anti-authoritarian anarchy. If there is one thing I have seen the most in the past few years, it’s how identity politics moves like a plague, consuming every social space — ironically including anarchist circles. For me, anarchy is about destroying socially assigned identity and all the limitations it imposes upon the imagination. Anarchy is an individualist experience that finds itself held captive by the prison of assigned identity. Rather than destroying that prison along with the society that constructs it, anarchism today has become a cemetery of dead potential, internalized victimhood, and an ideological competition for who is ‘most oppressed’.

Rather than taking aim at identity itself and the apparatus maintaining this paradigm, energy is spent tearing one another down, ignoring the complexity of individual uniqueness, and playing the State’s role of defining each other based on membership to identity categories. Embracing a particular identity only reaffirms that identity’s existence as a ‘universal ‘truth’ – and therefore, by the colonial intentions of assigned identity, the servitude and enslavement of some to others as a universal truth as well.

I refuse to participate in upholding enslavement as a condition of my existence, and therefore these ‘truths’ are nothing more than political works of fiction. They are the products of a well-perfected, socially engineered god-complex that enters the mind like parasitic cordyceps, demanding unquestionable obedience. The atom of mental manipulation is a mind institutionalized by the incarceration of industrial society. Identity politics are the antiquated chains of colonization, polished by those who assign personal value to them. These ‘truths’ are the social constructs of control, keeping the life of rebellion shackled in a cold well of reform. And while many have become comfortable there, I have broken out to explore the infinite unknown terrain of hedonism and anti-political anarchy. ‘Black’, ‘Brown’, or ‘White’ power is the antithesis of freedom; it is the ideological charity work of a civilized, humanist form of rebellion. Identity politics is the sterilization of individuality, rendering it both obedient to the collectivist authority of identity and gullible to the nationalist myth of supremacy.

Ultimately, the ‘human’ is an animal domesticated with labels socially constructed to correspond to a hierarchy of economic status. And though this hierarchy has changed over the years, it is constantly held in place by a relationship of those who make demands and those who obey. No matter how the categories are arranged, the hierarchy represents authoritarianism; the group dominating the individual. What defines a ‘human’ is the degree of obedience and commitment to civilized roles and behaviors required by industrial society. The less cooperative a ‘human’ is, the more likely that ‘human’ will be compared to an animal. The animal is the undesireable being – even for the identity politicians who prefer to adopt the colonizers’ ideological anthropocentrism. Perhaps this explains why there is such little discussion on animal liberation in leftist-anarchist writing. The marginalized voice is more concerned with being portrayed as equal to the civilized colonizer than with the lost connection between their animality and the earth. At the core of leftist politics is the humanist aim for social equality within industrial progress — all while the earth continues to be cut up into nation-states and ravaged for anthropocentric exploitation and expansion.

It is my opinion that as long as one maintains a personal relationship with the ‘human’ identity, similar to ‘white’ or ‘male’ identities, the individual will only continue to reinforce the colonial paradigm of civilized vs savage. And as long as this reinforcement continues, the individual also remains vulnerable to imprisonment within other identity constructs that further suppress feral potential.

I wonder when or if anarchists in general will move beyond the group-mentality of leftism toward individualist insurgency — recognizing confrontation with identity as an act of personal emancipation. Will anarchists one day come to realize that anyone or anything above the individual represents an authority figure – whether it be “The Commune”, the “Movement”, or the cultural governance of identity? Maybe some, but I am sure not all.

The Victimhood Saint

After a 45 minute drive we finally arrive. It’s been a long day of retail theft and this is the last stop. It’s my turn and I plan to walk out with at least $500+ worth of merchandise for online resell. But I’m already gettin’ a bad feeling from this place. Unlike the other locations, this store is much smaller which to me means Loss Prevention will have a visual advantage watching the doors. Bigger places mean the enter and exit doors are spread further apart. In addition, the bigger the store, the more difficult it is to keep track of every shopper through the cameras. I decide to go for it anyways. Never know anything for sure until ya try.

