Earl Grey

Stockholm Syndrome?

Free speech? If you include the countless insults and abuse that was levied against people here and abusive behavior unchecked as free speech, then the parallel I can think of is someone shouting, talking over others, belittling them for the things they say, and thinking there's nothing wrong with mocking them--no, that's not free speech, that's verbal abuse and bullying. It's all over the Trump thread, climate change, and even in some system threads. If you include the posting of copyrighted material (and even if it weren't unethical posting) of something that is also dangerous for others here (https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/47557-free-hua-tuo’s-spontaneous-five-animals-play-qigong -zi-fa-wuqinxi-dong-gong/), then that's not free speech, that's encouraging piracy, which is against forum rules too. I would love to have this thread deleted. How about the double standards of telling someone like ilovecoffee that he's going off topic within one or two posts and yet joeblast can disrupt any thread he wants with his conspiracy theory nonsense, verbal abuse, and belittling? Sure, back in the day I insulted Mo Pai but got sick of it and wanted to make peace with ilovecoffee and I'm glad I did because we don't agree on many things related to internal training, but he won't follow me around and mock me in other threads for my beliefs--he stayed in his own lane and I stay in mine, and rarely did he stray from his focus. How about protecting an inactive member who has already been proven a scammer when flowing hands warns us for our own safety of what their newest scam was, pushing out esteemed member flowing hands from the forum for merely warning us? Or how about when one member invaded the Flying Phoenix thread and started trolling the topic and knew nothing about it, yet when I and other members told him off, instead of warning him for his posts, I am publicly humiliated with a screen capture he makes to try to ridicule me, furthered by your public scolding instead of a public warning saying I "have a lot of anger" in my posts instead of a more courteous PM to allow me to change things on my own and spare me the embarrassment, but totally disregarding what he did to troll the thread? And ignoring my PM asking "WHICH POSTS SHOWED ANGER?" doesn't help especially if prior she said to ask for help any time. Kar3n was a good mod in the beginning, but I have to agree she and the team were the reason I left the forum last year and only came back because of the one good mod who supported me without question, and that mod was NOT Kar3n. The constant characterization I heard from many members privately when I first left and afterwards characterizing Kar3n was hypocrite. This forum was not free speech-oriented at all, it was focused on granting the loudest and most obnoxious voices the license to do as they will if they shared the same political view, which in this case was the Far Right. I nearly left a second, permanent time because bullying was allowed and my anger (as with many others who share the same sentiment) couldn't stand how that license was allowed under "free speech" but nobody protected us from the harm--if anything, we were mocked for all the hurt we experienced. How about the first time when I posted I was leaving in my PPJ, s1va and others told me that I was just too sensitive and made no apologies for what they said? The moment you say someone is too sensitive, whether they are or not, you're refusing feedback for what may fundamentally be wrong, and encouraging bad behavior and dismissing a person's genuine feelings of being hurt or upset. Saying "you're too sensitive" by the way is a form of abuse, and it's called "trivialization". Yes, I got so mad that I told joeblast I wish he were dead when he invaded my personal practice journal and kept harassing me, but I did apologize and rescind that, and proved my point in my final post on the Trump thread how much jerk-ass behavior goes on in this forum, led by him and encouraged by the mods. https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/49376-trump-talk/?do=findComment&comment=894472. And yet, nobody seemed to mind. Fa Xin once jokingly posted that I remind the forum often how much I hate it and I replied in a very reserved manner that I used to love it, the response I got was that the forum changes as do communities--a platitude, but I respected the sentiment of trying to communicate support and hold no ill will towards him nor have I ever had bad blood with him, although it does not excuse the direction the forum has gone. No malice with you, Fa Xin, and actually no malice with anyone above, but the behavior that was allowed on this forum was honestly and frankly flat out shitty. Now, I've aired my grievances towards some of the mods and their actions, I will speak well for those mods whom I can't stand, who are at this point mainly Kar3n and s1va (the others, I have no issue with aside from the inaction). Karen, in spite of all you have done that has upset me and my friends here (many who left after being fed up), you were dedicated to your job, gave your time, gave your support emotionally to those you felt needed it like the suicidal members, and in your own view, tried to be as impartial and fair as possible. While I do not agree with how you executed it, I respect your dedication and how you were very fast in assisting others with getting PPJs or access to the men and women's sub-forums. S1va, in spite of our disagreement on that thread, and my disdain for what was trivializing my own hurt with what you and the mods did, you did a good job of advocating to not ban others or warn them as admin, preferring to "nudge" and gently advocate others to remember their better selves rather than lay down the law. For that, I thank both you, Kar3n and s1va for what you have done and after airing my above grievances, I hold no more ill will and release the remaining anger I have, forgive you for everything else, and lay to rest my issues that had greatly disappointed me in my past year in the forum. I wish you all the best of luck and hope if you remain that you enjoy what the spirit of the forum means even if certain political views are off the table now. To the rest of the mods from dawei to Fa Xin, Zhongyongdaoist and others, I have never had an issue with any of you, and if you are happy with the job you have done, I am happy with the job you have done too and wish you all the best of luck, while hoping you remain to contribute because I thoroughly enjoy interacting with you and reading what you write even if we don't interact much. To take a page from a friend, Best wishes.

