What would Jesus Draw?

I would never have thought that being stranded in the centre of London, late in hours, by a Bus Strike, could be such a potent opportunity for reflection on matters topical.

As I traveled in the bus, I was thinking about ordinary folk in France, Iraq, Gaza, New York, Woolwich, in villages towns and cities around this Earth, when war comes knocking in the door.I meant knocking in. It is like that.

Wherever violence has been inflicted upon innocent civilians by warring parties, all sides irrespective of their ‘legitimacy’ will equally seek to justify that violence. At the beginning, throughout and at the end, and in their relative hagiographies/ History’s, and constantly re-enforced by their mainstream narratives, their myths. Our violence is 'good'. Theirs is 'bad'.

That act of violence from the perspective of the ordinary folk victimised in such atrocious manner. In the immediacy of that horror. Is always bad, very, very bad. and of course it is ignored. If it is mentioned, it is glossed over and an apology is issued. Sometimes compensation - shut your mouth money - is offered. Justice, never.

I considered the bus I was traveling in. What would we all feel if an explosive went off, or the bus was raked with bullets, attacking random innocents? I tried imagining the cascades of feelings, the terror, the fear, the confusion, the loss of hope, the panic, the shock that each and every person would in different ways be going through. And the pain. Utter horror. I shuddered as the bus rode on.

For each person, for every civilian harmed by violence the act is more than terrifying, it is physically horrifying, burning deep, deep into their very souls, their sense of self. To be so tortured and to see others in the same state, is for many, understandably an experience of utter helplessness. Hopelessness.

My thoughts were interrupted. The lights flicker,

The bus stops. We are at Oxford circus. The driver calls out “Last Stop! Last Stop” and flickers the lights. They go off. It’s 2.45am. I had left the event at 2.30am.

I thought “Great the journey is going well.”

“though it is late and I really need to get back home to get some sleep to be up, ready for some work at 10am…”

I walked around the corner to catch my second bus, for a 40 minute ride to where my home is.

I checked the time table and TFL on my phone. The timetable says the bus route is running. Bus in 18 minutes. Cool.

I fell back to my previous explorations of the meanings of that lived experience for those who go through it, and the consequences for their lives, and their relationships, and how it’s just not a part of the mainstream narrative on war and peace.

A huge part of the reality of both the Charlie Hebdo shootings and Falluja, of Nigeria and Boko Haram, of Chile in 1979, WWI and WWII and ….  and so on… the official history is littered with ‘great victories’, our broken lives are only of sentimental value, as ‘sacrifices’ for this cause, that flag, ‘our’ faith…

That my readers is a lot of trauma…..

Haven’t we had enough. already?

This is the appalling truth : the mainstream narrative reflexively, intentionally dilutes, sentimentalises, and compartmentalises the meaning of the lived experience of those who go through war-like violence inflicted upon them intentionally, arbitrarily simply because the violence was introduced as part of some politically driven  power struggle and that is the permitted narrative. People can side with one or the other – the meaning of the lived experience is taboo.

I noticed that my thinking was eating up the time… There was three of us at the bus stop, a few people walking in the street, frequent buses yet never the one I needed. I checked the time. It was 4pm.

“Oh dear!...”

Looks like this route is a strike route… I began to think on other options. Tube at 5.45am?  Walk to Trafalgar Square, Bus to Heathrow, Bus to home - two, possibly more hours?

I was looking at the street, imagining what it might be like to have a bomb go off or a shooting, seeing the debris, the damaged bodies, bits of bodies, people moving in shock. I shuddered. Horrible feeling.

Yuk!

How could anyone, anyone at all think on that and FEEL it’s meanings and not shudder, not wish to withdraw , not wish to prevent it, and how could anyone inflict THAT on innocent people?

The mainstream narrative, what some call ‘straight psycho-social reality’, ensures that what is understood by an ‘informed’ public, rather than the reality, populates and dominates all public discourse. Government routinely signals that it is un-moved by either protest or reasoned dissent. The violence continues on all sides.

The official Charlie Hebdo narrative ignores the meaning of the lived experience of one set of abused people, those who just happen to be born in  and live under the rule or ‘governance’ of their official enemies, and ignores the meaning of the lived experience those who just happen to be born in and live under the rule of oppressive regimes who are their allies. Gaza and Saudi Arabia.

This is 100% unacceptable. It is professional amoral brutal hypocrisy at every degree.

Under Rome, Reconciliation was process to 're consilo' - to bring back into the home, to return to the family of Rome (the abuser).

Vanquished Rebel Leaders would go through a ritual, where they would be publicly forgiven, welcomed back with a ritual embrace, and then ritually strangled. By the leaders suffering this, and new roman aligned leaders appointed from within the rebel community, no further reprisals would be taken against that community and the taxes would of course increase. An Heroic Sacrifice. Victor and Victim. These are the vernacular of Power. The Roman Empire was a business.

Same words, different meaning in the lived experience.

