Comments on: Emotional non-negotiables

By: The Sietch Blog » On Being Able To See The Perfect Storm

The Sietch Blog » On Being Able To See The Perfect Storm — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:26:08 +0000

[...] most people will never spend the time to think long enough about all of this to see it.Â Â And most people have deep vested interests that emotionally will prevent them from allowing themselves to see these things anyway even if they [...]

By: Dennis

Dennis — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 05:05:03 +0000

There are new voices being raised pointing out the problems with civilization as it is currently configured. James Gustave Speth, author of “Red Sky at Morning” and a major environmental force for decades, has decided to step outside the system after working within it for most of his professional life. He’s written a new book, “The Bridge at the End of the World”, and in it he basically acknowledges that the environmental movement, to date, has been ineffective and is likely to continue to be so. He’s shifted from trying to work within the system to stepping outside and pointing the finger directly at consumerism and the out of control corporations.

There’s another new book which I’ve yet to get a copy of called, “The Dominant Animal” by the Ehrlichs. From the reviews I read, it seems that they’ve picked up an association that I’ve long thought was badly under appreciated and that is the highly causal link between the evolutionary forces that shaped us as animals and our current aberrant behaviors as residents of the planet.

If voices like these keep stepping forward, then when the inevitable crash comes and people are finally driven into accepting that we (those who survive) need to change, then they will a least have a reasonable idea where the real problems lie and hopefully will turn their new-born willingness to change towards those culprits.

By: auntiegrav

auntiegrav — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:41:49 +0000

Very good. Next step: the feedback systems that have been designed to PREVENT humans as a group from contemplating Sinclair’s concept. It’s all well and good for you and I or even college environment protected groups to consider the futility and self-destructiveness of civilization, but anyone taking action against the status quo is going to be breaking some societal law, either statutorily or politically. Ever noticed the dead zone around a large thistle plant or burdock bush? Once the power of suppression is in place, it is hard for anything less than total annihilation by a more powerful force or depletion of resources (dieoff) to change the dominant structure. Corporations have eliminated the ‘diseases’ of unionization and popular control (government) by outsourcing labor and bribing government wholesale.
They are just one example of ‘civilization’s facets of dominating the ecosphere which we ourselves are dependent upon to be broadly distributed and diverse, not living in homogenous ’spikes’ of ‘normality’ where the uncomfortable parts of life that make life robust are isolated from our experience. Wendell Berry described the modern automobile or tractor as a coffin: simulating death to provide us with perfect isolation from the ‘jolts and bumps’ of the fields and life. I submit that humanity has built itself into a societal coffin called ‘civilization’ , and the only way out is for the coffin to rot, but if anyone survives, it won’t be us. Nature has handily provided disasters over the eons to prove that the fringe is just as important as the 3 Sigma in the middle.
“Drive like an Arab got your cash.”

By: AT

AT — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:02:33 +0000

I like what you say about emotional ties overwhelming rational control. Makes me wonder what mental state allowed some jews to leave Europe as Hitler built strength?

By: Arthur (AmeriNZ)

Arthur (AmeriNZ) — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 02:05:49 +0000

Very interesting post. I’ve long been critical of the modern business paradigm that puts the quick distribution of profit to shareholders ahead of all other considerationsâ€”including the long term viability of the corporation itselfâ€”but it hadn’t occurred to me how, exactly, that might be tied to other seemingly irrational behaviors. This gives me a new way to think about it. Thanks.

By: Cam

Cam — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:20:23 +0000

Excellent. You managed to articulate something that I have been failing to put in to words for a long time. Perhaps people are simply distressed by things like global warming – and they are trying to escape their distress by dismissing the evidence for it.

“distress causing them to waffle back and forth” was the line that really jumped out at me. I’ve been in so many discussions where the other person has gone off on what to me seemed like a baffling tangent at the time, but now it’s at least understandable in the context of them trying to ameliorate the situation. Like: ‘Global warming may be real, but its the politicians that are hyping it up and cashing in on it, so why should we trust them on it and why should we do what they say?”

Two separate issues, conflated, with a lot of real anger directed at politicians. If it’s a matter of cognitive dissonance, I might be able to think of a better response for the next time.