Also, the fruits of one's practice show how good their learning is, whether it is a teacher or a book. You may decide for yourself whether learning from a book which is also steeped deeply in cultural nuance and linguistic limitations is better or if people who teach it know what they are talking about based on what they have achieved. Both paths have their advantages and disadvantages, but I subscribe to finding a good teacher, which is also linked to luck, karma, and dedication.

Most books never teach the full technique, unfortunately, across systems, this is true. They are best viewed as marketing material.

There are a couple books by Cleary and Baine, and I refer to both for scholarly reasons only, but the technique I was taught has nothing to do with what's in the book, though it achieves the same result and similar experiences.

Which country are you in? As for health, there are a few members here who are professionals as teachers and doctors, if not people who can refer you to professionals. Eric Isen is a very celebrated friend of the community, but not a member here, who I am happy to refer you to in regards to getting some good herbal remedies and a good Ayurvedic intuitive reading that has been better than 99% of the TCM and Ayurveda healers out there. As for teachers, I know some online who teach remotely for those not able to come in person, but price and what you look for are also factors to consider, and they are based in Australia, the Philippines, and the United States.

In the sleeping qigong system, a weekly 36-hour fast on nothing but water is recommended. If my last meal is Monday night before fasting, my meal after fasting is Wednesday morning. As for herbal formulas outside TCM, GM Doo Wai has some from his system and are taught by Terry Dunn if you study Flying Phoenix qigong with him.

The political polarization of climate change is the issue for me--what should be a nonpartisan issue has become a partisan issue and now is causing all the progress and cooperation to address this to slow down and even go backwards due to people viewing it as a Leftist fantasy.

McCarthyism is the gross oversimplification and total lack of understanding of even the basic definition of socialism itself. Everyone is a "dirty pinko commie traitor" in the eyes of every Joseph McCarthy who sees you talking to a pretty girl or handsome guy who happens to be an activist on campus and scrutinizes you and your family of cavorting with the communists. What's worse is that Senator Joseph McCarthy himself was so insensitive and clueless to the consequences of his accusations and witch hunt (he was actually worse back then than Trump is now) that when he saw a friend whom he had accused prior for being a communist and had his entire life threatened, Joe put his hand on the guy's shoulder and said, "Hey pal, how ya been?!" thinking they would be able to get drinks and talk about baseball as usual the following week. He was surprised the guy told him to go fuck himself and never talk to him again, as though what he was doing was not a big deal--Joe honestly did not know the consequences of the poison tree seeds he was planting everywhere. It should be noted that he also had presidential ambitions. Expanding upon that, it is the same basic concept: nobody asks for context or to learn, they just focus on the labels and negative associations with it. As we have seen on the forum, most people defining the "Left" here are not actually describing actual Leftists, but the modern bastardized syncretic amalgamation of concepts associated with Leftist activists as they have done as far back in the 1960s. It's the same as saying that because someone plays video games, that person is obviously a loser living in his parents' basement and obese without realizing that the said gamer is one of the top lawyers at a firm who has been representing pro-bono marginalized people and immigrants from Chinese-speaking groups, is fluent in three Chinese dialects and English, is a published author, and has her own independent fashion brand available for people in the L.A. metro area? All because someone said "I am a gamer" and they made those assumptions of the stereotype until they find out that not only is the stereotype wrong, but it has nothing to do with the actual individual or complexities and appeal of something (Leftist views, Feminism, gaming, hockey, cheeseburgers, ice cream, alternative rock, whatever) that can appeal to many people instead of outdated stereotypes they try to associate with them? So in other words, and an example, if I were to say I read "Everyday Feminism" the website, someone would tell me I am a blue pill (in reference to the Men's Rights Movement) and take too much soy, have been emasculated, and am weak. Not true at all. If I were to say I watch pornography, someone would tell me that I'm an involuntary celibate (incel) and sexist and abusive. If I were to say I love Godzilla movies, someone would tell me I am a loser for watching stupid fake monsters fighting. If I tell someone I do Tai Chi, they would call me a weakling who can't win in a real fight (as said many times by armchair professionals who have never trained or fought themselves). Not once do they actually ask me why I do the things I do. People don't actually ask why you believe what you do or like what you like or care to understand. They just want to label you and associate you with the label's stereotypes. If they do care to ask you, some are not trying to understand, but to give you a prepared response to things they anticipate you saying. This is McCarthyism's root in how it affects people's absolutist fearmongering tendencies even into the present era. Now as for anarchy being Leftist--let's again say that the definition of "Left" varies from individual to individual. If "Left" means a community of individuals working towards the greater good without a centralized structure, then that's already anarchy, but if people think Left automatically assumes a centralized command like in the Soviet Union and top-down structure is Left, then the latter definition is not anarchy. How they both get lumped together is again people missing the point even if historically people from those ideologies had dialogues and engagements with one another to help influence their ability to put their ideals into action. Lastly, socialism and anarchism both share in common criticisms of the capitalist system and its power structures that dominate people unfairly. How those ideals are implemented however is up for scrutiny, and the fruits of those actions are what people look at and jump to conclusions, such as someone in Iowa looking at Cuba and North Korea and saying with absolute certainty that communism failed there and oppresses people, so any kind of Leftist view is evil. People simply have a hard time being open to understanding and dealing with complexities, simple as that.

Brent Staples had a wonderful essay talking about the progressive left in the NYT a few months ago. Feminism, ethnic studies, labor rights, and the power of institutions are hallmarks of the contemporary characteristics of the Left, but not traditionally. All those social movements in the 1960s in particular are starting to look a lot like today's, but without the optimism that died around 1965 that Hunter S. Thompson eloquently described in his wave speech in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, which was also a sign of him being critical of the Right. Strange memories on this nervous night in Las Vegas. Five years later? Six? It seems like a lifetime, or at least a Main Era—the kind of peak that never comes again. San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special time and place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something. Maybe not, in the long run… but no explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world. Whatever it meant.… History is hard to know, because of all the hired bullshit, but even without being sure of "history" it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head in a long fine flash, for reasons that nobody really understands at the time—and which never explain, in retrospect, what actually happened. […] There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda.… You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning.… And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave.… So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back. If the original focus was on the proletariat in Marx's view, it came to sudden realization that so many cross-sections of societies and resulting complexities means that one ultimately can't ignore gender, race, religion, immigration policy, and other variables when seeking to accomplish Leftist ideals. The modern era I have seen has focused so much on the individual parts of the puzzle that people still have the audacity to call it Left when historically, we can see very quickly once people get what they want, say racial groups or other interest groups like some Feminist groups (because there are many factions within Feminism, not one big lump, for those who don't know), they abandon everyone else. What Brent Staples referred to was for American women's suffrage and how the movement was empowered by working class and black women. Once suffrage was achieved, black women still couldn't vote and many of the Feminists who supported them were not interested in racial equality, as Staples stated that they got what they wanted but didn't feel any compelling reason to help the black Feminists vote as Jim Crow laws still prevented them from exercising what was their right to vote. Let us not forget that the labor class Feminists were also cast aside and the original Feminsm that Staples criticized was essentially middle class and elite white women promoting the ideal. The parallel to that in current Progressive circles looks at 4th Wave Feminism, which started around 2006 or 2010 and was focused on social media and tech, which again, as some authors in the sites Jezebel for Fourth Wave Feminism and The Root for black politics argue, is "mainly white insufferable privileged women telling brown women what to do with their bodies and completely ignoring the complexities of being black or brown or yellow and red". Not to bag on Feminism or whites by making those illusions, for I reference them to show that we are in an ahistorical cycle here where the parallels to the original suffrage movement in America and today's dialogues on Feminism are hard to overlook when pointed out, and what I speak to here is don't lose sight of the greater goal of a greater community and stronger bonds. Yes, gender rights are important, ethnic studies are important, the role of technology and globalization are very important, the environment is important--but again, those are only parts of the greater puzzle for what is the modern Left and its historical roots in pragmatic egalitarianism. And when those complexities themselves become part of the puzzle, say for example ethnic studies and race relations comes to the forefront, one can't ignore labor rights, Feminism, or the other categories I mention--they all play with each other because they can't be ignored or isolated, and oversimplifying each complexity only serves to subtract from overall improvement in all of them. In short: all of those groups and interests are in it together, whether they like it or not, and so to be on the Left, whether contemporary Progressive Left or historically philosophical Left, one must maintain awareness and sensitivity to achieve overlapping aims, or find the barriers erected from willful ignorance and compartmentalization worse than power structures. What I describe, by the way, has been part of a conversation I had where the most negative responses came from people in race relations and Fourth Wave Feminists whose understanding was limited to at best a class in college and club they joined and more often social media memes and groups. The people who had the most positive dialogue that was engaging were the people who actually were well-read in these matters and deeply involved in the community for a long time, not just a passing trend to follow in university or the online mob. And if it wasn't already clear, online dialogue and the complexities of the people one communicates with online are important to consider as it's easy to misunderstand what was said, which I am pretty sure some will immediately conclude what I quoted here as racist or misogynist without actually asking me what the point of what I'm writing here is, and that point as stated above is "We're all in this together and so it is in our best interest to know more about each other's complexities beyond just labor, gender, or race and more." Edit: I will also point out that this is from a primarily American context, but I will include the Philippine context later on and possibly Tanzania for other examples of complexities, for those are my strongest and longest experiences with discussing the Left in contexts outside of the West, particularly American.

Remember those old 1950s and 1960s exams in some colleges that essentially had you using a red pencil to color in all the communist countries on a map and reciting the domino effect Churchill warned about? I would say the dominant view that colors the way people perceive the Left is McCarthyism and that actual witch hunt. That was atrocious, and sadly many people in America now have 21st century McCarthyist lens for framing and understanding the Left. In college, we had an anarchist collective and free library and I only needed to go there and spend time with them to know that I was in good company. They always fed us, asked how they could be supportive to anyone, including those with higher tax brackets because they saw others as equals and peers rather than someone whom they could alienate themselves from by race, sex, income, class, or religion. Their treatment of people was a far cry from my days at an elitist international school in Southeast Asia for spoiled rich kids and expats where people stole each other's property out of boredom because they didn't need the money, they enjoyed the thrill of making other people inconvenienced if they were rich or crushing the lives of those of us on scholarships or funded by our foreign governments' tax payers and therefore without a lot of money to waste.

The politics, the philosophical roots, the history, the ideology, and the identity of the Left all seem to have their own divergent paths and yet also overlap. By the politics, I mean in how it is executed and murdered by bureaucracy and human nature, by roots, I find that it is a subject for a lot of ruminating and dialogue, the history in how it has been understood, interpreted, and implemented makes it seem like it is a very different beast (Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism are all quite different), and the identity, especially today, is certainly dressed in something new now that social values are being correlated to class struggle and worker's rights such as race, sex, and the impact of technology. In short: our contemporary values, technology, and context make it hard to retrofit into the original context, whereas the original context should probably be reframed (at the very least) and reimagined for the changing world.

So moving on to something related to the topic, let's look at one of my favorite expressions of Left views: music, particular punk rock. I love punk rock, from the Ramones to the Sex Pistols and X-Ray Spex, the Cramps, and so many more. I'll be discussing the music as a whole in following posts, but I'd like to start with the original punk band, the Ramones. Most people think punk is synonymous with the Left. While this is a common theme in many political bands and punk rock songs in the 70s and 80s (long before skateboarders in the 90s turned it into bubblegum pop for kids who focused on piercings, tattoos, and thinking that watching MTV was rebellious), punk is not strictly Leftist nor is it exclusively used by the Left. For starters, Johnny Ramone was about as Right-Wing as one can get to the point he considered Reagan to be one of the greatest American presidents of all time and loved George W. Bush, thanking him specifically when they were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. His belief is that a true punk is a Republican, not some liberal self-entitled and self-righteous brat expecting handouts and welfare. It was a point of contention with Joey Ramone, who was exactly the opposite, and did not appreciate a lot of the jokes about Jews and liberals (both of which were Joey's identity) made by Johnny who said them more and more often around Joey just to piss him off. Johnny is quoted by The Observer as saying: "People drift towards liberalism at a young age, and I always hope they change when they see how the world really is." Also another noteworthy quote: "To me, I think punk is right wing. What happened in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s was a lot of disaffected kids -- the kind who would’ve been hippies a decade before –- drifted into punk. But, when you think of who punks are, they’re greasers, people who didn’t fit in, but they didn’t back down either. Who above all, love America. I’ve voted Republican ever since 1960 when Kennedy ran against Nixon. I’ve been with the conservative Republicans since I was eleven years old." One political song written by Joey, "Bonzo goes to Bitburg" from 1986, was originally also supposed to be the title for the album that was eventually released as Animal Boy. It was a stab at Reagan who visited Bitburg, West Germany in May of 1985, and Johnny didn't want to play it often either because he didn't want to offend Reagan. Joey at this point had complete contempt for Johnny, not helped by the fact that in the 80s was when Johnny ended up marrying Linda, who before then was Joey's long-time girlfriend. The song in question with some lyrics: You've got to pick up the pieces C'mon, sort your trash You better pull yourself back together Maybe you've got too much cash Better call, call the law When you gonna turn yourself in? Yeah You're a politician Don't become one of Hitler's children Bonzo goes to Bitburg then goes out for a cup of tea As I watched it on TV somehow it really bothered me Drank in all the bars in town for an extended foreign policy Pick up the pieces My brain is hanging upside down I need something to slow me down Ooh yeah, my brain is hanging upside down And I need something to slow me down Shouldn't wish you happiness Wish her the very best Fifty thousand dollar dress Shaking hands with your highness See through you like cellophane You watch the world complain But you do it anyway Who am I, am I to say Bonzo goes to Bitburg then goes out for a cup of tea As I watched it on TV somehow it really bothered me Drank in all the bars in town for an extended foreign policy Pick up the pieces My brain is hanging upside down I need something to slow me down Ooh yeah, my brain is hanging upside down And I need something to slow me down If there's one thing that makes me sick It's when someone tries to hide behind politics I wish that time could go by fast Somehow they manage to make it last Ooh yeah, yeah, my brain is hanging upside down I need something to slow me down Ooh yeah, yeah, my brain is hanging upside down And I need something to slow me down Ooh yeah, yeah, my brain is hanging upside down And I need something to slow me down My brain is hanging upside down Pretty direct stab at Reagan and the establishment, eh?

Oh, get over yourself; several people have already made the same complaints as you about perceived oppression and censorship. Barely five pages in and it's already a broken record, sheesh. BACK TO TOPIC.

Jeez louise, how hard is it to stay on topic? Why not just split the discussion into a new thread on "welcomeness fear of censorship" because we're talking so much about the basic rules and limitations that we are barely focused on the left here.

From https://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/129563

It used to not be like this, and that was the appeal for me.

It might surprise you, but Sean is only asking for people to focus on the topic at hand here, not censoring people. If you’re concerned with fear for expressing one’s opinion, take a look at flowing hands and the climate change thread he started: what was clearly started for the purpose of sharing what we do knowing that it’s affecting us and getting worse instead turned into a debate on whether climate change is real or not. Not only did it steer far from its original focus to the dismay of the OP due to the conspiracy theory people from the right, but two mods even joined in on talking about how it wasn’t real, praised Trump, and the rest didn’t even bother stepping in to split the thread and keep it on topic. Sean is just asking people to stay on topic and be respectful in this thread—which he should have to given that it’s expected across the forum and has been ignored with alarming regularity in multiple instances. The climate change thread was one of two threads that pushed out one of our members from the forum. For everyone else worried about free speech, this is not a right, this is a privilege because it’s a focused discussion group, otherwise without that order, it becomes the loud and rude members talking over everyone else and changing the focus of the topic to what they want to talk about instead of what’s being focused on from the beginning. Do people attend meetings with topic agenda to suddenly shift focus to football when the topic is about corruption and racism in FIFA as opposed to who loves which team because the reference to football makes some members decide to walk in and change the focus to which teams like Man U or Real Madrid are superior? No.

Beautiful. The only thing I can add to what you've said is "Amen".

This is not a sincere apology, it is a nonapology as exemplified here from this wonderful comedy site: https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-types-apologies-that-arent-apologies-at-all/ and other examples you make a textbook example of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology Quote: Saying "I'm sorry you feel that way" to someone who has been offended by a statement is a non-apology apology. It does not admit there was anything wrong with the remarks made, and may imply the person took offense for hypersensitive or irrational reasons. Another form of non-apology does not apologize directly to the injured or insulted party, but generically "to anyone who might have been offended". There goes my experiment proving you, sir, have no desire to look in the mirror but somehow love to believe you are shining the light on others. You are too proud to offer a sincere apology or acknowledge harm you cause others, and you don't care, it is everyone else's fault-- how insufferable and insincere. A complete absence of empathy and compassion. The definition of a bully and jerk. At least you admit you provoked me, for that I give you credit. Doesn't make it right though. I know I have anger, but I am at least man enough to admit I need help and have been getting help, unlike you who won't take any feedback or admit for once in your life that perhaps you should consider that the things you do and say are not cool. Tip: what you are doing is not cool. As a former professional counselor myself, you would actually be no different from some of the people who many former clients wonder how the hell they got their credentials, including the board after reading the complaints filed against these soon-to-be if not already former counselors. The word for what you are doing is called abuse. It is gaslighting, trivializing, projecting, minimizing, and projecting, at the very least. Unsurprisingly, you did not take my invitation either, to speak man to man privately or even offline, so it is quite obvious you refuse to be a gentleman or a decent human being because you are too proud (or perhaps too cowardly), and that's fine--just stay in your own lane and away from mine. [to everyone else, please do not reply on this thread if you have issues with what I've posted here--PM me and continue, as I want nothing more to do with this thread as this is joeblast's lane and not mine]. Have a good life.

Mozi, believe it or not, has some views that sound like proto-communism as one of my academic friends in Korea jokingly describes him. Not the fun kind, mind you, but the eyebrow-rasing kind.

The issue is not about having different opinions, it's about the manner in which those arguments are occurring, namely in being rude and abrasive and labeling those of us who aren't fans of that as being too sensitive while saying you're just a straight shooter. Looking at you specifically, you do make very abrasive remarks and seem to think we like it. Let me show you a couple of examples: Do you talk to your friends that way saying "bye Felicia" in a mocking manner when they've obviously left and gotten fed up with the air you breathe? I don't put up with that in real life and I don't put up with a stranger on the Internet who before the climate change thread had ZERO interaction with me for the four years I have been a member here. That's why I left the climate change thread because I was FED UP with you. What's more is that you say I do have issues, which is true, but that doesn't mean I want you to provoke and mock. Perhaps you don't think you're mocking people and that's just how you are. I will give you that. But if I say STOP, you had better respect that. No ifs or buts. End of story. When you say in the third message here from the second image comes from my personal practice forum. Let me start with two things: 1) it is my PPJ. It is my sacred space, my personal space. If I've left you behind in another thread and I'm already pissed, don't come in if you're not welcome and pull that sass on me or anyone. You are not welcome there, you are not my friend. 2) I did wish ill upon you, and as a gentleman, I will apologize for that. I will not, however, go back on my feelings because the sentiment is still there, but the willwork used upon you I am rescinding. Now, in your own words, in the second post in the PPJ, you blame me for not understanding your intent--strike one, not everyone has the same sensibilities or communication style as you, let alone life experience to enjoy that garbage. Two, saying that I "put myself where your words belittled me" is inaccurate because again, I left our previous thread because I am sick of you and you followed me where you are not invited or welcome. This reasoning you are using is the same as saying it's my friend's fault for getting bullied because he carried a Barbie lunchbox his sister used one day instead of putting it in a paper bag--nobody asks for it, whether you believe it or not, but as it's already been established, you believe everyone is asking for it and you are insufferable. I enjoy a good challenge too. I do not enjoy an abrasive and belligerent one-sided exchange where you are constantly treating those of us who see things differently from you as delusional, crazy, or too sensitive. You fail to see it because you miss the platinum rule: treat others how they wish to be treated. If I don't like it, don't tell me there's something wrong with me, respect my wishes and shut your mouth. Now let's get things straight: I once heard a story from a wise man about a philosophy called "stay in your own lane" in reference to people going their own way on the highway every day. If you're not speeding ahead on a carpool lane or exiting, stay in your lane. I want nothing to do with you, you are not my friend, I have never had any positive exchange with you and do not see that ever happening. I've even almost eliminated my entire presence here from the forum because of you and your ilk here. Were it not for one kind admin and the owner of one thread who nominated me to oversee his thread on his behalf, I would have removed every single post and forgotten my password, because I already have enough stress to deal with, including the very real fear of getting shot or mugged every day where I live. Now, if you truly see everyone here as a friend, let me ask: what kind of friend are you? To me, you're the friend nobody I know would want around, and the parallel there is Wayne Arnold, the jerk-off older brother of Kevin Arnold from The Wonder Years. He's a bully, he's insufferable, he doesn't care, and yet he acts like Kevin has a problem when Kevin doesn't want him around. Sure, things got better in their later years, but he was the hate sink of the show, hands-down. He really thinks he's being cute and funny at the end. But he never for one moment asked how Kevin felt. You do this too. So, Joe, let me ask you this: if you're really chummy and friendly, what's holding you back from an apology? Or is there nothing you've done wrong? Because whether you meant it or not, guess what? Some people get upset, some people feel hurt. But you, old friend, are harming others with this kind of attitude in life, whether you will ever be mature enough to even consider for one moment how other people think, let alone feel. I normally ignore the hell out of you and everyone else here (most of the forum is on my ignore list now), but this post was brought to my attention by someone. And here I am saying this: if you want to make things right at least between us, you can apologize, you can even do it by PM and set up a face-to-face meeting on Skype or Zoom, and talk with each other--key word with, not at or over--and resolve this as men and gentlemen. No limitation of text only, no absence of tone or facial expressions or subtleties, no hiding behind keyboards and avatars--human beings engaging one another. But if that's too much for you and your pride, then let us formally make this the beginning of what I would like: for you to stay in your own f***ing lane and I will stay in mine. No future communication. Ever. This was my last attempt to speak with you as a human being, to let you know what should be known, even if it invites the mockery and scrutiny of the usual peanut gallery here who at this point, I don't even care if they continue with their insults, their mockery, trivialization, gaslighting, and all the like. I'm fed up, but I've made my peace and given you my apology above already. To the rest of the people on this thread, I apologize for taking things off topic even if joeblast has already done so by referencing another thread. I will excuse myself now and ask for you all to at least, if you have anything to say to me, whether it's insulting me or the opposite, please address me via PM. No more replies or derailing this thread any further, especially to highlight me.

Here is a very good op-ed from Al-Jazeera about how the green sustainability economy isn't a good idea--and it's not because it's a bad thing itself, it's because of the current state of capitalism and the current structure that elaborates on the tragedy of the commons. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/hipster-vegan-green-tech-economy-sustainable-190605105120654.html This to me is what the real left in the contemporary world begins to look like, not the insufferable urban bleeding liberal guilt tripping others for not volunteering at a soup kitchen or being vegan and using hemp products. To me, the left and true anarchists organize very well around community.

A shorter version of a longer piece I've been writing summarized here: the tendency to do "cultivation practices" is one thing, but the degree of quality is another. With the inherent nature of the Internet and some people making themselves self-proclaimed masters through YouTube videos and pirated PDFs who dislike the structure of formal tutelage, is it still surprising that the somewhat esoteric practices of varying quality also invites the conspiracists? Let's say you have someone who is open to these esoteric discussions and philosophies. She may be interested because she read a few books in college and decided to do a Reiki workshop, then joins an online board and gets introduced to some people of a similar bent. Her openness to the metaphysical and what is also very personal does not correlate to being balanced, because she decides she's going to buy into a lot of conspiracy theories that make absolutely no sense. What these conspiracies and these esoteric practices have in common are 1) no verification of actual value, 2) feeling of belonging to a cool kids' club of people in the know who defy the established norms and paradigms, 3) questioning or challenging those views and values is the same as discussing religion, as both are held sacred. For the esoteric influence, the only way to look at that for me is look at the fruits borne of their practice in character, health, and skill. For the conspiracy views, look at how much suspension of disbelief they need to carry and start believing is reality. In other words, if they're going to believe in qi and telekinesis, what's to stop them from believing in unfounded conspiracies like pizzagate? This is why years ago I liked the forum because it gave one of the four pillars important to any cultivator: community. The other pillars are good teacher, good system, good lineage, and the fifth pillar is good student. Due to the nature of my own work, community is lacking because I'm always hopping countries, and the Philippines is the longest place I've been stationed in for the past four years, which makes community organization interesting as the more one goes deeper into rooting, the better their ties to a community become and stronger the foundation for any work mobilizing things (PM me for all interested in stories as the rest is too sensitive to discuss here). ADDENDUM: So in short--believing in esoteric practices and doing them can strengthen one's existing ideological bent and fuels a lot of the conspiracies promoted here, reinforced by their belief in the power of their cultivation, often with poor barometers to test skill, character, and fruits of the practice if not an outright absence of them. It may feel more egalitarian, yet they seem to enjoy a strong man political approach, whereas they seem to fear that in a formal tutelage relationship even if with my own teachers, that relationship ends up promoting more subdued views and working with others, leading to more fairness. It's the difference between being Kid Miracleman, full of power and bored, or Superman, who looks at people compassionately and with love precisely because he is the most powerful being in the universe. Give people power and it will show their character, but let people think they have power and see similar results until they meet someone with actual power. An actual man with power is often the most humble of them all.

Interestingly, that has been addressed in the sequel, Doomsday Clock. The second Rorschach is black and this point is even raised by someone asking how he can conveniently forget those hyper right wing views and moral absolutism before he realizes how stupid it is to subscribe to that or have unnecessary hero worship. Voice of the Fire is one of my favorite histories of magic too and I will always have fun reading about Hob’s Hog. Alan Moore is a bit surprising in that he represents a vocal leftist voice but admittedly did not vote in Brexit, of which he was unhappy with the result. What I enjoy about my anarchic views is community organization, which in turn ties into development work, particularly grassroots and social enterprise. Absent of privilege, devoid of the democratic process, the unrepresented and underrrepresented are not necessarily helpless if they organize well. I could tell dozens of stories that would make all the left-hating members here grit their teeth about out work in Cambodia, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania that I personally saw and even in Seattle (for people who say “if you can help people around the world why don’t you do shit for America?”) too.