THRIVIVAL or mere Survival?

THRIVIVAL : A word I have created, and have been using for many years to describe the biological reality I have observed.

Survival as a word implies struggle, threat, risk and imminent potential of death.

Narrators of Nature Documentaries repeatedly use this term, not as scientists, but as a cultural meme. They claim to be scientific in their use of the word survival. The claim is false.

Natural communities THRIVE. The hunter hunts for but a little of their time. The hunted are hunted but for a little of their time. They do not spend the bulk of their time in aggression (hunter) or fear (hunted). Both are thriving most of the time. Natural communities THRIVE, and often in very large numbers... and their behaviour nurtures the world around them, way beyond their own species. This is both obvious and scientifically understood.

THRIVIVAL is thus defined as the state of existence, sets of behaviours and conditions  that nurtures more life for all life.

However, those who exert force or Power to control people are concerned with the use of force and control most of the time, for they know that as soon as they relax, those who are being controlled will break for freedom, in diverse emergent creative ways, urged on by their own biological calling towards optimal health. Power fears this calling.

Furthermore, those who use Power are in competition with others who would also use Power and Force to take over the position of Power. And so for them, they ARE concerned with Survival as a primary objective. They feel the threat is ever present, even when it is not. (most of the time the threat is non-existent: most 'ordinary people' have no desire to kill, murder, abuse those who have abused them, they mostly want the abusers just to stop and go away - that would be enough for most people, because we are biologically mandated towards empathic self organisation at the grass roots).

And the Power addicted always project their internalised view onto the world around them. The cultural projections of narrators speak to the conditioning which the narrator/writer has submitted to, internalised or assumed as normal, more than it describes the realities of nature.

Top predators, or those creatures who have are rarely hunted by others, who reside at the tops of food chains, tend to ensure the health of the communities they get their food from. Industrial Society has stepped out of this paradigm. And this disrupts the nurturant cycles of biology.

It is well past time to disestablish the 'Survival' meme, and to move towards THRIVIVAL.

And what a lovely journey, a fine destination that is.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Wonder, no wonder...

Here's a few recent thoughts uncluttered with world affairs and ongoing resistance and recovery...

Honesty is Science. When Scientific data is wilfully mis-interpreted, it ceases to be Science. You can quote me on that.

Here is Charity debunked, gracefully yet with such gorgeous vehemence!

          "True compassion is more than flinging a coin at a beggar; it comes to see that an     edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."
           -- Martin Luther King Jr.

What an elegant use of words, nothing wasted, each word full of meaning, of maturity and empathy.

I think of the amount of work, care, commitment, 'sacrifice' and energy the 'average' Mum and or single Mum's life; all that they do, to nurture, to stick with and submit to the reality of the child, to consistently assist a healthy child to grow up into a healthy human being, to pursue his or her own life in turn.  That ain't charity!
 

I often think on the un-natural poverty of Societal support for this most vital of human activities, this work of love, and of the willingness of some ideologists to isolate and identify 'single mums' as a 'problem', all too ready to dehumanise them by stereotyping certain lone parents as 'benefit scroungers'.

I think about the willingness of others, ideologists and propagandists and religious zealots, to assume to INSTRUCT Mums, quite often to go against the Mothers own deepest instincts and feelings...

These are not nice thoughts. The experience of those at the receiving end is many, many times worse. It's more than thoughts. It's lives.

The Bureaucratic fig leaf of 'parental leave' .. what a dull phrase that is in our lexicon. Such a small amount of time, given as a concession to the economy. How meagre! How cruelly efficient!

I was watching Kangaroo Dundee. A very busy man.

Yes, this man has become a 'Mum', albeit of adopted abandoned Kangaroos...  fluffy animals makes us coo. 

Men CAN mother.... when we really WANT to.

Benefits Addicted Mums make us scowl. Check the comments section when ever the Guardian ' Comment is Free' column starts a thread on this subject in response to some Government Minister pronouncing on the next 'plan' to deal with the 'problem'.

Yes, the public - actually, the wolf that calls itself the media, pretending to represent the public 'opinion' - will happily let the Government scowl at the Mum. As if it were ALL her 'fault'. Transferring the problem.

 
LOOK AT WHAT IT TAKES. TAKE IT IN. BE HONEST. 