The hypocrisy of the language of power. Of ignoring the meaning of the lived experience of those upon whom such extremes of violence are inflicted. Of manipulating the lives of the dead, maimed, wound as part of a mainstream narrative,which is sectarian - "our power is good, theirs is obviously bad." when all power exercised in this way is equally amoral.

Our dead, maimed and wounded are ‘victims’, ‘sacrificed’, ‘heroes’, they are identified, given a back story. Their dead, maimed and wounded are ‘collateral damage’; they remain largely without identity. If their identity is used, it most often by Charities, seeking funding to apply expensive though most often useful sticking plasters to a sea of life threatening injuries and situations, caused largely by power psychology.

The only thing that’s true in the narrative is that there are dead, maimed and wounded everywhere. What that actually means, in each and every case, is besides the point.

The cruelty of this dominate narrative is horrific. Truly inhumane. Not healthy, at all.

The thread of violence is what weaves the Emperors clothes. You have to pretend that thread is something other than what it is, and that it shines, and exudes power and glory. That is the mainstream narrative.

By mainstream I include the news media, and I include as part of it all that core psychology of Power as a psycho-social narrative that has lived meaning.

The Naked Bully.

Not the naked ape.

The Bully. Learned behaviour.

And all the bully can think of is how to manipulate the lives of those who died, who were maimed, wounded and traumatised or who witnessed what took place in a small office in Paris, in ways that will enhance his or her power.

On all sides, they all do it.

The bully culture. 

There’s a man at the bus stopping acting strangely. He’s heaving these massive sighs, moving erratically, subdued shouts, dancing like a boxer.

“What time is it, and where is that bus?”

I gave up, and walked to the tube station. It was 5.15. The station doors open at 5.30, and at least I will be warm. 

The newspaper headlines are sickening. They miss the point. I read them only to understand how they are doing what they are doing, how people might be influenced by that and what is the best response to rebut all that?

I got home eventually for 7.55am. Yeah. Not a 40 minute ride. One line delayed as over night work over ran. Another held back for ages due to a ‘signal failure’.

Signal failure. That’s what the prevailing Official narrative on war, terror and reality is.

A massive signal failure.

An easy one to fix.

If one tells the truth without fear or favour. What would Jesus draw?

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

Free Speech is a Social and personal Responsibility, it is not a propaganda truism.

Free speech is a responsibility, and the primary responsibility inherent in free speech is to speak truthfully.

A healthy family, community or Society treasures honesty and fairness in all matters.

We have a personal and collective responsibility be honest and fair because we do live together and our action or inaction affects each other,and feeds into the future to affect lives of people as yet unborn.

This responsibility is a constant. It is a fundamental standard. It's the very essence of adult maturity.

Free Speech is a social and personal responsibility, a response ability; we must not let it be sullied by those who are turning it into a propaganda truism, with an ideological agenda.

The men who took their guns into the offices of a French satirical magazine and murdered those people showed nothing other than their own deep and ugly dysfunction. Their actions cannot be defended or qualified or 'explained away'. They are utterly wrong. They are extreme bullies. It was not an attack on free speech. It was an attack on humanity, on humane values and on innocent people. It was and is terrorism.

Yet one has to challenge the manner in which the idea of free speech being undermined by these attacks is being used as a tool to drive deeper divisions amongst the grass roots of Society and to mask the realities of State terrorism. It's not that simple.

When the mainstream media and Government can prove to me that they are speaking truthfully, then the concept of free speech might have some real material meaning and value.

When mainstream media and Government actively support Survivors of many kinds of abuse in their desire for justice and resolution, by releasing all the files they have on various matters, ranging from colonisation to pedophile rings operating within Institutions, corporate lobbying that finances political parties and influences their decision making for commercial purposes, through to covert military operations, torture programs initiated and maintained by Governments and much else besides, then free speech might have some meaning.

As it is, people's emotions are being intentionally manipulated into supporting a false meme, into portraying free speech as an active process that defines this so called ' Western Democracy' as practiced by Power, which is, if we are honest enough to admit it, the deliberate propaganda of a power structure that is willing to exercise extreme violence to retain, enhance and expand it's power over people and land.

It is blatantly obvious that 'Free Speech' in this context is of the same calibre as 'Bringing Freedom and Democracy' on the backs of a Military invasion, when it comes to how Power actually operates.

Ask the Survivors of the Parliamentary pedophile ring, of Jimmy Savile where their free speech was, when they reported crimes committed upon their minds, bodies and souls, to UK Police forces, and were dismissed, ignored or intimidated.

Ask the young women of Rotherham where their free speech was when they reported crimes committed against them?

Ask the Iraqi relatives of the 350,000 children under the age of 15 who died extremely violently in Iraq between 2003 and 2006 how their free speech was nurtured by the 'bringers of Democracy' and the Western media.