I walk in, grab a cart and begin searching for the specific items I plan to take. I also scan the check out lanes and customer service desk. Two customer service employees busy chatting, check out lanes all blocked off except the one near the entrance and two near the exit. The entrance lane has a worker wiping down carts. One exit lane has a cashier, the lane next to it is totally empty. I take note of it as looking “too easy”, but I decide to refocus on where my items are located in the store. After loading my cart I start my journey to the exit. For anyone who shoplifts for a living, they know this is the exciting part. Every moment up to this point I’ve been just a regular shopper. But now, as I walk toward the exit, I begin to shed the costume of “shopper” and prepare for the criminal experience of “shoplifter”. As my heart starts to pound I feel my nerves initiate a well — developed calming response where I temporarily disassociate from the panic in order to keep my senses sharp and focused. I have to be ready for anything. And I still have to maintain my “regular shopper” face and body language. As I pass through the “too easy” lane everything looks good.

Customer service people are still chatting not paying attention, the one cashier is too busy ringing up someone to notice. I pull out my fake receipt and casually make my way through the first set of exit doors. If I was seen or caught, this is about the moment I would hear someone approach me from behind or feel someone grab my shoulder. Out the second set of doors, all is good. Time to start making my way toward the back of the parking lot – and then it happened...

Anyone who has ever shoplifted long enough knows these dreaded words: “Sir... Sir!”. I hear someone behind me yell out. I pretend to not hear it. Then I hear quick footsteps approach from behind. “Sir, I need to see your receipt” he says as he flashes me his Loss Prevention badge. Fuck. Where did this clean-cut lookin’ hipster see me? Must have been in the clothes area behind me... maybe that lane was a fucking trap? Doesn’t matter. Let go of the cart and walk away. I start to walk away and I hear “No no...sir we have to go back inside and fill out paperwork. Don’t worry you will not be arrested”. Yeah, fill out paperwork with all my information, have my picture taken for their records – fuck that. I continue walking away. Another LP runs out and is on the phone. This guy is on the phone with the police. I instantly realize the first guy was secretly stalling me till the police got there! I break out in full run. I hear them both running close behind me. I cross the street and bolt into a trailer park, zig zag between trailer homes and finally hide out in a steel shed. I force my paniced breathing to quiet deep breaths. I calm down and listen to them searching for me nearby.

Finally after not hearing them anymore I text my accomplices a rough idea of where I am. I come out of the shed, trying to tidy up a couple things that fell inside from when I stormed in there. The cops will be here any second. I see my accomplices car slowly drive by and wave em down. I jump in and lay down and we drive off.

I should have trusted my instinct. This was a bad run. But it could have been worse. Instead of being in jail tonight, I am comfortably here writing this text. But this is the reality of shoplifting – or any crime for that matter. No matter how many times you get away with it, it is important to expect to get caught one day. Be ready for it. And when it happens, study the panic, the emotions, the physical responses... know it all well. So the next time you engage in criminal activity, you have a better understanding of the worst case scenario. For me, this is elementary, and there is no place for victimhood or or an outcry of innocence.

While Covid-19 created the conditions for state repression in the form of “stay-at-home” orders, ironically my opportunity for illegalist fun has expanded! Many businesses are left unattended for weeks at a time, meaning property damage goes longer without being reported. In the midst of the panic, supermarket Loss Prevention and security personnel are focused on the number of items people purchase in each cart without realizing the cartloads of food quietly slipping out the other door.

Before shutting down, many stores like REI, L.L Bean and other places would deactivate their security towers. I am guessing this was due to the high volume of people passing through with purchased merch with hidden tags still attached. Probably to avoid the annoyance of the alarm going off every few seconds, the towers were turned off, leaving open a grand opportunity to simply walk out with security tagged items hassle-free.

