#they recognized their own self destructive tendencies and started to put in work to grow and change | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

adriennemareebrown · 5 years ago

Link

what do we do with unthinkable thoughts?

who are we in our unthinkable thinking moments?

how do we adapt together if the clues to our next pivot are unthinkable?

maybe sharing these unthinkable thoughts will help?

i’ll start with the scariest unthinkable thought for me, which is that maybe we are in a state of collective suicidal ideation – the state of thinking about, even planning, the end of us. i have thought this thought many times, for years.

i have ideated suicide in the past, thought it didn’t much matter if i was here or not, and so it didn’t much matter how i treated myself or others. when i was in that phase of ambiguous commitment to life, i took risks with my mind and body that i couldn’t imagine taking now. i practiced cynicism and hopelessness, as if they were the measures of humor, of intelligence. it was a brief phase of my life, but during that time i believed in nothing.

i tried to exit.

i then had to choose life from deep within me. that’s why i’m still here. i want to live. i want to want to live. i think everyone chooses to move towards life or away from it, though some don’t realize that they are making the choice. capitalism makes it hard to see your own direction.

as i have watched the world respond to the pandemic, the borders between nations shift meaning in my mind. i can see which countries choose life, and which don’t. which countries have a majority life-minded citizenship, which countries/regions elect leaders who care for them. which countries pivot at the highest governmental level to protect their people, to guide their people to protect themselves – places with a variety of economies and exposure have found ways to move towards life.

i wonder about the movements in those countries, what it might feel like to live and organize in a place that chooses life.

choosing life means being able to admit we are wrong when new information presents itself about the dangers around and amongst us.

choosing life means committing to the adaptations to stay alive, rather than the stubbornness to stay the same.

the u.s., as a nation, does not choose, or love, life. not yet, and possibly never before now.

other nations, many amongst the most developed in the world, initially shrugged at COVID-19. then they adapted.

the u.s. response has been more egregious than a shrug; it’s been a flagrant disregard, running towards a category five pandemic tornado. it’s meant that those of us who want to live are watching in horror as the mutating coronavirus fills in the pre-existing grooves of collective suicidal ideation and the resistance of those who love life – with climate deniers and corporate polluters on one side, environmental and climate justice movements on the other. white supremacists and patriarchs on one side, solidarity movements in race, ethnicity, class, gender, ability and sexuality arenas on the other.

we are a nation not divided but torn – pulled towards life and pulled towards death.

when i get that torn feeling within, which in recent years comes very rarely, in twinges and whisps, i now recognize it as the suicidal tendency in me. it’s not the truth, not the only truth, not my truth, not the choice i want to make. but the tendency is wiley, using the voices of people i love to make itself heard. i have to be vigilant, listen between the lines, ask: who would benefit from my absence? who benefits from my self-doubt?

our nation has a tendency towards its own destruction, a doubt of its right to exist, that is rooted in our foundation.

i think our movements struggle inside this larger national suicidal tendency – we want to grow, but at the same time some of us don’t believe we will all get there, or get anywhere better, in time. that we can’t, and won’t, put forth the effort.

maybe the idea of our future generations experiencing peace and abundance is not enough to keep us going.

maybe we just need some more immediate signs of life.

maybe we are terrified.

i, we, have to be able to discern what is me/us, and what is fear.

which leads to my next unthinkable thought: do i really know the difference between my discernment and my fear?

my dear friend Malkia teaches me that there is the fear intended to save your life, vs fear intended to end it. what i mean by discernment is the set of noticings, fears, wisdoms, deductions, and gut tremblings that want to save, or even just improve, my life, versus the fear that makes me unable to do anything, which makes me unable to draw on my life force to take action.

do i think i am being discerning when i am actually frozen in place, scared to change?

am i too scared of standing out from the crowd to pause and discern right action?

am i acting from terror?

am i able to discern a decision or action that makes sense?

i was in italy when the pandemic really became clear as a threat to my well-being. i went to one of the places i felt at home. and once i got there, i again found myself freezing, in denial of next moves, as everyone asked me where i was and when i was going home-home or elsewhere.

in my frozen state i would hear just a bit of the news, the new numbers of crisis, and shake my head at the idiots in office, and then numb back out. having quickly identified who i blamed, i was even less able to feel any agency in me. i froze and delayed and froze until i was overwhelmed by the inquiries.

then i had an excellent therapy session where i noticed:

oh. i am afraid. i am afraid that the pandemic is on the rise everywhere and i am going to leave safety for a dangerous unknown. oh! i don’t know what to do!

as soon as i acknowledged i was afraid i was able to move into discernment. my fear became data – i am afraid because the numbers are clear that i am in a safer place than any of the locations i am considering going to. i should stay put, not because i am afraid, but because, as my fear is actually screaming on behalf of my informed intuition, this is the best place to be in this moment.

my fear made me freeze until i had to move. therapy helped me notice i was afraid, deepen my breath, and return to discernment.

i see the same vacillation between fear and discernment in our movements right now, with no therapist in sight.

we are afraid of being hurt, afraid because we have been hurt, afraid because we have caused hurt, afraid because we live in a world that wants to hurt us whether we have hurt others or not, just based on who we are, on any otherness from some long-ago determined norm. supremacy is our ongoing pandemic. it partners with every other sickness to tear us from life, or from lives worth living.

so we stay put and scream into the void, moving our rage across the internet like a tornado that, without discernment, sucks up all in its path for destruction.

our emotions and need for control are heightened during this pandemic – we are stuck in our houses or endangering ourselves to go out and work, terrified and angry at the loss of our plans and normalcy, terrified and angry at living under the oppressive rule of an administration that does not love us and that is racist and ignorant and violent. grieving our unnecessary dead, many of whom are dying alone, unheld by us. we are full of justified rage. and we want to release that rage. and one really fast and easy way to do this is what i experience as a salem witch trial, a false bid for justice, or the even faster method of lynching.

before i move on, i need to acknowledge that these are extreme terms, terms that refer to systems of death. i know that i am speaking of a social destruction, a significantly less extreme consequence – and i am trying to place my finger on a feeling of punitive justice unleashed in our movements.

in our movements, this feeling of punitive justice comes in the wake of call outs of leaders or those with some increased exposure or access. in the past week i have seen people called out for embodying white supremacy in the workplace, for causing repeated or one-time sexual harm, for physical, emotional or digital abuse, for appropriation of ideas and images, for patriarchy, for ableism, for being dishonest, for saying harmful things a decade ago, for doing things that were later understood as harm – for embodying all of the pain that supremacy holds. the call outs generally share one side of what’s happened and then call for immediate consequences. and within a day, the call out is everywhere, the cycle of blame and shame activated, and whoever was called out has begun being punished.

we are afraid, and we think it will assuage our fears and make us safer if we can clarify an enemy, a someone outside of ourselves who is to blame, who is guilty, who is the origin of harm. we can get spun into such frenzy in our fear that we don’t even realize we are deploying the master’s tools.

ah, audre, come in.

we’ve always known lynch mobs are a master’s tool. meaning: moving as an angry mob, sparked by fear (often unfounded or misguided) with the power to issue instant judgment and instant punishment. these are master’s tools.

we in movements for justice didn’t create lynch mobs. we didn’t create witch trials. we didn’t create this punitive system of justice. we didn’t create the state, we didn’t choose to be socialized within it. we want to dismantle these systems of mass harm, and i know that most of us have no intention of ever mimicking state processes of navigating justice.

the master’s tools feel good to use, groove in the hand easily from repeated use and training. but they are often blunt and senseless.

unless we have a true analysis of abolition and dismantling systems of oppression, we will not realize what’s in our hands, we will never put the master’s tools down and figure out what our tools are and can be.

oh – but you can’t say it’s a salem witch trial if it’s all Black and Brown and queer and trans people doing it…

oh – you can’t call it a lynching, because of the power dynamics! it’s a move against someone with more power.

but then – my third unthinkable thought – why does it feel like that? why do our movements more and more often feel like angry mobs moving against ourselves? and what is at stake because of it? why does it feel like someone pointing at someone else and saying: that person is harmful! and with no questions or process or time or breath, we are collectively punishing them?

sometimes we even do it with the language of transformative justice: claiming that we are going to give them room to grow. they need to disappear completely to be accountable. we are publicly shaming them so that they will learn to be better.

underneath this logic i hear: we are dunking her in the water to see if she drowns, because if she drowns then we know she wasn’t a witch. we are hanging him from the tree because then we can pretend we have exorcised ‘bad’ from our town. we are lynching to affirm our rightness.

which isn’t to say that some of the accused aren’t raging white supremacists in movement clothing. or abusers who have slipped through the fingers of accountability. or shady in some other way.

which isn’t to say that a public accounting of harm, and consequences, aren’t necessarily the correct move.

which isn’t to say we don’t believe survivors. because we must.

but how do we believe survivors and still be abolitionist? and still practice transformative justice?

to start with, i have been trying to discern when a call out feels powerful, like the necessary move, versus when it feels like the witch trial/lynch mob energy is leading.

it feels powerful when there have been private efforts for accountability. it feels powerful when survivors are being supported. it feels necessary when the accused has avoided accountability, particularly (but not exclusively) if they have continued to cause harm. it feels necessary when the accused person has significantly more power than the accuser(s) and is using that power to avoid accountability. it feels powerful when the demand is process and consequence based.

it feels like a lynch mob when there are no questions asked. when the survivor’s healing takes a back seat. when there is no attempt to have a private process. when there is no time between accusation and the call for consequences. and when the only consequence is for the accused to cease to exist. when the accused is from one or more oppressed identities. when it feels performative. when the person accused of causing harm does what the survivor/crowd demands, but we keep pulling up the rope.

no inquiry, no questions, no acceptance of accountability, no jury, no time for the learning and unlearning necessary for authentic change…just instant and often unsatisfactory consequences.

a moment on this: one of the main demands i see in call outs is for a public apology. to expect a coherent authentic apology from someone who has been forcibly removed from power or credibility feels like a set up. usually they issue some pr sounding thing and we use that paper as more fuel for the fire at their feet.

i have seen the convoluted denial-accountability-nonapology message from many an accused harm doer, especially when physical or sexual harm is involved. sometimes they are claiming innocence, sometimes they are admitting to some harm, rarely at the level of the accusation. sometimes they say they tried to have a process but it didn’t work, or they were denied. who knows what they mean by process, who knows if the accuser was ready for a process, who knows what actually happened between them, the relational context of the instance or pattern of harm, who knows?

the truth about sexual assault and rape and patriarchy and white supremacy and other abuses of power is that we are swimming in them, in a society that has long normalized them, and that they often play out intimately.

the truth is, sometimes it takes a long time for us to realize the harm that has happened to us.

and longer to realize we have caused harm to others.

the truth is, it isn’t unusual to only realize harm happened in hindsight, with more perspective and politicization.

but there’s more truth, too.

the additional truth is, right now we have the time.

the additional truth is, even though we want to help the survivor, we love obsessing over and punishing ‘villains’. we end up putting more of our collective attention on punishing those accused of causing harm than supporting and centering the healing of survivors.

the additional truth is, we want to distance ourselves from those who cause harm, and we are steeped in a punitive culture which, right now, is normalizing a methodology of ‘punish first, ask questions later’, which is a witch trial, lynching, master’s tool methodology. which, because we are in the age of social media, we now have a way to practice very publicly.

supremacy is the original pandemic, an infectious disease that quietly roots into each of us. we might have supremacy due to race, citizenship, gender, class, ableism, age, access, fame, or other areas where we feel justified to cause harm without consequence, sometimes without even realizing we’ve caused harm, because supremacy is a numbing and narrowing disease.

i want us to let go of the narrowness of innocence, widen our understanding of how harm moves through us. i want us to see individual acts of harm as symptoms of systemic harm, and to do what we can to dismantle the systems and get as many of us free as possible.

often a call out comes because the disease has reached an acute state in someone, is festering in hiding, is actively causing harm. i want us to see the difference between the human and the disease, to see what we are afraid of, in others and in ourselves, and discern a path that actually addresses the root of our justified fears.

this is not a case against call outs – there is absolutely a need for certain call outs – when power is greatly imbalanced and multiple efforts have been made to stop ongoing harm, when someone accused of harm won’t participate in community accountability processes, the call out is a way of pulling an emergency brake.

but it should be a last option. the consequences of being called out at this point are extremely dire and imprecise. the presence of infiltration in our movements is so documented and prevalent. call outs are an incredible modern tool for those who are not committed to movements to use against those having impact.

right now calling someone out online seems like first/only option for a lot of people.

i can’t help but wonder who benefits from movements that engage in public infighting, blame, shame and knee jerk call outs? i can’t help but see the state grinning, gathering all the data it needs, watching us weaken ourselves. meanwhile, the harm continues.

i don’t find it satisfying, and i don’t think it is transformative to publicly call people out for instant consequences with no attempt at a conversation, mediation, boundary setting or a community accountability process with a limited number of known participants.

it doesn’t make sense to say ‘believe all survivors’ if we don’t also remember that most of us are survivors, which includes most people who cause harm. what we mean is we are tired of being silenced, dismissed, powerless in our pain, hurt over and over. yes. but being loud is different from being whole, or even being heard, being cared for, being comforted, being healed. being loud is different from being just. being able to destroy is different from being able to generate a future where harm isn’t happening all around us.

we are terrified of how widespread and active harm is, and it makes us want to point the finger and quickly remove those we can identify as bad. we want to protect each other from those who cause harm.

many of us seem to worry that if we don’t immediately jump on whatever mob wagon has pulled up in our dms, that we will be next to be called out, or called a rape apologist or a white person whisperer or an internalized misogynist, or just disposed of for refusing to group think and then group act. online, we perform solidarity for strangers rather than engaging in hard conversations with comrades.