350,000 Children who died in 'counter insurgency' initiated by the occupying powers, after they had annulled local elections held successfully all over Iraq in late 2003 and early 2004, once Saddam and his power structure was deposed, a counter insurgency which was aimed at destroying Indigenous multi-cultural Iraqi Nationalism, which produced the successful elections that undermined the occupying powers unspoken intent. A counter insurgency that traumatised an entire country, and from which the likes of IS have emerged.

Ask the aboriginal peoples around the world where their free speech or their cultures and land tenures that pre-date the creation of State systems are being respected.

It must also be said that deliberately goading someone, in order to stimulate their anger is not free speech, it is antagonism; just as the antagonised violently attacking someone who has goaded them is not free speech.

Both are equally irresponsible and avoidable actions. Neither is driven by a real need, in human terms.

Those who antagonise others with an ideological agenda behind it do not deserve violence served against them. They need help. They need to be confronted with the negativity of their behaviour through rational and honest discourse intended to nurture understanding.

The appropriate human response to any abuse of free speech must be honesty, clarity and fair mindedness, not violence.

Those who would stoop to violence to get their way, to serve their agenda need to be exposed and stopped from being bale to act out their violence. I doubt that there is much that can be done to help those who are truly predatory, mercenary or professionally violent.

Such violence is psychologically immature.

The intentional manipulation of peoples emotions is predatory.

Do not fall for it.

Think For Yourself, Question Authority.

Don't make it up. Be honest and fair, above all else.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

Pedophlia, Hierarchically Violent Societies and Political Attack memes.

Pedophilia is a part of a set of behaviours associated with dysfunctional Power Relationships within Hierarchically Violent Societies.

20th Century Indian Residential School in Canada - hierarchical, and violent 'child care'

 Child Abuse cannot be examined in isolation from the culture within which it takes place, or on it's own as some separate human flaw, with any degree of accuracy.

Paedophilia  should never, ever be used  as a meme or leverage point to attack the current status quo of power, as a political lever.

Instead we must work to understand it as a dynamic trait, as expressing the essence of intentional abuse of a power disparity, expressed through sexualised violence.

To use CSA as a political attack meme targeting one group among many, as we see deployed with online conspiracy narratives. undermines the work of Survivors, their advocates and their communities  everywhere.

Demand accountability, everywhere, equally. Demand prevention, at it's very roots.

Pedophilia cannot be understood without examining the psycho-social context within which it happens.

The problem of abuse of Power pollutes human relationships across all sectors and levels of any and every Hierarchically Violent Society.

From the organised rape of children to local extortion, from War as a tool of State Policy to Pimping, from FGM and MGM to Guantanamo Bay Detention, from Bhopal to Fracking, from Domestic Abuse to Ad Hominem attacks within discourse, the central issue is the same..

A psychology of Power that ignores the costs born by those who are most adversely affected by the exercise of Power over others. A psychology of Power that uses distraction to avoid the truth. A psychology of Power that claims an exclusive right to use violence. A psychology of Power that determines that indoctrination is an essential component of maintaining that power.

The issue is coming forwards in part because there is a growing understanding of this situation, not least as an outcome of Survivors testimony, brought before the public domain with great courage and determination from Survivors of organised sexual exploitation of children, to Survivors of State torture, from Survivors of colonisation and invasion to survivors of domestic abuse,  and many more besides.

And also because the best research in Anthropology, Neuro-biology, Neuro-Chemistry, Child Development, Optimal Human Biological Health, Permaculture, Psychology, Endocrinology, Honest History and Survivors insights all point in this direction.

When the natural bio-logically mandated processes of nurture are disrupted, pathology ensues.

This applies equally to the individual and to the society within which the individual lives.

It cannot be used to excuse or mitigate abusive behaviour, rather it must be integrated into the understanding of the situation as part of the process of an accurate recognition and description of the problem and in time, the resolution of that problem.

This is, in effect, the unspoken central plank of all single issue activism. The one understanding that must underpin all activism that seeks to be both effective and meaningful. Without this, healthy activism is lost in the rough and stormy seas of ideology and 'debate' with people taking sides and 'arguing' for their side rather than attempting to openly and honestly get to the truth of the matter in order to plan approaches that prevent further abuses, that mediate the harms caused, and that lead directly to much more healthy, functional and nurturing social organisation.

___________

A chart of social behavioural characteristics of different kinds of aboriginal cultures...

https://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Profiles_Peaceful_v_Violent.pdf

This chart outlines some of the results of a survey of 49 different societies carried out by James Prescott, Phd in the 1970s and notes a correlation between Hierarchical Violence as a social 'norm' and incidents of abuse and the degrees to which child-mother bonding and other empathy learning experientials mandated by our biology are disrupted. The greater the disruption, the more violence and abuse is seen in any given society.

Further research in Anthropology and in a number of other scientific disciplines as mentioned above, and referenced throughout this blog (and there is so much more than the limited amount that I have referenced) corroborates Prescott's insights.