The past few weeks got me revisiting old memories of when my understanding of anarchy was that of an activity that only lasted as long as a may day march, a demonstration, or night-time fun. I remember feeling like anarchy was the moment I wore black pants, shoes, gloves and a t-shirt around my face. After these activities it was back to the “real world”. Back to wage-slavery, back to the daily routine of paying rent and penny-pinching my food stamps for groceries. Sure, there was the occasional clandestine activity along with tabling zines at punk shows or radical events. But there was this divide that always created a separation, always treating anarchy like an extra-curricular activity. Sure, my life was committed to rebellion; the very concept of a zine distro before I named it “Warzone Distro” was conceived while wasting company time on the shitter. Despite wage-slaving, my mind was always fixated on understanding how to cut corners and work the least for the most amount of money. I was the worker who handed my extra hours over to others. Half-day at work due to light truck load? Hell yeah, I’m out!

Over time, anarchy as mere extra-curricular activity just wasn’t enough. And what I mean by that is I became less and less tolerable of bosses, wage-slaving, alarm clocks, paying rent, and penny-pinching. I remembered what it was like being a kid and not having to conform to such obligations. I remembered adventuring all day outside from early morning to late at night. Everyday was a new adventure, and everyday I was learning something new about myself. Then, as a responsible adult I was learning something new about myself. I hated adultism, adulting, and the performative role and identity of “adult”. But I wasn’t tryin’ to become a child again. Those days have come and gone. I began to wonder what an anarchist life that transcended the adult/child binary could look like.

Fast forward years later here I am, jobless but no longer penny-pinching, and older but more youthful than I have ever been. Some say I am the worst of all worlds; hedonistic, violent, and childish. Of course, what these words mean and how they are applied to me is subjective to interpretation, but one thing is for certain; I feel far more free than I have ever felt and experienced. And I have a love affair with crime. It is an intimate experience — committing crime with a furious contempt for society and the law. Causing disruption and getting away with it compliments my desires for anarchy moment by moment. Nowadays I adventure all day outside from early morning to late at night. And with every criminal activity I am learning more and more about myself. In addition to accepting the fact that my days of joy-riding the fuck out of life will either end in prison or sudden death, I am learning to appreciate the present more than the past or future.

One thing about crime that I have come to realize is a uniqueness that comes with breaking the law, a sense of individual ability, inability, strengths and weaknesses. All are discovered within the experience of breaking the law. And it is this experience that I intend to expand in order to discover more about myself, becoming ungovernable in an anti-social sense.

I reflect back on my past self imprisoned by the cult of identity-politics. I remember how one reason to glorify victimhood was to gain social attention and portray the (marginalized) identities assigned to me in a positive light. “Look at me! A responsible queer person of color holding down a job as a law-abiding citizen!”. But why? So I could prove how similar I was to all those ‘white’ hard-working class heroes that America needs to uphold its colonial establishment? Another wage-slave to passively, willfully accept the conditions of my enslavement? To become another christian of color pretending there is an imaginary kingdom above for all us hoodlums that just never got a fair chance in life? Fuck all that.

The reasons for white supremacists, homophobes, patriarchs, and patriots to fear people like me is beyond identity politics; I am a sworn enemy of their control and order. The societal castle they seek to build and maintain will always be the target of my sabotage!

I think most people can see and understand that embracing socially assigned identities is not necessary for understanding how society utilizes them as tools for social control. I think it is equally as easy to see how identity as a tool of revolution is limited and in fact has led to internal conflict within many revolutionary projects. But what blows my mind is the fact that for so many, these identities were not immediately rejected as a primal, personal form of rebellion. But to be fair I think it is safe to say that these identities maintained the power they do because they are so frequently used by leftist organizations for moral persuasion. Through victimhood and innocence, identity politics is used as an appeal-to-all method of creating group-think that ultimately encourages an individual to surrender independent thinking to a god-complex of morality and collectivism. I think this also plays a pretty big role in statism and the rejection of illegalist revolt.