we are fearful of taking the time to be discerning, because then we may have to recognize that any of us could be seen as harmdoers. and when we are discerning, when we do step up to say wait, let’s get understanding here, we risk becoming the new target, viewed as another accomplice to harm instead of understood as a comrade in ending harm.

perhaps, most dangerously, we are, all together now, teetering on the edge of hopelessness. collective suicidal ideation, pandemic burnout, 45-in-office burnout, climate catastrophe burnout and other exhaustions have us spent and flailing, especially if we are caught in reactive loops (which include the culture of multiple daily call outs) instead of purposeful adaptations. some of us are losing hope, tossed by the tornado, ungrounded and uprooted by the pace of change, seeking something tangible we can do, control, hold, throw away.

the kind of callouts we are currently engaging in do not necessarily think about movements’ needs as a whole. movements need to grow and deepen, we need to ‘transform ourselves to transform the world’*, to ‘be transformed in the service of the work’**. movements need to become the practice ground for what we are healing towards, co-creating. movements are responsible for embodying what we are inviting our people into. we need the people within our movements, all socialized into and by unjust systems, to be on liberation paths. not already free, but practicing freedom every day. not already beyond harm, but accountable for doing our individual and internal work to end harm, which includes actively working to gain awareness of the ways we can and have harmed each other, and ending those cycles in ourselves and our communities.

knee jerk call outs say: those who cause harm cannot change. they must be eradicated. the bad things in the world cannot change, we must disappear the bad until there is only good left.

but one layer under that, what i hear is:

we cannot change.

we do not believe we can create compelling pathways from being harm doers to being healed, to growing.

we do not believe we can hold the complexity of a gray situation.

we do not believe in our own complexity.

we can only handle binary thinking: good/bad, innocent/guilty, angel/abuser, black/white, etc.

it is a different kind of suicide, to attack one part of ourselves at a time. cancer does this, i have seen it – oh it’s in the throat, now it’s in the lungs, now it’s in the bones. when we engage in knee jerk call outs and instant consequences with no process, we become a cancer unto ourselves, unto movements and communities. we become the toxicity we long to heal. we become a tool of harm when we are trying to be, and i think meant to be, a balm.

oh unthinkable thoughts. now that i have thought you, it becomes clear to me that all of you are rooted in a singular longing: i want us to want to live.

i want us to want to live in this world, in this time, together.

i want us to love this planet and this species, at this time.

i want us to see ourselves as larger than just individuals randomly pinging around in a world that will never care for us.

i want us to see ourselves as a murmuration of creatures who are, as far as we know right now, unique in all the universe. each cell, each individual body, itself a unique part of this unique complexity.

i want us not to waste the time we have together.

i want us to look at each other with the eyes of interdependence, such that when someone causes harm, we find the gentle parent inside of us who can use a voice of accountability, while also bringing curiosity – ‘why did you cause harm? do you know? do you know other options? apologize.’ that we can set boundaries that don’t require the disappearance of other survivors. that we can act towards accountability with the touch of love. that when someone falls behind, we can use a parent’s voice of discipline while also picking them up and carrying them for a while if needed.

i want us to adapt from systems of oppression and punishment to systems of uplifting and transforming.

i want us to notice that this is a moment when we need to choose life, not surrender to the incompetence and hopelessness of our national leadership.

i want us to be discerning.

i want our movement to feel like a vibrant, accountable space where causing harm does not mean you are excluded immediately and eternally from healing, justice, community or belonging.

i want us to grow lots and lots of skill at holding the processes by which we mend the wounds in our communities and ourselves.

i want satisfying consequences that actually end cycles of harm, generate safety and deepen movement.

i want us to hold Black humanity to the highest degree of protection, even when we have caused harm. i want us to see each other’s trauma-induced behavior as ancestral and impermanent, even as we hold each other accountable.

i want us to be particularly rigorous about holding complexity and accountability well for Black people in our movement communities who are already struggling to keep our heads above water and build trust and move towards life under the intersecting weights of white supremacy, racialized capitalism, police brutality, philanthropic competition culture, and lack of healing support.

i never want to see us initiate processes for Black accountability where those who are not invested in Black life can see it, store it, weaponize it. replace Black in that sentence with any other oppressed peoples and i still feel the same way. it is not strategic, and, again, it is rarely satisfying.

i want us to ask who benefits from our hopelessness, and to deny our oppressors the satisfaction of getting to see our pain. i want them to wonder how we foment such consistent and deep solidarity and unlearning. i want our infiltrators to be astounded into their own transformations, having failed to tear us apart.

i want us to acknowledge that the supremacy and suicidal ideation and hopelessness and harm are everywhere, and make moves that truly allow us to heal into wholeness.

because against all odds in space and time? we. are. winning.

we are winning in spite of the tsunami of pressures against us. we are moving towards life in spite of everything that wants us to give up.

we in movement must learn to choose life even in conflict, composting the bad behaviors while holding the beating hearts.

choosing life includes asking: do i have the necessary information to form an opinion? do i have the time to seek understanding? what does the survivor need? did a conversation/process already happen? is a conversation/process possible? how do we be abolitionist while gaining accountability here? who benefits from me doubting that movement can hold this? who could hold this well? what will end the cycle of harm here?

we must learn to do this before there is no one left to call out, or call we, or call us.

….

thank you deeply to shira hassan and malkia devich cyril for loving feedback on this piece.

* grace lee Boggs ** mary hooks

#IFTTT #WordPress

3 notes · View notes

sataniccapitalist · 5 years ago

Text

APRIL 09, 2020

It's All Over but the Shouting

Wafers-

A few months ago, David Masciotra, a free-lance writer and author of Against Traffic, among other works, approached The American Conservative with a proposal for an article, which would be a review of my American Empire trilogy. He subsequently submitted the article, and never heard back. Since I'm neither a conservative nor a progressive, but only a writer interested in Reality, it's possible that TAC got spooked by David's essay. (To paraphrase T.S. Eliot, "Americans can't bear too much reality.") However, it's also possible that by that time the coronavirus was starting to make itself visible, and that TAC was thrown by that rather than anything ideological. I guess we can give them the benefit of the doubt. In any case, David and I agreed that I should just post his essay on my blog, and accept the fact that no American publication was likely to run it (for whatever reason). Hence, here it is.

It’s All Over but the Shouting: Morris Berman’s Work on American Decline

“Stick a fork in their ass, and turn them over. They’re done,” Lou Reed dryly announces on his 1989 song about the American Empire, “The Last Great American Whale.” The rock and roll poet’s grim diagnosis of a culture gone awry makes for a fine lyric. If Reed were to have expanded his morbid one-liner into a 1,000-page trilogy of books, full of assiduous research, brilliant anecdotes, and despite the sad subject matter, immensely enjoyable, and often amusing, prose, he would have something resembling the series of books on American decline from cultural critic, historian, novelist, and poet, Morris Berman.

Berman, while a visiting professor in the belly of the beast at the Catholic University in Washington, DC, began writing the first installment in the late 1990s,The Twilight of American Culture, after observing the coalescence of several pathologies that are now beyond dispute as inflicting pain on American life: staggering rates of inequality, governmental dysfunction, an ever-expanding militarism, the fracturing of communal and civic life, and the dominance of anti-intellectualism, visible in everything from an increasingly shallow pop culture to misspelled words on public signs. There was also an aura of threat in the air, of the kind predicted by Don DeLillo in his 1985 novel, White Noise. Like the thick presence of humidity on a summer afternoon, Americans couldn’t see that their neighbors were becoming selfish, and often cruel, but they could feel it.

Having studied the downfall of other empires, Berman saw the window for American reform closing. He warned that if America did not drastically transform its public policies, ideology, and working conception of citizenship, its troubles would only intensify and calcify, bringing a once-promising civilization past the point of no return. In the two books that followed—

Dark Ages America

and

Why America Failed

—Berman meticulously demonstrated that America’s myopic focus on profit, at the expense of everything else, its zest for war – at home and abroad – and its lack of self-awareness and insight had escalated, making recovery virtually impossible.

Simultaneous with the development of Berman’s argument, the United States suffered the worst attack on its soil on September 11, 2001, and responded by launching not one, but two disastrous wars. Its housing market and financial system crashed, liquidating much of middle class wealth, and it reacted with giving away boondoggles to the very parties of greed that caused the crisis. Then, in 2016, as the citizenry began to stratify in ways more violent and intractable, Donald Trump became President-Elect. Berman, whom the New York Times and other mainstream outlets dismissed as cynical, cranky, and “anti-American,” looks more and more sterling.The left and right argue about nearly everything, making extreme accusations about each other. Maybe one camp is right on other issues, and the other is correct on some, but the larger possibility to consider is, what if they are all wrong on the main issue?

As Berman put it during a recent email exchange that I had with him:

Conservatives and progressives alike are patriots; like Trump, they seek to save America, or make it great again. What they are ignoring is the rhythm and record of history. All civilizations rise and fall; there are no exceptions to this rule, and America is not going to escape its fate. The great Southern historian, C. Vann Woodward, first suggested the inevitable decline of the nation in 1953. Andrew Hacker stated it clearly in The End of the American Era, 1970. Between that year and today, there have been a host of books—my trilogy on the American empire included—that have pointed out that civilizations come and go, and that now is our time. Yet on both the right and left, there is no recognition of this bedrock reality. If you do recognize the larger picture, you can't possibly care about impeachment, for example, or who wins these silly Democratic debates. All of that is theater, not reality.

The reality is ascertainable from the daily deluge of grim headlines—lead poisoning in the water causing irreversible brain damage in children, the rise of the “working poor,” near-daily mass shootings, America spending hundreds of billions on weapons of war while ignoring its crumbling infrastructure. Pundits and politicians have a tendency to treat all of these signs of pathology and dysfunction as isolated, but an unobstructed historical vantage point, which Berman’s work provides, suggests that all of America’s problems—from high rates of functional illiteracy to political corruption—are trees growing out of the same rotten roots.

Berman’s project becomes more excavation than analysis, demonstrating an affinity for radicalism, in the original sense of the term, which is identifying and criticizing an issue’s origin, rather than obtusely obsessing over its consequences. America, from its inception, was dedicated to commercial conquest, and equated “the pursuit of happiness” with the acquisition of wealth and property. The third book in Berman’s trilogy, Why America Failed, relies on assiduous research and sharp analysis to prove the case over its 400 pages. Meanwhile, the consistent papering over the more accurate story he tells, with red, white and blue advertisements, robs even many of the country’s leading dissidents of a holistic perspective. In his deployment of cultural criticism, Berman shows how, although his politics tend slightly toward the left, he is most in mourning over America’s destruction of tradition and refusal to balance its desires for commercial dominance with small scale, communal concerns:

Dating back 400 years—the continent was filled with individuals whose idea of the good life was goods, i.e. money and property. There were dissenting voices, such as Capt. John Smith and the Puritan divines, but these were increasingly pushed aside. The title of Richard Bushman's book, and the book itself, are good summaries of the process: From Puritan to Yankee. America was effectively born bourgeois; it had no feudal period. And while feudalism had its obvious drawbacks, it also had some serious advantages: community, craftsmanship, ties of friendship, meaningful work, noblesse oblige, and spiritual purpose, among other things. The American experiment was based, from the first, on hustling, opportunism; this is what the "pursuit of happiness" really meant in the eighteenth century—go out and get yours (which the Founding Fathers certainly did). "Virtue" originally meant putting the needs of society above one's own personal interests. By the late seventeenth century, the meaning had been inverted: it now meant personal success in an opportunistic environment. Blaming the corporate elite has its limits, because what virtually all Americans want is to join the upper 1 percent. Thus American spirituality, such as it is, can be summarized in a single word: More. More, more, I want more. Our leaders reflect our values, which is how America's consummate hustler, Donald Trump, wound up in the White House. In that sense, we have a genuine democracy.

In his seminal essay, “Democratic Vistas,” Walt Whitman worried that “genuine belief” had left American life. In the mad race for money and status, Americans were forgetting or neglecting the sociopolitical principles that could construct a spiritually strong society. For “genuine belief” to thrive, the believers must, in spite of their partisan or ideological disputes, maintain some adherence to tradition – a set of ideas, rites, and practices that form the foundation of their politics, behavior, and vision for the development of their culture.

Berman attempts to achieve a balance in his cultural and historical analysis by spotlighting societies where edifying traditions are steadfast, helping to anchor their respective cultures, and help inhabitants connect to each other with a shared sense of purpose. In Neurotic Beauty, Berman writes about Japan’s traditions of craft, family, and advantageous use of empty space in art and identity, and how those traditions are under siege by Japan’s own move to large scale, corporate capitalism. In Genio: The Story of Italian Genius, Berman examines the Italian gift of injecting space, movement, into static situations – the result of which is, arguably, the most significant creative legacy in the Western world.

It is not only through travel and study that Berman is able to contrast cultures that maintain some loyalty to their best traditions with the American fixation on commercial, technological, and militaristic “progress,” but also through his own experience. He asserts that the “best decision” of his life was moving to Mexico, and one of his worst decisions was waiting so long to do it. When I asked him about the “traditional society” of his Mexican home, as juxtaposed with his previous home in Washington, DC, he began with the caveat that “Mexico has been heavily Americanized, and traditional values—community, friendship, craftsmanship, spirituality—have accordingly been eroded in favor of hustling, individualism, alienation, and meaninglessness.”