The way in which Power Institutions have sought to 'manage' the revelations of Survivors of child abuse within areas under direct control of those Institutions demonstrates both a lack of caring empathy and a wilful mendaciousness that most people at the grass roots of Society, and many activists, find difficult to grasp or truly understand.

In very simple terms, if one grows up in an environment where low level bullying is seen as being within normal ranges of behaviour, it's that much more difficult to see the behaviour for what it really is - a dysfunctional pathology that has a root cause that, even as it is socially masked, is tractable, that is to say it is an problem that can be resolved.

There is a lot of anger as a reaction and response to inequity, to abuse and violence, of course there is, and most of it is understandable and justifiable, yet we need much more than anger to address the issues we are faced with; we need an accurate understanding of how such behaviour emerges, what kinds of social conditions underpin such behaviour, how it can be stopped where it is discovered and what kinds of social relations will serve to break the cycles of this kind of behaviour, which has to be the ultimate aim of all activism : prevention of further abuses, nurturing healthy human relations in all areas of concern.
 
We also need to understand how Power, by triggering anger and rage in the grass roots, through media reporting, conspiracy theories, the 'blame game' and suppression of Survivors who come forwards to testify as to their experience,  is deliberately influencing what we are attempting to do as activists in order to co-opt and undermine the emergence of solidarity across the grass roots of Society.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

Activism : keeping it human and humane.

Keeping it Human and humane.

The questions before us all as we move into 2015, unexplored time as yet, a future we have some plans for, a future that is certain to contain challenges, set-backs, discoveries, new experiential learning’s, insight and much else besides that is the stuff of life, will remain questions that are largely concerned with optimal human biological health.

Be it ‘the Economy’, ‘The War Against Terror’, ‘Austerity’, The Environment, or any number of other serious problems current in today’s world, there are two generalised approaches open as we seek the answers to the problems facing ‘ordinary’ human well being.

The first approach, which currently dominates the way Governments and other power Institutions behave, which is associated with adversarial political alliances and far right/religious based political action and mainstream media is largely ideological – that is to say it is coming at the problems with a sense of ‘destiny’ that seeks to impose a certain value system upon the people, irrespective of the adverse outcomes for many people, and as such is void of the concept of optimal human biological health, which is quite willful.  

It is the systems ‘health’ that dominates this discourse. And by this I mean to say that it is the status, power and ability of the system of power to project itself into every area of our lives that is considered the ‘health’ of the system. If a majority appear to do ok, and a minority are oppressed, that’s the ‘price’ that power deems acceptable.

In as much as this approach reflects systemic thinking and tends to ignore, deny, dismiss, misinterpret or obfuscate on any area that exposes the ideological values as being hypocritical whereas the lived experience tells the truth, this approach tends to compound pre-existing problems, thus making matters worse. Lacking empathy it tends to make things worse as it shores up the failings of Power as a modality for human relationships and a caring community.

The second approach, which is emergent from peoples lived experience and it’s meanings, is empathic – in that we seek to understand a problem at it’s true roots, from inside the lived experience, taking into consideration what it is like to be that person or community going through that experience and clearly identify that which is truly unacceptable and to confront Society with that as the basis of it’s challenge.

“Enough! This (whatever experience is being described) must cease because the pain in the lived experience is unacceptable. It cannot be called a ‘price’ for some which then assumes a ‘gain’ that has value for others.

When the peoples trauma, pain and distress is so intense,  that in and of itself ought to be enough reason to cease whatever it is that is causing that trauma and pain, immediately. No ifs or buts.

The second approach takes optimal biological human health as its base, because that speaks to the lived experience, the ‘real’ real world.

The second approach allows that resolution of that confrontation will be a matter that develops, once the abuse of power has been stopped in it’s tracks, that cannot be imposed or predicated by ideology, because it is a response to an immediate situation that will also clear a learning ground that comes from each of us, as individuals and as communities as we tell our stories in all honesty and gain insight.

The material answers will emerge from honesty, and nothing else, because it is through acknowledging the truth we will set ourselves free to act as humane beings in a difficult situation, and this process will be all the more creative in the sense that the drivers of the solutions will be the people ourselves, and our own emergent sense of who we are, what we share, as we acknowledge an awakened sense of each other as people.

Whilst recognising who we are as people in experience will be a commonality, I expect to see a natural diversity that fine tunes solutions to local conditions.

That way the differences of Religion, language, currency, typography become irrelevant because they are not the problem.

The problem is abuse of Power: within that the co-opting of natural differences, natural cultural variations and so on by power in order to generate oppositional, adversarial behaviours at the grass roots, and the horrific outcomes for those people who are most adversely affected by such division and other abuses of power that are amongst the symptoms.

Charity aimed at symptoms is no longer a valid response on its own.

This must be articulated, again and again, in clear terms.

Irrespective of creed, ideology, skin colour, language we all bleed red. We all hurt in pretty much the same manner. And the solutions to the problems we face must reflect that understanding above all else. That must be at the very core of our activism.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

Herod, Christ and the Evolution of Empathy.

