Taomeow

Many people think we're this inherently bad and badass species... I've come to the conclusion there's something entirely else at work. The species that is domesticated can't be judged by its behavior in conditions of profound universal neurotization as having or not having particular traits unless they are only observed under conditions of domestication, as in our case. "Civilized" human behavior has nothing to in common with the behavior of any other apex predator under natural wild conditions. Apex predators kill for food, yes, but they seldom if ever kill for anything else -- occasionally, in conditions where their habitat has shrunk due to human intervention in nature (sometimes a thousandfold, sometimes more), there's competitive killing, but in adequate-size habitat it normally does not happen, and competing for a mate or for the leading position may involve a fight to establish dominance but it's almost unheard of for a wild animal to fight to the death even under those conditions. Many apex predators of the highest order simply avoid encounters with competition by remaining solitary and territorial (on a huge territory in some cases -- a snow leopard may have to traverse 400 square miles before encountering another snow leopard), others (lions, wolves) form tightly cooperating groups and also do not resort to deadly violence within the group under normal adequate conditions, and certainly none of them kill for killing's sake, and certainly none of them resort to mass murder of their own kind, or any other for that matter. No, I don't think there's such a thing as a "violent" wild animal. Violence is the child of civilization, domestication, conditioning. And domestication itself is nothing if not conditioning, either dismantling or re-channeling instinctive natural behaviors, which as a result become abnormal and pathological. So, video games and movies and the rest of violence desensitizing endeavors are yet another method of conditioning, and as such are definitely conductive to what they're trying to accomplish to begin with -- desensitization of, and promotion of, violence. It's not "human nature." It's "nurture," of the worst kind.

Yes. (In terms of cuts, boneless short ribs appear to be the champion. I also cook with butter, ghee or lard.) Of course the cleaner the source of meat, the better, and grass-fed is best (though there's no clarity what exactly is allowed to term "grass fed" commercially... but I don't want to look too closely into everything food regulations related or I'll wind up anorexic.) But overall, we're primarily designed as fat-for-energy burning machines -- slow and steady. Getting energy from the stored glucogen is an additional, emergency mechanism we have in our design, specifically for situations when a short-term burst of high energy that's needed immediately, not slow and steady, is the imperative of the moment (e.g. to run away from a predator or to catch up with the running-away prey). Switching the whole species, courtesy of grain and other starches agriculture, to using this emergency back-up system as the primary system instead is the starchy root of many long term bodily ills, mental too far as I've been able to discern. And the recent push into "low fat" diets didn't make things better. And those fats that are still touted as permissible or even "good fats" being unsaturated (an invitation to peroxidative chaos in the body instead of the stable, oxidation-resistant fuel saturated fats are) doesn't help.

Prolefeed for science... I've been reading the zerocarb reddit subforum for about a year and a half (yes, I had somewhere to go while not on TDB ) and there's lots of people there who have been eating nothing but meat and animal fat for years. Many of them monitor their lab work religiously. Most of them freak out their doctors by reverting from poor to stellar health. The real reason it's not a good idea to eat more than 35 percent lean protein in one sitting is that in the absence of adequate fat, and outside the state of ketosis (not to be confused with ketoacidosis), the body will promptly convert all that extra protein to sugar (glucose), in a metabolic process known as glucogenesis. So eating more lean meat winds up being equivalent to eating a hi-carb diet, the body doesn't care it's a steak, if it's lean and you are not getting any quality (animal) fat with it and/or haven't set your system (with a diet that can flip the switch) to burning ketones instead of glucogen for energy, it will turn that steak into a metabolic equivalent of a cake. And that's what the kidneys (like every other system) will object to. Excessive sugar in the bloodstream...

@MildMouse23 Thank you for finding my post worthy of your support toward making your own and your group's case. I've a favor to ask though: when you quote me and modify the original by adding red and huge fonts, could you also specify that the HUGE BOLD RED parts are your personal editing/addition and not mine? Many thanks.

I've always doubted this implicitly inclusive "we," inclusive by default due to mere linguistic peculiarities of the language we speak. Some languages have two versions of "we," inclusive for when you've actually physically been there and exclusive when you weren't. The dominant modern languages don't have this way to differentiate between "real we" and "imaginary we." When I hear things like "we went to war in Iraq" or "we sent a man to the moon" or "we won 23 gold medals in the Olympics" or "we put more people behind bars than China" or "we have a military budget greater than the next 7 countries combined," it always gives me pause. What I know for a fact "we" really do is believe that "we" share in the glory and shame of all deeds "we" are told we're part of as though we committed or accomplished them in our living-room or kitchen and clearly remember how and why. To think of something someone did that you weren't even close to actually participating in as something "we" somehow did together is habitual -- "we" need to identify with a group of "creatures like ourselves," that's the atavism of natural tribal mentality I was talking about earlier. Yet this terraforming thing... I'm not even sure (don't throw anything heavy) it was humans who started it -- let alone "we." We are the outcome. But of what exactly -- there's no "we" to really tell us. Only "them." "Them" that have always planted, not trees but this idea that "I" was part of something I have no personal recollection of being part of. I, me, a member of a particular species, the real me, didn't do any terraforming in one and a half million years (by conservative estimates, some researchers believe "we" pretty much lived like humans closer to two million) and then all of a sudden in a couple hundred years "I" started running amok doing it all over the planet, in places that had no way to communicate with each other simultaneously?.. "They" better sell me the Brooklyn bridge, I'm more likely to be interested.

Terence McKenna defined animals as "something plants invented to move seeds around." I guess replacing animals with machines is well underway. Who needs animals if we have drones now.

Yeah, something less tame than that is probably nowhere to look up. A rewilder is a person who avocates the reintroduction of all animals into the wild -- humans included. It's not conservation (turning into conserves and putting in a can) that's the goal. It's opening the can.

Laozi was an individual rewilder -- i.e. he wound up going it alone. (What else do you fellow bums think Daodejing/Tao Te Ching is if not an apology of the natural way and a condemnation of civilization and the so-called "progress?") But he wrote a book trying to plead his case with the powerful -- and even he failed. I'm also trying to follow in Laozi's footsteps. I.e. to write a book to plead my case. I, too, expect to end up throwing up my hands and riding off through the western gate.

Rewilding as I understand it is not an individual endeavor though, there's probably a different word for your (awesome) lifestyle. It would mean being part of a social structure that is very different from being either a "citizen" of any which "country" (with all it entails), subject of any which "government" you are not acquainted with personally and not related to by blood or common/shared life or both, or a lone wolf (with or without a partner.) A "lone wolf" is an exception even among wolves --- normally they live in packs, extended families, supremely supportive of each other and fiercely loyal to each other -- yes, not unlike that clan loyalty you mentioned... whatever happened to ours?... we used to all have it, humans that is, no exceptions. Clan loyalty that is not toxic is only possible if the clan is real though. All those bogus loyalties to all those bogus clans that replaced (always by force or cunning) our real tribal lifestyle are nostalgic atavisms, pining for the real thing, projecting onto whatever bogus thing is available those orphaned genuine feelings of unity and loyalty and devotion to the native tribe. Normal human societies (before all the tweaking) are tribal-cooperative, not imperial and not every-man-for-himself competitive. That kind of a solution is a bit harder to implement this late in the "civilized" human day than just moving away from the city... exponentially harder. Possibly impossible. But if you feel you're wild enough as it is, I can fully understand that and genuinely admire the move.

That's the best, Nungali, to live in nature and do things for/with it rather than against it. It was wise of you to choose this lifestyle. Padymelons look very cute, and the wegie looks very bossy. Presently, I only feed one cat. And donate to the Snow Leopard Conservation Foundation.

Here's a passable article that gives a wider take (though, like nearly anything on wuxing that can be found online, it's not entirely accurate, and in more than just minor details -- e.g. it asserts there's "two cycles" whereas in reality there's three -- generating/increasing, using up/decreasing, and controlling/conquering): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xing Basically it's one of the absolute space-time-energy-change fundamental laws of classical taoism, and as such is not reducible to anything less. It is the pattern of motion/behavior of qi in the universe on all levels -- cosmic, local/earthly, and human. An awesome and inexhaustible system that can be applied successfully to anything -- but in taoist subtle anatomy and physiology, as well as medicine, it is primarily associated with five organ-system-function units and their interactions. A qigong based on understanding these might aim to target a particular organ-system-function (increase, decrease, stimulate, pacify, replenish, control, etc.) or the whole body. Or just be bogus if such understanding does not underly it.

Yes. I don't care if it's a black cat or The White Cat as long as he catches mice.

There's thousands of different qigongs and perhaps hundreds of them share the same popular names. Even among the most well-researched and traditional ones there's usually a little -- more often a lot -- difference in execution, depending on who you ask. The reason being, qigong is not a lineage art in the sense taiji is, although of course there's some lineage qigongs in existence. But most of it is a free-for-all. My teacher taught me how to create a qigong form specifically for my beginner students who are starting a taiji practice, and specifically in the style they're learning, and specifically for their current level of movement proficiency. Custom designed, based on what I already know. I can call it whatever I like if I want to call it anything. The names are not copyrighted. Now then. "The lungs are organ of chi" is incorrect -- you are probably under the impression that "chi is breath," not a useful way to look at it at all. The lungs, in the wuxing system, are the organ of Metal. Starting with Metal makes little wuxing sense (unless there's a reason for that -- which can be the case in a particular case), since the primordial phase is Water -- Kidneys, so if you want to follow the generating cycle of wuxing, you start with Kidneys, go to Liver (Wood), then Heart (Fire) etc.. You don't have to though. You can go in reverse --- returning Kidney qi to the mother phase of Metal-lungs, returning Metal qi to its mother phase of Earth (spleen-stomach), Earth to Fire (heart), Fire to Wood (liver), Wood to Water (kidneys). Depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

Why plant for people? Everything is permeated with specieism as it is. Plant for rabbits, raccoons, reindeer and all the other "nasty" animals that begin with the letter R. Reptiles. Rhinos. Raptors. Plant what they like to eat. What do raptors like to eat? Oops... they like to eat other nasty animals that begin with the letter R. Rabbits, raccoons, rats... I think I found the solution. Plant for rabbits, rabbits will attract raptors, raptors will keep rabbits in check, then you can plant for people once the ecological balance is in full swing.

Catch-22, huh? Worth brainstorming. Between bad moderatorship and going back to RON JEREMY style unmoderated forum, I'd choose unmoderated forum, even though I was one of the people campaigning for the moderated forum when it was first proposed. Bad moderatorship is worse because it has vampiric powers. Yes it does. It can suck out all life out of a place and puppeteer the pale drained specter that remains into exhibiting a semblance of vital signs, but not keep it alive. Good moderatorship is ideal, of course. And as any ideal, it doesn't just appear because you want it to, you need to figure out how to create it. So, I'm all for figuring out. Maybe finding some incentives for people to rotate in as mods. Don't know what kind. Maybe a poll? Ask people what they would want to get in return for, say, a 6 month commitment (no strings attached, if you want to quit after 6 hours, it's understandable. I lasted several years on the first-ever mod team, burned out toward the end -- I didn't mention "whateverism" for nothing in at least some of the long-term concierges, guilty as charged). Find out what can inspire someone toward some community service. In many religious traditions, "good deeds" for others count as some spiritual capital that can be built, a kind of spiritual credit one gets toward getting richer or at least not bankrupting their good-bad, right-wrong account. Maybe remind those who do believe in such things (I'm not a disbeliever, at least, though with some caveats) to look at their lives and see if they're currently doing anything like that, spending enough of their time and energy on practical hands-on "deeds" that are their own reward because they are good for others? And if not, maybe they should -- just in case all those stories about it being necessary for any spiritual growth or at least toward avoiding spiritual or moral degradation have a kernel of truth within them? Or maybe screw that and offer a cash reward? A gofundme fund for supporting mods with modest cash gifts from the community for their service? Or...? Let's brainstorm.

I think the picture of what new age as we inherited it really is is incomplete if, from the early theosophical, jungian, crowlean et al origins one transitions directly to the "lazy hodgepodge" scene of today while unwittingly jumping over the interesting moment in history that took place in between. To wit, the moment (spanning several decades as it were) when it was identified as weaponizable, co-opted, and weaponized toward subverting, domesticating, discrediting, corrupting or confusing and effectively deactivating actual countercultural political activism of the time. I tried just now to retrace my search steps of years ago on the subject of new age connections (and in many instances origins) with Cointelpro, MK-ultra and other mind control programs -- tons of documents have been declassified (not the ones that were reclassified of course) -- but today's google coughs up a fraction of a percent of what one could find ten years ago on "controversial" subjects, and even what little remains available is now, in its turn, subverted with ideologies that appear to discredit what they're speaking against by being cooky themselves. So, can't point toward one great reputable source to end all sources to corroborate my assertion, but sharing in case someone might want to look into this venue. A very useful inquiry IMO for anyone bent on "we won't be fooled again." Oh, and if the first things you come across in the process of digging up those hidden roots appear ridiculous and dismiss-worthy, please don't stop. Dig deeper someday, it's worth it. It's there, I've seen it, I just don't know how to consolidate it into one shocking "looky here" at this point, the way I was shocked beyond a reasonable doubt myself way back when.

Good idea. I occasionally juiced the leaves with other greens -- but I bought them at a health food store, and not cheaply. Nowhere to pick wild ones, they get exterminated with extreme prejudice.

I still remember the first branching of "daoist" off the "general" and the reason it happened. It happened because taoists (it was still TTB then) and taoist sympathizers were vastly outnumbered and incessantly outshouted in the general area by members of far more densely populated denominations, chiefly buddhists and new agers. Some of the latter, encouraged by their strength in numbers, derailed every single taoist-proper thread by pointing out that it's not real dharma, it's samsara, it's maya, it's against the Law of One, against the Law of Attraction, and not what Jesus would have done. The embattled taoists, ganged up on and cornered and bruised, used up all their qi on hissing and meowing back in response to all these allegations, in a cloud of cat fur torn out by mala-twirling, khorlo-spinning hands of the hordes of pious sages, occasionally swinging back a paw and tearing a claw mark into a priestly robe. Well, one or two of them may have done it, not saying all taoists fight back, but when it was proposed to give taoists a place for taoist-proper exchanges, all taoists and sympathizers rejoiced if memory serves. Considering this past experience, I propose a choice of two possible solutions: 1. still keep a daoist proper area alongside general, and maybe put daoist textual studies there as well; or 2. extend some minority protections to daoist-proper discussions. I don't know what shape or form those might take, but I anticipate the need for them. And a far more important proposal: reinstate mod rotation and stipulate that this rule can never be suspended again. I believe this particular rule is needed more than all other innovations combined. Just imagine this on the news tomorrow: the president has decided to abolish all rotations in the oval office. No more presidents coming and going, end of story, whoever is in the office is forever. Regardless of anyone's subjective feelings about this or that past mod, objectively, we were stuck with a Putin-like and possibly a Kim Jong Un-like deal, though even Putin and Kim Jong Un were at least pretend elected. The unelected mods who come and never go away are perhaps wonderful people when they start out -- then complete lack of accountability coupled with this realization at the back of their minds -- I do whatever I want so suck it up because I'm here to stay -- forever -- changes even the best (yes it can, and yes it does) into, sometimes, screwy mods, sometimes triumphant abusive bullies, and sometimes just into burned-out whateverists. Please let's not risk it happening again.

If you make a bare spot green and attractive by planting trees, people will come and enjoy it. If there's people around to come and enjoy it, a corporation will want to buy it. Then they will remove all the trees, pave the spot and build a mixed-use development. I'm not talking hypothetically, this is exactly what happened next door. There was an empty, partially green space only a quarter of a mile away from an already existing large mixed-use development. I passed by that area often and always thought that it could be planted with trees and turned into a park. Then, for a while, every time I would go shopping to that already-existing development, some activists from this or that community group would be waiting there, asking people to sign a petition protesting the plans to build another development in that empty spot. I signed them to humor those folks but didn't believe for a second that mere constituents may ever impose their will on a corporation. I was right. The development just opened in March. 96,000 square feet of retail and restaurants, 280,000 square feet of office space and 608 luxury apartments. Who needs trees, after all. Trees are almost idle, all they do is remove CO2 from the atmosphere with efficiency and expertise of a mere several hundred million years. Can't beat new technologies -- to say nothing of profitability thereof for their owners. Oh, and if you plant sunflowers, in some states you will be in violation of the zoning laws that prohibit growing edible plants if your operation can be classified by someone as a "farm," no matter how small, and many other laws, e.g. rights to water and minerals in a particular location, esthetic requirements -- to bureaucrats sunflowers may well look esthetically unacceptable, just like dandelions do... and quite a few other things that may be deemed illegal if you just up and plant something without obtaining permissions. Check the laws in your state pertaining to sunflowers before planting or you can get in trouble.

These are priceless. I only meant "changed my mind." What, CMM for that is not in circulation? I'm always off when I try to use Computerese. (Or is it Onlinish?.. Drats!.. )

(sorry, CMM)

Getthereitis

Hi Rene

Took a picture of my fruit bowl this morning. You may notice that it is presently occupied by my cat Haomao. I've plenty of space that might seem far more appropriate and convenient for him to claim. But this is what happens every time I run out of fruits and nuts. This morning I was watching him impersonate fruits and nuts like the rest of us do but even more explicitly, and decided that this picture might be a good way to inform the rest of the fruits and nuts that the cat is now officially out of the bag. And unless this place goes once again from "too fucked up for me" to "too fucked up for me" in a smooth succession (may it not come to pass), I'm back. Hi old friends.

Thank you for the "random thoughts," Sean. I think the fighting spirit, the imperative to actively engage, in any revolutionary thinker, is directly proportional to his or her level of energy available to invest in the engagement and inversely proportional to the experience. I have to confess I was a revolutionary kindergartener, or maybe it started even earlier. But now there's only the cynical "nah, been there tried that" remarks from Experience and the tired "nah, just cultivate your own garden" mumbles from Energy. Rewilding (for which I happen to have both the energy still and the experience in the past, but not enough of either to pioneer anything -- I'd only jump on the bandwagon if a bandwagon that is not falling apart as it rolls ever showed up) is not likely to appeal to many precisely because we're all children of technology, and nothing scares most of us more than an invitation to be weaned off that artificial mother's tit. I, too, imagine myself with assorted bodily needs of my civilized body not being met should civilization collapse... but the truth is, rewilding (if it was possible somehow without civilization collapsing first, or even after -- put it in your pipe and smoke it, then try to put the smoke back in the pipe...) is likely (all the indoctrination to the contrary notwithstanding) to produce bodies down the line that might need none of those crutches, not being disadvantaged and distorted from the start by the usage they were never built for. But who can blame us if we're not prepared to fight for those hypothetical future bodies and their happiness, and are more interested in winning over the minds of our contemporaries. And those are fully civilized minds, and I have no idea how to undo that. Yes, AnPrim extreme is antisocial -- so is our society, despite the oxymoron an "antisocial society" is -- so the best they have come up with is fight fire with fire... and that's where my Energy says forget it, you've used up your quota, and my Experience says forget it, if they actually do something practical, they'll just be marked as troublemakers (or worse) and banned (or worse) and that's the end of it. So... considering I do believe in a main premise of my own -- yours is "ownership of the means of production," right? -- mine is "civilization is not sustainable" -- I'm pretty much left without a fight to fight and without hope that someone else will fight mine. Except... Except I've been trying for at least 15 years to write a rewilding novel that would make my case indirectly -- art sometimes convinces while bypassing intellect, just turns something around in the imagination. And now I'm writing on TDB again instead of fighting that fight. Sigh. We're all hopeless.