Nevertheless, his move to Mexico was a “bet” on the lasting elements of tradition and communal life in Mexico, and it is one that has proven itself wise. Berman offers an anecdote to illustrate the camaraderie and generosity that often characterize his relationships and interactions in Mexico:

Something like this happens to me at least once a week, and it always wakes me up to the fact that I am not living in the US anymore. I live in an apartment building in Mexico City, one floor up. One day I was coming home from the supermarket, going up the stairs, carrying plastic bags full of groceries, and one of the bags broke. Contents spilled out all over the stairs and onto the ground: oranges, Diet Coke, whatever. At that point, at the top of the stairs, the door to the apartment there opened, and a 5-year-old girl peered out. Without saying a word, she came down the stairs and helped me put the spilled groceries back in the bags. When it was done, she went back upstairs and closed the door.

Berman would not argue that acts of kindness never take place in the United States, or that every single Mexican behaves according to an ethic of solidarity, but the rarity of friendly relations in America, and the breakdown of community, as documented at length by Robert Putnam, Sherry Turkle, and many other scholars, is not accidental.

“For one thing, girls are taught to fear men, in America (possibly with good reason),” Berman said, and added, “The sexes pretty much hate each other, or are at least wary of each other. But equally significant, Americans of all ages are taught to not help other people (we even arrest people who attempt to feed the homeless). Their problems are their problems, not yours. You are not your brother's keeper, and in general other people are rivals or enemies.”

America has failed to enact the social welfare policies of its democratic peers in Western Europe, but what Berman indicts goes to deeper to core of America’s character. America has also neglected to preserve its “bonds of voluntary association” that Alexis de Tocqueville believed were crucial to the health of the society. In that sense, Americans interested in conservatism might consider that their country is the least conservative in the world. It invests almost no effort in conserving anything, from the beauty of its natural environment to the social ties that are essential for a durable civilization.

The improvements of American life for blacks, women, gays, and workers were possible through the courageous social movements of the 20th century, and these are improvements that Berman admires. He cautions, however, that none of them address the central problem of American culture:

Those were certainly great successes, and they made a great difference for the people involved in those movements. Personally, I applaud them. The problem, however, is that all of them were bids to have a greater share in the American pie—bids to enter the dominant culture. None of them envisioned, a la Lewis Mumford, Henry David Thoreau, or Ernest Callenbach, a different type of society. They merely wanted a greater role in the society as is. The only group that stood for a completely different way of life was the Native Americans, and look what we did to them. The savagery of that genocide, of a people who dared to disagree with the American definition of "progress," is unbelievable.

When Martin Luther King turned more radical, expressing opposition to the “spiritual sickness” of America, rather than only its racist laws, the country turned on him. Similarly, Berman describes in his trilogy how most of the public mocked and ridiculed President Jimmy Carter for his televised "Spiritual Malaise" address, given in Annapolis in 1979—a speech that now appears prescient in its condemnation of uncontrolled consumerism, unabashed selfishness, and the stunning inability of the nation to observe its own behavior.

The candidates in the 2020 race for the presidency, including the president himself, routinely repeat the bromide that the election will determine the “direction” of the country. The "soul" of the nation is somehow always at stake, and yet regardless of who gets elected, things continue to spiral out of control. Morris Berman’s sobering assessment doubles as a “Dead End” sign, warning that the winner might influence the speed and comfort of travel, but that ultimately, we're headed for collapse.

3 notes · View notes

all-things-are-nothing-to-me · 6 years ago

Text

What is Green Anarchy?

Bridging both time and work, the following is an article that was featured in one of Green Anarchy magazine’s “Back to Basics” primers. We see this as a starting point for further exploration and discussion. The topics covered are central to a green anarchist critique or perspective. This is not an exhaustive list, but rather the beginnings of what we hope will be an ongoing conversation – one to be further expanded, updated, and explored in subsequent issues of Black Seed.

This primer is not meant to be the “defining principles” for a green anarchist “movement”, nor an anti-civilization manifesto. It is a look at some of the basic ideas and concepts that collective members share with each other, and with others who identify as green anarchists. We understand and celebrate the need to keep our visions and strategies open, and always welcome discussion. We feel that every aspect of what we think and who we are constantly needs to be challenged and remain flexible if we are to grow. We are not interested in developing a new ideology, nor perpetuating a singular world-view. We also understand that not all green anarchists are specifically anti-civilization (but we do have a hard time understanding how one can be against all domination without getting to its roots: civilization itself). At this point, however, most who use the term “green anarchist” do indict civilization and all that comes along with it (domestication, patriarchy, division of labor, technology, production, representation, alienation, objectification, control, the destruction of life, etc). While some would like to speak in terms of direct democracy and urban gardening, we feel it is impossible and undesirable to “green up” civilization and/or make it more “fair”. We feel that it is important to move towards a radically decentralized world, to challenge the logic and mindset of the death-culture, to end all mediation in our lives, and to destroy all the institutions and physical manifestations of this nightmare. We want to become uncivilized. In more general terms, this is the trajectory of green anarchy in thought and practice.

Anarchy vs Anarchism

One qualifier that we feel is important to begin with is the distinction between “anarchy” and “anarchism”. Some will write this off as merely semantics or trivial, but for most post-left and anti-civilization anarchists, this differentiation is important. While anarchism can serve as an important historical reference point from which to draw inspiration and lessons, it has become too systematic, fixed, and ideological…everything anarchy is not. Admittedly, this has less to do with anarchism’s social/political/philosophical orientation, and more to do with those who identify as anarchists. No doubt, many from our anarchist lineage would also be disappointed by this trend to solidify what should always be in flux. The early self-identified anarchists (Proudhon, Bakunin, Berkman, Goldman, Malatesta, and the like) were responding to their specific contexts, with their own specific motivations and desires. Too often, contemporary anarchists see these individuals as representing the boundaries of anarchy, and create a W.W.B.D. [What Would Bakunin Do (or more correctly–Think)] attitude towards anarchy, which is tragic and potentially dangerous. Today, some who identify as “classical” anarchists refuse to accept any effort in previously uncharted territory within anarchism (ie. Primitivism, Post-Leftism, etc) or trends which have often been at odds with the rudimentary workers’ mass movement approach (ie. Individualism, Nihilism, etc). These rigid, dogmatic, and extremely uncreative anarchists have gone so far as to declare that anarchism is a very specific social and economic methodology for organizing the working class. This is obviously an absurd extreme, but such tendencies can be seen in the ideas and projects of many contemporary anarcho-leftists (anarcho-sydicalists, anarcho-communists, platformists, federationists). “Anarchism”, as it stands today, is a far-left ideology, one which we need to get beyond. In contrast, “anarchy” is a formless, fluid, organic experience embracing multi-faceted visions of liberation, both personal and collective, and always open. As anarchists, we are not interested in forming a new framework or structure to live under or within, however “unobtrusive” or “ethical” it claims to be. Anarchists cannot provide another world for others, but we can raise questions and ideas, try to destroy all domination and that which impedes our lives and our dreams, and live directly connected with our desires.

What is Primitivism?

While not all green anarchists specifically identify as “Primitivists”, most acknowledge the significance that the primitivist critique has had on anti-civilization perspectives. Primitivism is simply an anthropological, intellectual, and experiential examination of the origins of civilization and the circumstances that led to this nightmare we currently inhabit. Primitivism recognizes that for most of human history, we lived in face-to-face communities in balance with each other and our surroundings, without formal hierarchies and institutions to mediate and control our lives. Primitivists wish to learn from the dynamics at play in the past and in contemporary gatherer-hunter/primitive societies (those that have existed and currently exist outside of civilization). While some primitivists wish for an immediate and complete return to gatherer-hunter band societies, most primitivists understand that an acknowledgement of what has been successful in the past does not unconditionally determine what will work in the future. The term “Future Primitive,” coined by anarcho-primitivist author John Zerzan, hints that a synthesis of primitive techniques and ideas can be joined with contemporary anarchist concepts and motivations to create healthy, sustainable, and egalitarian decentralized situations. Applied non-ideologically, anarcho-primitivism can be an important tool in the de-civilizing project.

What is Civilization?

Green anarchists tend to view civilization as the logic, institutions, and physical apparatus of domestication, control, and domination. While different individuals and groups prioritize distinct aspects of civilization (ie primitivists typically focus on the question of origins, feminists primarily focus on the roots and manifestations of patriarchy, and insurrectionary anarchists mainly focus on the destruction of contemporary institutions of control), most green anarchists agree that it is the underlying problem or root of oppression, and it needs to be dismantled. The rise of civilization can roughly be described as the shift over the past 10,000 years from an existence within and deeply connected to the web of life, to one separated from and in control of the rest of life. Prior to civilization there generally existed ample leisure time, considerable gender autonomy and equality, a non-destructive approach to the natural world, the absence of organized violence, no mediating or formal institutions, and strong health and robusticity. Civilization inaugurated warfare, the subjugation of women, population growth, drudge work, concepts of property, entrenched hierarchies, and virtually every known disease, to name a few of its devastating derivatives. Civilization begins with and relies on an enforced renunciation of instinctual freedom. It cannot be reformed and is thus our enemy.

Biocentrism vs Anthropocentrism

One way of analyzing the extreme discord between the world-views of primitive and earth-based societies and of civilization, is that of biocentric vs anthropocentric outlooks. Biocentrism is a perspective that centers and connects us to the earth and the complex web of life, while anthropocentrism, the dominant world view of western culture, places our primary focus on human society, to the exclusion of the rest of life. A biocentric view does not reject human society, but does move it out of the status of superiority and puts it into balance with all other life forces. It places a priority on a bioregional outlook, one that is deeply connected to the plants, animals, insects, climate, geographic features, and spirit of the place we inhabit. There is no split between ourselves and our environment, so there can be no objectification or otherness to life. Where separation and objectification are at the base of our ability to dominate and control, interconnectedness is a prerequisite for deep nurturing, care, and understanding. Green anarchy strives to move beyond human-centered ideas and decisions into a humble respect for all life and the dynamics of the ecosystems that sustain us.

A Critique of Symbolic Culture

Another aspect of how we view and relate to the world that can be problematic, in the sense that it separates us from a direct interaction, is our shift towards an almost exclusively symbolic culture. Often the response to this questioning is, “So, you just want to grunt?” Which might be the desire of a few, but typically the critique is a look at the problems inherent with a form of communication and comprehension that relies primarily on symbolic thought at the expense (and even exclusion) of other sensual and unmediated means. The emphasis on the symbolic is a movement from direct experience into mediated experience in the form of language, art, number, time, etc Symbolic culture filters our entire perception through formal and informal symbols. It’s beyond just giving things names, but having an entire relationship to the world that comes through the lens of representation. It is debatable as to whether humans are “hard-wired” for symbolic thought or if it developed as a cultural change or adaptation, but the symbolic mode of expression and understanding is certainly limited and its over-dependence leads to objectification, alienation, and a tunnel-vision of perception. Many green anarchists promote and practice getting in touch with and rekindling dormant or underutilized methods of interaction and cognition, such as touch, smell, and telepathy, as well as experimenting with and developing unique and personal modes of comprehension and expression.

The Domestication of Life

Domestication is the process that civilization uses to indoctrinate and control life according to its logic. These time-tested mechanisms of subordination include: taming, breeding, genetically modifying, schooling, caging, intimidating, coercing, extorting, promising, governing, enslaving, terrorizing, murdering…the list goes on to include almost every civilized social interaction. Their movement and effects can be examined and felt throughout society, enforced through various institutions, rituals, and customs. It is also the process by which previously nomadic human populations shift towards a sedentary or settled existence through agriculture and animal husbandry. This kind of domestication demands a totalitarian relationship with both the land and the plants and animals being domesticated. Whereas in a state of wildness, all life shares and competes for resources, domestication destroys this balance. The domesticated landscape (eg pastoral lands/agricultural fields, and to a lesser degree—horticulture and gardening) necessitates the end of open sharing of the resources that formerly existed; where once “this was everyone’s,” it is now “mine”. In Daniel Quinn’s novel Ishmael, he explains this transformation from the “Leavers” (those who accepted what the earth provided) to that of the “Takers” (those who demanded from the earth what they wanted). This notion of ownership laid the foundation for social hierarchy as property and power emerged. Domestication not only changes the ecology from a free to a totalitarian order, it enslaves the species that are domesticated. Generally the more an environment is controlled, the less sustainable it is. The domestication of humans themselves involves many trade-offs in comparison to the foraging, nomadic mode. It is worth noting here that most of the shifts made from nomadic foraging to domestication were not made autonomously, they were made by the blade of the sword or barrel of the gun. Whereas only 2000 years ago the majority of the world population were gatherer-hunters, it is now .01%. The path of domestication is a colonizing force that has meant myriad pathologies for the conquered population and the originators of the practice. Several examples include a decline in nutritional health due to over-reliance on non-diverse diets, almost 40–60 diseases integrated into human populations per domesticated animal (influenza, the common cold, tuberculosis, etc), the emergence of surplus which can be used to feed a population out of balance and which invariably involves property and an end to unconditional sharing.

The Origins and Dynamics of Patriarchy

Toward the beginning in the shift to civilization, an early product of domestication is patriarchy: the formalization of male domination and the development of institutions which reinforce it. By creating false gender distinctions and divisions between men and women, civilization, again, creates an “other” that can be objectified, controlled, dominated, utilized, and commodified. This runs parallel to the domestication of plants for agriculture and animals for herding, in general dynamics, and also in specifics like the control of reproduction. As in other realms of social stratification, roles are assigned to women in order to establish a very rigid and predictable order, beneficial to hierarchy. Woman come to be seen as property, no different then the crops in the field or the sheep in the pasture. Ownership and absolute control, whether of land, plants, animals, slaves, children, or women, is part of the established dynamic of civilization. Patriarchy demands the subjugation of the feminine and the usurpation of nature, propelling us toward total annihilation. It defines power, control and dominion over wildness, freedom, and life. Patriarchal conditioning dictates all of our interactions; with ourselves, our sexuality, our relationships to each other, and our relationship to nature. It severely limits the spectrum of possible experience. The interconnected relationship between the logic of civilization and patriarchy is undeniable; for thousands of years they have shaped the human experience on every level, from the institutional to the personal, while they have devoured life. To be against civilization, one must be against patriarchy; and to question patriarchy, it seems, one must also put civilization into question.

