Wilderness versus Civilisation

[Asyloth]

Hello avalonians,

I've come to the realisation that most of the rebellious thinking, even my own, against the way things are nowadays are actually more of a "wild way of thinking" against a "civilised way of thinking".

I feel like the "alternative movement" of which project avalon is the perfect example, is a wild, more natural point of vue having trouble with the civilized, more compartimented way of doing things of our world today.

For having thought about it quite a bit, I've also realised that I could find positive and negative outcomes out of the two ways of thinking.

For example :

- A negative point about wilderness - natural, is that there is no such thing as justice in wilderness, justice is a creation of civilisation.

- A negative point about civilisation - compartimentalisation, is that civilisation tends to put everything into small boxes to be more effective which is its most fundamental credo.

I think that the most part of our different with the way things are today are within this question.

What do you think about it? What positive and/or negative consequences do you see in both of these ways of thinking.

[Bill Ryan]

.
It's possible a more productive dichotomy might be harmony vs disharmony, or balance vs imbalance.

In other words: How can we live WITH nature without destroying it?

(Ask any Native American — or any other indigenous people anywhere in the world. They knew, and still do.)

[AriG]

I am living this conundrum every day. A few years back, we moved from the city to a small farm. And I think that Bill has hit the nail on the head with respect to living with nature.

Every day, we make choices at our farm that many other local farmers do not make, thus detracting from nature. First and foremost, we are stewards of this land. We own it on paper, but we truly do not own the Earth. We just care for it, for now. It is our plan to take no action that negatively impacts the land or flora/fauna with the ultimate goal of leaving it in far better condition than when we arrived. Some examples would include coyote deterrent versus elimination, not using chemicals, utilizing permaculture, not installing a septic system, but rather using a sunmar composting toilet system, grey water recycling and capturing rain water from our roof. We live in a Barndo. Barn on the bottom, condo on the top. It has a low footprint and was built pole style with the lay of the land to not overtly impact water run off upon which the creek depends.. We use wind and solar wherever possible and over 50% of our land is virgin forest and wildlife habitat. We use only what is necessary and always rotate and replenish. Nature is harsh. It is heartbreaking to hear a coyote take down a young fawn, hearing that collective yap/howl of a fresh kill, while knowing that if we could stop it (at night no way to find), we shouldn't. Or to see a hawk tear into a young rabbit, etc. But we feel that we are managing this land with the love of Earth in mind. Yes, there appears to be no justice from an urban perspective, but once you realize that there would be no justice in these animals starving and that they play a role in keeping animal numbers in proportion to land to sustain them, the apparent harshness diminishes into understanding and acceptance.

Are there days that I miss pulling out of a garage onto a clean driveway in my stiletto heels? Sure. I'd be lying if I didn't say I missed some of the conveniences of urban life. But in our hearts, we are where we belong. And we make it work for us and for nature. We have all the conveniences. We still shop for many items. I guess where I am going with this is that living with nature is very possible. Living with 'civilization' is much more challenging. We partake in that we find palatable, and do make every attempt to positively affect change whenever possible. We have our little anarchy moments ;). And one interesting caveat. There is a family, about 1 mile from here. Side of the street trailer dwellers using their acreage as a dumping ground. They approached us recently for assistance in removing the junk and planting a garden.

[zen deik]

Compartmentalisation is a way to avoid being accountable for anything and remain guilt free of any collective misdeed.....

[AriG]

Compartmentalisation is a way to avoid being accountable for anything and remain guilt free of any collective misdeed.....

IMO, compartmentalization is a means of control. Consider demographics if you will. Was that even part of the vernacular 100 years ago?

Some compartmentalization is necessary for good mental health from an individual perspective. I certainly kick back when my husband comes home still wearing his 'boss hat'. In order for our marriage to work, he absolutely must compartmentalize those roles.

However, when it is done to us, versus choosing, it becomes just another cog in the wheel of the machine that attempts to run us. A very evil intent.

[zen deik]

The
bosses hat is merely head of the family as it should be, the evil of compartmentalization is very real thing, but to structure things in a certain way for the streamling of things is not a bad thing

[AriG]

The
bosses hat is merely head of the family as it should be, the evil of compartmentalization is very real thing, but to structure things in a certain way for the streamling of things is not a bad thing

Although I appreciate your perspective, in a healthy marriage, there are no bosses. Each party being equal in consideration. Sometimes one takes the lead and the other follows, generally when there is a strong opinion that prevails on either side, but under no circumstances do we approach one another in a boss/servant way. There is no "head" only participants. We are partners, through and through. Women and men are different, but equal in their sovereignty in spirit, mind and body.