Jingle Bells, and all that - 'tis Christmas, a time of good cheer to all men.

Logos of the companies exploiting parents and children to make profits whilst polluting our Earth home.

So here's a thought I present as a present to all readers.

Survival is not the same as Thrivival

These are two images I have crafted express the difference I sense that lies between thriving as a human community and merely surviving. Modern consumer culture is clearly not thriving, and it is close to not even surviving. Egalitarian cultures have thrived for many, many tens of thousands of years across this Earth. I know which state I would prefer we were living in. It is possible to live well, to be comfortable and truly happy as a community, to thrive without causing intense damage to our shared habitat. It is not thriving to live comfortably, worried, stressed out, dimly or acutely aware that we are causing irreversible long term harm and irredeemable short term harm.

"Survival of The Fittest" is in reality a meme created by the philosopher, economist, sociologist, writer and  academic, Herbert Spencer, in a book he wrote, Principles of Biology,  after having read Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection: Or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life  which Herbert, and the majority of his class took to reflect their cultural assumptions in regard to their comparison between African, South American, Asian and Indian cultures and the White European Imperial culture from which the Industrial Revolution and their wealth and status emerged. Spencer was a white supremacist seeking to justify his stance.

It became a common re-interpretation (misinterpretation)  or re-positioning of Darwin's central thesis, and was never used by Darwin in the manner most commonly attributed today, aka that the strong (the most favoured races) naturally prevail over the weak in 'The struggle for Survival' - a phrase so beloved of Malthusian enthusiast David Attenborough and others less savoury, whose sense of the phrase is probably better articulated in the term 'might is right': people such as George Bush, Dick Cheny, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Jimmy Savile and others.

Darwin first used Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" alongside "natural selection" in the fifth edition of On the Origin of Species, published in 1869, intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment"

Darwin was referring to the evolution of life enhancing traits in response to environmental changes, which he observed in some detail.

It turns out that empathy is one of those traits or capabilities that has emerged in the human organism, as well as many others, as a life enhancing trait that facilitates and sustains long term existence really, really well.

Optimal Human Well Being is an Evolved Default.

Empathy, and indeed love, lies at the base of both effective co-operation and accurate responses to environmental changes. It is a bio-logical mandate.

It is also true that this behavioural trait is vulnerable, and under chronic stress can be undermined. The architecture is genetic, yet the development of active empathy is experiential, it is cultural...

Some cultures are more empathic, egalitarian, others are hierarchically violent. James Prescott's research reveals this dynamic spectrum and shows a correlation  between egalitarian societies who demonstrate high nurture of babies, infants and children, and hierarchically violent societies where typically there is a disruption of biologically mandated child mother bonding processes.

Sarah Blaffer Hrdy is another diligent researcher who has looked deeply at the evolutionary biology of the egalitarian cultural human. 

Her work has been presented in books such as The Woman that Never Evolved, selected by the New York Times as one of its Notable Books of 1981, Mother Nature: A History of Mothers, Infants and Natural Selection, chosen by both Publisher's Weekly and Library Journal as one of the "Best Books of 1999" and, her latest, Mothers and Others: The Evolutionary Origins of Mutual Understanding.

Hrdy has challenged, and transcended, many of the flawed assumptions that biologists have held dating back to the Victorian era. It is a body of work that continues to provoke and inspire a new generation of scientists..

Her key insight is that alloparenting - where parenting was a task distributed throughout the group - was a key shift in pre-hominid primates, and in early hominids that drove the evolution of a larger brain, the brain that can manage the detail of layers of co-operative relationships, that can manage self regulation that is required for peaceful, effective conflict resolution and bond building over generations.

Disruption of the biological default for optimally healthy behaviour changes behaviour.

Which is the logic or reason why torture (topical subject these days) and politically and ideologically based economic pressure upon vulnerable communities and people remain consistently utilized  tools of Hierarchically Violent Power - the bullies understand the effect, and it's utility.

Herod and Christ, and the people they have been portrayed as.

I am not at all religious, nonetheless I find their stories instructive. The crucifier and the crucified.

What was Herod's childhood like? We can only guess!

But we do know something of Hitler's infancy and childhood, as we do of Pol Pot, George Bush, Tony Blair, Stalin and many other leaders who exercised power that deployed massive organised violence and caused untold harms to largely innocent people (Herodianesque) and none appeared to have had the kind of nurturing experience that would have laid the foundation for caring empathy.

Alice Miller's book 'For Your Own Good'  touches on this subject, with regard to Hitler, Stalin and 'traditional parenting' in European culture, and is a classic in this regard.

No excuses, yet understanding the roots is essential.

This is not to suggest they - Hitler, Stalin, Bush, Cheny and any other abuser - are thus excused from accountability and responsibility for their actions and the harms and consequences imposed on others by their actions. Far from it, as there are many examples of people who had dreadful childhood experiences who emerged to become kind and caring adults.

