The Psychology of a culture is revealed and perpetuated in how they relate to and treat their children and in how they relate to and treat the most vulnerable people within their society. Heal that and we can heal everything.
"In a society that has institutionalised a hierarchy of lethal violence, a predator mixes in with the crowd, and in an egalitarian society, the predator sticks out like a sore thumb."
Families and communities lived and thrived in the city of Homs, before the war, which was escalated by the indirect support, materially and logistically, of violent militia... paid for by UK, US, Saudi and Qatari Tax payers...
1, We can see that the Ruling culture of Europe, before World War I, and II, was that of competing powers, all militarised, all seeking to enhance and expand their power and economic dominance through violence, intrigue and commercial exploitation of other countries, their peoples, and of each nations own people..
(take a look at the propaganda to support WWI in England and in the USA, where the majority of the working classes objected to war, but needed to be persuaded, manipulated into becoming cannon fodder ).. That culture of power that intentionally manipulates a population into mass violence was and remains a pathology, a disease, a sickness....
"In a society that has institutionalised a hierarchy of lethal violence, a predator mixes in with the crowd, and in an egalitarian society, they stick out like sore thumb."
Thus ultimate responsibility cannot be placed in any one countries, or on any single Rulers behaviour, but on all, equally. Hitler was not to blame, alone, for WWII. The responsibility lies with the system of competing militarised powers...
3. That so many died then, and are being murdered, maimed and displaced today by this dynamic of competing militarised powers is indicative of a pathology.
The UK and US escalated the violence in Iraq, Afghanistan with direct military intervention, and indirectly in Libya and Syria..... what does that tell you about the prevailing culture of rulers, and the submission of their populations to that culture of violence that we, as tax payers, fund?
In England, income tax was introduced as a way to fund the Napoleonic Wars, as a temporary measure. We are still funding war. We are funding and enabling psychopathic behaviour, and people are being harmed...
No one in the mainstream, few in Academia , none of the institutionalised state religions will acknowledge this truth.
Why?
Kindest regards
Corneilius
"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"
Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.
We can argue about opinions. We can disagree, and argue for our opinions from different perspectives.
That is the mainstream media game, where
opinions are so often touted as facts or 'alternative facts', where the deliberate omission of
key evidence is a central ploy in their narratives and manipulations. One cannot gain a accurate picture of something if much of the detail is deliberately omitted.
We cannot argue about evidence that exists, that is well documented, that is reliable. It is there.
Which is why the Main Stream Media, and the other sources of propaganda and false/fake news avoids this.
The Invasion of Iraq was and remains a War Crime. Fact.
No mainstream media has reported this fact, alongside the various national and international statutes and ratified treaties that prohibit war and make the prosecution of any war of aggression a criminal offence.
The entire political structure of power depends on the electorate and intelligentsia arguing opinions.
Was Saddam a nasty dictator?
Yes, he was, albeit his system was much weakened by decades of sanctions. He was not a threat to any State in the West, or anywhere else for that matter, apart from Iraq itself, and then only in terms of being unable or unwilling to help the Iraqi civil Government deal with it's issues.
Was it morally right to remove him?
The only people who had a legal right, and the moral right to remove him were the Iraqi people. They were not afforded that option. Their rights in the matter did not matter to the international community.
Does Blair's opinion that he did the right thing at the time, bearing in mind all available evidence at the time, and the setting of post 9/11 stand as evidence?
Yes, evidence of either his duplicity or his insanity, or both. But it does not get him off the War Crimes charge.
Opinion being touted as evidence in the media, and in politics, as a tactical weapon used against entire populations, to distract, confuse, divide those populations.
"God told me to do it!" George Bush.
The reason why opinion is given such a status, is because most opinions, lacking the evidence, are reflections of personally held belief systems.
There is a lot of emotional attachment to those beliefs.
This means that when a personally held opinion is challenged, the person holding the opinion feels as if it is a personal attack, and the fight or flight sequence kicks in, and it all gets quite nasty very quickly.
So to rile folk, attack their personally held opinions or beliefs. And to get folk to fight each other, attack each sides opinions, using proxies within each community... to make it look like each community is attacking the other. Fake News.