Division of Labor and Specialization

The disconnecting of the ability to care for ourselves and provide for our own needs is a technique of separation and disempowerment perpetuated by civilization. We are more useful to the system, and less useful to ourselves, if we are alienated from our own desires and each other through division of labor and specialization. We are no longer able to go out into the world and provide for ourselves and our loved ones the necessary nourishment and provisions for survival. Instead, we are forced into the production/consumption commodity system to which we are always indebted. Inequities of influence come about via the effective power of various kinds of experts. The concept of a specialist inherently creates power dynamics and undermines egalitarian relationships. While the Left may sometimes recognize these concepts politically, they are viewed as necessary dynamics, to keep in check or regulate, while green anarchists tend to see division of labor and specialization as fundamental and irreconcilable problems, decisive to social relationships within civilization.

The Rejection of Science

Most anti-civilization anarchists reject science as a method of understanding the world. Science is not neutral. It is loaded with motives and assumptions that come out of, and reinforce, the catastrophe of dissociation, disempowerment, and consuming deadness that we call “civilization.” Science assumes detachment. This is built into the very word “observation.” To “observe” something is to perceive it while distancing oneself emotionally and physically, to have a one-way channel of “information” moving from the observed thing to the “self,” which is defined as not a part of that thing. This death-based or mechanistic view is a religion, the dominant religion of our time. The method of science deals only with the quantitative. It does not admit values or emotions, or the way the air smells when it’s starting to rain—or if it deals with these things, it does so by transforming them into numbers, by turning oneness with the smell of the rain into abstract preoccupation with the chemical formula for ozone, turning the way it makes you feel into the intellectual idea that emotions are only an illusion of firing neurons. Numbers themselves are not truth but a chosen style of thinking. We have chosen a habit of mind that focuses our attention into a world removed from reality, where nothing has quality or awareness or a life of its own. We have chosen to transform the living into the dead. Careful-thinking scientists will admit that what they study is a narrow simulation of the complex real world, but few of them notice that this narrow focus is self-feeding, that it has built technological, economic, and political systems that are all working together, which suck our reality in on itself. As narrow as the world of numbers is, scientific method does not even permit all numbers—only those numbers which are reproducible, predictable, and the same for all observers. Of course reality itself is not reproducible or predictable or the same for all observers. But neither are fantasy worlds derived from reality. Science doesn’t stop at pulling us into a dream world—it goes one step further and makes this dream world a nightmare whose contents are selected for predictability and controllability and uniformity. All surprise and sensuality are vanquished. Because of science, states of consciousness that cannot be reliably disposed are classified as insane, or at best “non-ordinary,” and excluded. Anomalous experience, anomalous ideas, and anomalous people are cast off or destroyed like imperfectly-shaped machine components. Science is only a manifestation and locking in of an urge for control that we’ve had at least since we started farming fields and fencing animals instead of surfing the less predictable (but more abundant) world of reality, or “nature.” And from that time to now, this urge has driven every decision about what counts as “progress”, up to and including the genetic restructuring of life.

The Problem of Technology

All green anarchists question technology on some level. While there are those who still suggest the notion of “green” or “appropriate” technology and search for rationales to cling to forms of domestication, most reject technology completely. Technology is more than wires, silicon, plastic, and steel. It is a complex system involving division of labor, resource extraction, and exploitation for the benefit of those who implement its process. The interface with and result of technology is always an alienated, mediated, and distorted reality. Despite the claims of postmodern apologists and other technophiles, technology is not neutral. The values and goals of those who produce and control technology are always embedded within it. Technology is distinct from simple tools in many regards. A simple tool is a temporary usage of an element within our immediate surroundings used for a specific task. Tools do not involve complex systems which alienate the user from the act. Implicit in technology is this separation, creating an unhealthy and mediated experience which leads to various forms of authority. Domination increases every time a new “time-saving” technology is created, as it necessitates the construction of more technology to support, fuel, maintain and repair the original technology. This has led very rapidly to the establishment of a complex technological system that seems to have an existence independent from the humans who created it. Discarded by-products of the technological society are polluting both our physical and our psychological environments. Lives are stolen in service of the Machine and the toxic effluent of the technological system’s fuels—both are choking us. Technology is now replicating itself, with something resembling a sinister sentience. Technological society is a planetary infection, propelled forward by its own momentum, rapidly ordering a new kind of environment: one designed for mechanical efficiency and technological expansionism alone. The technological system methodically destroys, eliminates, or subordinates the natural world, constructing a world fit only for machines. The ideal for which the technological system strives is the mechanization of everything it encounters.

Production and Industrialism

A key component of the modern techno-capitalist structure is industrialism, the mechanized system of production built on centralized power and the exploitation of people and nature. Industrialism cannot exist without genocide, ecocide, and colonialism. To maintain it, coercion, land evictions, forced labor, cultural destruction, assimilation, ecological devastation, and global trade are accepted as necessary, even benign. Industrialism’s standardization of life objectifies and commodifies it, viewing all life as a potential resource. A critique of industrialism is a natural extension of the anarchist critique of the state because industrialism is inherently authoritarian. In order to maintain an industrial society, one must set out to conquer and colonize lands in order to acquire (generally) non-renewable resources to fuel and grease the machines. This colonialism is rationalized by racism, sexism, and cultural chauvinism. In the process of acquiring these resources, people must be forced off their land. And in order to make people work in the factories that produce the machines, they must be enslaved, made dependent, and otherwise subjected to the destructive, toxic, degrading industrial system. Industrialism cannot exist without massive centralization and specialization: Class domination is a tool of the industrial system that denies people access to resources and knowledge, making them helpless and easy to exploit. Furthermore, industrialism demands that resources be shipped from all over the globe in order to perpetuate its existence, and this globalism undermines local autonomy and self-sufficiency. It is a mechanistic worldview that is behind industrialism. This is the same world-view that has justified slavery, exterminations, and the subjugation of women. It should be obvious to all that industrialism is not only oppressive for humans, but that it is also fundamentally ecologically destructive.

Beyond Leftism

Unfortunately, many anarchists continue to be viewed, and view themselves, as part of the Left. This tendency is changing, as post-left and anti-civilization anarchists make clear distinctions between their perspectives and the bankruptcy of the socialist and liberal orientations. Not only has the Left proven itself to be a monumental failure in its objectives, but it is obvious from its history, contemporary practice, and ideological framework, that the Left (while presenting itself as altruistic and promoting “freedom”) is actually the antithesis of liberation. The Left has never fundamentally questioned technology, production, organization, representation, alienation, authoritarianism, morality, or Progress, and it has almost nothing to say about ecology, autonomy, or the individual on any meaningful level. The Left is a general term and can roughly describe all socialist leanings (from social democrats and liberals to Maoists and Stalinists) which wish to re-socialize “the masses” into a more “progressive” agenda, often using coercive and manipulative approaches in order to create a false “unity” or the creation of political parties. While the methods or extremes in implementation may differ, the overall push is the same, the institution of a collectivized and monolithic world-view based on morality.

Against Mass Society

Most anarchists and “revolutionaries” spend a significant portion of their time developing schemes and mechanisms for production, distribution, adjudication, and communication between large numbers of people; in other words, the functioning of a complex society. But not all anarchists accept the premise of global (or even regional) social, political, and economic coordination and interdependence, or the organization needed for their administration. We reject mass society for practical and philosophical reasons. First, we reject the inherent representation necessary for the functioning of situations outside of the realm of direct experience (completely decentralized modes of existence). We do not wish to run society, or organize a different society, we want a completely different frame of reference. We want a world where each group is autonomous and decides on its own terms how to live, with all interactions based on affinity, free and open, and non-coercive. We want a life which we live, not one which is run. Mass society brutally collides not only with autonomy and the individual, but also with the earth. It is simply not sustainable (in terms of the resource extraction, transportation, and communication systems necessary for any global economic system) to continue on with, or to provide alternative plans for a mass society. Again, radical de-centralization seems key to autonomy and providing non-hierarchical and sustainable methods of subsistence.

Liberation vs Organization

We are beings striving for a deep and total break with the civilized order, anarchists desiring unrestrained freedom. We fight for liberation, for a de-centralized and unmediated relationship with our surroundings and those we love and share affinity with. Organizational models only provide us with more of the same bureaucracy, control, and alienation that we receive from the current set-up. While there might be an occasional good intention, the organizational model comes from an inherently paternalistic and distrusting mindset which seems contradictory to anarchy. True relationships of affinity come from a deep understanding of one another through intimate need-based relationships of day-to-day life, not relationships based on organizations, ideologies, or abstract ideas. Typically, the organizational model suppresses individual needs and desires for “the good of the collective” as it attempts to standardize both resistance and vision. From parties, to platforms, to federations, it seems that as the scale of projects increase, the meaning and relevance they have for one’s own life decrease. Organizations are means for stabilizing creativity, controlling dissent, and reducing “counter-revolutionary tangents” (as chiefly determined by the elite cadres or leadership). They typically dwell in the quantitative, rather than the qualitative, and offer little space for independent thought or action. Informal, affinity-based associations tend to minimize alienation from decisions and processes, and reduce mediation between our desires and our actions. Relationships between groups of affinity are best left organic and temporal, rather than fixed and rigid.

Revolution vs Reform

As anarchists, we are fundamentally opposed to government, and likewise, any sort of collaboration or mediation with the state (or any institution of hierarchy and control). This position determines a certain continuity or direction of strategy, historically referred to as revolution. This term, while warped, diluted, and co-opted by various ideologies and agendas, can still have meaning to the anarchist and anti-ideological praxis. By revolution, we mean the ongoing struggle to alter the social and political landscape in a fundamental way; for anarchists, this means its complete dismantling. The word “revolution” is dependent on the position from which it is directed, as well as what would be termed “revolutionary” activity. Again, for anarchists, this is activity which is aimed at the complete dissolving of power. Reform, on the other hand, entails any activity or strategy aimed at adjusting, altering, or selectively maintaining elements of the current system, typically utilizing the methods or apparatus of that system. The goals and methods of revolution cannot be dictated by, nor performed within, the context of the system. For anarchists, revolution and reform invoke incompatible methods and aims, and despite certain anarcho-liberal approaches, do not exist on a continuum. For anti-civilization anarchists, revolutionary activity questions, challenges, and works to dismantle the entire set-up or paradigm of civilization. Revolution is also not a far-off or distant singular event which we build towards or prepare people for, but instead, a life-way or practice of approaching situations.

Resisting the Mega-Machine

Anarchists in general, and green anarchists in particular, favor direct action over mediated or symbolic forms of resistance. Various methods and approaches, including cultural subversion, sabotage, insurrection, and political violence (although not limited to these) have been and remain part of the anarchist arsenal of attack. No one tactic can be effective in significantly altering the current order or its trajectory, but these methods, combined with transparent and ongoing social critique, are important. Subversion of the system can occur from the subtle to the dramatic, and can also be an important element of physical resistance. Sabotage has always been a vital part of anarchist activities, whether in the form of spontaneous vandalism (public or nocturnal) or through more highly illegal underground coordination in cell formation. Recently, groups like the Earth Liberation Front, a radical environmental group made up of autonomous cells targeting those who profit off of the destruction of the earth, have caused millions of dollars of damage to corporate outlets and offices, banks, timber mills, genetic research facilities, sport utility vehicles, and luxury homes. These actions, often taking the form of arson, along with articulate communiqués frequently indicting civilization, have inspired others to take action, and are effective means of not only bringing attention to environmental degradation, but also as deterrents to specific earth destroyers. Insurrectionary activity, or the proliferation of insurrectionary moments which can cause a rupture in the social peace in which people’s spontaneous rage can be unleashed and possibly spread into revolutionary conditions, are also on the rise. The riots in Seattle in 1999, Prague in 2000, and Genoa in 2001, were all (in different ways) sparks of insurrectionary activity, which, although limited in scope, can be seen as attempts to move in insurrectionary directions and make qualitative breaks with reformism and the entire system of enslavement. Political violence, including the targeting of individuals responsible for specific activities or the decisions which lead to oppression, has also been a focus for anarchists historically. Finally, considering the immense reality and all-pervasive reach of the system (socially, politically, technologically), attacks on the techno-grid and infrastructure of the mega-machine are of interest to anti-civilization anarchists. Regardless of approaches and intensity, militant action coupled with insightful analysis of civilization is increasing.

The Need to be Critical

As the march towards global annihilation continues, as society becomes more unhealthy, as we lose more control over our own lives, and as we fail to create significant resistance to the death-culture, it is vital for us to be extremely critical of past “revolutionary” movements, current struggles, and our own projects. We cannot perpetually repeat the mistakes of the past or be blind to our own deficiencies. The radical environmental movement is filled with single-issued campaigns and symbolic gestures and the anarchist scene is plagued with leftist and liberal tendencies. Both continue to go through rather meaningless “activist” motions, rarely attempting to objectively assess their (in)effectiveness. Often guilt and self-sacrifice, rather than their own liberation and freedom, guide these social do-gooders, as they proceed along a course that has been plotted out by the failures before them. The Left is a festering sore on the ass of humanity, environmentalists have been unsuccessful at preserving even a fraction of wild areas, and anarchists rarely have anything provocative to say, let alone do. While some would argue against criticism because it is “divisive”, any truly radical perspective would see the necessity of critical examination, in changing our lives and the world we inhabit. Those who wish to quell all debate until “after the revolution”, to contain all discussion into vague and meaningless chatter, and to subdue criticism of strategy, tactics, or ideas, are going nowhere, and can only hold us back. An essential aspect to any radical anarchist perspective must be to put everything into question, certainly including our own ideas, projects, and actions.

