WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Ilie Pandia]

Just finished reading that Chomsky essay that Melinda linked to.

It was an interesting ride...

Based on Wade's definitions I would have to say that Noam is a structuralist and seems a materialist too . Ah, just rechecked that part of the essay and Wade actually refers to Noam as being such (a structuralist).

Another thing that became obvious: there is virtually no mention of technology and of course no mention of energy. And I realized what I felt was "not working" with that writing as soon I read Fuller's quote about politics...

Now, that the more obvious observations are out of the way, I have other notes I took while reading.

First one was the continuous mention of work, work, work, labor, labor, labor. That to me evokes the image of a mine worker, using a pickaxe to dig for coal.

And then this came: "[labor will] become not only a means of life, but also the highest want in life". It was too much!

So I had to stop and think: what is the problem here? Why could not work be the highest want in life?

This question made me realize that I was thinking with my scarcity mindset ON. I see work as a form of slavery and servitude. Work is something that you do so you can survive, and if you are lucky, you will get a few days off each year to do what you want with your time. And even then, you are conditioned to spend your savings on vacation trips and so on, and you will get right back on the grind. Of course that could not be the highest want in life!

Wade mentions that people will have "one hour workdays" in a Free Energy world. I don't think so. I think that work, chores, drudgery, grinding, repetitive and mindless tasks will be completely obsolete. "Work" may likely stay in our vocabulary, but only associated with physics, energy and machine "effort".

The way I see it, in an abundance world, if you do not want/desire to do something, nobody will make you do it. The paradox is, I don't think anyone will be sitting on their bums all day doing nothing. In fact, it's very possible that the activities will greatly surpass what we call today a "workday". It is possible that when the Sun sets you will feel exhausted, but eager to start again the next day. Why? Because you would not be working, you would be doing what you love most doing, what is your highest form of expression in the moment. That seems like Utopia, and probably this is why Noam stays away from it? Since it's logically impossible to attain with limited resources.

Something else that seemed apparent in that essay was a quest for a "hive mind" called the "the whole body of workers". It is possible that I misunderstood that concept and I am projecting my own fears over that form of social organization, but it seemed to me that individuality gets lost there. Abundance is actually the only way you can have full individual expression without exploiting someone or something. And argument could be made that harmony could also allow for individual expression if you love doing what I need as a resource, so me using you will not be called exploitation. But that could quickly slide into me having a vested interest into conditioning you to love "the work" so you don't get any other bright ideas about "moving on" or "changing professions".

Another idea that caught my eyes was: "the ability of the worker to be master over production". Here, again, I could be biased and rightfully accused of being elitist, but it seems that a lot of mental horse power is required to have this ability! You would need to be able to study and develop a comprehensive perspective well beyond your field of "labor". If you fail to do so then... to a hammer everything looks like a nail! (Pretty much how to a worker: labor and industry is the way to go!).

Next, I noticed that Noam is picking on technocrats. At this point I don't understand what the problem with Technocracy would be and it seems to me that this is exactly how the so called "industrial administrative committee" would work. With technocrats in the administrative positions.

Moving on to: abolishing the rights of property! Oh, oh!! That was a trigger for me... Where would I be if I could not own anything? What would be the meaning of my work and effort? Boy, is that scarcity at its best or what ? If I truly look at it, in an abundance world I really do not want to own anything and it would make no sense to do so. But now? There is a tendency to "hoard things", for that "rainy day"... It's a tendency of selfishness. I work hard so I deserve to own, or I've studied more so I deserve to own, or I make more money so I deserve to own. And why share it with all the "lazy people" out there that only watch TV and go about their day in a mindless state, complaining how bad things are?

Pretty thoughts, aren't they?

And finally, the full Notes on Anarchism seems to make the assumption that the general population is able and willing to look at these issues and understand the problem and put thought into it. There is an assumption of freedom of thought, which I don't think it actually exists... We are so deeply conditioned, that we mostly react to stuff and very rarely "stop and think it through". When people vote on issues, they vote emotionally not with their minds. And the campaign managers make full use of that knowledge.