If I want to 'save the world', or work for a healthier political set-up, then I must study grooming, and I must study my own
manipulative behaviours where they occur, and deal with them so that I never manipulate
and that will go some way to ensure that I am less likely to manipulated.
Nobody else can do that for me.
This is a task that requires ruthless self honesty and some practice.
A hard road, yet worthy of my best efforts.
It will go some way towards ensuring that trolls, bullies or seducers, liars, cheats, thieves and political demagogues have less purchase on my conscious and unconscious choices.
I do not watch tripe such as East Enders, Neighbours, X-Factor, Big Brother, The BBC News, etc as I find it deeply uncomfortable to watch dysfunctional behaviour normalised.
I am not 'moved' by puerile movies or triggered into unconscious reactive behaviours by tabloid headlines.
The hero kisses the girl in the midst of a battle.
American troops are scarred by their activities, whilst the deaths of the 'enemy' are relatively consequence free.
Spies are good. etc. it's all dodgy as...
The choice is mine, for I can alter my behaviour far easier than I can attempt to alter another's behaviour.
That is my primary sphere of influence.
Start here and work outwards.
In terms of professional manipulation of people through access to their often unconscious behaviours, I have written in previous blogs about the Behavioural Insights Team, originally attached to the British Government Cabinet, now a private enterprise drawing a steady earner from the public purse for advising Government on psychological tactics to 'nudge' folk into 'better behaviours'....
The assumption behind this 'nudge' is that some people are in a better position or are better 'qualified' to tell others what they should and should not be doing, but becausthose lessor able people are so 'resistant' then they need to be manipulated into behavioural changes. For their own good.
Another area of professional manipulation of electorates is big data, psychographics (psychometrics) and targeting known vulnerabilities to be triggered by 'messaging'.
Big data is a useful tool, and has many applications that will prove to be very valuable in terms of improving people's lives. But, like all tools, it can be used in benign or malign ways.
Brexit and the 2016 US election were new in that a highly sophisticated use of user data across a variety of platforms, apps, media, devices was used in real time to track and locate targets, and then that information about the target was used to designed specific 'messaging' to tap into their vulnerabilities, insecurities, prejudices.
This targeting was aimed at supporters, potential supporters and the other side.
It was coordinated in real time with media outlets and blogs etc with the intention of influencing the electorate, way, way, way beyond any potential that the Russians might have been able to affect. There is plenty of evidence of real time trolling by the media, of issuing reports designed to inflame anger and escalate hatred.
If anything the Russia influence was a distraction, a sleight of hand to hide the real hidden influence. It is basically an advanced high tech form of bullying. A beating that leaves no marks...
Russia aside, none of this would be possible if people in general were less susceptible to being manipulated, if critical thinking and evidence based policy making were core subjects of secondary schooling.
That is one of the key problems the world and all people's face as we slide into 2017.
Kindest regards
Corneilius
"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe" *If you like this post, if you found the themes resonant, if you agree in part, would you be kind enough to let others know about it? I would really appreciate that.
You could drop a comment too, if you felt the urge. Or not.
I will moderate contributions, and block any that are abusive. For obvious reasons.
Thank you for reading.
I have been thinking about the way that generalisations such as 'Jews' or 'Arabs' or 'Men' or 'Women' or 'Benefit Scroungers' or 'Rich Elite' or 'Conspiracy Theorists' or any other label for a group are so frequently used by so many people.
Hugely generalist terms used to label an entire group of people in a derogatory manner, or as a focus of anger and rage, hatred or fear.
We can see patterns related to behaviour and culture emerging across
populations and these do contain information that is useful.
Yet we cannot
use those patterns to describe individuals.
When we get to the
individual case we cannot simply dump the pattern on that individual as a
way to define that individual - the diagnosis must be prepared to meet
the specifics of that individual case within the larger whole....
without losing view of both individual and whole... it must take on board the setting within which an event or experience occurs, all the way to the top of the tiers of social violence and hierarchy and how that violence and dominance pollute grass roots life.
For example that story about the Gorilla, the Child, The Mother, The Zoo and how much invective was poured out on the interwebs towards all parties involved. So called 'Anonymous' issued threats against the mother! Really? Is this how we move forwards?
What the invective missed out on - in terms of evidence - was irrelevant to the intent of those who so freely gave of their spleen.
What is omitted is the kind fo society we live in, the cruelty of Zoos, the dysfunctional manner in which this society relates to creatures great and small.
The cruelty of how motherhood remains, in the 21st Century un-valued, un-paid work within Institutional Power settings, and across mainstream propaganda.
The state of mind of the child, the mother, the gorilla, the zoo keepers in that tragic event. Blame.
The invective stood. Free speech won the day!
However, the exercise of free speech does not confer accuracy in and of itself.
Free speech exposes the paucity of logic, humanity and humility of those who attacked the mother, or who sought to 'blame' - sometimes accidents do occur.
Lacking evidence, we all have a choice to make it up, or say 'I don't know.'
In order to permit some people to spout their own angry view, they must make something up about that incident or event or situation.
They will, of course, use a generalisation. A stereotype.
They will imagine hypothetical situations to assert what they would do in a similar situation.
They name call those who see things differently rather than deal with what ever point or piece of evidence is presented.
Dismissive and arrogant.
Are they any different to the politicians?
Labeling happens in a consciousness that is not consciously connected to the world; the world is full of 'things' - naming living things is the expression of connection, of those who live within a given habitat and see the life in it as equal in value, meaning and respect.
Naming and labeling are different aspects of knowing.
My friends have names, the groups of things in my home, such as books, shoe shelf, spice rack, have labels.
Language is an old way of storing topographical and psychic experience within a locality.
Language speaks of what is.
Propaganda avoids what is by pretending it is something else.
A bit like Zionists claiming the Holocaust as a justification for their aim, whilst cloaking themselves in the label of Judaism, clearly manipulating the perception of reality through dedicated professional gaslighting, in order to mitigate the harms caused by Zionist policies, to set them aside as an unfortunate outcome. The 'moral' IDF.
Or Brexit campaigners complaining about an anti-democratic EU without addressing the very serious problems with un-healthy un-democratic governance and corruption by a Power Establishment that shields war criminals, a shit storm we must face up to in the UK.
Or women complaining about men and men complaining about women.
Or American citizens arguing about 'communism' vs 'capitalism' whilst their own political situation deteriorates because they do not grasp the meaning of the take over of the US continent by European predatory Power. Earth and people into property.
The issue is always less about gender or Sovereignty or Land or ideology than it is about respect, empathy, co-operation across diversity, humane social settings, and how we resolve apparent conflict so that all needs within that setting are met justly.The cruelty is always cruelty, not matter what justification, and talking about the justifications without ceasing the cruelty is an enabling behaviour.
Wherever cruelty is permitted to continue, in the name of 'whateva' I avoid entanglements in the justifications.
Let us deal with the cruelty. Then, with the cruelty ceased, one can take time to disentangle the various false assumptions and nasty justifications, a sort of co-counselling program. And heal.,
First, do no harm..
Deal with the cruelty. Do not take sides - that way lies distraction.
That does not mean do not critique the behaviour of those who abuse their power, it does not mean we turn away from supporting the abused by confronting the abuser. It means that we decide to stick to the facts, and ignore all justifications for violence as being a separate matter, an abstract way of avoiding reality.
Deal with the cruelty. It starts and ends there.
That is the specific from which peace emerges in the long term.
What ever your belief, there is no way to justify cruelty. None.
Kindest regards
Corneilius
Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe
If this piece struck a chord with you, please consider recommending it so that others might discover it, and contribute to the conversation.
Nurturing life is our primary biological directive.
However, the facts are that we are born into a Hierarchically Violent Power System that consistently disrupts this mandate. It suggest our mandate is to dominate, conquer and alter the living world to meet the needs of 'Civilisation', by which it means maintaining the distal social and material power over all.
Because the conditioning by the behaviour of Distal Power and the outcomes of
that behaviour are ubiquitous, everywhere we turn we face the adverse outcomes, the chronic stress induced upon parenting, fathering and mothering, is ever present.
The grooming of children and electorates by Power
Institutions is constant. The threat of destitution and war ever present. No child left behind. No tribe left untouched.
Thus the recent media led discussions about the 'Tax on Tampons as a Luxury' did not bring up this: that
women and men learn or are taught to hate menstruation, to relate to menstruation as something disgusting, a taboo subject. We are taught to dislike a key aspect of the way the human body functions, to distance from the embodied wisdom of our creative
response ability in nurturing life itself.
That men and women internalise
the 'rules' of the social and political systems into which we are born, in order to sit within them is obvious. And that reliance on external definitions of who we are and what is truly healthy is what generates an internal conflict, which in turn leads to a subtle self loathing and an undermining of the natural emergent self.
From flags to parades, from statist identity to religion the internalisation is obvious to me, and many of us. It happens easily as children assume the world they grow into is normality, naturally enough. If the social material constructs and the biological world are not congruent, then that can become a problem.
Nurturing life is our primary biological mandate.
Some people feel I go too far.
Obviously, I do not.
I
see and understand what is called 'rape culture' aka misogyny as part of the same overall cultural
power dynamic of hierarchy of resource and power that undermines natural parenting, fathering and mothering. I understand this as a dynamic that disrupts the evolved optimally healthy child bonding attachment processes mandated by our very biology
as the basis of long term psychological and physical health.
I understand that any system that treats
children as economic units to be conditioned, bodies to be trained and constrained for the work
place to serve the economy, and that launches war as a policy
enforcement tool is a toxic system.
I can defend my position with scientifically examined evidence, insight, compassion and clarity.... and I will every time.
Nurturing life is our primary biological directive.
“women are still the poorer sex, doing two-thirds of the
world’s work, including growing most of their families’ food. We remain the
primary carers everywhere: for children and for sick, disabled and elderly
people, within the family and outside, in war as in peace. In 90 per cent of UK families the
primary carer is a woman. Seventy-nine per cent of
austerity cuts have targeted women – that is, carers and those we
care for. While the 1 per cent more than doubled their income in the last 10
years, and the arms trade has grown by 22 per cent, one billion children
worldwide live in poverty, 3.7m in the UK and 176,565 surviving on food
banks. Society cannot survive without caring, yet carers are undermined not
supported.” She is 100% correct. Nina devotes her time and energy into supporting women who have been abused, traumatised, harmed and maimed in seeking justice through the courts.
Nurturing life is our primary biological directive.
and Selma James, in an article the Guardian commissioned, yet did not publish.
"It is
women who have been the target of every attack on the welfare state.
It’s not news that jobs women have lost were often waged service and
caring work, and that women as unwaged carers have been deprived of the
services they need to do their job. What job? Why, reproducing the
human race. How did that get sidelined? Austerity attacks carers first
of all. In 90% of families the primary carer is a woman. Austerity is
sexist.
We have got used to measuring sexism by lack of female access to the
commanding heights of the economy and politics, that is, by the very few
women realising their personal ambition. Thus we may not recognise
pervasive and even life-threatening sexism when it hits us.
Yvette
Cooper, a contender for Labour’s leadership wants the party of labourers
to prioritise women’s capability for ‘the top jobs’. As Secretary of
State for Work and Pensions she brought in the Welfare Reform Act 2009
which abolished Income Support and extended Labour’s infamous Work
Capability Assessment for sick and disabled people.
The money that
recognised unwaged caring work, enabled single mothers to leave violent
men, and allowed disabled people to live independent lives, is largely
gone or under threat. No one knows how many disabled people have died
as a result: the government refuses to publish the figures.
Women have been the prime targets of all three austerity parties
since it is caring they’re attacking. Women are ‘workless’ according to
Tony Blair and his ‘Babes’ unless we do what men are supposed to do, go
out to work – not for the top jobs but the zero-hour contracts at the
bottom."
and
"Jeremy Corbyn offers women 50 per cent of his shadow cabinet, but
with anti-sexist policies, including not only free childcare but the
‘recognition and valuing’ of women’s unremunerated caring work. Women
coming in on a rising popular tide, could build on that for the rest of
us – we could call them to account on the basis of this programme.