I reject the statist, civilized binary of guilt and innocence, and therefore also reject the internalization of victimhood. I have no use for “call-out culture” or an internet lynch-mob against my enemies. On the internet, attempts to gain public support against one enemy only informs and empowers another enemy (the state) to confiscate my responsibility. And guilt and innocence is a legalistic binary that only serves to judge and divide based on moral determination. I despise the State, all its social manifestations, and it’s enforcement of repression against chaos. Therefore I am not a victim; I am a self-declared enemy in a war against it. I don’t expect pity, a pardon or charity from it, nor from its defenders.

It was the day Chicago issued its Stay-At-Home order. My partner-in-crime and I were in my home town visiting my mom. While driving home from getting my mom some groceries I notice someone sitting on a park bench alone. “Big Momma” is her name. I was surprised to see her outside in the cold and not indoors at one of the local shelters. Come to find out the shelters had closed their doors probably related to Covid-19. I started to wonder how many others were outside in the cold...

My partner and I head over to a park that I used to do Food Not Bombs at and to my surprise there are about 20 people set up camp outside a building’s air vent blowing out warm air. We walk over and ask how everyone is doing. Some people, after recognizing me from activist projects years ago, excitedly run over to greet me. They are all the unlucky ones locked out of the shelters at least for that weekend. My partner and I get back in the car and come up with a plan.

A half hour later we are at another grocery store. Unlike other times, getting out of this one with free food is going to be a little difficult. The set-up has changed due to heightened security at the door due to Covid-19 and the fear of looting. But it is still possible to get out with a full cart. We load the bottom of the cart with bottled water, multiple loaves of bread, peanut butter, jelly, over 20 bags of mixed dried fruit, fresh apples and bananas. Were ready. We make our way to the door with me leading. My role is to peer around the corner at two self-check out clerks to make sure they aren’t looking. If they are, I will pull out my phone like I am making a phone call. If not, I keep walking forward. My partner and the cart close behind, the coast is clear. First set of doors... second set of doors... all good. Finally get to the car and unload into the trunk. Success! Next stop is another grocery store, but we won’t be getting food at this one: we’re raiding the men’s and women’s bathrooms for huge rolls of toilet paper. The dispensers can be a little loud opening sometimes, but relatively easy to do with any kind of house key. Two backpacks filled with about three huge rolls each, we are all set.

Back at my moms we clean our hands thoroughly before making bags and bags of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Once we finish with that were off back to the homeless encampment. Every person gets two sandwiches, two apples, two bananas, some dried fruit and a bottle of water. In addition we wrap the toilet paper rolls in the grocery bags to keep dry and pass them out. We stick around for a bit and exchange laughs and talk shit on the cops. It was good to make new friends and catch up with old friends. It was good to see they were all maintaining and in high spirits despite the circumstances of the weather and the shelter closures. We left and decided to check other parks for people. Found a few lone wolves who happily took what we had left of the water and sandwiches. We arrive back at my mom’s house and settle in for the night. I open the fridge and giggle while scanning over all the stolen vegan food contemplating what to have for dinner.

The Allyship Coward

In my opinion, the concept of “Allyship” started with good intentions, but like other aspects of identity politics became sour and ready for immediate disposal. Here is how I feel about “Allyship”: If you need a politicized buzzword and concept to motivate you to build bonds with people across gendered or racial categories, your “solidarity” is disingenuous. If your style of communicating is loaded with talking points pre-approved by some Woke Ally 101 workshop, you have become a free-range puppet. Genuine mutual aid or solidarity doesn’t require trendy twitter phrases to motivate bond building. In other words, don’t work with me only because that’s what you read is the “right” thing to do, or because your progressive college professor told you to. Don’t kiss my ass and follow me because I am a victimized, ‘marginalized’ or ‘poc voice’. Or because your friends or comrades will guilt you. Don’t let something as fake as socially constructed categories define our relationship. Work with me only if you personally enjoy our interaction, my personality and most importantly you want to out of individual desire. I don’t believe in coercive mutual aid: it makes a fool out of two people at once.