I wonder what would happen if, by law, all the campaign would have to be black text on white background . No video, no audio (except for when disabilities are concerned). Boy, will we get some fine writers in quick order... Oh, and we can do that online to! Save a lot paper in the process. This will also cut down the campaign budget requirements quite a lot, no more need of corporate funding.

[Melinda]

You bring up a lot of good stuff Ilie.

It's interesting thinking about 'work.' Obviously our culture has relied upon work, specifically large amounts of manual labour, for centuries in order to facilitate survival and progress. But a lot of the drive to have 'work ethic' has come from others who needed people to believe in the work they were doing in order not to rebel against it, and to line the pockets of their masters. So a lot of people can end up too busy working to have time to think, and that's one of the reasons we don't have genuine progress that actually serves the majority of humanity.

I agree with you, and it's been discussed here before, that once free energy facilitates people being freed from drudgery, their motivations for work will change, and it won't feel like 'work' anymore. A lot of people become despondent in their jobs, or on unemployment benefits, because they don't have the resources or cultural support to develop their innate gifts and soul's creative inclinations. Families, partners, employers, friends are sometimes the source of that deflating commentary : “Who are you to think of being a great artist, inventor, healer, sage?” Sometimes it is out of fear manifesting as jealousy, and sometimes out of fear that the person won't survive or provide for their family if they don't buckle down to 'real' work.

To me a free energy world starts with freeing people from drudgery and survival needs so they can begin to explore their deeper nature and find their bliss. For some that may first take a turn as being escapist and even nihilist – but as society starts to see the fruits of people being freer and more fulfilled, it would make no sense to stay in a slump, when opportunities grow, and more and more people inspire those around them by the happiness they exude from realising their potential. It creates an energy shift that is inspiring, and more and more this becomes the norm.

A lot of depression (that leads to inertia) is really blocked anger, and that anger is really blocked or wounded love. The more opportunities there are to explore alternatives to the life situations that wounded us in the first place, the greater the chances of moving on faster. A world in which we are inspired to work, is more conducive to our wishing to explore ways we can contribute to the good of the whole – to discover how we can effect the lives of others positively. To see the fruits of that endeavour becomes reward in itself – rather than us needing to be reminded via an oppressive manifestation of a work ethic.

In a world of scarcity, as you aptly point out, owning material things is often the one tangible perk of labouring most of your time away for a pay cheque. It's part of the conundrum with jobs that focus on sustaining the material world, and a materialist mindset. You rarely see a high-earning broker who spends 16 hour days on the stock-market who is happy to live in a modest flat with few material possessions except some books and a wooden flute. But I did read about a multi-millionaire film-maker who went to live in a trailer on his own property to abandon the baggage that came with his plush home, and get back to an environment that focused his mind on what was within, and important to the health of his psyche.

This ties in with another misinterpretation of a free energy world – that it will lead to gluttony and general excess. I actually see it the other way around. That it can in fact more naturally lead to our having less rather than more in many respects. Both because it reduces the need for as much physical infrastructure and machinery as we have now (which will be kinder to the planetary environment and our homes) and also with the way it facilitates room for soul growth in our culture, so we are less focused on material benefits.

Your last points about what can be done online, with political campaigns in order to simplify them, reminded me of how we can contribute politically in a world of abundance. A lot of issues can be voted on online rather than at polling stations. In a world of abundance, respect and generosity, we have time to understand issues enough to vote consciously on far more of them, and we have the motivation to do so. But a lot of policies and decisions now are based on a complicated infrastructure riddled with problems to solve. In a world of abundance you would have far less issues that needed solving, and far more decisions that directly effect people could be made locally rather than by central governments that tie so many aspects of our lives together.

To your point about individuality – the more contended the individual parts of the whole, the stronger and clearer the collective energy will be. That is conducive to a healthier community, rather than one glued together based on survival needs.

A world of abundance offers much to look forward to.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi people:

Great posts, and I could spend a very long time replying to them, but will try to keep it relatively brief.