It is to suggest that there is a way to understand, and thus prevent the abuses of Power we see as a fundamental pattern of what is known as 'civilisation'. And that lies in how we parent, how we as a society related top and treat our children, and the most vulnerable people within our Society.

Abuse and bullying are, at heart,  cultural problems. Some cultures avoid those problems by the way in which they parent and relate, others do not. The choice is ours, as we have the information, and the responsibility.

The choice is yours. It is mine.

Let us all make that choice as our daily Christmas present to ourselves, our families, our communities and our culture.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Thank you for reading this blog.

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received

https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius .mp3 Songs

https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous .wav Songs

https://www.corneilius.net - Archive

Questions every social worker, every civil servant, every carer and every parent (to be or active) ought to wrestle with

There is a genuine need to protect society from some people whose behaviour is dangerous,  by incarceration, and  not as a 'punishment' or ‘revenge’ or 'paying the price' but as a safety of the community measure, and this must be done as humanely as possible.

There is also a need to see where rehabilitation can be efficacious, and what best facilitates this.

Abuse does not answer abuse, and violence tends to be cyclical......I have NEVER come across a Survivor who would urge violence against abusers.


It horrifies me the way Survivors voices and insights are brushed aside by people who claim to be supportive yet also declare they'd be happy to 'hang 'em'.... those people are making life for Survivors harder rather than easier because they are clouding the discourse with their rage and hatred.

I do understand that there are reasons why so many people react in this manner.

Social conditioning, inter-generational trauma behaviour patterns .....

How many people were flushed with stress hormones whilst in the womb?

How many mothers are subjected to stress by external events?

How many fathers have been trained to be 'tough'..?

How many men return from war, with wounds they mask, that their children are affected by?

How does chronic stress (12 years of schooling, relative poverty, religious indoctrination) alter the growing child, in schools, where bullying, peer pressure and submission to authority are constants?

These are not excuses for adverse behaviour, but an attempt to understand that dynamic that flows through time within Hierarchically Violent social systems where Power has a massive influence on peoples lives, and the emergent psychology of society, at the grass roots.

How many 'leaders' learned bullying as a power transaction in private boarding schools?

Is Social Services, as a State Institution, concerned with regulation over healing?

These are all questions EVERY social worker, every civil servant, every carer and every parent (to be or active) ought to wrestle with... as by taking that role on, they also take on a response-ability to those the intend to serve, and more so to the children yet to be born from those they serve....

Where is the nurture?

And importantly, the question of what best represents optimal human biological health must be tackled with a back ground in science, anthropology, history and personal growth..

These are the questions that Survivors have had to answer in their path towards resolution.

The State has yet to step up to the plate on this, as is the case for the mainstream media.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

The Pedophile Next Door : C4 'Documentary'? I don't think so!

I watched the 'documentary' , The Pedophile Next Door, yesterday, and I thought it was more about 'normalising' pedophilia as a genuine biological sexual attraction, than anything else.

Here is what C4 says : "This brave and thought-provoking documentary sets out to discover why legislation to protect children from sexual abuse has failed, and explores radical and controversial alternatives"

It does none of this.

It does not deal with the failures of reporting, policing or the cover-ups we know have taken place, orchestrated by Powerful Institutions to protect themselves.

Within the first ten minutes, the program quoted dubious research and then made the claim that pedophilia as a sexual orientation 'probably' emerges from brain damage within the womb. 

a) This is speculative theory at best

b) Child Rape is not a sexual orientation. It's a devious and abominable criminal act.

The inclusion of that meaningless theory is willfully missing the point.

It's the action taken that harms a child that is the issue, nothing else.

In terms of prevention, it ignores the reality that authoritarian parenting AKA traditional parenting, sets child and adult against each other, the former to seek autonomy and freedom, the latter to curtail the child's freedom based on false fear and authoritarian 'rights' and that this 'style' of parenting's origin lies within the Judeao-Christian tradition with it's hierarchical and judgemental ethos.

In terms of prevention it ignored Mandatory Reporting as an immediate legal necessity.

In terms of prevention it ignored solid research that links childhood trauma, stress and abuse with dysfunctional adult behaviour, research that suggests that parenting counselling and relationship counselling in Schools could prevent abuse by helping parents maintain close and open communication with their children - it is when this is not present that pedophiles knowingly groom children. Even within a single family.

In terms of prevention it ignored the reality that current sentences handed down by courts, for sexual assaults and violence against children, are way inadequate.

In terms of prevention it ignored the deceitful and intentional manner in which powerful institutions have sought to, and continue to attempt to protect themselves rather than the children.... as in the current non-going inquiry into pedophile rings within Political power circles...

Some more thoughts after sleeping on it.