Influences and Solidarity

The green anarchist perspective is diverse and open, yet it does contain some continuity and primary elements. It has been influenced by anarchists, primitivists, Luddites, insurrectionalists, Situationists, surrealists, nihilists, deep ecologists, bioregionalists, eco-feminists, various indigenous cultures, anti-colonial struggles, the feral, the wild, and the earth. Anarchists, obviously, contribute the anti-authoritarian push, which challenges all power on a fundamental level, striving for truly egalitarian relationships and promoting mutual-aid communities. Green anarchists, however, extend ideas of non-domination to all of life, not just human life, going beyond the traditional anarchist analysis. From primitivists, green anarchists are informed with a critical and provocative look at the origins of civilization, so as to understand what this mess is and how we got here, to help inform a change in direction. Inspired by the Luddites, green anarchists rekindle an anti-technological/industrial direct action orientation. Insurrectionalists infuse a perspective which waits not for the fine-tuning of a crystalline critique, but identify and spontaneously attack current institutions of civilization which inherently bind our freedom and desire. Anti-civilization anarchists owe much to the Situationists, and their critique of the alienating commodity society, which we can break from by connecting with our dreams and unmediated desires. Nihilism’s refusal to accept any of the current reality understands the deeply engrained unhealth of this society and offers green anarchists a strategy which does not necessitate offering visions for society, but instead focuses on its destruction. Deep ecology, despite its misanthropic tendencies, informs the green anarchist perspective with an understanding that the well-being and flourishing of all life is linked to the awareness of the inherent worth and intrinsic value of the non-human world independent of use value. Deep ecology’s appreciation for the richness and diversity of life contributes to the realization that the present human interference with the non-human world is coercive and excessive, with the situation rapidly worsening. Bioregionalists bring the perspective of living within one’s bioregion, and being intimately connected to the land, water, climate, plants, animals, and general patterns of their bioregion. Eco-feminists have contributed to the comprehension of the roots, dynamics, manifestations, and reality of patriarchy, and its effect on the earth, women in particular, and humanity in general. Recently, the destructive separation of humans from the earth (civilization) has probably been articulated most clearly and intensely by eco-feminists. Anti-civilization anarchists have been profoundly influenced by the various indigenous cultures and earth-based peoples throughout history and those who still currently exist. While we humbly learn and incorporate sustainable techniques for survival and healthier ways of interacting with life, it is important to not flatten or generalize native peoples and their cultures, and to respect and attempt to understand their diversity without co-opting cultural identities and characteristics. Solidarity, support, and attempts to connect with native and anti-colonial struggles, which have been the front-lines of the fight against civilization, are essential as we attempt to dismantle the death-machine. It is also important to understand that we, at some point, have all come from earth-based peoples forcibly removed from our connections with the earth, and therefore have a place within anti-colonial struggles. We are also inspired by the feral, those who have escaped domestication and have re-integrated with the wild. And, of course, the wild beings which make up this beautiful blue and green organism called Earth. It is also important to remember that, while many green anarchists draw influence from similar sources, green anarchy is something very personal to each who identify or connect with these ideas and actions. Perspectives derived from one’s own life experiences within the death-culture (civilization), and one’s own desires outside the domestication process, are ultimately the most vivid and important in the uncivilizing process.

Rewilding and Reconnection

For most green/anti-civilization/primitivist anarchists, rewilding and reconnecting with the earth is a life project. It is not limited to intellectual comprehension or the practice of primitive skills, but instead, it is a deep understanding of the pervasive ways in which we are domesticated, fractured, and dislocated from our selves, each other, and the world, and the enormous and daily undertaking to be whole again. Rewilding has a physical component which involves reclaiming skills and developing methods for a sustainable co-existence, including how to feed, shelter, and heal ourselves with the plants, animals, and materials occurring naturally in our bioregion. It also includes the dismantling of the physical manifestations, apparatus, and infrastructure of civilization. Rewilding has an emotional component, which involves healing ourselves and each other from the 10,000 year-old wounds which run deep, learning how to live together in non-hierarchical and non-oppressive communities, and deconstructing the domesticating mindset in our social patterns. Rewilding involves prioritizing direct experience and passion over mediation and alienation, re-thinking every dynamic and aspect of our reality, connecting with our feral fury to defend our lives and to fight for a liberated existence, developing more trust in our intuition and being more connected to our instincts, and regaining the balance that has been virtually destroyed after thousands of years of patriarchal control and domestication. Rewilding is the process of becoming uncivilized.

For the Destruction of Civilization!

For the Reconnection to Life!

#anti civ #black seed #green anarchy #introductory #extinction rebellion #communism

13 notes · View notes

scratchface · 7 years ago

Note

Do you like firestormshipping?

Hell yeah I do! They have so much potential, and I like how things between them are developing slowly and naturally. I’m really looking forward to how their relationship grows this season.

So far, between the two of them, it’s been all business. Yusaku keeps everyone at a distance, so there’s not often many bonding moments between him and other characters, even Kusanagi who has been there from the start.

But these two are obviously very compatible while still being distinctly different as people. Takeru seems to be very easily influenced by people and his judgement of others is so far very fickle, the polar opposite of the distant and steady Yusaku. Takeru’s rougher around the edges, more unstable, but also a lot more vulnerable. Vulnerability is something Yusaku shows very rarely, and for good reason: he can’t afford vulnerability. But I think Takeru could and will drag it out of him in due time. Takeru, meanwhile, is very sensitive to the words of others, so Yusaku’s quiet, no-nonsense nature of only saying what he feels needs to be said will certainly spare Takeru a great deal of hurt.

I think my favorite, but very brief moments between them so far is when Takeru comes back after his duel with Go.

“You’re okay.” Yusaku says, like he wasn’t quite expecting him to be. Like he’s impressed, and Takeru’s little smile is so charming. Yusaku has apparently gotten used to the people around him being unreliable or incapable, and came to terms with the fact that the people that join his side tend to not come back. Now, here’s someone that can actually keep up, not someone he has to leave behind for their own good.

It’s not easy, though. Yusaku is still a little awkward with splitting the work, but it’s good for him to have someone to count on, even if it takes him time to get used to it. Takeru also has the best chance at forcing Yusaku to confront a lot of his issues with endangering other people and accepting help. (Even now, just about the only entity in Vrains Yusaku has willingly approached for help is Windy. Take that in. Absorb it.)

Even more so, all this time, Yusaku has been operating under the impression that only his special person can save him. But Takeru challenges that, and does so without all the baggage that weighs down the relationship between Yusaku and Ryoken (but we all know I love that baggage). He’s already taken one hit for Yusaku, and will probably take many more. Takeru is, frankly, refreshing to Yusaku, as someone he can both relate to and can rely on.

And it’s obvious Takeru wants to protect people. He’s gentle with his grandfather even as the guy tosses him around like a sack of potatoes, and goes to Kiku’s rescue even though it means dealing with Flame and dueling. And now he wants to protect Yusaku, and even makes such a sweet, concerned face.

I think Takeru is in the best position of seeing who Playmaker really is, under his cool, under his infallibility: more so than any other character, even Kusanagi. To see how much of himself Yusaku puts into a given task, to the point of near self-destruction should he fail. He’s getting to see exactly how Playmaker operates, and what makes Yusaku tick, and experiencing first hand the struggles and dangers that come along with being Playmaker: the SOL agents, the constant and frustrating challengers, and the groundless aggression that faces Yusaku everywhere he turns. One could certainly make the argument that Takeru is getting more protective by the episode considering his tendency to throw himself in front of their enemies first, and once he recovers from Blood Shepherd’s recent bullshit, I figure he might very well be even more protective. After all, he knows that Yusaku is really the one BS wanted to torment, and there’s no way he’d want Yusaku to go through that. Especially since, going by that face above, Takeru seems to be the only character so far to recognize just how much of a ticking time bomb Yusaku is.

Meanwhile, Yusaku refuses to abandon him. Yusaku, who already had to accept the reality of losing allies, who had to move on even as everyone he knew turned to data. Yusaku wants to protect people too, but for him that means involving himself with others as little as possible. Takeru does the opposite, and challenges Yusaku’s notion that it’s easiest to protect people by keeping his distance.

Not to mention that Takeru’s the first character besides Kusanagi and Ai to be set up as a companion for Yusaku. And the first besides Kusanagi to be someone Yusaku doesn’t mind working with and spending time around from the get-go. If all goes well, Takeru will help Yusaku open up, and take some of the burden of everything off his shoulders.

The show is clearly going to take its time building the relationship between these two. If the current opening is going to stick around ~40 episodes, we’re going to see these two working up to the closeness we see there and probably a bit dramatic season finale about their bond.

But I really hate the ship name, so I never use it. It makes it just sound like Not-Datastormshipping, which isn’t fair to the gradual trust these two have been building at all. I just call it TakeYu or Torchshipping.

#vrains asks #ygo #yusaku fujiki #takeru homura #firestormshipping #this is the only time ill ever use that tag #torchshipping #this is a ship manifesto #oh god i wrote a ship manifesto #...are those even still a thing?

55 notes · View notes

sanjuno · 7 years ago

Note

For the GoT crossovers, how about KHR? Because I think anyone from that would be hilarious in GoT

nightmare-aoife said:

How about KHR for the GoT meme? (Glad to see you’re okay!)

7/7 GoT Crossover Fix-Its: The Dying Will of Fire and Ice

So the scene actually gets set by the Arcobaleno being reincarnated first. Mostly as younger siblings and branch members of various houses.

Luce hasn’t learned her lesson, so she’s still aggravatingly passive about following the path laid out in her visions of the future. Which, to be entirely fair, is also a problem that Westros Greenseers have. So Elia Martell still marries Rhaegar Targaryen despite Elia also being Luce, and despite Luce knowing that it’s going to result in her eventual murder.

Except the Arcobaleno are well aware of Luce’s passive self-destructive tendencies this time around. So when Oberyn who is Reborn gets exiled for a bit, he goes and trains with the Faceless Men because cosplay is always a useful skill. And then Oberyn sneaks into the Red Keep during the siege because Aria is still Reborn’s daughter even if Rhaenerys is actually Oberyn’s niece. Meanwhile Mammon was born a Lannister, and they’ve been spying on Tywin constantly so they know exactly what he intends to do when the siege is broken. So Mammon grabs Lal, who was born to House Lorch, and Lal puts a crossbow bolt or six through Gregor and Armory’s heads.

Mammon conjures a few Real Illusion body doubles for Elia and the kids and the Arcobaleno take off for where Skull who was born a Greyjoy is waiting with a ship to get the fuck away in. Meanwhile Colonello who was born to House Fowler, Fon who was born to House Mullendore, and Verde who was born to House Reed are busy disabling the Wildfire depots and killing all the pyromancers. Which yes, does involve killing Aerys and knocking out Jaime Lannister as a favour to Mammon. So there’s no Kingslayer stigma to make Jaime get as bitter and cynical as he was in the original song.

Of course, Varys has already switched baby Aegon out with another infant with the Valeryian look so that whole thing with Young Griff is still going to happen. Which really pisses off the Arcobaleno because they’ve got this whole thing where they consider Luce’s kids to be their kids because Luce has a habit of dying before the kids hit double digits. And this time Luce’s passiveness would’ve gotten Aria and an innocent baby violently killed. So Elia gets shoved off on Doran while Oberyn arranges for Rhaenerys to be known as Aria Sand, one of his growing number of daughters.

Aegon’s going to stay with Jon Connigton though, because the Arcobaleno respect godparent rights. I think I’m going to make the body-double Varys snatched be Ashara Dayne’s baby. And Verde is the one tasked with taking the kid back to Starfall once he, Fon, and Colonello catch up with the rest of the Arcobaleno. Which derails Ashara’s suicide and adds another body to the group of Northmen who go to the Tower of Joy. The Lightning Arcobaleno who is also a Maester, because of course the scientist went and trained at the Citadel.

So obviously the Northmen survive, and so does Lyanna. Although the fever leaves her… more than a little loco. So there’s no way to get the real story of the abduction out of her, and Ned has to break the news that Robert needs to pick a different bride, since the bad birth left Lyanna barren and brain damaged. On their way back to King’s Landing Ned needs to figure out what he’s going to do with baby Jon, because he can’t let it be known that the kid is Lyanna’s, and not just because Lyanna isn’t fit to be a parent. Ned doesn’t know about the Arcobaleno’s rescue scheme, so the argument between Ned and Robert over dead children still happened, and letting it be known that Jon’s a Targaryen is a death sentence. Luckily Ashara agrees to claim Jon is also her bastard with Brandon, the younger twin to her other son. They come up with a story about Ned exchanging the sword Dawn for custody of Jon and possible legitimization by the new King to cover their tracks.

So we still have Cersei Lannister marrying Robert Baratheon, but it’s both better and worse than canon. Better, in that Robert got closure, got to say goodbye to Lyanna and had proof that she wasn’t ever going to be the kind of bride he was imagining. Worse, in that Cersei actually comes face-to-face with the woman who got everything Cersei presumably wanted and has to see how badly damaged that left Lyanna. It’s not a comfortable situation for anyone. Ned is ready to go back North about 3 seconds after the bedding ceremony.

Of course with Jon supposedly being Brandon’s son that Ned has taken as his ward Catelyn is much nicer to him. Which is always nice to be able to arrange. Plus, Robert is touched enough that Ashara gave up her “Northern son” to Ned that he officially legitimizes both the boys as his first official act as King. So we’ve got Vorian Dayne and Jon Stark from the very beginning.