There are also those who assume they know how other people think based on racial and gendered assumptions. These are the identity politicians who act as both police and representatives of others, coercing allyship through guilt and shaming campaigns. Using their identity, they declare themselves beyond reproach while utilizing a passive-aggressive method of communication for intimidation. But in my opinion, nobody is obligated to support or listen to them, or any one, especially based on something as flat as identity. I am always weary of those who talk as if they represent the interests of people they have never met. It is foolish to think that just because people are socially assigned similar identities that every individual subscribes to the stereotypes of those identities.

Identity politics has successfully offered an understanding of how civilized society works, but as a solution to tearing it all down only leads to boundary policing identities, nationalism, internalized victimhood, and more stereotypes for people to find themselves fighting against.

Wanna know someone’s experience? Interact with them directly. Don’t make assumptions based on social constructions. Wanna show solidarity with people? Treat them as individuals with unique experiences and histories, not as mere drone members of homogenized groupings. And to those who still obey without questioning, another word for white ally is still coward!

The Woke Leadership

Personally, I don’t like to use the word “educate” to describe the communication of ideas between two individuals. “Educate” implies the instillation of universal “truths” rather than the horizontal exchange of personal perspectives. The context of which I see this word “Educate” used the most reinforces a social hierarchy between those who are “woke” and those who are not. Do people actually learn anything when the communication of ideas is asserted in a top-down manner? Maybe. But I prefer not to entertain that hierarchy.

Individual people are more than just ‘white’, ‘brown’ or ‘black’, ‘male’ or ‘female’, or whatever social construction assigned to them at birth. Therefore, communicating with identity-based assumptions will almost always come off as condescending. I see shit like “educate your friends”, or “get educated”, as if to direct toward a Church of Social Justice in order to be “awakened”. And apparently the capitalist mentality of further monetizing information is acceptable without question. Some think the ‘labor’ of answering questions merits a wage, citing something as voluminous as a Google search if one is unable to pay. Ironically, many questions come in good-faith, and are from well-intending activists who endure being talked down to in the first place. In my opinion, this elitist way of responding to well-intending people discourages their empowerment by trivializing their personal histories and guilting them into accepting others as paramount. There is a collectivism to this method of “educating” which creates the foundation of another social system of coercion. I have no interest in contributing to the materializing of that. I can offer a critical view or counter a point without socially stratifying the exchange.

I consider each and every individual mind a rushing, wild waterway of ideas that spill out when the dam of social subordination breaks down. Society collectively discourages any wildness, domesticating the individual and ultimately creating a caged animal within the mind. Beneath all the social conditioning there is a unique individual that discovers itself in chaotic contradiction with society.

Uniformity is the enemy of free expression. There is no “education”, only popular opinion enforced by those who intend to think for others. I think ideas and perspectives can be exchanged in a way that doesn’t resemble an authoritarian model of top-down communication. I’m not an educator and I seek to educate no one. Rather, as they grow and develop, I share my personal experiences and ideas with the world with the understanding that others will differ and have unique experiences of their own.

For example one thing that I have come to realize is that the illegalist life isn’t for everyone. I have seen some people do it for a while and ultimately break under the weight of the very real stress of criminal activity. So when I write these words about criminality – and my contempt for identity politics – I speak only for myself. When I began writing “Descending into Madness”, it was the same night I had walked out of a Seattle REI with two packs worth over $300 each. The security tower alarms never went off as I walked right out with two rope-style security tags attached. Prior to walking out I joked with myself that my criminal affairs indicated that I was descending into madness because attempting this was fucking crazy. And then I was successful. And I realized on the car ride home that if it wasn’t for entertaining such courageous insanity I might not have never known that some of these stores have non-operational security towers.