First, Nine, I am impressed that you read that essay. It is a big one, and yes, average Americans would not want to read it, is it blows the fairy tales of our indoctrination out of the water (but all peoples have their self-serving fantasies – I just know my nation's better than any other). My studies for writing my big essay, including anthropology, allowed me to see how the Founding Fathers were really little better or worse than elites anywhere. The rise of Europe was a catastrophe for the rest of humanity, and Europe raped and plundered the world because it could. I know almost no white people able to admit that obvious truth, but all manner of cover story has been concocted to make it seem like a noble undertaking, of "civilizing" the world, when that notion is a complete crock. It continues to this day with the USA's genocidal "liberation" of Iraq. We are the 21st century's Nazi Germany (and hiring death camp Nazis to become American heroes was right down our alley). That virtually no white people can admit the obvious has huge implications for the FE conundrum, which I will mention later.

The bottom line is that North America was history's greatest material prize, arguably even greater than Middle East oil, and as from time immemorial, some out-group sat on it. The invading English, Dutch, and French of the 1600s were on the rise, and their economic notions were more sophisticated than Spain's and Portugal's obsession with slaves and gold, and the proto-industrial English instantly saw the worth of the rich Eastern Woodlands. As with all out-groups for the entire human journey, the natives were fair game, and the genocide of the Western Hemisphere's inhabitants, which is history's greatest demographic catastrophe, continued in North America. The way that the USA treated its natives helped inspire Hitler's Final Solution, and Hitler actually got his anti-Semitic ideas from one of the USA's greatest industrialists, Henry Ford. I'll return to this issue after replying to Ilie.

Hi Ilie:

Yes, there is plenty about our world today, even observations from humanity's greatest living intellectual, which seems kind of crazy when viewed from a place of abundance. That situation reflects the absolutely radical change that FE and abundance will bring, which will transform human civilization into something unrecognizable today. Even "progressive" shows such as Star Trek barely hint at it, and for the 100th time, that world that Roads visited is the closest thing that I have seen to the kind of world that I imagine that FE can help bring about.

Yes, Noam is a structuralist and materialist, as nearly all scientists and the scientifically minded are. I saw a survey that showed that about 99% of practicing scientists were functional atheists (Greg Gaffin performed that survey – see The Dark Side of Charles Darwin – which is not a very good book, BTW), and Noam has stated that religion is "irrational," and as I have written, the worldview of such scientists rejects out of hand the idea that anybody is actively manipulating the world economy, as they have an "anarchist" view of what happens at elite levels. Those lefties are obviously not elites, especially at Godzilla's level of the game.

That attitude of people like Chomsky, which arises from the scientific establishment's worldview (as I eventually came to understand), is something that conspiracists in particular have a very hard time with. Somewhat crazily, conspiracists have called Noam a "Left Gatekeeper" who willingly works on Godzilla's behalf. Noam, for instance, really takes it to JFK and how the CIA had no reason to help kill JFK. It is a naïve position, unfortunately, and riled up many in "conspiracy" circles. That is not to say that conspiracists really see the big picture, either, and what unites structuralists and conspiracists is thinking like victims.

Yes, when I write "workday," I mean the time spent providing humanity's standard of living. People will be busy, but there will also not be any sense of time pressure, and there will be nothing that anybody has to do. Again, almost nobody today can even imagine an existence like that, but it was that way before every Epochal Event. Nobody could imagine the end of slavery before the Industrial Revolution began making backbreaking human labor obsolete. Women were also liberated from being barefoot and pregnant.

As I have mentioned, I plan to write a little tale of a day in the life of somebody in that Roads world, and almost none of it will be doing what we consider to be "work," but it will be far from dull.

Yes, the "anarchist" view of work can seem pretty primitive and kind of 19th century-ish. Michael Albert's Parecon is when I really began to see how the "radical" left was boxed in by their scarcity-based framework, and kind of trapped in Marxist thinking. In Parecon, there was not one word about energy, and the entire book was devoted to social organization and the workday of somebody in the anarchist's ideal world. It was one of the dullest books that I ever picked up.