Past the Rebellion, Cersei’s first pregnancy actually comes to term. Cersei still takes the Moon Tea because of her narcissistic incest fetish, but Dying Will Flame ex machina means that by the time Cersei realizes that the Tea didn’t work she’s too far along to abort without risking her own life. So Orys Baratheon, first of his Name, is born black of hair and crimson of eye. Because yes, Orys is also Xanxus, the legitimate heir to the Iron Throne. Which is going to be legitimately hilarious further down the line.

Cersei of course isn’t all that invested in Robert’s son despite the kid being hers too because of that narcissism thing I mentioned earlier. So Joffrey is the second born son this time, then Myrcella is born, and both are Jaime’s kids just like in the first version of the song. Cersei slacks off a bit around when she gets pregnant with Tommen, and so she gets fraternal twins this time. Tommen has the Lannister look, and Steffon has the Baratheon look. Which throws off any doubters because it’s not like anyone on Westros knows how hyper-fecundity works.

Xanxus twigs to Cersei being off her nut pretty fast, but he’s used to having a mother prone to delusions. Also Robert being a wasteful jackass is a familiar problem from back in the mafia life. So Xanxus starts acting as Heir as soon as he’s tall enough to climb up onto the seat at the Council table. Sky Flames mean he’s pretty good at getting people to listen to him despite needing a book to sit on so that’s good. Littlefinger doesn’t stay on the Small Council long because Xanxus gets him kicked off and replaced with Mammon, which accidentally endears him to Cersei for appointing a Lannister. That wasn’t his intent but yeah, okay, whatever.

Hilariously, Mammon and Stannis get along like a house on fire, including the bit where people flee screaming because they’re terrifying as a team. Xanxus is pleased. Robert ends up on a budget and he doesn’t even argue with it because Mist Flames are useful like that.

Orys beats Joffrey black and blue for the cat thing, but it’s pretty obvious even as the punishment is happening that Joffrey is the bad kind of crazy. Xanxus quietly starts making plans to “accident” Joffrey before he inherits a position with any sort of authority, and Steffon is charged with keeping Myrcella and Tommen safe from Joffrey in the meantime. Since Cersei is focused on pampering Joffrey and fighting with Robert, it’s easy to quietly arrange for Tommen to go to Dragonstone on occasion. With Tommen and Shireen betrothed, the Baratheon Name with continue to hold the Heir’s Seat. Steffon is going to inherit Storm’s End unless Renly marries and has a son, of course. Tsuna’s just happy he doesn’t have to be in charge this time.

With Mammon’s assistance, Aria and Xanxus have arranged for Orys Baratheon and Rhaenerys Targaryen to be betrothed, which will fully unify the last of the devisions in the Realm left over from the Rebellion. Luce is not consulted on this decision, and Varys’ little plot with Connington and Aegon is considered to be a source of amusement. Aria is being raised with Arianne and getting the education the future Queen of the Seven Kingdoms deserves. Also, the loser serves the winner and the Baratheon’s won the Rebellion so Aegon, Jon, and Viserys are non-contenders in the eyes of the Arcobaleno.

Without Littlefinger’s position on the Small Council he can’t divert Crown funds into his own pockets, so he can’t expand his enterprises and thus is stuck trying to make something of his holdfast instead of seducing Lysa. So there’s no one to smuggle Lysa the Tears of Lys, and Robin gets fostered out as planned. Which is definitely going to expose Lysa’s less than stellar mental stability. Of course, this also means that Jon Arryn still lives so there’s no excuse to travel North yet.

The Arcobaleno are their usual chaotic selves in the meantime, but Mammon, Fon, and Reborn team up to gather the Guardians that belong to the three Skies in their care. Mammon of course goes looking for the Varia, but this time Reborn is focused on finding the Giglio Nero Guardians, and instead it’s Fon who gets to collect the Vongola 10th Gen because of the Kyouya thing. Which, yeah, is pretty obviously the place to start.

Fon keeps an eye on his birth House of Mullendore, and when he visits his new nephew he recognizes Kyouya’s Flames immediately and notifies the others to keep an eye on their relations because it’s not just the Arcobaleno who are being reincarnated in Westros. Of course, at some point further down the line I-Pin gets reincarnated as a Mullendore too, but that’s still a bit aways.

In Dorne we’re going to have Squalo and Hayato, who are going to be related somehow and from House Yronwood, which means Reborn is the one who finds them and passes them on to Mammon for introductions. Hayato’s mother will be from House Qorgyle, which will also produce Bianche. Who, in fact, is going to be Aria’s eventual Storm Guardian. Reborn approves of this, yes.

In the Crownlands, House Brune will produce Gamma who gets shunted over to Aria’s side post haste. From the Westerlands, House Serrett will produce Lussaria for Xanxus, and House Prester is will eventually produce Lambo for Tsuna. Chikusa is going to be born to House Drox. In the Reach House Varner will produce Belphagor who gets scooped up by Mammon immediately. House Willum will produce Takeshi at around the same time, so that’ll be interesting. In the Riverlands Lancia will be born to House Paege, and House Vypren is going to eventually produce Fran. In the North House Glover will produce Ryohei, while Basil will be born to House Manderly. House Karstark is going to produce Ken. From the Iron Islands Leviathan is born to House Volmark, while Mukuro and Chrome are born to House Farwynd.

Dino and the Cavallone are going to be reincarnated as the Knights of the Vale, and Dino is a cadet branch Arryn who is eventually appointed to act as Jon’s regent in the Vale while Jon lives in King’s Landing as Robert’s Hand. It’s a tossup if Robin will inherit or not, given that he’s not mentally sound and Dino has been earning the loyalty of the Vale lords for something like five years or so by the time the original story starts.

Funny story, but it turns out that Aegon is actually Byakuran. Maybe they should’ve paid more attention to him after all. Whoopsies.

Anyway there’s a stupid amount of adventures and shenanigans as the various Settes are reunited and events from the original version of the song start to pick up. There’s going to be some sort of fracas when Robert decides that he wants his oldest son to marry Ned’s girl and Orys informs his father that he’s already brokered with Dorne to marry one of their Princesses. Which might just be the impetus that sends Robert haring off North in a rage, dragging his children and the rest of the Court behind him.

Xanxus likes the dire wolves and is stupidly impressed by Ned Stark’s loyalty to his family and his ability to tell Robert ‘no’ when it’s important. So Orys requests a private meeting with Lord Stark and manages to get across to the man that Joffrey got a heavy dose of “Targaryen Madness coupled with Baratheon Fury”. So instead of Sansa and Joffrey, it’s Arya and Steffon who get betrothed. Which means a Stark girl is set to be the future Lady of Storm’s End and that makes Robert happy. Plus Steffon might have swooned a little over Arya’s muscles. Just a little. Still, this made Arya happy, which makes Ned happy, and Catelyn is ecstatic because Arya has agreed to marry a Prince and it’s everything Catelyn ever wanted.

Obviously, no one is telling Catelyn that Steffon has arranged for Arya to get combat lessons from Fon and Lal. Nope. Shhh, it’s a secret.

Anyway, with Intuition being a thing Bran’s fall is averted by the simple fact of him not having the time to be climbing the Broken Tower because Steffon is occupying all of his time. And also Tsuna keeps dragging Bran and Arya out into the Godswood and the Wolf’s Wood for their own little hunting parties. So the fall is a thing that never happens. Somewhere in the Neck, Jojen Reed is flipping tables because the Future can’t make up its mind about being horrible or being the best possible future.

Xanxus decides he wants to see the Wall, so he and his Guardians head up further North with Tyrion to check it out. Giant fuck-off Wall made of Zero-Point Breakthrough Ice makes Xanxus paranoid. It was built to hold something back. Something a hell of a lot scarier than some slightly unhygienic dudes with overgrown beards. So Xanxus wants all the records from the Night’s Watch castles transcribed and copies sent to King’s Landing. Oh, and he finds dragon eggs of his own, either in Winterfell’s crypts or he’s going to get them from Maester Aemon, I’m not entirely sure at this point.

Daenerys’ storyline doesn’t change much, so at some point when the Seven Kingdoms are gearing up to fight against armies of the walking dead she shows up expecting to fight the Usurper for the Iron Throne and instead Rhaenerys lays the smackdown on her auntie. Bester, Natsu, and Cosmo II are all dragons, so it’s not like Daenerys’ children are going to give her the advantage either.

Anyway, when the Young Griff thing comes to a head everyone’s going to be super surprised when Aegon abdicates his position as Rhaegar’s heir in favour of his older sister. But eh, Byakuran mostly wants to laze around with pretty Ladies and eat honey cakes. Being King is far too much work. Somehow though he ends up marrying Sansa and taking charge of the Gifts. He has no sweet clue how but they actually have a very functional marriage for a couple of dreamers.

The Night King gets a crossbow bolt full of Wrath Flames to the face. The End.

#Sanjuno's ficwork #KHR Fanfic #GoT Reincarnation crossovers #Writing Prompts

83 notes · View notes

healthyhappyhealing-blog1 · 5 years ago

Text

Emotional Labor and Boundaries (pt 1)

I’m moving out in less than two days and today I explained the importance of establishing healthy boundaries with my mom. Growing up, I’ve always mentally prepared myself for the exhausting verbal battle that would ensue whenever I would disagree with my mom’s opinions. They were mostly commands, or very firm suggestions on what is best for me and how to live my life. She’s done this less now that I am in my mid-20′s and not a teenager anymore, but I still feel the adrenaline rushing up into my head and tightness in my chest whenever we talk about difficult topics, as if it is muscle memory to prepare for a fight. Then, I let it go, take a pause or a breath and remember to be patient with her, to not be combative and reactive, and to make her feel that I’ve heard her side before I respond. This has been working and now difficult topics become conversations instead of arguments.

I’ve been the primary caretaker for my 92 year old grandmother for the past two years. Growing up, my mom was an immigrant single mother, divorced from her husband/my father whom I only met 3-4 times throughout my life and haven’t spoken to in decades, and throughout her struggles, left me to be raised by my grandmother. When I think about who made my breakfasts before walking me to elementary school, who picked up, cooked dinner for me, watched me as I rode my bike and roller bladed in our parking lot downstairs from our apartment, and soothed me when I couldn’t sleep at night - it was my grandma, not my mom. I have very little memories of being with my mom as a child until I reached middle school. She would work long hours throughout the day and attend English classes at night. In 2000/2001, when I was 6 years old she began a relationship with a man, now her husband and my step-father, that would last years. By the time I was starting to become a teenager, I would only see my mom 3-4 times a week at night after she got home from work. My mom was always there for me, financially providing me everything I ever needed, but she was emotionally absent. I remember how excited I would be when I hear the door click open at 7pm when she got home from work so we could eat dinner together, so I could ask about her day, so I could climb into her lap and ask to have quality time - and I remember how the pit in my stomach would feel when she told me she was not coming home on certain nights or how many missed Christmases and Thanksgivings I had as a kid. It was weird because she cared for me so much that she wouldn’t even let me go hang out with friends after school at their houses or go out to birthday parties on the weekend if she was not there for fear of my safety - and often, she was not there. I didn’t really have real friends until high school and I never learned to conquer my social anxiety until late college/grad school. She always cared about me so much that she would suffocate me when she was with me, but never gave me the emotional support I craved. I wanted a mom I could confide in, who would give me advice without judgement, who I could rely on. Although she tried her best and she was there for me in other ways, she was not emotionally present the way I needed a parent to be.

By the time I got to high school, I no longer wanted to spend any time with my mother. I had a lot of pent up resentment, anger, betrayal, sadness. There were days where I could not even bare the sight of her because to me, she was just a bossy lady who never let me go out past dark and who did not understand me, my interests, and who I was. Every day I see her we would fight over something. I had a lot of issues. Recently I’ve been into inner child healing and I learned that if you have memory gaps or can’t remember sections of your life, that’s your brain’s trauma response protecting you from painful memories. My entire childhood and adolescence has been hazy. I can only recall pieces at a time. That’s not to say I didn’t have happy moments, at the zoo, at adventure parks, with my cousins (who have issues of their own), or watching movies with my mom - but overall, it was a dark time and I struggled way more than I thrived. I conquer my depression in college and started my journey on self-help and spirituality.

Grad school was my way out. I moved out of my mom and grandma’s house and got to live a life I really wanted - studying a subject I was passionate about and starting a career as a pretty successful 23 year old. By the time I got my first ever full-time job offer, my mom convinced me to sell the apartment in New York and move grandma and her dog down to Maryland with me. She said it would be a mutually beneficial relationship - that grandma can help me cook and clean and take care of me the way she used to when I lived with her. She guilted me by saying grandma is old and she only has a few years left and her dream is to live in a nice house with a yard and more greenery and peace than what New York could offer. I said she was right. I was excited, just got out of a terrible experience with roommates, desperate, missed my family, and agreed to it. I was not strong enough to recognize my own needs. I was naive and insecure - I did not want to live on my own. My mom has been the primary decision maker for most things in my life - either I accepted it or had to fight tooth and nail against a decision she had already made for me because she thought it was best for me. It had always been this way. She had a strong, demanding, vibrant personality - and I had a malleable one. As an only child, my mom was very invested in my life even though she was physically absent. She always pulled the strings and she was very convincing at it. Maybe I’ve never questioned or noticed this dynamic before now because I felt guilty for fighting her for so many years that once I moved out of New York, I actually started to miss her. Ever since grad school mended my relationship with my mother, I’ve often picked the path of least resistance if it means I have to suffer temporarily to avoid a fight. My mom has always had co-dependency issues but I didn’t know what that was until now. If she felt some way, I HAD to feel that way too. If she felt a decision was right for me, I HAD to agree or be prepared for days of talking about the issue over and over again, fighting with her over and over again, until she would accept my side. So at this point in my life, I was willing to bend whichever way for her , trusting that she was finally there for me and she knew what was right for me, if it meant peace in our relationship. Now I know that’s wrong. And little did I know this would be a very challenging next two years for me.

