Occupy Something… (Besides this sense of higher moral ground).
Ever since the Occupy movement began and spread around the globe, I have been waiting. Sure, I knew that in the beginning there would be a great deal of both positive and negative coverage (well it did seem to take the mainstream media of the United States a long time to actually cover it, but eventually they did, and I will speak more about that later). Sure I knew that in the beginning the feeling of something exciting was happening would permeate many a person and drove them to do things that they may otherwise never have thought they would do. Sure I knew that in the beginning people would think that this time something really could be done, really could change and really could bring about a shift.
…. But that was in the beginning. What I was waiting for was the other shoe to drop. The other shoe called reality. For you see, while I am a firm believer in many of the ideals of the Occupy movement, what I think many of them (those on the front line.. and believe me, I have a great amount of appreciation for what all of them have and continue to do) fail to see (or don’t want to participate in) is … the system. And unfortunately those failures to understand that sometimes you have to “play the game”, is what could be the downfall of this movement and block it from ever reaching the heights and aspirations it could and wants for itself and the globe as a whole.
Occupy wants, well, many things, but above all there is a fundamental idea that there needs to be a better distribution of the wealth of the world, and a more accountable way for what they term the 99 percent to be part of the entire pie. What they fail to see is that by circumventing a lot of the things they don’t like… like certain types of organization, like sponsorship, like money, they are loosing a part of the movement that they will need to take it to the next step. I applaud the idea of not wanting to go down that path, of staying true to the ideals of the movement, but again, I have to say… it is time for a deep seeded reality check.
Occupy Wall Street… the idea… was floated by a magazine that I have read (sometimes with amusement, sometimes with opposition to the single-mindedness of some of the ideas within but always with a sense of understanding and being akin to the principles behind the magazine) for longer than probably some people (if any are) who are reading this have existed on this planet. Adbusters, the little Canadian wanna-be anti corporate magazine that could, was the spearhead of the idea.
So let’s look at this magazine for a moment. While the magazine generally does not have advertising in their pages, they do charge for the magazine. As a person whom lives on the other side of the globe from its place of its inception, I can attest to the fact that even this magazine is not immune to the inequality of how much is charged for it from country to country. I have purchased it in a few different countries, and I can say that to buy it on the magazine stands here… if you can find it… it is DOUBLE what it would be to buy it in Canada or the United States, and the price then fluctuates again depending if I buy it in another Asian country, in Europe, and so on. While this is not necessarily the actual fault of the magazine itself, they do understand that this does occur but they do want their magazine to reach the widest audience possible, (hence the reason they have an American Edition and so forth). My point being, is… they do CHARGE for the magazine, for they understand that in order for the message to be heard, they need structure, organization, a way to pay their employees, etc. In other words, while they do believe in a change to the capitalist system we have now and an end to the consumerist society we all live in, they do also participate in it (if only to get us to look at how we participate in it). They do understand that they cannot change the entire way our world has function in one magical swoop of their desire for it to be so. They have… in a sense, grown up. Become a middle aged entity (like myself), that desires change and desires more equality in many things… but also understands that the system itself (using it to ones own advantage) may be the best way to go about bringing that change they so desperately feel is needed. But they also know that it is not going to happen overnight.