In my opinion, the “Woke Leadership” of leftism leads anarchism over a cliff into a downward accelerating disintegration. Paralyzed by the fear and shame enforced by a new order, some anarchists will never make it to self-emancipation, or independent thinking as a rejection of group-think authority. It is by a narrow, liberal definition of anti-oppression that many individuals define themselves as anarchists – a type of definition that limits anti-oppression to the moralist, humanist confines of civilized society. It is not a coincidence that most anti-oppression praxis requires a statist apparatus to enforce laws that accommodate equal rights. And while there’s nothing wrong with people having equal rights under capitalism, that victory celebrates the power of statist reform rather than anti-authoritarian attack. And in front of this statist power are the “community leaders” or those who have no interest in critiquing authority. Instead, they have built their socio-political careers on petty reforms in the name of “the community” and scold radicals – calling them “outside agitators”. And following behind these leaders are ‘white’ anarchist allies, confused and frustrated, trying to decide between being called a racist for setting shit on fire or a good ally for kissing a ‘black’ preacher’s ass.

“What you or I may or may not consider ‘tactical’ isn’t really relevant. This is less a war in the traditional sense and more a storm -uncontrollable and chaotic. This is one of the problems with the left’s characterization of ‘the movement’ as something uniform, monolithic, and ideologically consistent. It isn’t. It won’t be. ‘The movement’ consists of a million individuals with their own individual views and opinions and actions, and it does no one any good to deride anyone who isn’t doing things exactly the way you see fit.” Baba Yaga

Another Word For “Black Leadership” is Authoritarianism

After marching, we arrive at the 3rd Precinct at East Lake St and Minnehaha Ave. BLM organizers begin howling into the megaphone about demands, with a few prayers and droning chants mixed in. I notice someone slowly creeping up behind me who starts bangin’ his fist on the window. Concerned it will break, three bystanders begin quietly shaming him “this ain’t the place for that, keep it peaceful!”. The person responds back quietly but with angry tension in his voice “that’s the fuckin’ problem, y’all muthafuckas never wanna do shit except march and chant...”. Discouraged, he starts to walk away. “I’m with you on that shit fo real tho” I tell him. “That’s what’s up – fuck all this other shit” he responds while walking away. A minute or so later, I lose my patience for listening to BLM talk about being peaceful and decide to go look for that same individual again. I round the corner to the back of the police station and notice a commotion. A group of about 5–7 ‘black’ folks are blocking the back glass doors of the police station, arguing with a group of about 20 ‘black’ and ‘brown’ angry youth – including the one from earlier. Unable to contain my own frustration I get caught up arguing with the police-defenders as well. Finally, in the middle of the shouting a couple of ‘black’ and ‘brown’ youth begin spray painting “fuck 12” near the commotion. Cheers behind me erupt from a crowd that has now tripled in size. A brawl breaks out near the doors, and then a single rock smashes through the precinct window and is immediately followed by a hail storm of rocks, street cones, water bottles, and anything else within reach. The group of 5–7 ‘black’ pacifists cry out in desperation to stop the destruction, going as far as attempting to physically detain people, but ultimately are overwhelmed. They try to collect the rocks after being thrown and find themselves in multiple physical confrontations while doing so. People from the front of the building run over and join in on the vandalism. Eventually after every window is smashed the crowd moves toward the police parking lot and begin damaging police cars. I finally pause to catch a breath when I hear a stun grenade go off. The police run out from another door and begin shooting rubber bullets and tear gas. The crowd disperses but with hysterical laughs of joy and accomplishment. The 3rd Precinct is in ruins — and little did I know this was all just the beginning.

The very next day a bigger crowd of mostly ‘black’ and ‘brown’ youth showed up and continued to wage war on the 3rd Precinct. By night, a three mile radius was liberated from police control by the people on those streets. The 3rd Precinct was breached and taken over. Police abandoned the area all together. Their building was looted and cop cars driven into the street and set on fire. A Target across the parking lot was broken into and looted along with other stores nearby. People celebrated the victory by shooting off their guns in the air. Strangers sang and danced around burned out cop cars, exchanged high-fives in passing, and shared looted food. People casually socialized in front of burning buildings while others threw rocks through the remains of store front windows for target practice.

While it might have seemed like a perfect utopia, it wasn’t divorced from reality. Fights broke out between small factions of people and long-awaited personal conflicts were solved in the now cop-free streets. Business owners shot and killed looters and low-income housing units burned to the ground. But this is the difference between the textbook, sugar-coated ideologies of politics and raw, unmediated rage. The revolt didn’t happen due to any teachings of Mao or religious messages from a god. The fires, looting, and attacks against police didn’t need Marxism, a transcript of The Coming Insurrection, or an academic course on the history of anarchism. All that was needed was the chaotic expression of rage against representations of authority.

As expected, many people on the internet – including many self-proclaimed anarchists — passed judgement on the situation – most often coming from an ideological position that placed value in uniformity and a narrowed range of “acceptable” forms of revolt. In my experience, uprisings like this flourish best when least controlled or organized. The more that expressions of anger are controlled and organized the less anarchistic they become — essentially becoming pacified to accommodate a particular political vision. For me that is undesirable and also unrealistic. Destruction is destruction, violence will be violence, and to expect an uprising to be anything less is naive at best. While some can sit on the sidelines and moralize specific tactics or forms of emotional expression, they disregard the reality that full-fledged warfare has no inherent morality. Businesses that were boarded up and declared “black owned” weren’t spared by any moral consideration; they too were broken into, looted, and subsequently burned to the ground.

Also, in my opinion, the more uncontrollable and unmanageable an uprising remains, the less likely the police will have the ability to adapt to its formation and dominate it. The police had the least control over hundreds of individuals rebelling in such a chaotic manner as to overwhelm them and send them fleeing.

Over the next few days, attacks against the 5th Precinct happened while liberals, pacifists, and identity politicians quietly crawled back to avenge their loss and inability to control the first riot. The internet became their ground zero for one of the worst campaigns of lies and fear mongering I have personally ever seen.

As the victories of burning cop cars and police stations circulated online from all over the states, liberals rushed to the scenes in a desperate authoritarian attempt to assert their ideological morality and political program. They insist on a narrative that labels anyone who engages in sabotage as a “white supremacist” or “undercover cop” “infiltrating” the uprising.

Many of these liberals are the same ‘black’ people who failed to stop ‘black’ and ‘brown’ rebels from looting and destroying property. They failed to convince all ‘white’ people to evacuate the riots (because even some ‘white’ people knew not all ‘black’ or ‘brown’ people have a problem with them being there – recognizing their value as accomplices). And in an effort to preserve capitalist, reformist values, liberals of all races sought to halt the looting and vandalism by bombarding social media with blatantly false information. This false information is riddled with catch phrases like “outside agitators” and “white supremacists” in order to emotionally motivate readers to chose a side within a false dichotomy. And those who are not physically on the streets or there with rebels battling police are the target audience of these narrowed, inaccurate representations of reality.

Different ideological motives create different interpretations of events. And since liberals and pacifists tend to dominate social media more than those who are too busy out in the streets, they have an advantage. And since liberals morally frame all people of color as obedient, victimist heroes, most people have difficulty admitting that people of color are capable of destroying property and participating in violent forms of protest. This also plays into the compulsion to blame ‘white’ people for forms of rebellion considered morally undesirable. Riots/uprisings are not all utopian and pretty. They are the dangerous elements of liberation that occur when all other options have failed. Whether people are afraid of violence or not won’t change the fact that police kill, and will continue to kill as long as the concept of law enforcement exists. In my opinion there is no “bettering” the police, and there is no “justice” when someone is already being buried six feet deep.

And the police are not all ‘white’. ‘Black’ cops kill ‘black’ people too.

The worst part about the online interpretation of events is that the people spreading this misinformation fail to communicate to the online-world the joy, smiles, singing and dancing of racially diverse rebels as they celebrated the destruction of the 3rd Precinct.

I mean shit, imagine being a person of color, harassed by police all your life, and then a day and night comes when you actually get to see a police station burning, and police completely abandoning the area. All this is erased from history when liberals credit it all to a group of people — white supremacists — who didn’t exist in those battles in the first place.