[zen deik]

Can or worms I certainly opened and thought better, did not mean any disrespect and certainly agree, head of family in a biblical sense is what I was aiming for... To live in harmony with nature and one another is challenging due mostly to my short sightedness and inability to communicate successfully.. …

[AriG]

Can or worms I certainly opened and thought better, did not mean any disrespect and certainly agree, head of family in a biblical sense is what I was aiming for... To live in harmony with nature and one another is challenging due mostly to my short sightedness and inability to communicate successfully.. …

Not to worry :) The bible is a wonderful collection of essays, platitudes, metaphors and idioms representing man's plight and his association with a god head in those times. Many still translate today. Many do not.

You are not short sighted. Simply relaying your personal opinion. :) No can of worms. Maybe a jar of perspectives and we all have them.:focus:

[Ernie Nemeth]

On compartmentalization: Civilization is based on compartments of similar mental cognition. Where there are compartments, there must be buffers. Those buffers can be monetary and hereditary, laws and regulations, treaties and pacts, but in the end all buffers are policed and enforced. That means compartmentalization can only be maintained by the use of force and intimidation. A beautiful high end gated community is buffered from the ghetto by money, law and front line peace officers (interesting oxymoron). The countryside is a compartment by location and life style for the most part, but is still enforced by deeds and contracts with the final arbiter being sheriffs and guns. It seems justice is an invention of civilization. Justice from the barrel of a gun.

I could do with a little less justice.

Harmony is such a nice word. Singing in harmony in Wade's choir comes to mind. That would be something to experience when it happens. Harmony vs. discordance is no contest, or shouldn't be.

There are so many people displaced and dispossessed, millions took a chance at a shot at a better life in Europe. Talents and skills of countless millions squandered.

Entire habitats are being destroyed. The disharmony is palpable. It's the disease the indigenous people saw in the eyes of the newly arrived white man. Their civilization was a plague, a ravaging illness gone wild. Too fast, too big, too arrogant. Too mighty in arms, too little in heart. And they were right, it will eat the earth and consume its maker. Only they can undo what they have done.

Truth is we are not civilized. We aspire to be, but we are premature in our assessment. The civilized do not behave the way we do. Perhaps it was necessary at one time, to amass and store food and hold a standing army to protect it but those days are gone. The world is a much smaller place and there are far more of us now. We can do better, we have the ability but we have yet to find the will. When we become truly civilized we will see that it will be natural and it will be in harmony will all the people and life on the planet - and eventually elsewhere.

[Constance]

The Kogis, an indigenous tribe in Northern Columbia and our brothers, have something to say about "civilisation". It is a long video but well worth the watch. :happy dog:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq0kWs1q3hI&feature=iv&src_vid=5Z-NDNHw6wQ&annotation_id=annotation_618934

La Ciudad Perdida (The Lost City) | From the Heart of the World - The Elder Brother's Warning

[araucaria]

I think you have touched on an important topic here. I see you have started several threads these past few days: would this be an example of wilderness or of compartmentalized civilization, I wonder? A bit of both, I’d say, making your own distinction somewhat irrelevant. That is why you are looking for a new tool beyond either. Also heading in this direction, Daniel Quinn in the Ishmael books advocates a new tribalism – the fact that Ishmael is an intelligent gorilla who communicates telepathically, an ‘ugly’ earth creature as opposed to some beautiful extraterrestrial, suggests that we are being misdirected.

Applying this reflexively to thought and thought processes, this would mean, rather than splitting them up into different strands, building up your individual thoughts into a complex state of mind. Why are they racing through your head at the same time, and how are they connected? This is a similar exercise to ‘joining the dots’ or to running a thread with various contributors often teetering to stay on topic. You are constantly nearly off-topic because along with the relevant thought you bring along to the discussion this whole state of mind, which doesn’t necessarily fit in, but which is precisely your irreplaceable personal input at that time. You speak not just to the topic itself but to the relevance or validity of that topic both in general and specifically with reference to yourself. This is something you have managed to do right from your opening post; I say well done! :)

For an example of what I mean, I was asked recently what I could contribute to the latest planet X thread (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?88839-Nibiru-Will-Pass-Earth-Before-November-2017-The-Evidence-w-Investigator-David-Meade&p=1053302&viewfull=1#post1053302). I ran through the thoughts in my head and came to the conclusion that I thought the whole thing was a diversion. This is a potential thread-stopper, but the existence of a planet X thread doesn’t make planet X real. So far it is all talk, both here and in the scientific community. The purpose of the thread (any thread) is slightly different: if the emperor has no clothes, then we need to find out. When I say ‘along with the relevant thought you bring along to the discussion this whole state of mind, which doesn’t necessarily fit in’, that is precisely germane to the substance of that post. To summarize what I was saying, planet X seems to be a mangled version of the Story of Saturn from way back, but the apparently external and seemingly irrelevant appendix to that story is the idea that it had planet Earth in tow; so with a change of perspective for us earthlings, the sideshow becomes the main story and the walk-on part becomes the leading role.