THAT'S a work load. Huge amounts of all kinds of energy required. For a LONG time!

Especially during infancy. The slow segregation of Mother and Father into discrete 'roles' as full-time caretakers and breadwinners, separated from their extended  family and their community looks more and more like a culturally induced avoidance strategy. Conditioned slacking.

Irrespective of what primates may or may not do, our biology functions at it's best, in context, when the load is shared by a community of people who probably love each other to one degree or another. Oxytocin is a molecular expression of that reality.

Historically, - read the literature, don't take my word for it - Kings (and most Queens) never seemed to like the messy WORK of parenting.

We Industrialised Peoples live like Kings, in relative terms, with our gadgets, resources we use, land we use .... relative to biology, anthropology, culture.

It is that work, care, commitment and energy that is the core of a healthy functioning human community, it does take a village to care for a child, indeed all the children of the community, at optimum biological state. A village in a natural setting, naturally.

Until Motherhood/Fatherhood and community parenting are at the very core of this Society, informing it's long term decision making processes and behaviours, it will remain selfish in it's core psychology. And unsustainable.

And it doesn't have to be that way. 

We have brains.....

"The idea that the brain can change it's own structure and function through thought and activity is, I believe the most important alteration in our view of the brain since we first sketched out its basic anatomy and the workings of its basic component, the neuron.

The neuro-plastic revolution has implications for, among other things, our understanding of how love, sex, grief, relationships, learning, addiction, culture, technology, and psychotherapies change our brains.

All of the humanities, social sciences and physical sciences, in so far as they deal with human nature, are affected, as are all forms of training. All of these disciplines will have to come to terms with the fact of the self-changing brain and with the realisation that the architecture of the brain differs from one person to the next and that it changes in the course of individual lives.

While the human brain has apparently underestimated itself, neuro-plasticity isn't all good news; it renders our brains not only more resourceful by also more vulnerable to outside influences."

 
Norman Doidge "The Brain that changes itself"

We as people all have this capability, it is innate. And each of us needs an appropriate environment and experience for it's healthiest expression. We continually change and grow. Self healing. Solving problems. Then we die.

And what is innate in us, as individuals, must also be innate in a healthy functioning human community. Our optimum biological state. Where individuals live and die, and the community is sustainable over many millennia. Kinda state I'd love to live in.

How we get there is a very interesting journey.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Is/was George Osborne Bush The Third Evil?

I was asked this question.

"Is George Bush Evil?"

Not really. And this does not let him off the hook. Not a bit of it.

I think there's enough evidence to suggest that Institutions, which are rigidly hierarchical, and violent, and are populated by people, whose actions according to the Instituition's rules, using powers accrued to the Institution, have an adverse affect on many other people, then all those people become to some degree Institutionalised, or conditioned, more or less 'adapted' to a sick society.

And that this can lead to individual. group and mass culturally accepted adverse behavioural issues, related to fear, power and control, which become 'normalised' in the eyes of those growing up into it. What his or her parents, siblings and extended family and community do, how they behave, is the model the child observes, which the biology has mandated as fundamentally empathic in nature.. It's common sense.

Due to historical influences beyond our parents ability to avoid, we were born where we were born. No plan.

And in that situation this could happen to anyone.

Where we are born in this life is an accident of birth.

Fate, not that I subscribe to the idea, could not be so cruel to so many, for so long.

Our long gatherer-hunting-gardener history goes back 1.5 millions years minimum, probably way longer back in time... we don't really know.

As it happens, that history stands as a testimony to Homo Empathicus as a biologically sound organism.

Biologically speaking, not one of us was, at birth, expecting this Society - based on our biology, as in what our biology tells us we ought to be expecting for optimal health. Which is nature's way, after all.

Yet in a traumatising environment, and I see the Dominant Civilisation as a traumatising situation, one that is set in course and maintained by Power and Influence, where are the tools to prevent this cycle from being repeated? ..... for the benefit of all concerned?

It's not rocket science.

Judgements as to 'evil' I find to be self limiting. For me the criteria is 'does this action nourish the world in which it occurs?' Nature says 'does this work, in the present and in the future?' It's that kind of criteria ......

Without mitigating the human emotional realities of the trauma, this thought helps me to find for myself a balance. I understand the shock, rage, horror, revulsion .. the healthy feelings of a sensitive human being facing such adverse behaviour and outcomes. It hurts. It sears the psyche. Pain IS physical.

