Thursday, October 31, 2019

Is our culture capable of changing the date of a major holiday?

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/halloween-petition-date-october-trick-or-treat-costumes-a9022551.html

https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/growing-push-to-move-halloween-over-forecasted-rain-1.4662466


Our culture has a growing sense of flexibility. I think something like this would not have even occurred in my youth. Like the thought to even be able to do it wouldn't have occurred.

One could see it as a culture where everything is altered to be more convenient, a sort of snowplow parenting, a putting of convenience over tradition and dealing with adversity.

Or one could say we're letting go of the old limits on our thinking, going what makes sense instead of what we've always done, loosening up our minds to fully live our best lives.

I wonder how it affects social cohesion and inclusion. When decisions get made emergently and creatively, unless you have a rock solid communication system and the population is very socially and idealistically cohesive, or has some sort of meta-decision-making scheme that puts everyone on the same page, you're going to end up having two Halloweens.

I see this working best in a very small town!

Emergent decision making works best in populations that are very cohesive and in clear communication. Outside of that, it can be chaotic. We have all have the experience where a plan is in place and one person asks about a change at the last minute and everything goes a little sideways.

If populations are resilient to complexity, both emotionally and logistically, not minding if things happen twice, don't happen, get delayed or people get left out, then emergent thinking is very workable. Populations like this must have a bigger picture goal beyond the immediate logistical results. They must also have a strong capacity to hold their own experience without blame and be willing to learn and respond constantly from a place of curiousity and fear management. I have seen this happen in subcultures and it can be very energizing and rich.

Our current culture does not have this capacity. We are half way to emergent decision making, in that our minds have opened up to question social forms and traditions that don't always serve us. How liberating this is!

We however still lack of the other side of it, the emotional capacity to live in this more fluid world without fear. In some ways we have more to fear, since instead of one authority figure to be afraid of, we have a billion authority figures, in the form of the people all around us, each with our own desire and beliefs, telling us who we should be and what we you do, even (and perhaps ironically) within this culture of freedom.

I mean, this completely makes sense. We've only known the authority model, so we still use it, in both aggressive and passive aggressive ways. Even while we try desperately to be accepting of diversity, our habits of judgment and control are strong. We're like children raised by unreasonably judgmental, fixed mindset parents who have to figure out how to grow ourselves up on a different model.
What does it look like to have a mind willing to be truly emergent and flexible?

Maybe this year, two Halloweens?

Is that a scary thought to you, or a cool one? Our culture is changing and we don't really know who we are becoming. Some people feel really good about these changes; other people are scared. I'm somewhere in the middle, like most of us, I guess.

But pretty sure the bitching about snowplow parents or inflexible thinkers on the internet ISN'T the solution. I'm going to sit back and just see what happens, trying to be curious but probably also being fairly judgmental towards everyone, mainly by habit. And since it is Halloween (officially, although apparently some towns in the US celebrated it LAST night) I'll be wearing my Star Trek uniform and looking forward to social utopia.


Monday, October 21, 2019

Dealing with billionaires: Choose to not participate in a power-seeker's control drama (personally and politically)


When a person is a billionaire, where actually is their money? I mean because it's obviously not just piles of gold in a vault, but moving around a system. I think it would be more accurate to speak of a "system of wealth" than point to any one billionaire, right? A system of billionaires are working alongside millionaires, high earners right down to minimum wagers. It's just that the billionaire has more leverage in the system.

So the metaphor isn't exactly hoarding so much controlling. It's not about keeping money out of the system by hoarding it, but controlling the system in your own interests by excessive leverage.

Taxing the wealthy is a way of hacking that system.

Unfortunately, the value of being a billionaire is that you have so much power (collectively with others like you) that you might be stronger than the government, and that's why it's harder to tax the wealthy.

Asking a person to give up a level of control they are used to is somewhat of a losing strategy. Forcing them is better, though it does then become a sort of war (in this case, class war) in which the powerful help each other find ways to hide their money or shift the system back.

That's why it's hard to make progress in economic justice.

I've always thought the only tool the working classes have is resistance and non-participation.

Workers: strike. Consumers: boycott.

What powerful people know, deep down, and what makes them insecure (and thus, addicted to power) is that ultimately, they rely on the people they have power over. I know that strikes and boycotts are not always possible, but whenever they can be used, they should be. People who seek "power over" others are always vulnerable, but people who discover the energy of "power with" can be successful in ways that are both psychologically and economically stable.