The program ignores issues such as Mandatory Reporting, the adverse affects of Traditional Authoritarian Parenting, the adverse affects of Religious Indoctrination, the validated research that shows that sexual abuse is a social behavioural marker of Hierarchically Violent Societies; the program does not confront the intentional manner by which powerful institutions have sought to protect themselves rather than the children... a behaviour that is still extant.

All of which I covered above, though it is the case that all this needs repeating.

It ignored the lack of training of police and other services in how to deal with Survivors. Rotherham.

In the 80s a massive 'scandal' occurred when it emerged that state run foster homes were rife with child abuse. Thousands of children were victimised by hundreds of adults. What the Government did was arrange to have a few abusers sent to trial, and then closed down the entire system, thus freeing many hundreds of abusers from further investigation, and destroying evidence. A cover up.

And of course, those who were victimised were abandoned.

When all of these points have been dealt with in the manner they demand, then perhaps we can go back to the issue of people who find they are sexually attracted to children and have not acted on their 'attraction'.

Being sexually attracted to children? FFS!

Being sexually aroused by a weaker, more vulnerable non adult person? Is that not indicative of a core power psychology issue - is the attraction more a question of maintaining a position of relative power?

This is a question that is valid and is not addressed.

And the program had very little to say on preventing anything other than peoples ire at pedophilia in general.

The 'cause' is not in the attraction - that's way in the background. And I say this - any adult who cannot control themselves when it comes to this kind of behaviour is 100% responsible for that lack of control.

The 'cause' is in the details of why one person with more power would assault and manipulate another with little relative power.

Which is THE primary issue facing Western 'Civilisation' across the globe as we speak. The willingness to abuse Power and to justify the abuse of other more vulnerable people.

Now let me address the self declared pedophile, Eddie.

We need more information. We have only his word, and his absence from the Criminal Records Bureau to confirm that that he has not offended. None of which is proof positive. I am not accusing him. I am saying the program does not present anything that confirms his claims.

We have his claim that he is sexually attracted both to women and to young children, as young as five.

Can this be checked in any way?

Who is he, what is his background?

We need more, much more detail as to his acknowledgement of his 'attraction' to small children.

Are there diaries where he records his concerns?

Has he ever spoken to anyone of these concerns, professionally or otherwise, who can corroborate his claims?

Why has he emerged? How did the program makers find or make the connection with him?

Is he in counseling at present?

What is his claim truly representative of?

Can we interview any of his adult partners? What do they have to say?

Is he genuine?  How did the program makers test his case?

I do understand that any adult who feels such an attraction will feel a certain jeopardy, will be inclined not to acknowledge it to others out of a reasonable fear that such an acknowledgement might lead to action against him that would hurt him, or cause him harm. I also acknowledge that to come out with this is, to a degree, courageous. It would be more courageous for him to submit to analysis and to undergo therapy to address the issue. Tackle the issue head-on.

That he has not is worrying. Does he feel that his attraction is somehow valid, even if he refuses to act on it, out of a moral consideration?

Was he paid for his 'appearance'?

There is too much in this program that is questionable, too many unanswered questions. It does nothing for Survivors, and it does nothing in terms of a robust examination of the failures of both legislation and Government services in terms of reporting, investigating and confronting child rape.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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

Politics, Arguments, Debates and Institutionalised Emotional Blindness

Politics, arguments, debates and the abdication of responsibility.

The Power Inquiry Report 2006.

If you have not heard of it, then I suggest that you need to know more about it. We all need to read the report and understand it's full implications, not least because it emerged from the grass roots, rather than a think-tank. And it challenges a number of assumptions about the ability of grass roots folk to engage with shared responsibility, robust governance and detailed policy deliberation.

The Power inquiry, an independent investigation into the condition of democracy in Britain, was set up in 2004. The members of its commission (chaired by Helena Kennedy) hosted meetings around Britain and heard submissions from a wide variety of interest groups, professionals, and concerned citizens. The commission published its report on 27 February 2006.

"After eighteen months of investigation, the final report of Power is a devastating critique of the state of formal democracy in Britain. Many of us actively support campaigns such as Greenpeace or the Countryside Alliance. And millions more take part in charity or community work. But political parties and elections have been a growing turn-off for years.

The cause is not apathy. The problem is that we don't feel we have real influence over the decisions made in our name. The need for a solution is urgent. And that solution is radical. Nothing less than a major programme of reform to give power back to the people of Britain..."

Examine it.

D. Cameron, E. Milliband and Menzies Campbell paid lip service to the report and initiative at the time. Cameron said, in public, and it's on video, that The Power Inquiry was the 'most important initiative in Democracy in the UK' in a long, long time.

I was there. I heard them speak and mouth hearty support for the report, as they stood and spoke before the assembled crowd of more than 500 people. 

Less than a week after attending the launch of the report, at a conference in Queen Elizabeth Hall, Parliament Square, after praising it during that weekend conference, after saying how important it was, after speaking about it in glowing terms to the attendees, they dismissed it as 'impractical.'

'Impractical'? Well, yes. Ceding power to people is always 'impractical' to the Ruling Class.