And yet I sense too that under the very personal as well as the Legal Institutional desire to punish, there is grief.

The ubiquitous urge for revenge, the hyper outrage, the almost religious judge-mentalism of peer pressure, where group identity is hardened, and which is fundamental to political strategy, all of these repeated patterns creates a protective skin, neural pathways habituated to that state, the need to control certain feelings (which contain key information which that person needs) masks amongst other things, a deep grief, loss, scars and fears ... and the urge to push it all away has to be strong, such is the pain of the grief. 

Making myths concrete serves to maintain this control.

That's not to say that the use of violence is not Institutionalised in Hierarchical Societies like ours in a quite conscious and intentional manner. Which is quite an 'evil' action to undertake....

It's all quite sad.

Especially with so much testimony to the natural intelligence and beauty of human birth, infancy and early development, so we KNOW what the natural happiness bench-mark is.

All the more reason, as a conscious adult, a mature human being to engage in looking for practical pathways through this life (a gift of nature) and through observing the lives of others, finding those actions and behaviours and other material realities that nurture that empathic nature our biology mandates.

That's a long game.With regard to people who engage in extremes of abuse through which they harm other people, children, communities, etc... there are aspects of the range of learned manipulative behaviours which are well developed in such harming people, as survival tools are generally, and in the case of abusive people, manipulation is the key tool to maintain control and mask the outcomes of the behaviour, with an inner coldness, outer charm/warmth and many more subtle characteristics. 

ALL these qualities are so at odds with the human biological mandate - homo empathicus - as to be biologically dysfunctional. What baby is born, with this in mind? None!

And the results when harming people like that organise, or build a structure, that structure will reflect their psychology, and if it is institutionalised, it makes the illusion that psychology as being the 'best' psychology more 'concrete', set in stone, so to speak.

Some folk call it '"The way it is.'" and they sigh. It does seem immense. Of course it does. It is.

The larger the organisation, empire the more people whose lives are affected in ways that disrupt the natural development of the natural human biological mandate - homo empathicus - . The more real it's self created myths, the wars they fight for peace, the stronger it's grip on the psyche of those who have no choice but to try to live through it.

The myths aren't real, of course. The myths are lies, and so the 'proof' is manufactured, war is intentional, business like and the cycles of violence continue. Institutionalised. Institutionalising all who come under it's sway.

Institutionalisation is a process that is, in and of itself, dehumanising. It's the de-humani-fication of interpersonal relationships, where everything is a matter of 'form'. Not so much formalities, as life limited by objectification, the key ingredient in Corporate Ideology.

An object is a 'thing', which can be manipulated, as cheaply as possible, so as to generate an outcome that profits the manipulator's boss. His or her owner. An object can also be discarded, Expendable. Fodder. 

Statistics and registers  can be used to turn people into 'things', separate objects, which are then manipulated and used by different factions to make spurious, and often opposing generalisations about how best to organise 'things', (without reference to the pathways the 'things' themselves might self organise, naturally .....). 

And whenever a faction is in Power, they impose their psychology on the people.

It's insane!

It can be VERY cruel and harmful.

Until someone says "Does it really have to be this way?"

And tries to answer it, through diligent yet not too onerous study, honesty and with an open mind and heart, and a healthy respect for scepticism.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Nurturant Biology

 'Natural Humans Beings' is one thing. Adapted to Oxytocin. Peace.

'Conditioned/traumatised Human Beings' is another thing. Adapted to Cortisol. Stress.

Each will give up a different emergent Societal Modality.

Or a spectrum of Societal Modes,

Egalitarian, Empathic towards ever more Hierarchially Violent.

Natural Humans Beings is one thing. Adapted to Oxytocin. Mother Child bonding.

Conditioned/traumatised Human Beings is another thing. Adapted to Cortisol. Stress. Indoctrination, War.

Nature undoubtedly tends towards resolution of problems. Oxytocin. Dopamine. Serotonin.

It's in our nature. It takes time.

The wounds are deep, and everywhere.

I TRUST the innate biology of myself, of all of us,
 
it has immense wisdom, bio-logic.
 
The natural self healing, the natural flow towards maturity and nurturing .....

is in everything alive! Or is alive in everything ....