Bill immediately suggested alternatives to your wilderness/civilization dichotomy, preferring harmony and balance. The above remarks suggest to me another: tiny individual dots vs the big picture. We are all ‘tiny individual dots’, we are also all ‘the big picture’ in microcosm; we need to bring that big picture to everything we do. We are all both wild and civilized, respectively individualized out of society and collectivized out of our individuality. Purely wild behaviour gets out of hand and eventually criminal. What we are now discovering is that purely civilized behaviour as practised by the elite also gets out of hand and eventually criminal. So we need to find harmony and balance between the ‘lone nut conspiracists’ on the one hand and the ‘insane cabal’ on the other, who seem to be agreed on only one thing: that everyone else is crazy. Let us agree on something else for a change: the madness is in the disagreement. The individualists, the dots, are beginning to join together into a (large) organized group; the collectivists, the big picturists, are beginning to splinter through individual whistle-blowers; at some stage, this dual process is going to coalesce bigtime.


Hello avalonians,

I've come to the realisation that most of the rebellious thinking, even my own, against the way things are nowadays are actually more of a "wild way of thinking" against a "civilised way of thinking".

I feel like the "alternative movement" of which project avalon is the perfect example, is a wild, more natural point of vue having trouble with the civilized, more compartimented way of doing things of our world today.

For having thought about it quite a bit, I've also realised that I could find positive and negative outcomes out of the two ways of thinking.

For example :

- A negative point about wilderness - natural, is that there is no such thing as justice in wilderness, justice is a creation of civilisation.

- A negative point about civilisation - compartimentalisation, is that civilisation tends to put everything into small boxes to be more effective which is its most fundamental credo.

I think that the most part of our different with the way things are today are within this question.

What do you think about it? What positive and/or negative consequences do you see in both of these ways of thinking.

[AriG]

Truth is we are not civilized. We aspire to be, but we are premature in our assessment. The civilized do not behave the way we do. Perhaps it was necessary at one time, to amass and store food and hold a standing army to protect it but those days are gone. The world is a much smaller place and there are far more of us now. We can do better, we have the ability but we have yet to find the will. When we become truly civilized we will see that it will be natural and it will be in harmony will all the people and life on the planet - and eventually elsewhere.

We? What? You got a mouse in your pocket? Lol. All kidding aside, I have never authorized these behaviors. I am sure you haven't as well. It is pretty important that we not serve as the collective "scape goat" for the actions of the elite. We didn't sanction these actions. If so we wouldn't be here (Avalon)

[Ernie Nemeth]

Sorry to include "us". But it is the society "we" live in. Sometimes that inclusive "we" is a healthy reminder. Plus I'm one for the dramatic.

Beyond that, I've resented being included in this society because I have known better my whole life. As a child I honestly thought adults were stupid and that when my time came I could reverse their crazy policies. I remember the event that began it too. We were on our way to Ottawa to visit my dad's parents. On the radio a news story was examining the marvelous solution for the pollution of the Rideau Canal. The solution was to divert the effluent to the nearby Ottawa River instead. I commented on the solution that was not a solution at all, and my dad just shrugged and told me to shut up, he was driving.

My vigil to uncover all conspiracy and government double talk began there. It has been very lonely, with only a few like-minded ever to show up in person in my life. I scoured libraries, books, magazines and TV broadcasts for any clues - there was no internet, only the Encyclopedia Britanica. Clues to anomalies, to exceptions, to secret groups and esoteric knowledge, along with scientific breakthroughs and information. I kept on the vanguard of many fronts, keeping as current as those days allowed. I was a keeper of knowledge. Now, with the advent of the internet, everyone is. My role has been superseded, I no longer stay current in a lot of areas. There is no need, if I need some new data point I google it.

So now I analyze my philosophical attitudes to see where that life style caused me to veer off track. And how I can get it back, in some smaller version, where I can still live out my days in relative comfort and ease, as all should be able to do in their later years. But my strong political bent and bias does not let me alone and requires I keep on trying. So here I am, preaching to the choir, it seems. But I am aware that others read through these pages too. So I try to ensure that those who don't know as much as we, understand the underlying condition of our present circumstance, without the official propaganda and societal rhetoric.

[AriG]

Sorry to include "us". But it is the society "we" live in. Sometimes that inclusive "we" is a healthy reminder. Plus I'm one for the dramatic.