Here's an outline of the recommendations:

http://www.lgcplus.com/give-citizens-power-to-make-laws-urges-inquiry/513437.article

Here's the full document, PDF download, very much worth a reading.

http://www.jrrt.org.uk/publications/power-people-independent-inquiry-britains-democracy-full-report

Power without accountability or shared responsibility is always going to be a serious problem, and open to abuse.

Quite a lot of the comments flying around about Russel Brand, UKIP, and politics in general are antagonistic 'debating' style, rather than mature deliberation or critical analysis. Trying to win or batter the other side down as opposed to learning enough to develop a win-win solution.

What's that phrase they use about the Court system?

Adversarial.

I find that appalling. An abdication of responsibility. Politically immature. Psychologically immature. An adversarial Parliament is immature, and unworthy, easily corrupted - a collegiate parliament would be mature and worthy and would repel corruption.

Because the issue of power and legislation is really about us, we, the people who form the community and how we work together (or not) to create a society that nurtures, that cares for the vulnerable.

The issue is about relationships based on kindness, rather than power.

Healthy discourse is about sharing, exploring and growing together.

Debate is about power, it's about who wins.

The Power Inquiry emerged out of the Community Voluntary Sector, which has decades of providing services at the local community level, dealing with amongst other things : finances, governance, research, best practices, transparency, service provision, understanding their 'clients' needs, overcoming institutional obstacles, overcoming Institutionalised Emotional Blindness, campaigning, fund raising, discourse on policy formulation and much else besides. These are real life skills.

It was these people that David Cameron's BIG SOCIETY was aimed at, as a direct institutional assault. And it was their clients, the vulnerable who suffer doubly as a result.

And it's working.

Speak to any disabled people currently being denied benefits on the false basis of 'austerity'?

Use your voice to nurture the active grass roots, as well as to chastise the powerful.

In another comment, elsewhere, I pointed out how appalled I was at the sniping that is so common.

Instituionalised Emotional Blindness. There's something here for everyone to consider.

The immaturity of the debating style of the discourse, as opposed to an effort to share, learn and grow in order to create a more nurturant society.

An abdication of responsibility. It's really quite ugly.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."

This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.

Thank you for reading this blog.

https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received

https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius - .mp3 songs

https://www.corneilius.net - archive

https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous - .wav songs

It's always worth studying leaders childhoods to see what patterns emerge.

artwork by Nikolai Kozin, London

It's fairly obvious to anyone who studies behavioural bullying the psychological projection and disassociation in David Cameron's public speeches about war, DAESH, Libya, and terrorism in general.

For example, on the kidnap and murder of three Israeli teens which became the pretext for the most recent Military assault on Gaza.

'This was an appalling and inexcusable act of terror perpetrated against young teenagers. Britain will stand with Israel as it seeks to bring to justice those responsible.'

But when have Obama or Cameron ever condemned the killing of Palestinian youths or children by Israelis in this vehement way? (from medialens.org)

There are parts of his psyche, formed from the experiences of his early infancy and Eton etc, that he has shut away within himself - the wounds accrued from fagging, the violence, the bullying, the hatred, the submission and affiliation with the more powerful 'inmates' and the cultured arrogance that he dare not admit to himself, let alone to the public, yet these experiences live within him, unresolved, unhealed and he projects them onto others so that he can 'manage' his own wounded feelings, his wounded sense of self.

He will say today that that experience was 'formative'. Many of his ilk do likewise. "It made me the man I am!"

To survive in this environment, the psyche of the child has to become deeply manipulative, and his behaviour, along with the behaviour of the established press, which is governed largely by ex-public school alumni, in the recent Scots referendum on Independence shows this quite clearly. When this psychology emerges in a Political leader with real material power to inflict harm, it becomes incredibly dangerous.

Likewise with regard to Obama and his early childhood. Adolf Hitler. Take your pick.

It's always worth studying leaders childhoods to see what patterns emerge.

This is not to offer any of those who exercise power and wage war an excuse - it is rather to attempt to gain an understanding of why they behave as they do, to outline a reliable grounded evidence based description of the cultural social psychological backdrop within which such a dysfunctional psychology emerges in statistically significant numbers.

It is to inform and to help parents at the grass roots of society and elsewhere to regain empathy for children, and not least for themselves as children growing up in such a culture, as a social movement that leads to the emergence of empathic power as a shared and caring sense of responsibility towards each other. As a basic marker of biological human biological health.

European culture has been on this trajectory of slowly recovering from this trauma cycle for some centuries, and it will take some more time to complete the process. This is scant comfort for those who are at the receiving end of powers brutalities, it does little to diminish the reality of the concrete experience of oppression perpetuated by Power.

It does however speak to the deepest nature of the human spirit, the reality of optimal human biological health as a fundamental and the need for action that is threaded into a long term perspective as well as dealing with the immediate concerns - these two go together.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

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