...and

rather than instructions or explicit directions, 

I have found that supportive discourse does help the individual 

to make his or her own pathway, 

using their own inner resources 

and receiving those they may find on the path,

through meeting brothers, sisters, one's recognised family of life

... and seeing all paths connected,

as each path is itself interwoven with all life,

thus there is plenty enough for all to thrive.

And we ARE in it together.









Kindest regards

Corneilius

2013. A message not so much of hope, but of work to do, which if done will benefit all.

Today is Jan 1st 2013. 

I am a human being, a biological organism. That is my first identity.

We human beings are in the first instance biological organisms. We have emerged from the biological processes of life on Earth. We are part of those processes. We are defined by those processes. We are alive courtesy of those processes.

The biological processes of life tend to increase the fecundity and diversity of life. This is reflected in the behaviour of all natural organisms, and is the outcome of all natural biological behaviour. All these living processes are connected and interdependent.

It follows that healthy natural human behaviour is a part of this reality.

All unhealthy behaviour is at odds with this reality.

When we look carefully, scientifically and honestly at the nature of the mother child bonding process, we see biology operating from the molecular level to the level of discrete organisms in ways that nurture both mother and child, in ways that nurture true humanity as part of the biology of Earth. We also see that the father is nurtured in the womb. In the womb we learn some the lessons of nurture, and in early childhood.

Oxytocin is no accident. It is a statement of intent.

In the case of Oxytocin, the intent is to bond mother and child during the intensity of childbirth, in ways that support each as separate, individual and conscious beings, living and growing within a community, a community which itself exists within the biology of Earth. The intent is to establish self awareness and awareness of others, in such manner as to enable empathy, understanding, care and love for one another. To nurture is our nature.

In biological terms this makes perfect sense. We are imbued with sense, with sensitivity, both towards ourselves – self awareness - and to others, including all that exists within the habitat into which we are born.

What this means is that our environment will play a large part in our emergent development and behaviour.

This sensing of life enables us to understand and work with the living biological processes that govern life itself, in ways that nurture more life.

The urge to power has it’s roots in the disruption of those processes around empathy that are the biological expression of love and care. The urge to power is not a natural outcome of biology. It is the outcome of the disruption of biology. The disruption of the child mother bonding process is central to the continuation of the urge to Power.

Evolution is not random, nor is it a question of programming, as some geneticists would have it. Evolution is governed by the ability of any organism to respond to a changing environment; all habitats are subject to change, to fluctuations of their constituents, and be it a bacterium, a human being or a rain forest, so too organisms respond to those changes to maintain the biological processes of life.

Evolution is the resolution of problems that arise for organisms as the habitat and conditions of life change over time.

Inability to resolve those problems leads to a dead-end.

In nature immense or sudden catastrophic changes can and do make it all but impossible to resolve certain problems, for certain species, in certain situations.

For example, a volcanic eruption is lethal to all life within the reach of its immediate outcomes. Species local to that event may indeed be wiped out. Yet in the long term, the volcanic eruption releases more material that supports life, and the habitat that is lethally affected by the immediate outcome of the volcano is always repopulated over time by living organisms, and brought to life once again.

The urge of life is to create more life, to nurture more life.

However the urge of Power, as a process amongst human beings, is to nurture itself alone, to retain Power, always at the expense of all which falls under it’s influence, and in particular all that cannot be manipulated to meet the demands of Power.

The urge to Power is the result of an unresolved problem. The urge to Power always avoids natural resolution of the problem it represents, because the problem is fear. That fear is related to the loss of self empathy inherent in Authoritarian Parenting, which is the predominant mode of parenting across the Dominant Culture.

That fear that drives the urge to Power, the desire to exert so much control, exists because Power does not trust the processes of life; this is an outcome of unresolved trauma.

Nature always seeks to resolve problems and stands in direct confrontation with Power.

Bacteria learn about anti-biotics and can circumvent their use, because bacteria are problem solvers rather than problem creators. Likewise the natural mind and heart of the human being. We all know of stories of people who somehow see through the veil of conditioning, who survive great trauma and yet retain humanity, empathy and human kindness.

This is why Power seeks always to inculcate the children of those over whom Power has agency. Education by Power is not designed for genuine learning, it is a form of social conditioning, a question of programming prescribed behaviours based on the knowledge of how a traumatised person or child responds to a trauma situation that they cannot control.