The Left's materialist framework hems it in and is self-defeating in ways that they do not seem to comprehend. Marx advocated violence and coercion toward the elite, so have Chomsky and Albert, and even Uncle Howard, with Ward Churchill the most militant of the bunch. When I saw them advocate violence and coercion, I saw the seductions of materialist philosophy at work, even in the most enlightened materialists, which is another reason why I say that people need mystical awakenings so that they discard materialism. Materialism is a religion, although those in the pews deny that there are any pews.

The materialist framework usually has the "laws of physics" as a central part of its religion, and that, combined with their denial of Godzilla's very existence, is what makes materialists such heavily entrenched Level 3s. They do not seem to realize the irrationality of their position (or, at least, the false assumptions underlying their logical process), and I kind of gave up on the Left several years ago.

The greatest measure of wealth, for an organism, ecosystem, or civilization, is energy surplus, and with FE, how much surplus do you want? So, yes, the idea of possessions goes away with FE and abundance, but not because of some coercive vigilance against accumulating possessions, but because possessions will just be seen as easily replaced tools to make our lives better. If somebody coveted your home, you would let them have it, but that entire attitude of coveting, hoarding, and the like would become as obsolete and repulsive as the idea of slavery. It simply would not make any sense in a world of abundance.

At this stage of writing my response, I see that Melinda has replied, and her brilliant comments can stand on their own. Even though Melinda is no scientist, she is quite perceptive regarding the practical ramifications of FE and abundance.

Today's political process is all about who gets the scarce resources, so virtually nothing about today's political process will survive in a world of FE and abundance, not the retail politics (professional politicians and voting), or the wholesale level, where all the important decisions are made, outside of public awareness (and Godzilla has his claws in those waters, to manipulate events either subtly or dramatically, as needed, but as long as everybody plays the scarcity and survival game, he is content).

To get back to Nine's observations, they are highly relevant to FE. People do not want their cherished and self-serving fantasies challenged, as they feed them. It is a corollary to personal integrity being the world's scarcest commodity. In a world of scarcity and fear, everybody is trying to survive and all out-groups are fair game. In our modern world, people feign consideration for out-groups, but the most transparently stupid arguments are trotted out to justify out-group treatment, and people eagerly lap it up. If I had not witnessed it countless times, I would not have believed it, and watching people embrace certain death rather than question their indoctrination has been something to behold, and showed me how deeply baked scarcity was. Joe Average is not going to wake up to FE and abundance with talk. That much I know for sure, and is partly why approaches like Level 10 do not have a prayer.

That choir, if I can get it formed, is going to carry the ball for humanity until it wakes up. But the choir will be comprised of highly unusual people, and for starters, they will care for something besides their immediate self-interest. They will realize that there are not any "bad guys," even Godzilla. But they also know that the masses and Godzilla will not wake up with talk (or singing), but there will be a tiny fraction of humanity that has been waiting for that song for their entire lifetime, and that will be the choir's target audience. If 5,000-7,000 can learn to sing and can reach those 100,000 or so, FE will by far be a done deal. Nothing like my approach has been tried before, and other than the outcome of the battle at Godzilla's level in which cooler heads prevail (who do not want to live on Mars in case Earth becomes uninhabitable), I am not sure what has a chance. My approach could be called the enlightenment route to FE (although that may be just another delusion ), and I call it Level 12. I do not know if it will make a dent, but I had to try.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Well... I'm in a writing mood today...


One of the issues I have with some of what is termed 'New Age' philosophy, is that it dresses itself as spiritual whilst actually being preoccupied with the material. I know this is fairly obvious to most here. But I just thought to explore how it ties in with a scarcity mindset.

With a lot of self-help movements that spawn books, films, costly workshops and other merchandise, there appears to be this focus on empowering yourself to get (or attract) what you want, with the focus being material possessions / achievements. (One law of attraction guru wears a jewel over her third eye and advocates that you look away from overweight people if you're trying to lose weight – which seems glaringly like denial rather than self-empowerment.)

Given how we live in a world of scarcity I completely understand how having a home paid for, or personal transport and clothes and goods that don't fall apart, can be a stepping stone to a better way of life, free from mundane or oppressive distractions. Equally, purchasing works of art can have an uplifting spiritual purpose and supports the artist, rather than just being a materialist investment.

But it becomes morally dubious when the scarcity-system through which we work to get those things often requires us exploiting others to get it. In the global environment it has become even easier to ignore that aspect. For example - I could decide to be independent-minded and entrepreneurial by starting my own business. But then I might realise that in order for it to be cost effective it would be better for me to outsource production or labour to a foreign country where the manufacturing cost is far cheaper. If I take that route then I conveniently don't have to see if and how labourers are mistreated or underpaid, and I could hide behind the excuse that China, Indonesia (or wherever else) is too far and too expensive to travel to in order to oversee the process.

When my shoes developed holes years ago, I began looking into the manufacture of sports trainers in an attempt to make an educated purchase. I quickly discovered the murky world of brand trainers. On the one hand I sought them because they were well made and would last longer. But my research uncovered that it was virtually impossible to buy brand names that weren't manufactured abroad, specifically - in countries that had a poor track record of caring for their labour force.

Whilst it might be too expensive for individual entrepreneurs to travel back and forth overseeing foreign production lines, the excuse I found multi-million dollar brand name companies giving in the press was that it wasn't their place to interfere with the politics of those foreign territories. Why not? If they can use their millions to sway policy-makers in their own country they obviously have no problem with politics, and if they are invested in the economy of a foreign country then they do have political influence. It's just a matter of whether they would use it, if it risks being detrimental to profit.

The lure of hypocrisy permeates both the corporate world and the (multi-million dollar) spiritual industry. I remember a friend of mine telling me how they approached a priest in the building of a well known religious movement, and said they truly wanted to enrol in the life-changing and deeply spiritual course, but they felt it was very expensive given what they earned. The priest / teacher replied that if they were truly 'ready' for the course, that if they really wanted it and were open to higher guidance, they would find a way to find the money.

But too much earning potential in our current world is tied in with convincing someone to see worth in the purchase of something they don't necessarily need. It is exploitation that is difficult to avoid, and avoiding acknowledging that in order to participate without flinching demeans both the salesperson and the consumer.

So to my mind that priest's answer was in a sense close to advocating robbing Peter to pay Paul, as the saying goes.

I've also heard it said that healers, philosophers, psychics are giving energy, and the customer's money is a form of energy-repayment to balance the energetic transaction. Obviously those offering their services need to earn for rent, food and costs or they can't be available to do that work. With the huge money-earning spiritual enterprises however, you wonder how much of that reasoning is just too convenient to abandon.

The sooner we can have a true world of abundance, the sooner we can be done with that kind of scarcity-based 'spiritual' philosophising. And many of those who hide behind it inordinately might even breathe a sigh of relief.

These are sticky parameters for existence. We either miraculously overcome our material need to eat, travel and be sheltered, or we design our way out of scarcity technologically - with true energy abundance.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Melinda:

I had my mystical awakening in Southern California before there was a New Age, and that was quite the scene. Spiritual hucksterism is as old as civilization, and the first religions were designed to form group cohesion to win wars. My pals in that scene today pronounce "New Age" to rhyme with "sewage." The New Age has largely become a way for male "leaders" to get paid and laid, which reflects our societies. I get the disgust with such practices that drive people into becoming materialists, but that is also missing the boat.

Spirituality, like any human endeavor, is conditioned by the material reality that it arises within. The idea that some kind of spiritual awakening will put us over the top is similar to thinking that some kind of new social organization is going to do the trick. The only "trick" is going to be rising standards of living driven by an abundant energy source. All the rest is wishful thinking that really does not understand the human journey very well.

When scarcity stops being the song that everybody sings, everything will change, and radically, including spiritual practice.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Another heavy lift is finished, as I edited the "Lies That I Was Raised With" essay. I suppose that the edit of the American Empire essay is not far off. Again, these are basically only grammar and style changes, so there are no substantive changes to them. I do not plan any more substantive changes to my site for years, if ever. Other than my forum and Avalon, and periodically updating my big essay with new findings, I do not anticipate any new writings for the rest of my life. What I have produced is plenty to train a choir.

Best,

Wade

[Ilie Pandia]

"I do not anticipate any new writings for the rest of my life."

Yeah... you don't have a good track record with following through with such claims

[Wade Frazier]

Yeah, I could be accused of being a habitual liar on that score, but I still can do forum work and keep to that pledge. Also, I really do not see myself exceeding that big essay. Really, nothing remotely like that has ever been written that I ever heard of. I think I have done enough of that for this lifetime.

I see myself updating that essay periodically, but new scholarly essays I think I am finished with. Now, if somebody dumps $10 million on me, I get a choir going, and somewhere down the line when the singing is getting pretty good, maybe there will be something new, and I would be happy to be called a liar then.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As I polish off my site, which may never really change much from its state today, other than choir work, I have been lately reflecting on my journey. What a long, strange trip it has been.

If you had told me at age 15 what I was in for, I doubt that I would have comprehended much of it. If you had told me at 21, I doubt that I would have believed any of it. What a teacher life is. As I think about my journey, or those of my fellow travelers, we cared about making the world a better place and just never gave up. There does not seem to be anything magical about those qualities, but I eventually discovered how rare they were. As unbelievable as my journey has been, I have lived Walter Mitty's life compared to Dennis's Indiana Jones existence. Even the life of an astronaut asked to go to Mars does not hold a candle to Dennis's preposterous ride.

When I think of how we never gave up, there does not seem to be much special about it. If we had any conscience at all, how could we give up? Brian understood how Spaceship Earth is crashing, as does any scientist without conflicts of interest and with a clue. Averting the catastrophe would be enough for most of us, but we also had the chance to help initiate the biggest event in the human journey. None of us began our adventures thinking that way, but we could not pursue that path for long before it began dawning on us. That presents ego challenges, and many have fallen by the wayside because of it. If you walk that path for long, you get humbled, but you also get bitten by the bug.

Our bodies have expiration dates, and each one of us faces the question of what we will do with our time in this dimension. Although we all live forever, we only come here once with each particular earthly personality. When we pass over, we review our lives, digest the experiences, and then come back for more, fools that we are. I cannot speak for Brian, but Dennis and I heard from something that guided our efforts, and that is not easy to turn one's back on. Dennis thinks that he heard from "God," but I do not know who piped up in my head. However, my visit to Mr. Professor's grave last year leads me to believe that I am far from finished and that our missions are something that we chose and will not regret, however life-wrecking they may have been.

I never quite went "all in" like Dennis did, but as I look back, my life has been dominated by my quest, and I just do not see myself giving up in trying to make a dent. You eventually accept that this is what you came here for, and you just keep going. If you had told me when I was 30 that I would have spent all of my "spare" time during the next quarter-century doing what I have, and produced the body of work that I have, and then be able to interact with a global audience and have the chance to create a virtual community, in a way that I can sit in my office at home and immediately publish my thoughts to the entire planet, I again wonder at how much I would have believed it.

So, how "unrealistic" is a vision that I can currently imagine, as far as it coming to pass in my lifetime, or at least beginning to? It does not seem too crazy to me, or grandiose, but is just the next phase of the human journey, if enough of us can muster the integrity and sentience to help get us over the hump, and nobody needs to be a hero. Ilie remarked how high I have set the bar, but for the journey I have been on, and what I have seen my fellow travelers go through, what I ask of my readers is trivial. If I had encountered the work of my 56-year-old self when I was 25, I would not have come up for air for years. I have found some readers like that, but they are rare. Rare, but precious. But I do not need many of them for my little plan to make a dent. One-in-a-million would work. Some think that I will not be able to find them. I plan to devote my "spare" time for the rest of my life on finding and training that choir, and we will see what shakes.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

This is a strategic and reflective post. I developed my current approach by my experiences with trial and error, trading notes with fellow travelers, and watching others make their attempts.