Beyond that, I've resented being included in this society because I have known better my whole life. As a child I honestly thought adults were stupid and that when my time came I could reverse their crazy policies. I remember the event that began it too. We were on our way to Ottawa to visit my dad's parents. On the radio a news story was examining the marvelous solution for the pollution of the Rideau Canal. The solution was to divert the effluent to the nearby Ottawa River instead. I commented on the solution that was not a solution at all, and my dad just shrugged and told me to shut up, he was driving.

My vigil to uncover all conspiracy and government double talk began there. It has been very lonely, with only a few like-minded ever to show up in person in my life. I scoured libraries, books, magazines and TV broadcasts for any clues - there was no internet, only the Encyclopedia Britanica. Clues to anomalies, to exceptions, to secret groups and esoteric knowledge, along with scientific breakthroughs and information. I kept on the vanguard of many fronts, keeping as current as those days allowed. I was a keeper of knowledge. Now, with the advent of the internet, everyone is. My role has been superseded, I no longer stay current in a lot of areas. There is no need, if I need some new data point I google it.

So now I analyze my philosophical attitudes to see where that life style caused me to veer off track. And how I can get it back, in some smaller version, where I can still live out my days in relative comfort and ease, as all should be able to do in their later years. But my strong political bent and bias does not let me alone and requires I keep on trying. So here I am, preaching to the choir, it seems. But I am aware that others read through these pages too. So I try to ensure that those who don't know as much as we, understand the underlying condition of our present circumstance, without the official propaganda and societal rhetoric.

All so very well said. I too, saw the world through a very different lens than most. Back in the eighties, it was apparent to me that the elite had a stronghold that was very deep and that there was much more to the picture. Luckily, the internet has brought us together!

But Ernie, 58 is not old. I hope that you are not in ill health and if not, you're only 8 years older than I am! We're pups! Again, I hope nothing sad is happening for you, but keep that spirit going and always preach to the choir!

[amor]

Thank you for this thread. The very worst thing I witnessed in my life about the deliberate pollution and destruction of the earth was when driving through New Jersey from New York City. The Rockefeller factories spewing out sulfurous fumes that put any volcano to shame. I thought, are these people insane? Can no one stop them? And no one has. Our or their way of life is sick, their minds are sick. Scientists must direct their energies to finding ways of feed the life on earth so that the destruction which takes place to accomplish this is short circuited. We are not meant to live as industrial slaves. This is when my rage against those who destroy the earth began; and I do understand the Indian's story about the creator mother and how she thought the world into being. What seems to us incomprehensible babble is actually extremely sophisticated theoretical physics or metaphysics learned in a previous age of wisdom. May we know better and do better and soon.

[Baby Steps]

The concept of civilisation is a thought form loaded with prejudices based on history. We look at great ancient ruins and remember these past 'civilisations' and compare to our current vast hierarchy. But really these grand relics we see-and today's equivalents-are not a sign of civilisation. Definition-Social development and organisation.

The reality is that most of these past Epochs were tyrannies-or became so. They functioned as complex hierarchies that could funnel resources into grand buildings , statues and art works because they included exploitative hierarchical structures for taking the resources from the down trodden, and to the elites.

After the Normans arrived in Britain there was a century during which an unprecedented period of Church & Cathedral building happened-the greatest ever in European History. Was this because they brought development and well-being to the poor down trodden Saxons? Or was it an impressive project to stamp their dominance on their new conquest, as a psi-op and a tribute to ROME?

Could it be that these hierarchies are mostly not in service to the ordinary Human?

Could it be that true civilisation is practised by those simple groups who exist with reverence for nature, in harmony with their life support system? The only trace such people leave is the oral histories, the vast multi millennial history or Herbal & spiritual medicine, and a way of living that is fundamentally moral. These are the qualities of so-called primitives. This is what we lose when we exterminate the indigenous.

I don't think it's an either-or argument. I prefer BOTH PLUS MORE. Let's build our specialised hierarchies, science and culture, but bring back the morality and reverence for nature. Start living in and with Nature, but keep our technology. Use the tech to save our life support system.

God Bless

[Ernie Nemeth]

This society has demonstrated its preference and the established institutions uphold its fundamentals. There is no mistake and nothing has gone wrong. This society is as it always was meant to be. If there are inequities, if there is unfairness, if there is not a level playing field, it is not by coincidence but by intent. If a certain class has far more than they are entitled to it is by design. If the system endorses the fleecing of the flock it was so ordained from the start. There has been plenty of time to right the wrongs and make true reparations, but it has not been done because there is no wrong to right. This society is dead on course and holding to the plan. It's just that the course is not of our choosing and the plan is not for us. Any who think otherwise need to do their homework...