This can take can take the form of Religion or Ideology or Fantasy (consumerism) and always reflects the psychology of fear. It seeks to inject fear into the heart of all those who fall under it’s agency. Fear of God. Fear of The Devil. Fear of Poverty.

And this process starts in utero, for the mother, living as she does within a pre-existing structure of Power, is  most often ‘informed’ by the dominant psychology of Power. Part of this ‘information’ comes from her parents and grand parents childhoods, and what they were conditioned to, and may have generated unresolved issues which were passed on, most often unwittingly. I feel that most parents do love their children, yet are limited by the degree to which each generation can resolve what they lived through.

And it’s clear that Power inhibits the resolution of these issues.

The fears of the mother, fears that are injected by Power, replace her confidence in her biological body, which ‘knows’ how to nurture, to give birth, to care for and relate to the child she has borne. This is also true for the father.

The fears of the community that survives under the influence of Power, fears that are injected by the situation that Power determines, replace the natural communities humanity, strength and beauty and reduces community to the necessities of mere survival.

To resolve the problem of Power is the central task ahead of us.

Paolo Friere suggested that the process of liberation is in fact a process of humanisation: he wrote that both those who exercise Power and those they oppress are equally dehumanised, and that the contradiction of the oppressed lay in the need to humanise those who exercise power as much as their need to break the chains that bind them.

He pointed out that attacking, killing, destroying the oppressor dehumanises the oppressed as much as the Powerful are dehumanised by their oppression. He called for a deeper analysis, a praxis of liberation that seeks to humanise the dehumanised.

Religion, personal salvation, the accrual of wealth at the expense of others, are all the outcomes of living within a dehumanising situation, where Power dominates relationships. They are usually related to the individual’s own mere survival, rather than the nurturing of all.

Spirituality, personal growth and the sharing of resources so that all may benefit are the outcomes of a fully humanising situation. They are inextricably linked.

And it is this that I work towards and with in my life.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Question Time : the BBC, the media and the past, present and future, with regard to all our children.

Seriously, it's time The Guardian and The BBC reported on WHAT IS KNOWN about child development, intergenerational and historical trauma, PROPER child protection at the very roots of Society in terms of full support for families (be they in poverty, dual working parents/childcare, in 'stress' or suffering themselves from intergenerational trauma or dealing with psychological distress of any kind).

IT'S 100% CLEAR THAT INSTITUTIONS CANNOT DO WHAT CAN BE DONE AT THE FAMILY LEVEL. THEY HAVE FAILED TIME AND TIME AGAIN IN THIS REGARD. CHURCH AND STATE.

BBC : SHOW THE DOCUMENTARY "WHAT BABIES WANT" AS A STARTING POINT.

GUARDIAN : PLEASE GIVE SPACE TO OLIVER JAMES, SUE GERHARDT, JAMES PRESCOTT, SUE PALMER AND OTHERS SUCH AS THE FOUNDERS OF THE NATIONAL COALITION FOR CHILD PROTECTION REFORM

Last night on the BBC's "Question Time" Thursday 15th November 2012 (Corby) the Politicians were questioned on whether or not the story of the abuse of children was eclipsed by the story about the BBC. IT was surreal to see them do exactly what the questioner was pointing out - they spoke about the BBC, about false allegations and said nothing meaningful or nothing that showed they had ANY scientific or common sense understanding of the issue.

Two comments were revealing - Chris Grayling's Freudian slip about "a clip around the ear!" when defending SECRECY concerning allegations made against a teacher.... and Tessa Munt's comments that she taught her children that 'respect must be earned' which sounded like respect for children must be earned by children, which is part of the old-school Empire traditionalist approach.

Respect from children is dependent on the children themselves being treated with respect AT ALL TIMES, at home and elsewhere. This they learn by example, as they do empathy, honesty, courage and so forth.

The fact that Tessa Munt did not clarify what she meant, given the seriousness subject matter, is typical of un-thought, sound-bite, politics.

... and when a Paediatrician spoke out, briefly, on Question Time, one could see the pain, the sheer frustration in that man's face in regards to what I wrote above.... he is not alone in this.. and he was more or less passed over - Dimbleby as chairman of the panel, could have asked him to expand a little, as he was the only one who spoke who seemed to have a grasp on the realities.... this omission is revealing.