We are told that if Corbyn wins, Labour won’t be electable.
Anti-austerity not calls for independence won the SNP its 56 MPs.
The
maiden speech of Mhairi Black made it clear that in following
anti-austerity she did not leave Labour; Labour left her. It is a kind
of political corruption that assumes that his popularity augurs badly
for electability."
Nurturing life is our primary biological directive. And it depends utterly upon healthy, honest, nurturing relationships at all levels of our Society.Any abuse of power is an intentional act, a corruption of our relationships that will pollute and diminish our lives, our entire social system.
women
are still the poorer sex, doing two-thirds of the world’s work,
including growing most of their families’ food. We remain the primary
carers everywhere: for children and for sick, disabled and elderly
people, within the family and outside, in war as in peace. In 90 per
cent of UK families the primary carer is a woman. Seventy-nine per cent of austerity cuts have targeted women – that
is, carers and those we care for. While the 1 per cent more than
doubled their income in the last 10 years, and the arms trade has grown
by 22 per cent, one billion children worldwide live in poverty, 3.7m in
the UK and 176,565 surviving on food banks. Society cannot survive
without caring, yet carers are undermined not supported. - See more at:
http://www.bigissuenorth.com/2015/11/why-dont-we-just-pay-a-living-wage-to-mothers-and-other-carers/15383#sthash.nrgkTnJm.dpuf
women
are still the poorer sex, doing two-thirds of the world’s work,
including growing most of their families’ food. We remain the primary
carers everywhere: for children and for sick, disabled and elderly
people, within the family and outside, in war as in peace. In 90 per
cent of UK families the primary carer is a woman. Seventy-nine per cent of austerity cuts have targeted women – that
is, carers and those we care for. While the 1 per cent more than
doubled their income in the last 10 years, and the arms trade has grown
by 22 per cent, one billion children worldwide live in poverty, 3.7m in
the UK and 176,565 surviving on food banks. Society cannot survive
without caring, yet carers are undermined not supported. - See more at:
http://www.bigissuenorth.com/2015/11/why-dont-we-just-pay-a-living-wage-to-mothers-and-other-carers/15383#sthash.nrgkTnJm.dpuf
women
are still the poorer sex, doing two-thirds of the world’s work,
including growing most of their families’ food. We remain the primary
carers everywhere: for children and for sick, disabled and elderly
people, within the family and outside, in war as in peace. In 90 per
cent of UK families the primary carer is a woman. Seventy-nine per cent of austerity cuts have targeted women – that
is, carers and those we care for. While the 1 per cent more than
doubled their income in the last 10 years, and the arms trade has grown
by 22 per cent, one billion children worldwide live in poverty, 3.7m in
the UK and 176,565 surviving on food banks. Society cannot survive
without caring, yet carers are undermined not supported. - See more at:
http://www.bigissuenorth.com/2015/11/why-dont-we-just-pay-a-living-wage-to-mothers-and-other-carers/15383#sthash.nrgkTnJm.dpuf
women
are still the poorer sex, doing two-thirds of the world’s work,
including growing most of their families’ food. We remain the primary
carers everywhere: for children and for sick, disabled and elderly
people, within the family and outside, in war as in peace. In 90 per
cent of UK families the primary carer is a woman. Seventy-nine per cent of austerity cuts have targeted women – that
is, carers and those we care for. While the 1 per cent more than
doubled their income in the last 10 years, and the arms trade has grown
by 22 per cent, one billion children worldwide live in poverty, 3.7m in
the UK and 176,565 surviving on food banks. Society cannot survive
without caring, yet carers are undermined not supported. - See more at:
http://www.bigissuenorth.com/2015/11/why-dont-we-just-pay-a-living-wage-to-mothers-and-other-carers/15383#sthash.nrgkTnJm.dpuf
Do not "calm down, dear!"
This matter is way to central to our lives and the lives of our children's children, to whom we, the adult worlds, owes a profound and ultimately liberating, nourishing responsibility.