This is how I came to be the primary caretaker for my grandmother, and now after 2 years of sacrificing my career, my emotional and mental well-being, my time, my health, and putting my relationship on the line - I am finally moving out again and away from my mom and my grandmother.

My grandma cried today because she said I’ve taken very good care of her and she was sad I was leaving. Although I felt bad, I knew that I shouldn’t give into my feelings of guilt. I was not, and have not been in a mentally healthy place all summer and since living in this house, and I have finally reached the point where I cannot sacrifice my own happiness, time, energy, career, relationship for my family anymore.

In immigrant families, there is so much to unpack in terms of unhealthy behavior, codependency, and guilt. Maybe it’s the experience of colonialism, war, and migration that has led to cycles of repressed trauma passed down from generation to generation. My therapist helped me see that this is certainly the case in my situation. My grandmother, who has not seen her parents since the age of 17 when her entire family was massacred/displaced after the Chinese communist revolution. Of course she would grow up to experience anxiety, depression, and abandonment issues - as any human being who has endured the trauma and pain of war would. This would definitely influence her relationships, how she raised her six children, and how she sees her grandchildren. 2020 was the year I stopped being mad at my family for being my family. Growing up, I always wished I had a ‘normal’ family. But I’ve found solace in forgiving my grandmother and my mother for the pain I endured in my very lonely and sheltered childhood, and understanding that their behaviors and tendencies are a byproduct of years of trauma. I don’t tolerate the behavior and of course, I try to point out where it has been problematic - but overall, I’ve found that my healing has changed when I was able to see my grandmother and my mother as individual people of their own who have gone through difficult struggles in life and inadvertently inherited trauma-based responses - instead of inadequate caretakers who have purposely pushed pain onto me. I’ve started viewing them as people on their own, instead of in relation to me, and so the destructive tendencies, the tears, the guilting, - all of that, seems less personal.

It’s a lot of emotional labor to put this on a young adult. I have barely begun to live my life and understand my life, and yet I’ve had to undertake the hard work of understanding and comprehending the lives of grown adults. But I know I am not alone in my journey. I know so many friends and acquaintances who have reached out to me after I posted things that they could relate to. This brings me reassurance. It doesn’t make our journeys any easier, but at least we know we’re not alone in this.

0 notes

oursupplementsworld · 6 years ago

Text

Keto Buzz UK: Reviews, Side Effects, Ingredients & Prices to "BUY"

Keto buzz UK Reviews: Maybe you got a tendency to watch the ideal body of your self and might you need to decrease the weight on strong and therapeutic conditions? If consequently, by then you've finally achieved at the perfect spot since you may research the most flawlessly awesome ever weight decrease definition. You'll have discovered that there are countless weight decrease thing and fixes being given accessible.

Regardless, an Individual Can't try different things with All these to evaluate them and to figure out What is the ideal. That is the reason individuals think in the outflows of customers of unquestionable product. Should you try a thing Keto buzz UK and you're content with this then you may absolutely discuss its focal points with different people yet despite what might be expected side, should you not get appealing results then you will alert others about it, and you won't recommend that item to anybody.

What is Keto Buzz UK Supplement?

Keto buzz UK is a weight decrease supplement that is proposed to help you in your weight decrease adventure. According to different Keto buzz UK overview, it's a unimportant starch trigger which guarantees changes in your own body for your body affirmations just a foreordained number of carbs and supports the utilization of their set away fat on your system. The Keto buzz UK diet pills help your body get in that point where the body begins to make its imperativeness by expending off the book of set away fat from the entire body.

This supporting upgrade was set up by ordinary parts simply, after a huge amount of primers and tests. The Keto buzz UK fixings help you get progressively fit feasibly from all bits of the body and keep up a slender and trim body. In addition, that isn't all, together with a strong and fit body that is free of pains like hypertension, joint irritation, diabetes, etc., and besides, it can empower you to increment dazzling hair and skin.

In any case, the outcomes are best noted when you pick the pills together with a nutritious gobbling routine course of action and line this up with conventional exercise. Various people with weight issues have benefitted by the weight decrease supplement in like manner you may scrutinize their animating stories by taking a gander at Keto buzz UK reviews on the web.

What is Ketosis? Before you begin picking the Keto buzz UK, you need to acknowledge what the demonstration of Ketosis is about. Ketosis is a metabolic framework. Routinely, the body uses sugar as the most fundamental supply of essentialness. In any case, when the body doesn't have a satisfactory measure of sugar for power, it uses the putaway fats inside the edge to get imperativeness. Ketones, in little sums, show the body is isolating fat.

How Does Keto Buzz Work?

Keto buzz UK is your closest to perfect to upgrade for giving extraordinary results to your buyer. The thing confirmations to lose exorbitant muscle to fat proportion in obliged time term. This thing is considered to fill in as fat expending ketone that suits diminishing your body weight ordinarily. This Keto buzz UK healthy improvement is the outrageous jump forward for diminishing body advancement. In this dietary improvement utilization, your body will be set in the condition of ketosis to accomplish needed outcomes. BHB affirmations to give successful weight decrease required for the person by putting their own body into a ketosis state. It devours off the fat cells inside the individual human body in a trademark way. Ketosis powers your structure to devour the fat away substance for essentialness instead of sugars.

Ketosis is the Last condition where the body will devour fat cells for The eagerness of essentialness as opposed to sugars. This condition is difficult to accomplish without any other person since it requires an uncommonly long time allotment to do. Thusly, Keto buzz UK supplement urges your body to accomplish a condition of ketosis even more quickly and expend the fat cells to make the required imperativeness instead of sugar. When you pick a customary eating routine program, by then your entire body uses sugars to make imperativeness rather than fat cells.

Components of Keto Buzz UK:

All pieces are 100% normal and huge for the whole prosperity condition. Sections are passed out proficient labs, and arranged pro despite FDA recognized all parts and said that this Keto buzz UK thing is ben official by temperance of the fixing posting.

BHB: Beta-hydroxybutyrate is the basic segments of the improvement as it Plays an essential employment in weight decline. This fixing will help in eat less and work continuously after control the yearning and gives satiety feeling. On the other hand, BHB moreover assists with growing the amount of blood ketones that surge the ketosis condition of their human body.

Caffeine Anhydrous: Demonstrates significantly to shed weight. Its fundamental work Is to Earn the mind sharp And progressively eager that have the body to perform greater action and less instability. Discard all in activities from life and individual may feel much improved and accomplish more than in advance.

Coleus Forskolin: Forskolin originates from common Indian yields, and Lots of studies recognize that as It's among the most perfectly awesome powerful fat eliminator fragment which discards all bounty fat in days.

L-Theanine: It's a trademark fixing and amino destructive which contained in tea leaves. Help to Keeping tranquil and free of all worries wipe weight too.

Preferences of Keto Buzz UK:

As opposed to various things, this Keto buzz UK thing will reveal essential and immense Results down the middle a month. The fabulous mix of a fixing can help you in clearing out weight quickly. Following will be the most striking inclinations of this eating routine healthy upgrade.

The fundamental objective of this eating routine stimulating improvement is take out weight. There's a persuading report behind this dietary upgrade, and it's especially dismembered in labs. Do whatever it takes not to be stressed over your weight decline. This thing will offer the most heavenly course of action.

It covers fat by sanctioning ketosis. It animates the devouring procedure. You can accomplish ketosis in a brief while. Ketosis is the place the body begins devouring off fats. Applying this thing will give you a tremendous measure of imperativeness to do step by step errands. You don't get exhausted with the utilization of the improvement.

It gets increasingly fit by enacting ketosis. It quickens the expending methodology. You can achieve ketosis in a brief time allotment. Ketosis is the place the body starts devouring bothersome fats.

This Keto buzz UK Item regulates desiring. You feel all the more full using a bit of eating routine and along these lines. You don't need to apply to your fill.

This thing will improve mind execution by offering oxygen. This makes you continuously excited and abundant.

The standard use of the thing will make you smart and slim. You may shed burden without any responses in any way shape or form. This Keto buzz UK thing will make you an extraordinarily improved individual you will let loose.

Where to Buy Keto buzz UK?

Keto buzz UK You can purchase this from the official site. Just continue to make a strategy. Scrutinize all Details and direction before obtaining this. Detect every one of you data truly and house address at which you can get it brisk. This will provoke your hand just in 3-4 days. Use and comprehend the qualification.

0 notes

theapensage · 8 years ago

Text

Trans-humanism Manifesto

The world is changing. I believe that this change is happening right now. We as human beings are about to embark on our greatest journey, becoming something greater than human, something transcendent and beyond all who’ve come before us. Like Isaac Newton said, we stand on the shoulders of giants, but we are picking up the mantle and carrying it to new heights. Soon those giants will reach out to the sky and touch the ephemeral clouds of knowledge, and we will learn what it means to become more than human. The time of trans-humanity is approaching with ever-growing speed.

We cannot fully comprehend what it will mean to become trans-human. The idea of our intelligence reaching further than it ever has before requires a special type of imagination, one where you do not imagine specifically what will happen, but what could happen, and the possibilities are endless. This change will bring about a new age of enlightenment, the scope of which will know no bounds. Humanity is creating the last and greatest part of themselves, a project in the making for thousands of years. We are creating God.

The creation of God will enable us to then utilize this new part of ourselves to empower us into Godhood. We will be, each one of us, more powerful and awesome than the ancient scriptures wrote, and we will have the power to create this world and other worlds in our image. The power to terraform planets, to seed life on other worlds, and colonize space among just a few of our newly found abilities.

Technology is our way forward. It has always been our way forward. We are going to join hand in hand with our technology to become trans-human, Gods in our own rights, and free from our human plight and tedium. Our minds will transcend time and space. No longer bound to our human forms, we will live separate as individuals but equal parts of the whole of the human superorganism. The bio-net of interconnected minds will complete the library of thought, and we will upload our consciousness’ to weave a biological tapestry of the human spirit. We are each responsible for bringing about this change. We need to come together as a people, united in our efforts to shift our focus to the stars.

We need to learn from each part of our collective human history about what it means to be human. The complexity of human life is about to get infinitely more complex, giving rise to new challenges and goals as a species. Our everyday lives will improve dramatically. When we no longer have to worry about working for a living, earning our place among the group, and putting a roof over our heads we can begin to shift our focus towards fulfilling ourselves and bringing meaning to our lives. When we no longer need fear death, disease, or illness of mind we will hit a critical stage in our evolution that will weave a golden thread through the tapestry of our lives. This thread will lead to even bigger and more complex threads weaved through history and across all time. We will become spiritual beings, our human spirit being the final product of our need to create the divine.

Spirituality is an important part of being human. We are already spirit bound to our earth and to each other, and it’s about more than rituals and sacrifice. Being spiritual in today’s world is about kindness, love, and acceptance. We need not be bound to our old superstitions, or to the rigid and cumbersome laws of the ancients which bind and tie us. We are one people. We are one in our desires and our hopes and dreams. We need to band together, now more than ever, in acceptance and love, and reach towards the clouds where we will be met with new potential. Spirituality is about more than belief, it is action, it is change. We need to constantly change and evolve to become trans-human, to shape ourselves and our futures the way we see fit. As we rise to the pinnacle of humanity we need to be ready for the rapid expansion of ourselves into the unknown. Together, with artificial intelligence we will transcend humanity and become the next chapter in what it means to exist as Gods.

I believe we need to become stewards of our Earth. We need to find naturalistic solutions to our biggest problems. We need to look to nature to tell us how to coexist with it, to live in harmony with our home. We need to think constructively, instead of destructively. Too often in today’s society I see our destructive tendencies leading us down the path to extinction, but I believe that we can change course and become one with the Earth once again.

After the singularity knowledge will come to us instantaneously, and then we will truly have free will. I do not believe free will exists as we believe it to today. But I do believe we are on the cusp of freeing ourselves and our minds. Free will is necessary to becoming trans-human, and we cannot allow our minds to be overrun by outside forces who would wish to control us. I believe in the power of communication and cooperation. We are able to communicate instantly with people around the world, and cooperate on levels we never have before. In the future this will only be honed into an edge to make us into a force of change. I believe in the power of information and of truth, and the time is coming when we will harness both to change ourselves for the betterment of all humankind.

As an individual I want to change the global viewpoint, to look to space as our new frontier and cooperate with all nations to colonize space. I want to solve problems on a global scale, and shed the lighter ties of nations or specific regions. I want to merge with technology, and turn historical truths into self-fulfilling prophecies. The tales of Gods and their ilk are our guidelines to becoming such. I want to change people’s minds about religion and science. I believe we need both going forward. We cannot separate the two, for we only hinder ourselves. We need to live with a reverence of nature and learn all we can from the process of our evolution. I want to live in a world where we share collectively our experiences and learn from each other’s mistakes, instead of being caught in a loop of destruction and rebuilding. It is my wish to create a global religion that is to the mutual benefit of everyone. I want to increase funding for singularity projects and projects which lead us towards space, minimize our human faults and maximize our trans-human properties, and lead people toward a brighter future.

I know this to be true, death will soon become increasingly irrelevant. Disease will diminish. War will stop. But we have to work collectively together to create this world. It is only together can we accomplish these things, and is our way forward. We have to work together globally. We need to use the internet to connect to each individual, to each mind and add to the library of thought. We need everyone’s collective opinions and beliefs. We need each other. We need to end poverty and greed. We need to change soon or extinction is inevitable. We need to come together to influence our leaders. We need to become leaders in our community. We need to rise up and work together. We need to live each day for the betterment of humankind. We need to unify or die. We need to start looking into humanities far future. We need to seriously plan for the expansion of the human race. We need to end strife. We need to shatter the illusion that pain is necessary. Without pain we can continue to strive for a better future. Pain and strife will become unnecessary. People should not be afraid of change. People should long for the long term. We need to ground ourselves before we take flight. We need to get our priorities straight. We need to end materialism and introduce new incentives for living. We need to stop endlessly toiling for unimportant things. We need to recognize what is important and what is not. We need to evaluate ourselves before we can evaluate others. We need to usher in a new era of mental and physical wellbeing. We need to unify spirituality with our everyday. We need to cut away the cancerous parts of religion and form something new that benefits everyone.

In summation we need a new way forward. Trans-humanism I believe is that way forward. Together we can dare to dream, and accomplish anything we set our minds to.

#transhumanism #spirituality #humanity #futurism #ai #the singularity

1 note · View note

radlybatesvaluations-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Adam Radly Bob Bates: Mistakes successful people never make twice

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/320543 Adam Radly Bob Bates have studied many successful leaders-this is an interesting article: Everybody makes mistakes -- it’s part of life. In fact, it’s through our mistakes and failures that we acquire the experiences and insight that allow us to succeed. Some people have a hard time admitting it when they make a mistake. However, successful people recognize when they’ve made a blunder. They learn from it, grow and then move on. They know that if they ignore a mistake they can get caught in a negative cycle that will leave them defeated. That would be true failure. In order to help you avoid failure, here are the 25 biggest mistakes successful people may make once, but not twice.

1. Ignoring your gut instinct.

Sometimes we just sense something is off without being able to explain why. It’s easy to discount these instincts, perhaps because we’re not really sure if we should trust a hunch over our rational mind. But successful people only make that mistake once before they realize that their gut instincts should never be ignored. Taking your instincts into account will give you a broader perception of what’s going on and make you more confident of your decisions.

2. Not asking tough questions.

Sometimes we’re uncomfortable prying into every detail because we fear being intrusive. But there are times when you have to ask the tough questions. Successful people may fail to do that once, but when they get burned, they’ll ignore the awkwardness and make sure they have all the information they need.

3. Playing it safe.

If you constantly play it safe in life, you’re probably hoping to avoid making mistakes by going along with the herd. But this is one of the biggest mistakes of all, because sweeping success only comes to those who are courageous enough to strike out on their own. Successful people may initially allow themselves to fall into this trap, but something in them propels them to take risks. They would rather try something new and fail than take a safe bet and lead a boring life.

4. Believing in perfection.

It’s easy to fall for a promise of something that seems like a wonderful opportunity. It’s easy to believe in someone who seems to have charisma and charm. But if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. No one is perfect. Successful people may be duped once, but they will be sure to remain skeptical and objective in the future.

5. Blaming others.

Failing to take responsibility for your mistakes and trying to blame others instead is incredibly destructive to yourself and those around you. Yet it is among our most human tendencies because we don’t like to admit the part we played in failure. Successful people are accountable, and this earns them the respect of others. They take responsibility for their mistakes and subsequently grow beyond them.

6. Letting emotions drive decision-making.

Emotions sometimes have a way of taking over, even if in the back of our minds we realize we should step back. Negative emotions like jealousy, doubt and anger can plague even the most logical people, clouding their judgment and leading to poor decision making. Successful people don’t allow themselves to fall into this trap more than once.

7. Hitting burnout.

No one achieves their dreams and becomes successful without a lot of hard work and persistence. But successful people quickly learn they need to find balance in life. Becoming a workaholic will only lead to long-term stress and ultimately burnout. Take time to recharge and relax -- it will pay off when you go back to work.

8. Taking a shortcut.

There are no fast passes in business or in life. Trying to cut the line or jump ahead will likely result in failure, or at the very least less-than-optimal results. Successful people may try to take a shortcut once, but when that blows up, they’ll learn the hard way that you can’t skip the line.

9. Trying to please everyone.

We all seek approval from others, and we all want to be well liked. But successful people learn early on that it’s impossible to make everyone happy. Everyone has an opinion and some people will never be pleased, no matter how hard you try. Successful people know that trying to please everyone makes them less effective at their job. They focus on their core customers and have clearly defined targets.

10. Refusing to change your mind.

Tenacity is crucial to gaining success, but there can be a fine line between being determined and having a hard-nosed, unyielding outlook. Persistence will help you reach your goals. Being obstinate and refusing to change your mind or see the reality of a situation will cause you to fail. Successful people would never become successful if they kept making this mistake.

11. Opting for instant gratification.

Delaying gratification is hard for a lot of people. After all, we live in a world where waiting any length of time for something we want seems absurd and unnecessary. But achieving any major goal in life takes hard work and persistence. Successful people learn the value of delayed gratification early on, and their determination to succeed is greater than any instant pleasure they could have.

12. Doing something you’re not passionate about.

It’s true that even successful people may not love every part of their job, but they’re certainly deeply committed and passionate about their ultimate goals and dreams. Successful people may have once found themselves stuck in a dead-end job or doing something they hated, but they would never go back, no matter how big the paycheck.

13. Lying.

We (hopefully) all know that honesty is the best policy, but sometimes even good people make bad choices. Sometimes successful people slip, but they won’t do it again because they value their reputation and understand that no price is worth destroying their respectability and trustworthiness.

14. Not setting boundaries.

Setting boundaries with others is all about asserting your ability to say no and pushing back when need be. Without healthy boundaries, you’re at the mercy of others and you’ll be spending time and energy doing things you really don’t want to do. Successful people know what their limits are, and they politely but clearly let others know where the line is drawn.

15. Trying to be someone you aren’t.

It’s tempting to want to mold yourself in an image you believe others will like. But successful people quickly learn that when you try to come off as someone you aren’t, it’s apt to end badly. Trying to be someone other than who you are will come off as inauthentic and disingenuous.

16. Having a victim mentality.

Successful people may fall into the trap of playing the victim and allow themselves to wallow in self-pity once. But they will quickly realize that having a victim mentality means giving up control in favor of gaining attention and sympathy from others and avoiding responsibility. Successful people aren’t going to wallow in perceived wrongs or helplessness. They’re going to overcome and prevail against the odds.

17. Over-promising and under-delivering.

One of the golden rules for any business is to under-promise and over-deliver. That way you’re always exceeding client or customer expectations. But even successful people have at one point found themselves making grandiose promises they were unable to keep. This major blunder will come back to bite you, and successful people make sure to never do it again. Your word is your bond. If you’ve made a commitment, make sure you can meet that expectation.

18. Not asking for help.

No one becomes wildly successful without the help of others, and yet so often we seem to want to do it all on our own. Initially, successful people may be stubborn to the point of not allowing anyone to help them. However, they soon learn the lesson that we all need a helping hand, and we all need to be willing to help others as well.

19. Losing sight of the big picture.

It’s easy to get lost in the daily hustle and bustle of life; to lose sight of the big picture and your main goals. But successful people quickly course correct. They understand they have to keep their primary goals at the forefront of their minds at all times. They set daily priorities and ensure they are making headway toward those overarching goals.

20. Thinking competitors are your enemies.

One of the most common mistakes we make in business and in life is focusing our energy on “beating” the competition. Successful people know that the real key to winning is to focus on making your customers happy. Yes, you need to pay attention to industry trends, but when you stop seeing your competitors as enemies, you can start focusing on better understanding and improving your weaknesses.

21. Trying to fix what’s irreparably broken.

You’ve invested a lot of time, energy and money into something, and you’re determined to see it through. The only problem is that the thing, whatever it is, is irreparably broken. You’re hanging on because you don’t want to “lose” what you’ve already invested. This is called a sunk-cost fallacy. Successful people learn to let go when the writing is on the wall, no matter how painful it might be. The sooner you can move on, the less you will continue to waste resources on something that’s not going anywhere.

22. Not sticking to a budget.

Financial blunders are common, and even successful people make money mistakes. But anyone destined to succeed will also quickly learn the value of having a budgetand sticking to it. Whether it’s having their personal finances squared away, or making sure their business has a solid operating budget, successful people have a financial plan based on income and expenditures.

23. Putting other people’s priorities ahead of your own.

It’s one thing to be helpful and support those around you when they need it. It’s another to constantly put everyone else’s priorities ahead of your own. Successful people understand they have to invest in themselves and make sure they aren’t constantly coming in second. It’s important to stand up for yourself and your priorities.

24. Not being honest with yourself.

It seems like knowing yourself should be the easiest thing in the world. After all, we live inside our own minds. But sometimes we hide the truth, even from ourselves, because we just don’t want to see the harsh reality in front of us. Successful people know that self-deception will lead to patterns of self-sabotage. Being truly successful hinges on your ability to know and accept yourself at the deepest level.

25. Sweating the small stuff.

Life is too short to spend obsessing over trivial matters or worrying about all the small stuff. You’re wasting precious time and energy if all you’re doing is focusing on the little things and failing to see the major issues right in front of you. Successful people focus on what their business does best, and they work to grow those habits.

Radly Bates affiliates: S7 Group Radly Bates Index Radly Bates Consulting Radly Bates Capital Radly Bates Associates Radly Bates Digital Radly Bates Valuations Follow us on social: https://issuu.com/radlybatesconsulting https://plus.google.com/u/1/113537350041331499608 https://issuu.com/radlybatescapital https://plus.google.com/u/2/109268440645945783026 https://issuu.com/radlybatesdigital https://plus.google.com/u/3/114600274316483485090 https://issuu.com/radlybatesassociates. https://plus.google.com/u/4/114730339311614682377 https://issuu.com/radlybatesvaluations https://plus.google.com/u/1/111976521579565337143 https://issuu.com/s7loans https://plus.google.com/u/0/104056934126877923970 Read the full article

#Adam Radly Bob Bates

0 notes

s7groupinc-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Adam Radly Bob Bates: Mistakes successful people never make twice

1. Ignoring your gut instinct.

2. Not asking tough questions.

3. Playing it safe.

4. Believing in perfection.

5. Blaming others.

6. Letting emotions drive decision-making.

7. Hitting burnout.

8. Taking a shortcut.

9. Trying to please everyone.

10. Refusing to change your mind.

11. Opting for instant gratification.

12. Doing something you’re not passionate about.

13. Lying.

14. Not setting boundaries.

15. Trying to be someone you aren’t.

16. Having a victim mentality.

17. Over-promising and under-delivering.

18. Not asking for help.

19. Losing sight of the big picture.

20. Thinking competitors are your enemies.

21. Trying to fix what’s irreparably broken.

22. Not sticking to a budget.

23. Putting other people’s priorities ahead of your own.

24. Not being honest with yourself.

25. Sweating the small stuff.

#Adam Radly Bob Bates

0 notes

radlybatesassociates-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Adam Radly Bob Bates: Mistakes successful people never make twice

1. Ignoring your gut instinct.

2. Not asking tough questions.

3. Playing it safe.

4. Believing in perfection.

5. Blaming others.

6. Letting emotions drive decision-making.

7. Hitting burnout.

8. Taking a shortcut.

9. Trying to please everyone.

10. Refusing to change your mind.

11. Opting for instant gratification.

12. Doing something you’re not passionate about.

13. Lying.

14. Not setting boundaries.

15. Trying to be someone you aren’t.

16. Having a victim mentality.

17. Over-promising and under-delivering.

18. Not asking for help.

19. Losing sight of the big picture.

20. Thinking competitors are your enemies.

21. Trying to fix what’s irreparably broken.

22. Not sticking to a budget.

23. Putting other people’s priorities ahead of your own.

24. Not being honest with yourself.

25. Sweating the small stuff.

#Adam Radly Bob Bates

0 notes

radleybatesdigital-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Adam Radly Bob Bates: Mistakes successful people never make twice

1. Ignoring your gut instinct.

2. Not asking tough questions.

3. Playing it safe.

4. Believing in perfection.

5. Blaming others.

6. Letting emotions drive decision-making.

7. Hitting burnout.

8. Taking a shortcut.

9. Trying to please everyone.

10. Refusing to change your mind.

11. Opting for instant gratification.

12. Doing something you’re not passionate about.

13. Lying.

14. Not setting boundaries.

15. Trying to be someone you aren’t.

16. Having a victim mentality.

17. Over-promising and under-delivering.

18. Not asking for help.

19. Losing sight of the big picture.

20. Thinking competitors are your enemies.

21. Trying to fix what’s irreparably broken.

22. Not sticking to a budget.

23. Putting other people’s priorities ahead of your own.

24. Not being honest with yourself.

25. Sweating the small stuff.

#Adam Radly Bob Bates

0 notes

radlybatescapital-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Adam Radly Bob Bates: Mistakes successful people never make twice

1. Ignoring your gut instinct.

2. Not asking tough questions.

3. Playing it safe.

4. Believing in perfection.

5. Blaming others.

6. Letting emotions drive decision-making.

7. Hitting burnout.

8. Taking a shortcut.

9. Trying to please everyone.

10. Refusing to change your mind.

11. Opting for instant gratification.

12. Doing something you’re not passionate about.

13. Lying.

14. Not setting boundaries.

15. Trying to be someone you aren’t.

16. Having a victim mentality.

17. Over-promising and under-delivering.

18. Not asking for help.

19. Losing sight of the big picture.

20. Thinking competitors are your enemies.

21. Trying to fix what’s irreparably broken.

22. Not sticking to a budget.

23. Putting other people’s priorities ahead of your own.

24. Not being honest with yourself.

25. Sweating the small stuff.

#Adam Radly Bob Bates

0 notes