Even the 'liberal' political mindset is trapped in the past and refusing to address the present and all the more likely to undermine the future. 

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Wrong Word : "Oi Paedo!"

Paedophile : is a technical term, and piece of misleading use of language.

More correct would be 'manipulative or violent (child/minor) focused sex attacker': irrespective of who is being attacked, the choice to attack, to manipulate, to predate upon the other, is always, always equally evil.

This choice is made  possible only when the other, the person is transformed into an object, is de-humanised.

‘OI!  PEADO!” - the unsubstantiated internet.gossip allegations being promoted with some vigour ....

This is human evil….. and the beginnings of yet more human evil, ‘oi peado!’, followed by an assault, based on what evidence?

"..... don't like the look of that individual!"? "I heard that...."? "It's on the internet!"

(as opposed to "I found direct links to proven evidence that stands up on the internet, and then I checked them....")

One might comment that those people that enjoy or seek pleasure in violence, manipulation or predation are more evil than those who perhaps behaving thus because they ‘are doing a job’.  Soldiers?  Vigilantes? Prison Officers? Police?

The Stanford Prison Experiment - The Power of the Situation to de-humanise ...

Is the line between either of these definitions really real? Does the person on the receiving end care more which side of the line their attacker is on?

Dehumanisation can also find expression in the way an agenda driven analysis might attribute negative qualities to chosen opponents, perceived ‘enemies’, as a way of undermining how others perceive them..

I don't think this is something we can leave to just one sector of Society.

This 'issue' affects us ALL! In real terms, in the lived experience.

The issue, as I see it, is not just one set of actions, by one particular group of people, but an entire spectrum of behaviours that are almost Institutionalised in full, in the social structures that have emerged from the current Dominant Statist Culture.

They might appear to be many individual states, yet there are only states, no 'nations' in the distinct sense of an aboriginal 'nation'. There is a trans national myth of social organisation that seeks infinite expansion in a finite world.

All of these sets of relationships, personal and Institutional, have been adversely  influenced by the Power, (which David Smail calls 'distal power' - power beyond the average person’s ability to affect) so that a majority of living relationships end up becoming Power Relationships.

Assault and sexual exploitation of children, or the murder of civilians, including children, by military, the willingness to really heavily harm another, or to kill to get one's perceived needs met,  as acted out by individuals or groups or Institutions.... these are extremes of that spectrum .....  of power relationships – as opposed to empathic relationships, a spectrum that ranges from close intimacy to the collective interactions that are expressed in healthy psychologically social, cultural, and organisational behaviours.

The other end of the spectrum of Power Relationships is, for me at this time, describable in a speculative manner, as a kind of starting point description:

So here goes: behaviour that may be the expression of social and experiential distress, and that has an adverse affect on others only because it appears or presents as petty bickering, jealousy, sullen-ness, sulk, mind-games, sexism, thoughtlessness and whole host of other variations on psychological distress languaging.  The person is unhappy. And needs support and help, appropriate attention.

In between we have a range of permitted behaviour that is expressed all too clearly in our history texts, our newspapers, our entertainments, notably, war, invasion, infinite growth empire/economies, militarised police FORCE, and 'non-permitted' yet fairly widespread organised violent crime (which in some cases is linked to wars pursued by Institutions of State), gang wars, organised group violence of any kind, domestic abuse, bullying.... it's all linked. Some is ‘good’ Some is ‘bad’.

IT’S ALL HARMFUL. EXTREMELY HARMFUL!

I think that to address one serious area of this harming dynamic one has to commit to  addressing the holistic image, the whole picture of a Dominant Culture in psychological distress  - to also see how this 'fits in' in a cultural sense.

This means to me that when I can fully humanise the victimiser, to fully humanise the survivor, not to excuse anything, certainly not to mitigate the trauma and what followed, and humanise what that MEANT to the survivor, the person who was victimised,  and to fully understand these events and what may have lead to them, in order to securely find a societal pathway to prevent further victimisation. This is not a single issue.

 Wherever it occurs. Starting with myself.

Let me address the behaviour, and see the human being as human, through broken, damaged and dangerous; part of my family.

One I must stop from any further damaging behaviour.

Can I see the 'enemy' as a human being, and not a monster. It makes it easier, I think, to look at the behaviour, to look at the experiences of people and assess what one finds, honestly.