Human beings will NEVER agree totally on all things, and, in my thoughts, I would never want them to. I enjoy the diversity of our thoughts, it is what drives me in many ways and keeps me reading, traveling, writing, thinking and the like. So while I too sometimes desire this change to come about in some magical fashion outside of the system we already have, the reality is, that is not going to happen unless the world de-evolves into anarchy. Now some may love the idea of this occurring, but again, let us clear our heads for a moment. Anarchy does not and will never work as a way of leading an existence in our world. Human beings need structure and in some ways need laws and direction in order to function to their fullest capacity. It is the system we have now, with all of its faults that has helped to bring about some of the greatest things of our evolution as a species, and it is this system that continues to do those things
Let’s leave this idea for a minute and look at the media coverage of the Occupy movement. In the beginning, especially in the United States, it seemed the coverage of the movement was … lacking. There could be many reasons for this occurring, but again, it seems to me one of the biggest reasons is that the structure of the news (how it is gathered, packaged, reported etc) has itself changed as well, and again, the Occupy movement needs to understand this. I mean really understand it. Not just fight against it. Play their game a bit, Understand that middle of the road Pat and Joe are more akin to listening to someone whom is not screaming demands all the time, face covered in a black mask and the like. (humans get very affronted when someone seems to just demand, demand, demand… even if their demands are warranted). News, like it or not has become a commidity, so, use it to change it. While the past decade has seen the deterioration of real talking into thirty second rants of exploitation and pandering and talking heads screaming about this and that, I don’t think this is the way to go. While it may seem to be the way at the end of the day, true level-headed, reality based intelligence (I really believe) wins out in the end, only if because at the end of the day, it is the level headed that have the patience to sit through all the emotion and the rants, to see through the thoughts of the heart vs. the mind and get to the real heart of the issues. That is what needs to be done with Occupy. It is a great idea for everyone to have a voice, but again, let’s speak to reality. Spending your whole time just listening to those voices and never really deciding on anything because your afraid that someone will not agree with what you are doing will result in… well… nothing. This is a place where Occupy (especially in the United States, the seeds of its existence) seems to really have dropped the ball. Other movements in that country (the so-called Tea Party comes to mind) have been much more successful because they have decided to play the game, to not just talk, and to understand that action … within the system… must occur in order to bring about the change they desire. They have come to see that they must work with different groups, not necessarily totally like them in their actions, but in the fundamental idea of what they desire, in line with each other. From what I see of what has occurred in the United States over the past few years, they have been very successful so far in forwarding many of the things they desire, even thought they too seem to hate the system as it is. They have been good at using it to their own advantage.
I know that many may see that as a total lack of principles to their own moral code, a type of pandering in its own right, but lets again look at the reality of our species. Many of the ways in which we function are riddled with paradoxes and catch 22’s. Change comes about (it seems to me) when one accepts these realities and uses them to ones understanding … and ultimately to their advantage.
Occupy seems to be at that point in its evolution the world was at after they were hooked on the drug Barack Obama sold to us all in his slogan “Change”. After the reality of the real world set in, and the drug did not produce all the “change” it promised (or perhaps many people just assumed it to promise), the disillusion became too much and people once again began to look for something else that could appease their desire for something different. They began to look for a new fix. They believed in something, and when what they believed in became diluted, the purity of the drug became less than the initial effect it gave them, they began to look elsewhere for something that was more pure to their own thinking… to get them high again.
That, my friends is never going to happen, unless we all choose to splinter and begin to live in our own little worlds. living only with those whom are like minded in all ways. Now that may be fun for awhile and it may be something that many think would be a great thing, but I do believe there would come a day when those whom thought that way would realize they were missing something. That spark, that difference, that diversity that makes us such a frustrating species in so many ways… but also one of total fascination, intrigue and desire.
So to Occupy I would say… the time has come to really take it to the next level. The protest, the sit-ins, the shut-downs (and so forth), they were just the beginning. Now it is time to really get organized, to really move into the next phase of change. Don’t be afraid of one whom may have money who desires to really be with you and to use that money to help you. Not everyone whom has money is hell-bent on keeping the system we have now. There are many out there that desire change, desire a different way of going about doing things in the world, but don’t feel the need to circumvent the system we have now to do it. Don’t ignore that group, embrace them, and understand they can be your allies, not someone else you need to change in thought. It might not be what one wants to hear, but there are certain ideas of inequality that are going to take… money… to make them right again. After all, again, I must state, we live in the reality of the world we have all created. We cannot wipe it clean and start a-new in one full swoop. The results would be catastrophically bad for us all. And so, understanding that money is needed, but that money CAN bring about change, if it is done in certain ways, needs to be embraced.
Sometimes the most like minded people are those whom you seem to think you have the least in common with. Sometimes understanding that desiring the same outcome or the same thing does not necessarily mean taking the same path to get to that place. But it takes more than just an understanding of this. It takes a willingness to work together… differences and all… to succeed in those goals. This is the place I see that Occupy needs to really concentrate on now. And I wish them all the best in that venture. It is the hardest thing for humans to do sometimes, but if the movement ever really wants to make a change, and not fade into the sunset, it is a place they will need to go, and if they do, they may be surprised the people (and entities) that will follow.
Good Intention Photos that make me think… well wait a moment
Part Thirteen
Progress and Change are (like death) two things that all humans must accept in life. Things will change; the human species will continue (for better or worse) to evolve so often the question one must ask oneself is… “Am I going to let go of my fear and apprehension of the unknown of the situation or am I going to let my own self doubt hold me (and my species) back”?