To this day as I write this, there are still people spreading conspiracy theories on the internet like the famous “brick bait” video of cops unloading bricks (behind their own building – not in an alley as originally propagated). While I can’t say for absolute certainty that there were no white supremacists at the events at all (I mean I saw some driving past in pickup trucks yellin’ white power shit, and the ‘brown’ dude who rolled up in a truck rockin’ pro-police slogans and a confederate flag) I sure as hell didn’t see any in the battles. I have seen pictures of ‘black’ people locking arms to protect riot police, white allies turning other ‘white’ people over to the police in the name of ‘black’ support, and ultimately police regaining control and using these pacifying efforts to brutalize peaceful protesters.

Feral Delinquency

It is my opinion that the last months expose weaknesses of civilization in very obvious ways. Governmental control had increased as a panic response to social tension and spontaneous ruptures of illegal activity. Covid-19 broke the order of daily productivity and civilized slavery, leaving people more time to contemplate their lives and the value of their free time outside of working. The uprisings in response to the murder of George Floyd demonstrated the weaknesses of the police power and control – even at their own home base. At this point I have no earthly idea what will come next.

I admit to finding it fascinating to see non-human animals and the earth flourish in the midst of our industrial despair. To see clearer skies, various animals walking the streets, flooding that loosens the foundation of this concrete jungle. I can’t help but feel both the pandemic and these continued ruptures against authority are better than a return to normality; a normality where death from industrial civilization and the State is as routine as a slaughterhouse in full operation.

I wonder what kinda conversations people are having with each other or with themselves during this blooming destabilization of domesticated order. Will more and more people seize this opportunity to express anger and frustration through random acts of violence and sabotage against one another? Against law enforcement? Against the institutions that have become weaker due to financial loss and now stand more vulnerable than ever? I can only hope the uprisings continue in some capacity – above or below ground which is personally more favorable for me at this point.

Will people beg for the return of the old daily misery of monotony, or will they explore the depths of permanent uncertainty? Return to work or rewild? I guess only time will tell.

But here, I can only speak for myself. My anarchy is my own, as are my thoughts and words in this text. I don’t write to impress any club of internet anarchists who flex intellectual texts for self-congratulatory praise. I make my diary public in an antagonistic effort to mock the victimist, anti-individualist narrative of leftism which currently dominates contemporary anarchism.

I don’t wish for a return to normality and the daily misery of industrial production. I have no desire to celebrate ridiculous “victories” such as police accountability, firings, or prison terms – which will only be followed by the rebuilding of their ruined precincts or perhaps an equally authoritarian “community-based” replacement. I desire nothing less than the total abolition of all governance and policing. And perhaps those who hold some form of elitist power will find me undesirable and will orchestrate a smear campaign against me, banning my writing and “cancel” me from their Movement. But little would they know that the days and nights, between wide fields and the stars, and between the tree tops and the ground – is the domain of my adventure! And with it is a joy that follows anarchy as a vibrant life experience rather than a measure of social capital online, or a theory frozen in an academic journal.

The internet has created a culture of desperation for social continuity and digital validation. It is the breeding ground for “new” concepts of anarchism that are nothing more than communist corpses with hipster aesthetic. Anti-civ anarchy, impregnated by leftism now displays the extent of its power with endless twitter debates on “eco-fascism”. Twitter — a place where reclaiming one’s life and body is shamed by the disciples of privilege politics – is a graveyard of voices glorifying their own death-by-internet.

My animalism looks nothing like adopting the imagery and behaviors of existing animals. Instead it is the silhouette of an illegalist, feral menace dancing around the burning prison of domestication. My abandonment of victionhood is a foreclosure on both the pity politics of morality-based organizing and the sainthood of innocence. My anarchy is an obituary for identity politics. It is a personal insurgency without a future, a dream without the anaesthesia of hope, a declaration of joy with the lifespan of an exploding bomb.

This text is dedicated to all those rebels whose only negotiation with authority is fire and destruction...I am forever inspired by your courageous wrath across racial and gendered lines... To the youth who made history on May 26th, to the rebels who perished, and to those currently held captive for their part in this war against the state. RIP George Floyd