It doesn't diminish the horror, the revulsion, the sheer visceral anger and shock we all naturally feel, up close to such behaviour - until we are de-humanised : that is what military training tries to do, certainly in terms of the 'enemy'. Veterans appear to 'get over it', mostly.

It doesn't mean not being angry, not feeling the rage, suppression. for me, it means choosing not to cause harm whilst feeling the anger, the rage, the frustration.

Fully conscious. Fully aware, Alive.

For me, this is all about the David Icke, Rense, Jones stable of publishing that hypes the horror, insinuates and alleges, and present no credible attributable sourced EVIDENCE for their claims,and worse, they rarely speak of the world of child development, trauma studies, intergenerational behaviour patterning, the study of the development of empathy and it's biological functioning, which it appears is our natural optimal.

Why?

Surely if there's proven evidence, then the two go together: if one is committed to resolving the issue.

The Institutionalisation of Power Relationships across Society, from violent abusers in 'care homes', 'prisons', 'schools', the office  bully, to warring states, the disruption of the child mother bonding essential to the development of empathy, as a socio-cultural structures is a crucial matter.

Address that and the rest will flow from there.

This is not to be taken to mean mitigating the needs of those being victimised or of Survivors. The two go hand in hand.

The latter being the more immediate need.

There is time then to deal with the former matter in depth, over time.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Power or the children's best interests?

If mothering was truly respected in our Society or Culture, and recognised as the central crucible of the psychology of the adult world, which it is, then the concept of a 'working mother' would not exist : mothering (and all parenting) would be seen and valued and understood as a primary, not a secondary activity, at the very centre of our Society..... or in other words, the children's welfare would be our primary Scoietal concern, in both the short term and long term.

The phrase 'the working mother' would be seen and be understood as an oxymoron.

The various Government initiatives to 'get mothers back to work' are not designed for the best interests of the children, the parents or our society : they are designed for the best intersts of 'the economy'. This always means the best interests of profit, power and great wealth.

Irrespective of peoples lack of knowledge, the degrees of social conditioning we all endure and the all too common reflexive, reactive objections to the central point I am raising, which others such as Sue Gerhardt and Oliver James and James Prescott have examined in great detail in their work, the fact remains that the psychology of the adult world is both revealed and perpetuated in how the adults relate to and treat children.

Adults whose natural needs as children have not been fully met will express that loss in many ways, not least in repeating aspects of the behaviour that lead to their own loss when they too become responsible for children, either as parents, or teachers or celebrities... and punishing them or 'correcting' them or nudging them is not the way forward.

Recent events demonstrate quite clearly that The BBC and The Vatican quite obviously do not hold the welfare of children at the centre of their deliberations, as is the case for many of the 'great institutions' of our Society...

It is the way Institutional Power is mediated to protect it's power and self image that most needs to change. David Smail pointed this out in a cogent essay, "there's no such thing as Society". Well worth reading.

I say this because the messages Institutional Power(s) transmit to parents are a huge determining factor in how parents organise their lives, and to date no Institutional Power has supported Natural Parenting to the degree our innate biological psychology demands, as to do so would lead to the demise of the POWER of the Institution. This is clear to any who examine their own lives, let alone the lives of the Powerful, with any degree of honesty and empathy.

It is the Power that is protected, time and time again. And that is a psychological immaturity. To see Power as more important than function is deeply dysfunctional.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

An open letter to the media, the BBC and all others concerned with the issue of child abuse, and in particular concerning the reportage of the Jimmy Saville case….

An open letter to the media, the BBC and all others concerned with the issue of child abuse, and in particular concerning the reportage of the Jimmy Saville case….

To whom it may concern,

The most frequent word being used to describe those who have been abused, harmed or assaulted by Jimmy Saville is ‘victims’, rather than the term ‘Survivors’ which we Survivors ourselves prefer to use.

There is a qualitative difference between the two words – one implies weakness, the other strength.

The etymology of the word ‘victim’ and its link to the word ‘victor’ is interesting, and worth reflecting upon. The victor tends to justify any abuses they perpetrate, or harm they cause, and thus they minimise the meaning of the lived experience of those amongst the ‘defeated’.

Yes, Saddam was a monster – yet did the Iraqi people deserve what was visited upon them by the International Community in the name of removing this monster?