There are just so many, many ways you can choose to not participate in a power-seeker's control drama. This applies in your personal and political life. Especially if you have privilege.

Sunday, October 20, 2019

Comment: Don't protect the aggressor

Conservative MP: rainbow pride flags at schools ‘diminish the dignity’ of the Maple Leaf flag

https://pressprogress.ca/conservative_mp_rainbow_pride_flags_at_schools_diminish_the_dignity_of_the_maple_leaf_flag/?fbclid=IwAR3NdIdGvbxtpNl2jjpYXO5lEKyYs-MgNTE8dCBxsVtpqhPN73ARbqvLvtU

I have no source for this, but I read in an article last year about the logic of the Jewish ghetto during the Holocaust. Official SS party line was that since Jewish people were being aggressed on by the German people in their daily lives, for their own protection, Jewish communities should be kept in a separated ghetto. Of course, these ghettos were anything but healthy, protective spaces. They were prisons.

And of course, any reasonable person could see that the Nazis were looking for ways to limit the freedom of the Jewish people; they didn't care at all about their safety.

When Albrecht suggests that the Pride flag creates division and should be removed, he's using that same bully, gaslighting logic. I'd like to say any sane person could see through it.

What would a reasonable person do if someone is being attacked - and in fact, what does our justice system do (at its best)? We remove the attacker from civic society to (ideally) rehabilitate them or, if that isn't possible, keep them away from the vulnerable.

Imagine a world where every person who was attacked, robbed, raped or harassed was put in jail "for their own protection" while murders, rapists, and thieves ran free? What a horrible society that would be. And in fact, that is what Germany and Europe became during the Holocaust.

I know this is a very different incident level situation. But the logic is the same. Because queer kids get beat up on, Albrecht thinks that we should hide all signs of them so more division isn't created! If we just stop talking about those homosexuals and stop giving them space to be, they'll be safe from those otherwise decent people who just can't seem to stop beating them up.

Know what happens when you do that? You get a culture of bigots. And that's what Albrecht's attitude creates - a place where no one is safe because the criminals are running the show.

I don't believe than any human can't come back from bigotry and ignorance. We're all fairly easily influenced by our communities. We need to keep flying that flag, and everything it stands for, keeping talking, share, being, to make this a just and content society. We need to protect the victims, not the aggressors.

We won't let the bullies pervert the basis of social ethics; they can't gaslight us. We see how irrational they are and we keep pushing forward with our clear thinking and true civic spirit.

Straight Extraverted Men: Please learn to flirt with each other.

When I'm walking into a store, looking down at the ground, not making eye contact with the man coming towards me, and he jovially belts out "Thanks for bringing the good weather? Was that a present from you?" then NO. I don't find you to be "friendly" and "just keeping up civic connections." I don't find myself to be "unfriendly", "jaded" or "maladjusted" because I don't want to participate in this exchange with you and told you so with my body language and eyes.
I find you to be the opposite of civic and friendly - not reading my body language at all, and not taking a moment to think about whether I want your communication. Probably not even knowing that I'm likely going to feel guilty and pissed for the next twenty minutes because I'm socialized to think I should go "Oh TEE HEE OH MR! OH YOU!! TEE HEE WOW YOU'RE SO NICE" and all I can do is squeak out a resentful, powerless small "tee hee" that I hate giving you and also know isn't enough really, for what you seem to want from me.
I wish I could say "No thank you" or better "I wonder if you are reading my body language correctly? It seems clear to me and to a casual observer that I'd like privacy at this moment. You have no idea where I am at emotionally and you're not giving me any choices. I know you're having a moment but please check to see if I am that moment with you. I am not. A friendly head nod would have been fine."
Oh wait, a head nod? That's what you would give a man. You would not demand a flirt from a man.
In the spirit of problem solving, I offer this: hetero extravert men, LEARN TO FLIRT WITH EACH OTHER. You like flirty banter with strangers? Give it to each other since you love to impose it so much. Wait! You feel scared to flirt with a strange man? Or you feel it's "too much"? Or it's "not appropriate?" Or wierd? Then think twice before you do it to a woman.
Men. Learn to flirt with each other. I am tired of bearing the emotional responsibility for your fears of intimacy with 50% of the human race.
I am very, very tired of being imposed on emotionally by strange men and then running a script that I am the rude one.
I. am. not. the. self-absorbed. person. in. this. situation.