But even more so than that these days it is the understanding that this progress is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people and harder and harder for larger portions of our species to obtain. Sure, we all benefit from the progress in some way or another, but with the ever increasing wealth gap between the rich and poor of our world (in all nations, in all area of the world), it only seems a matter of time before we begin to see a stark difference created in two types of our species…the ones with the means to continue the evolution and the ones that don’t.
Waiting to see what happens… for more and more is becoming the only option they have in a world that is marginalizing greater and greater numbers as our “progress” is linked more and more to a monetary sum.
Progress for our species needs to be one across the board, in all areas of the world, in all walks of life. In the globalized world we are creating, this is ultimately beneficial to all of us for this to occur. It is ethically sound and no matter how one looks at it, even if it is from a place of power and money, history has taught us that eventually the have-nots will rise up and demand their own. If this were to occur, the effects would be felt not only in one area of the world, but more and more across the planet as our species weaves an ever increasing interactive web of existence.
As technology accelerates our progress the challenge to proliferate these changes throughout the whole of humanity will increase as well, but it is a challenge we must understand we need to face and find a solution to, simply because it is the logical and practical thing to do for the increased betterment of our species.
What’s in a Word? Part Twenty
Change:
Language, like all things, is in a constant state of flux. The Oxford Dictionary adds between 200-2500 words a year (a Harvard study found up to 8500 words entered the English language every year, but many words… like postcoarctation, reptating and subsectoral….. never catch on).
If the English language has transformed almost beyond recognition in 1000 years, imagine what it will look like in say…100,000?
While hard to predict, futurists can look at patterns in language use now and extrapolate what may be in the future. For example, even thought the English language is the world’s “lingua frnaca”, the popularity of it largely hinges on the economic importance of English speaking countries. As we can see now, other cultures that do not speak English as their primary language are coming to the forefront, so the future may not be just for the English language. Even so, like today, words are incorporated into many languages. Take the word tablet or podcast for example. They are incorporated into most languages. That being said, if history is any indication, popular languages seem to be resilient to invasion, so while some languages will surely die out, the more dominant ones will probably still be around (but to what degree is up for debate and speculation).
Of greater probability in the more dominant languages will be what is termed “splinter languages” That is the melting of different ideas into (especially English). We see that all the time with the importing of words from different cultures into the English language (in what we often term … slang… words), as well as the idea of what we call “American” and “British” English.
The place it seems we may see the most changes in the way we speak will be in the area of Grammar. Today, more than at any other time, we are seeing a “simplification” in the way we use (especially) past tense verbs. Many past tense verbs do not have the typical -ed ending to them, (left not leaved), but over time irregular verbs (often dictated by the frequency of use) are more likely to become regular verbs. Take for example “to wed”. People are already starting to say “newly wedded” rather than “newly wed”… other words like “slunk” have a high possibility of becoming “slinked” due to the lower frequency of use.
Irregular plurals is also an area of probably change. Words like “men” could become “mans” in the future.
Studies have also shown that words evolve to suit their purpose (just like most things), so therefore in the world of word evolution, that means if a word is common and represents important concepts, it is much more likely to .. stick around… longer. Words such as “highly fit” are much harder to dislodge from the human (English) language as it is difficult to find an idea that conveys it more accurately as we evolve.
If we take a look back through time (the Beowulf time) we can see that words like “Nama” have stayed around much the same (name), as have numbers, question words, and simple nouns.
What does this all mean for the evolution of our language? Well, perhaps in the future our descendants, if viewing this page in an archive may still understand the sentences “what is your name” “I drink water” “I eat food”, but other larger concepts will probably be very different and be something that we (as yet) don’t have the concept to understand … as we don’t yet know the language that is coming.
Good intention photos that make me think…. Well wait a minute (and in this case it makes me think…. Holy Crap….YIKES!!)
Part Eleven:
Back in the early parts of the 1900’s this was seen as “entertainment”, accepted and the norm. It is not just the picture that gives me pause for thought, but the song that this picture is the advert for. Here we have, what was billed at the time as “the most successful hit song of 1901”.
How times have changed… or have they? With our climate of political correctness and ability to “know the right language”, one can still get away with such ideas… just not in such a blantenly overt manner of hatred. Like him or not, the manner in which people interact with the President of the United States if they are opposed to him is more disrespectful (in terms of the way people speak to/about and with him) than from what I have seen or heard of any president of that country in my lifetime.. and I am sure longer. Generalizations of certain groups of people are strong in many cultures today.
Today we subvertly do it through such things as “profiling” of certain cultural backgrounds. Plastic surgery (to make eyes wider, change noses to look more like others etc) marks another way that internalized ideas of these things rear their ugly head. Whitening products (especially in Eastern countries) for ones skin and other such advertising notions still navigate society as a whole.
We are a long way from true equality… but at the same time (I would like to think and hope) we are a long way from where we were in the time of this song….
For your interest (of the thinking of many at that time… and I am sure still this time as well for some) the lyrics to this song….
They are as follows: (seriously makes me stop to think about ideas of human thinking and what fear one has inside oneself that would drive them to think in this manner)
Although it’s not my color,
I’m feeling mighty blue;
I’ve got a lot of trouble,
I’ll tell it all to you:
I’m cert’nly clean disgusted
With life, and that’s a fact
Because my hair is wooly
And because my color’s black.
My gal, she took a notion
Against the colored race.
She said if I would win her
I’d have to change my face;
She said if she should wed me,
That she’d regret it soon,
And now I’m shook, yes, good and hard,
Because I am a coon.
CHORUS:
Coon! Coon! Coon!
I wish my color would fade.
Coon! Coon! Coon!
I’d like a different shade.
Coon! Coon! Coon!
Morning, night and noon.
I wish I was a white man
‘Stead of a Coon! Coon! Coon!
I had my face enameled,
I had my hair made straight.
I dressed up like a white man,
And cert’nly did look great.
Then started out to see her,
Just shortly after dark,
But on the way to meet my babe
I had to cross a park;
Just as I was a-thinking
I had things fixed up right,
I passed a tree where two doves
Sat making love at night;
They stopped and looked me over,
I saw my finish soon.
When both those birds said good and loud,
“Coo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oon.”
HOW MANY people does it take to change a light-bulb?
Light bulbs and the notion of… change…
Q: How many Einstein’s does it take to change a light bulb?
A: That depends on the speed of the changer, and the mass of the bulb. Or vice versa, of course.
Then it just might be easier to leave the bulb alone and change the room. It’s all relative.
Q: How many existentialists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Two: One to screw it in and one to observe how the light bulb itself symbolizes a single incandescent beacon of subjective reality in a netherworld of endless absurdity reaching out toward a maudlin cosmos of nothingness.
Q: How many Nietzchians does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Don’t worry, I’ll just sit here in the dark, alone.
Q: How many Marxists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None: The light bulb contains the seeds of its own revolution.
Q: How many Greek Orthodox priests does it take to change a light bulb?
A: What do you mean, “change”!?
Q: How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb?
A: A tree in a golden forest.
Q: How many postmodernists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: In a Derridaist reading, wherein light is a social construct, there is a dialectic between Darkness as a reality and reality as a mode.
Q. How many sociologists does it take to change a light bulb?
A. One–but the light bulb has to really want to change first.
Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Fish.
Q: How many pessimists does it take to change a light-bulb?
A: What’s the point? It’ll only blow again.
Q: How many optomists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None, the old one is probably screwed in too tight.
Q: How many social scientists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: They do not change light bulbs they search for the root cause as to why the last one went out.
Q: How many Unitarian Universalists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: We choose not to make a statement either in favor of or against the need for a light bulb. However, if in your own journey you have found that a light bulb works for you, that is fine. You are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your personal relationship with your light bulb (or light source, or non-dark resource) and present it next month at our annual light bulb Sunday service, in which we will explore a number of light bulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, three-way, long-life, and tinted — all of which are equally valid paths to luminescence
The Human Animal is its Own Worst Enemy:
Part Two:
If legal rules that authorize change can be used to change themselves, then we have paradox and contradiction; but if they cannot be used to change themselves (and if there is no higher rule that could authorize their change), then we have immutable rules.
Paradox and immutability should create an uncomfortable dilemma for jurists and citizens in western legal systems. It appears that we must give up either a central element of legal rationality or a central element of democratic theory.
A Dose of Sanity: Part Three
The problem with spirituality (while trying to open itself up from the binds of just saying “religion”…which are quite rigid in their ways/teaching/actions/beings and inability… or unwillingness to change and evolve), is that it does not relate to the actual human condition but the (unrealistically) idealized version of it.
Being human is not as simple as one may think.