Madelaine Albright’s infamous comment on the sanctions that preceded the removal of Saddam, was that “the price was worth paying – we think the price was worth paying.”  A price paid not by her, not by the US Government, or any other, not even by Saddam, but by the Iraqi people and their children.

There is also the use of the phrase “victim consciousness” which is often used to denigrate those communities and cultures who have been subject to massive and long term trauma and who come forward and seek acknowledgement of their stories as human beings, (rather than the simple and cold historical facts and statistics), from the inheritors of the Powers that traumatised them.

They are asked to ‘get over it’ – ‘ old history, not our ‘fault’, ‘things are different now’, ‘can we please move on’ etc etc….

These phrases are used to deflect honest reflection upon what has happened, and what the long term and present adverse affects are in meaning, and in the lived experience.

Vulnerability is not the same as weakness. One cannot describe the boys and girls assaulted by Jummy Saville as being weak, and ascribe that value of weakness to them as a quality they expressed that led to their abuse. One cannot in all fairness ascribe the value of weakness to those who suffer from the adverse affects of intergenerational trauma. Vulnerability is closer to the truth.

To Survive trauma and abuse most often means to live past the events themselves, scarred and wounded, and to slowly and painfully try to re-assemble oneself so as to continue to live as best one can.

Often this has to be done without adequate support or understanding from those closest to the Survivor, let alone the wider community and Society. This takes a formidable  unacknowledged strength.

Not all Survivors make it, and it’s not through weakness that this happens. It’s through vulnerability, and through that heart breaking sense of abandonment that comes with denial, that comes with the all too common reflexive unwillingness of Society to accept that a pillar of Society could behave in such manner, a refusal to believe the Survivor because it threatens the projected image and self image of what are held to be central tenets or solid Institutions of Society.

”How could someone who did SO MUCH GOOD do so much evil?”

A Survivor would never ask that question in the way the media has framed the reporting of that question. A Survivor would never ask it in that tone of bewilderment.
 The Survivors of Jimmy Saville's abuses are not concerned with the reputation of the BBC, as much as they are concerned with truth, recovery and restorative justice and the protection of present and future children.

So I am calling on all media, and anyone else concerned with these matters, to cease using the word ‘victim’ to describe those who were abused, and to use instead the word Survivor.To attribute strength to those who come forwards, and to those who are unable to come forwards, just for their willingness to continue living and coping with what they have been through.

I would also add that using the word ‘victimisation’ to describe the abusers actions towards the vulnerable is more reliable and accurate. The victimiser alters the reality of the abused. The victimisers is the culprit.

Finally, I note that in all of the reporting, the stories and histories of Survivors appears to be being screened out. This is a grave omission. It cannot, and must not stand if truth, justice and genuine resolution is the intent of those who are writing and acting on this matter. Kindest regards

Corneilius Crowley

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

The BBC and an Empathic Civilisation, from the cradle...

The roots of a genuinely humane and empathic Society are to be found in how we parent, as individuals, families, communities and Societies. Likewise the roots of a violent society.

PROTECT THE CHILDREN, NOT THE BBC

The psychology of any given family, community or society is both revealed and perpetuated in how that family, community or Society relates to and treats the children. Change that and you can change everything.

There is a spectrum of Societies ranging from egalitarian empathic to totalitarian violent, ans the best predictors of the evolution of either end of the spectrum, and everything in between is in how the natural child-mother bonding process mandated by our biology is either supported or undermined.

The biology and neuroscience of the natural development and utility of empathy as part and parcel of the human species adaptation to and position within a nurturing biosphere, one which incrementally increases environmental fecundity through the behaviour and action of all it's constituents, is quite well understood, yet Governments, Religions and Ideologies and many 'great Institutions' are consistently ignoring this data, because it is now amongst the greatest threats extant to their Power, their status and their image.

If the majority of people we aware of this data, and could both comprehend it and recognise aspects of it within themselves, based on their own visceral lived experiences, a primary source of information about the world, then Hierarchical Power which abuses those within it's 'mandate'  as we know it would soon fail, because inert compliance would not be forthcoming from such people.

The BBC has a role to play in this. Only we, the people, can create the pressure necessary for that role to be fulfilled in such manner that all our children's futures may be prepared for in ways that will guarantee the best possible outcomes for their lives.



Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe