Post 8: Recommendations

Sorry for the immense delay in posting. One day, the clueless honky will return with new material.

In the meantime, let me make a couple of recommendations:

1) If this is your first visit to the site, please read the posts in the order they are numbered. They might make sense reading them out of order. But goodness knows, they'll make a lot more sense in the order they were intended to be read.

2) If you're looking for other blogs worth reading, let me kindly recommend two blogs by one author, John Michael Greer, that are not only highly valuable, and incredibly well thought out and written, but are also highly pertinent to the subject matter of the Clueless Honky.

Greer's weekly blog is Ecosophia:   https://www.ecosophia.net/ 
His monthly blog is the Well of Galabes:    http://galabes.blogspot.com/

The Well of Galabes was started just this last year (2014), and is only done monthly, so it is worthwhile to go back to its beginning and start reading from there. Even if it seems like it's not up your alley, I'd recommend really giving it a concerted effort. His unfolding description of the magical traditions is the best I've ever read, and is certainly causing this clueless honky to really sit with my own understanding of the story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice.

My own use of the term "magic" within this blog, and how I believe it applies to all ancient and modern forms of technology - this is most certainly not what Greer means by the term "magic". There are huge important differences between magic and technology, and likewise important reasons to maintain them as separate and distinct concepts.

And yet, however, there also seems to be some strange similarities. Perhaps I'm forcing them under the same word "magic" because of my incredible affinity for the story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice, and because of how much I find this story to be a strong and clear message/ warning from our ancestors.

And perhaps I am not forcing the issue. Most of the earliest scientists whose insights led to many of the modern technologies of the industrial revolution were also practitioners to some degree of some ancient magical tradition. We are heirs to whole worlds of linguistic confusion, and the subjects of magic and technology seem particularly ripe with these "gifts".

It is likely that clueless honky postings in the near future will have nothing to do with these questions about the strange relationship between magical and technological traditions, but I guess I just wanted you to know that these questions are afoot. Maybe you too can catch sight of them sneaking around.

Thanks for your time and attention.
take care,

Post 7: Magic is Life

Important: For the first 7 posts on this Blog, it is best to read them in order!

Magic is Life

In order for any of our magical spells to work appropriately; the spell has to be grounded – meaning that the magical spell has to return the power back to the source.  

I proposed in an earlier post that the “source” is the marriage of heaven and earth.  Where the radiance from the heavens, either from our star the Sun during the day, or from the Sun’s neighbors at night – where this radiance falls and meets the earth, either on land or on water – here at the marriage of heaven and earth we find the source of our lives, and the source of life itself.  

I now want to focus on a mostly overlooked aspect of life that can perhaps help us understand more about magic. I know that this might seem strange, but I want to talk about bacteria. Because bacteria are literally invisible to us, bacteria are far too easy to overlook for their massive role in our world, in our lives.

Scientists now believe that life on earth is about 3.5 to 4 billion years old. And they believe that for the majority of that time, for almost 2 billion years, bacteria were the only living beings on Earth.

These are admittedly realms of time beyond our ability to imagine – and for the majority of this unimaginable time on Earth, the only living beings were those that would be unnoticeable to our present senses. Part of me would like to stop this post right here, and just have everyone meditate on that simple fact.

How did everything else besides bacteria eventually evolve (the eukaryotes – which include protozoa, fungi, plants and animals)? Well, scientists now believe that more complex life forms evolved through symbiogenesis, which literally means “creation through symbiosis” – in this case, symbiosis between two different bacteria.

The first eukaryote evolved from two bacteria in such an intimate relationship with one another that one got subsumed into the other and became an organelle. As if they made a deal. ‘Look’, one said, ‘I’ll take care of the whole energy production business, with ATP and all, and you take care of all the other functions of the cell.’ We call these ancient ones “mitochondria”, and they now take care of energy production within all eukaryotic (non-bacterial) cells. We all inherit our mitochondria from our mothers.

Then, for the evolution of green algae, the precursors to all modern plants, scientists believe there was a protist – a single cell organism with an organelle such as mitochondria as I’ve just described – in intimate relationship with a cyanobacterium (a photosynthetic bacteria) and it was such an intimate relationship that the same thing once again happened – symbiogenesis. The cyanobacteria got subsumed into the protist and became an organelle. These organelles, or ancient ones, became what we now call “chloroplasts” within the cells of all modern algae and plants. They are why we have air to breathe.

One could argue that all of life is either a bacterium, or an amalgamation of bacteria which joined forces to create more complex cells.

Many modern taxonomists no longer talk about the 5 kingdoms of life like they did when I was in high school, but about 3 kingdoms, two of which are bacteria (the eubacteria and the archea bacteria). The third kingdom is everything else – the eukaryotes, which includes the plants, animals, fungi, and protists – each of which used to be classified as their own kingdom.  The point of this change was to emphasize that all animals, plants, fungi, and protists are actually more alike one another than the eubacteria and the archea bacteria are alike one another, or alike the eukaryotes.

These bacterial kingdoms are themselves arguably like big super species, or super organisms. What I mean here is that historically the definition for a species is a group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring by having sex with one another.  Well, for a long time, we assumed that bacteria didn’t have “true” sex.

Well, although it is true that bacteria reproduce asexually by simply splitting into two, it turns out that all bacteria are still having “sex” with one another all of the time.  Biologists call it “horizontal” or “lateral gene transfer”. Bacteria regularly go up to one another and swap genetic information; they swap snippets of their DNA with each other. So it turns out that we call bacterial “species” are more like temporary “habits” within this one big bacterial super-organism.

Bacteria themselves continue to play an absolutely crucial role in the ongoing lives of supposedly “higher” organisms.  Take the soil food web, for example.  For those unfamiliar with the soil food web, I think the best way to describe it is to point out that for an average plant, 1/4 of all the sugars the plant creates through photosynthesis are “leached” out of the plant’s roots into the surrounding soil.  When biologists first realized this, they were astonished that a biological system could have evolved that was that leaky and inefficient. But then they realized that it wasn’t inefficient at all – that the plants’ leachate feeds huge populations of beneficial bacteria and fungi, upon which a whole microbial ecology - “the soil food web” - grows.

Why would a plant trouble itself with cultivating a “soil food web”? It turns out that bacteria and fungi are experts at releasing organic acids that break down earthen particles and extract nutrients from them; that bind soil particles together and create the humus that gives soil a crumbly structure, and that magically allows for both good water retention and water drainage, essential for plant health. 

Bacteria and fungi are very nutrient dense, and all of the other microorganisms that eat them like protists and nematodes have to eat a lot of bacteria and fungi to get the carbon they need, so then the protists and nematodes wind up “pooping” out the excess nutrients in soluble plant-available form right there by the roots of the plants – exactly what the plants need. 

It has been pointed out that it’s almost like the plants are “farming” this microbial ecology all around their roots, in order to achieve all these many benefits.

What I want to ask, however, is:  Who is farming whom?

It has been known for a while now that an average human body contains more than 10 times as many bacterial cells as it does "human" cells: (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=strange-but-true-humans-carry-more-bacterial-cells-than-human-ones)  Try reading this linked article, and then ask yourself again, who is farming whom?

So, to summarize here: 
For the majority of life on earth – for roughly the first 2 billion years – bacteria were the only life forms on earth.

Ever since then, ALL the non-bacterial living cells evolved as amalgamations of bacteria themselves. 

All bacteria are like one big super organism in a strange sense, continually swapping genetic information with one another.

And one could argue that they seem to be “farming” all supposedly “higher” life forms.

Bacteria are the ones that gave birth to our oxygen atmosphere.  Bacteria are the ones who primarily seed our clouds and therefore give us rain and rivers, and therefore, life on land.
There is an unfathomably deep intelligence within the bacterial realm.

What are bacteria but little spheres of flesh? And what is flesh but the 5^th element? Flesh is characteristically different from the other four elements – earth, air, water and fire – and is actually the weaver of the 4 elements, the conversation holder between the inside and outside of organisms.  And what is on the outside of any one bacterium is the whole cosmos, which includes all of the other bacteria.

But what’s on the outside of each of those other bacteria is, once again, the whole cosmos, which includes all of the other bacteria, including the bacteria previously mentioned.  And what’s on the outside of each of those bacteria is the whole cosmos, including the two previously mentioned. And so on, and so on.  There is this crazy way in which flesh really is all one. “Inter-subjectivity”, phenomenologists call it.

For us animals, we need to remember that flesh is not just our skin, but all those organs where the inside and outside of us meet, greet, converse and explore – our eyes, our ears, our nostrils, our mouth, our entire gastro-intestinal track, our lungs, our sexual organs – this is the conversation holder between the inside and outside of us.   

Too often we assume that our flesh is just our skin, and that “who we are” is simply what is on the inside of our skin. I would argue instead that “who we are” is the ongoing conversation between the inside and outside of our flesh.

So much of modern physics has pointed out that what we call “matter” is barely even there, that when you break it all apart; matter is almost all empty space.  This has led entire legions of “new agers” and the like to proclaim that reality is but a dream.  But what I want to say is – No, no. A dream is what each and every one of us does within us. Reality is instead an ongoing conversation amongst all of us. And I for one am definitely including bacteria and all other life forms in the definition of “us”.

At the core of so many of these conversations is the question: Is there some aspect of the cosmos that has not yet been unfolded, expressed, made manifest?  If not, then let’s do it together. 

Magic is not supernatural. Magic is not pretend. Magic is life.

Check out the next Clueless Honky Blog post for more.

Thanks for your time and attention

Post 6: Money As Wealth

                  Important: For the first 7 posts on this Blog, it is best to read them in order!

Money as Wealth

In my last two posts, I gave some examples of how everyday technologies such as writing, agriculture, time-keeping, and money all have within them some "mirroring" or "reflecting" quality to them. I went further into a broad analysis of money, and how we have mistakenly been using money as a reflection of debt instead of as a reflection of wealth as we had previously thought.

My exploration of money may have brought up two questions for you. First question: Is this honky crazy for even thinking that our entire culture is going to go back to the drawing board to completely re-work how we create and use money?

This is a great question. And to be honest, no, I don’t think it is very likely that this is going to happen anytime soon.

However, I don’t think using money as a reflection of debt is likely to continue for very much longer without us walking our way into a horrible civilizational collapse. The viability of debt-based money goes hand in hand with a world awash with cheap energy, cheap food, and cheap timber.  And since cheap food and cheap timber are themselves contingent upon cheap & profitable energy, cheap & profitable energy is truly the linchpin that allows debt-based money to continue to function.

In other words, if cheap & profitable energy goes, so does cheap food, cheap timber and debt-based money along with it. And it is becoming an increasingly safe bet to claim that we are experiencing the first stages of cheap & profitable energy’s departure from our lives.  

So sure, we can hold on to our debt-based currency system if we’re scared of confronting the political and economic powers that keep it locked in place – if we’re OK with sacrificing any kind of viable and attractive future for ourselves and our children.

I’m a little sorry for stating such sweeping opinions without having laid the groundwork to fully explain and justify them. I hope you can forgive me in the moment, for laying such groundwork is one of the many aims of this series of posts, and we are only just beginning. For now, please just let me tie these sweeping opinions back into the story of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice and say the following: 

We are now at the point in the story where all of our accumulated miscast and ungrounded magical spells are beginning to completely spiral out of control. We can kick back and assume that the Sorcerer will soon return to cast the one overarching spell to put everything back aright. Or we can commit ourselves to returning the power back to the source by using our magical spells consciously with gratitude.

Does this mean that we have to wait for our central bank to re-create itself before we start using money with gratitude in our own individual lives? No. We can begin that anytime. But eventually, we will have to unite to address this deeper root – of not only how we use money as individuals, but how we all create money together as a culture. And honestly, the sooner we address it, the better.

The second question: Even if we were going to start over and begin to use money as a reflection of wealth instead of debt, then that begs the question, what is wealth?

This is another great question. I will always assert that wealth is an integrated ecology of:  happiness, healthy communities, healthy ecosystems, fertile soil, clean air, clean water, knowledge of place, knowledge of one's past, healthy integration of generations so a culture can remember itself, exquisite adaptations to natural and cultural landscapes, the skills and disciplines of taking care of ourselves without poisoning or exploiting other people and places, and the time and space necessary to adequately gawk at the mystery of existence.

Of course, how we each define wealth and just how exactly our culture should go about spending new wealth into our country is open for debate. But this is exactly the debate that our country should be having right now. What technologies, using what methods, in which locations, at what scales? But right now isn't the time or place to go further into those debates. What I am saying here is that unless we get clear on the "money as debt" vs. "money as wealth" issue, our debates will never amount to any lasting solutions.

In other words, I am not saying that changing our money from a debt-based to a wealth-based system will solve all of our problems. Not at all.  I am saying, however, without solving our debt-based money problem, then we will be extremely challenged in providing any lasting solutions to anything. And since we all live on a small planet falling through space, we might want to give it a minute or two of our attention and thinking.

Right now, the important thing is, the next time you overhear a debate about economics, and there are a lot of them these days, listen to it anew. More than likely, both sides of the debate are assuming the continuation of our debt-based money system - where money is created as debt, for the benefit of a few.  We had decades of a cold war and many real wars between communism and capitalism, yet neither side of this war between economic paradigms ever questioned the validity of debt-based currency. Yes, there may continue to be very differing “sides” to current economic “debates”, but they are all different paths that lead to the same black-hole. Think instead about the options for a money system where money is created as wealth, for the benefit of all.

If you’re interested in exploring more about this subject, I’d recommend an excellent documentary called The Secret of Oz, by Bill Still.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swkq2E8mswI

And also check out the American Monetary Act by the American Monetary Institute.

http://www.monetary.org/intro-to-monetary-reform

A bill similar to the American Monetary Act was introduced on Sept 21^st, 2011 before the House of Representatives by Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers. In that congress, it was HR2990, and was called the NEED Act.

Since then, long term Representative Dennis Kucinich was gerrymandered out of his congressional seat by his own Democratic Party.

Admittedly, I had only intended to mention money in my last post as yet another example of a magical spell that we don’t usually see in that light. And as another example of how magical spells often have some kind of mirroring or reflecting quality to them. And perhaps as another example of how “mirroring” and “reflecting” aren’t really quite the right words for what I’m talking about yet.

The issues surrounding debt vs. wealth-based currencies was a little like a tractor beam pulling me into the Death Star. I do want to go further into these issues eventually. But for now, I want to zoom back out again and remember that in order for any of our magical spells to work appropriately; they have to return the power back to the source. A magical spell has to be grounded.

I’ve stated before that I believe the “source” is the marriage of heaven and earth. Well, there is a funny thing that happens on the ground here at the marriage of heaven and earth – namely Life. And next week, I want to focus on a mostly overlooked aspect of life that can perhaps help us understand more about all of these magical mirrors.

Until then, take care, and happy new year.

Check out the next Clueless Honky Blog post for more.

Thanks for your time and attention

Clueless honky is taking a little break. Please check in again.
Thanks.

Post 5: War God

                 Important: For the first 7 posts on this Blog, it is best to read them in order!

War God

I’ll give one final example of how magical spells embed a mirror within them – money. Money is a potent magical spell that can summon all kinds of potentials into existence. For money is a mirror, or reflection, of the time and space necessary to provide any good or service. And we assume that it therefore is a reflection of wealth.

We often lay paper bills and plastic cards down as we would wave a magic wand. Abracadabra, give me a cheeseburger. Abracadabra, give me a spool of black poly pipe. Let me summon additional weight to the momentum of processes that led to this cheeseburger, to this spool of pipe. We are all continually summoning the world into existence through the magic of money. The power of voting is laughing stock in the face of how this mighty power shapes our world.

And when we truly see how we sorcerer’s apprentices have been using money, we will see that we have all fallen under a spell of our own making. There is no longer any separation of church and state here in America. Regardless of whatever our acknowledged beliefs may be, we have all fallen under the spell of worshipping the same god.

We all go to him daily. His altars and temples are everywhere. And to appease him, we continually lay down and sacrifice the world upon his altar.

This god is a war god. He is out to destroy the world. And his name is the cheapest price.

But where is the gratitude in always choosing the cheapest price? And yet we do it time and time again, summoning more and more weight to the momentum of processes which have taken on a life and mind of their own, that only serve themselves, and that never return the power back to the source.

Who can provide goods and services for the cheapest price? Sure, it sometimes is those who are the most innovative, the least wasteful, the hardest working and/or most intelligent. But let’s be honest. Very often it’s those who operate on the hugest economy of scale, who are able to externalize the most actual costs, and/or pay the lowest wages. We know this.

Some folks look upon the horror of hugely centralized, corrupt powers in this world, and complain that Obama is a communist, or that Bush is a fascist, but I instead say that we are a bunch of clueless honkies unaware of continually waving the magical spell of money around, and every day we summon into the world more and more centralized, corrupt powers.

Who can provide food for the cheapest price? Well, huge farms that are addicted to fossil fuel based fertilizers and pesticides and genetically engineered seeds, that’s who.

Who can provide electricity at under $0.12 per kilowatt hour? Well, huge centralized corrupt powers that blow the tops off of the Appalachian Mountains to scrape out the coal into rail cars, that’s who.

Who can provide a kiln-dried, planed 10 foot 2x6 consistently for under $0.75 per board-foot? Well, huge centralized, corrupt powers that clear-cut stands of old-growth trees in the Pacific Northwest, or that endlessly rotate cloned mono-cultures of clear-cut tree plantations on sprayed lands, that’s who.

There’s no need to go and blame the farmers, or the loggers, or the miners of this world, when it is all of us, through clueless consumption, who continually conjure into the world an economic treadmill where only the most exploitative and destructive can survive.

Cheap food, cheap energy, and cheap timber are the three strands of the rope used as the noose around our necks. 

And, yet, amazingly enough, this is nothing for us to feel guilty about. We all do it to some degree. More and more of us will feel pressed to do it more and more as the coming economic contractions roll in. We will simply have to be more coherent with our magic.

Sure, but what in the world does that mean? Good question. We’re slowly getting there. Thanks for your patience.

We thought we were using money as a mirror or reflection of wealth for all of this time, but alas, it turns out instead that we have been using money not as a reflection of wealth, but of debt. And so we have therefore been confusing debt for wealth for longer than anyone can remember.

What I mean is this – the only way that money comes into being in any country in the modern world is as a representation of debt. Money is created out of thin air, mostly as debt with interest – either as debt to a private central bank who just issued the money, or as simply a loan by a private bank, under the terms of fractional reserve banking.

Before getting too lost down the rabbit hole of fractional reserve banking and central banking practice, the pivotal point I am trying to address here is that every dollar (or other currency) is created as debt by a private bank – a debt payable with interest to that private bank. Now there are some obvious logical fallacies in this system - such as the fact that the creation of that new dollar now requires more money than is presently in circulation to be able to pay back both the principal and interest. So where does the money come from to be able to pay back that interest? Well, you guessed it. More money created as more debt, with more interest. That’s simply not a system with a bright future. 

That's definitely not "returning the power back to the source". But is instead returning the power back to a narcissistic ego. Talk about taking on a "mind of its own."

However, my point remains that this is not how it has to be. We don’t have to create money as debt with interest, payable to private banks. Money could simply be created as a mirror or reflection of wealth.

What would this look like? Well, it could look like more things than I myself can imagine, so I’m almost hesitant to say an example, for fear that this one example would get pigeonholed as the only possibility, and the whole notion dismissed out of hand.

I will suggest some actual examples in future posts, but for now let me focus on an even larger point, and say what surely appears to be a crazy suggestion at first: governments can print money out of thin air and spend it on the creation of sustainable infrastructure throughout society.

“Whoa, whoa, whoa!” – Most people say. You just can’t go and print money out of thin air! Money would become worthless if you just printed it out of thin air!

Well, the first challenging pill to swallow is that this is exactly how money is already created.

The second challenging pill to swallow, at least for Americans, is just how much money our country’s private central bank has recently been printing out of thin air. To put the amount in perspective – if you spent $1 million every day since Jesus was born, you would not have spent as much money as our central bank has printed out of thin air in the last 9 months. They call it “quantitative easing”. It’s a nice phrase. Look it up.

And what have they done with this money? They have primarily bought toxic mortgage-backed securities from the too-big-to-fail banks. This becomes even more fascinating when you realize that our central bank itself is basically a quasi-private cartel comprised primarily of the too-big-to-fail banks.

Not only does this remove losses from the big bank’s books for the bad bets they made during the housing bubble (bets on bets, actually, with all of their derivative hocus-pocus), it also creates an across-the-board inflation for the currency which increases prices on everything. But this inflation also works in the interest of the too-big-to-fail banks because it counters the deflation of the housing market’s bubble bursting, thereby also decreasing their losses for their bad bets in the housing market.

It is very easy to spin out of control emotionally around all of these issues and jump to all kinds of blame and conspiracy theories.

If I may, I want to reach beyond all of that, and simply make one simple statement and ask one simple question. The statement – this sad state of affairs is simply the unbelievable accumulation of miscast, ungrounded magical spells that have now unfortunately taken on a life of their own.  And have they ever.

The question – what if printing money out of thin air isn’t the problem? Could it be done in a grounded way, in a way that returns the power back to the source?

Instead of the money being printed by private banks, who require it all to be paid back with interest, and who spent it to erase all of their own bad bets; what if we instead printed it as governments, as groups of people, to create sustainable infrastructure throughout our society?

Not only would the money not have to be paid back with interest, it would not have to be paid back at all. What I mean is this – if the money was spent in a manner that increased the overall wealth of the country equal to the amount of money that was created – then there would be no inflationary repercussions. In other words, not only would there be more money in circulation, there would also be more wealth for which that money was a mirror or reflection, so therefore there would be no inflation.

What do we want: money as debt, or money as wealth?

Check out the next Clueless Honky Blog for more.

Thanks for your time and attention.