I have always been a technology aficionado, especially regarding computers and IT. I have sometimes been on the cutting edge, but that bleeding edge stuff can really be painful, and the benefits can be so small that it is not worth it. I am a wary IT consumer, and have been a very late adopter of popular technologies when I could see that the downsides could outweigh the benefits, particularly for me. I was the last kid on my block to get a cell phone, and also a smart phone, and both times, others essentially forced me into it. I saw those technologies as electronic leashes in my professional life, and about all that I saw people do in their private lives was chatter with them. I did not see much benefit and still don't, at least for my life. I saw how to use such technology to make the lives of millions better, but nobody really wants to do that.

But I followed the development of the Internet from the beginning and immediately saw its potential. Being a bookworm and somebody with something to say, who began his writing "career" in the 1980s, the Internet's potential benefits were obvious. I have many pals who write professionally and have published books. What a risky and often thankless task. Self-publishing drove Brian O into bankruptcy, when his distributor went bankrupt and Brian's inventory sat in his publisher's warehouse. In the electronic age, paper books are truly dinosaurian technology. I still buy books because I am a scholar, and even though I do not sell my work, my work is professional level (or at least aspires to be! ) and professionals do not rent their tools. Electronic books are really rented, not owned, and tied to the device that the work was acquired on. That is a huge downside of electronic publishing, and I have purposely provided my work for free and always will.

Of course, doing it for free has its challenges, and it probably cost me at least $1 million to write my big essay. But the work is done, and we will see what I can help make shake with it. Money-hungriness perhaps has been the single greatest downfall that I have witnessed in this realm. Godzilla effortlessly defeats money-hungry efforts, and people who need money to be involved with FE efforts are the weak links that Godzilla goes after. The self-serving are easily defeated on the FE front, and all capitalist efforts are doomed to failure.

When the Mafia approached Dennis in his early days, their standard approach was to try to "invest" in his effort. Once they "invested," then came the takeover, and their takeover methods could be harsh, let us say. They were aggressive in trying to get Dennis to take the money, not much different than a street-corner drug dealer giving out "free" samples. I have watched many idealistic efforts, such as environmental organizations, become corrupted and co-opted as they became beholden to their patrons and became professional beggars. That last time that I looked, more than a third of Greenpeace's income was spent on fundraising. I cannot have people involved with my work who are trying to make a living doing it. It certainly limits my audience, but a self-serving audience is no help at all and a great hindrance, as I learned from my journey with Dennis.

But, the ability to publish my work to the world for almost no cost is the Internet's great potential that I am using, and I plan to build a virtual community of high sentience and heart, and that bar that I have set so high is intended to dissuade self-servers, the lazy, and those looking for easy answers, and Godzilla's minions will find it hard to derail. There are no easy answers for manifesting the biggest event in the human journey. But I do not need any money to build the choir, and I plan to use that window of opportunity.

Also, as I discovered during my days with Dennis, anytime that you take money from the public, even if you are selling the best heating system that has ever been on the world market and put it on people's homes for free, those "protectors" of the public interest then have their excuse to come after you, and as I saw, they can make it up as they go. So, not taking in any money is a great way to avoid many potentially fatal problems. Those who want me to publish a book don’t get it. My essay is a next-generation resource and I am trying to avoid the many pitfalls that I have witnessed.

Back to work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I am working on editing another essay, but will take a little break. A number of problems exist with developing a comprehensive perspective that looks at the roots and does not get distracted by branches, and probably the biggest one is fixating on certain ideas or frameworks (AKA paradigms), and excluding other facts and facets that can help develop that comprehensive picture.

The ideal of the scientific process is coming up with bright ideas and then putting them through the crucible of testing, ideally for falsification. That is the scientific ideal. It is certainly not the only path to truth and knowledge, but is the ideal of today's scientific practice. The greatest physicists cautioned against people trying to make science more than it is, which, like anything else, has been abused, particularly by organized skepticism, which is essentially a political movement. My encounters with them were something to behold, as the alleged voices of fairness and reason were deeply dishonest and irrational. Ironic indeed, but Orwellian irony abounds in today's world. As I recently stated, it has increasingly appeared that Mr. Skeptic was on Godzilla's payroll. He appeared the day after Dennis's Philly show, lied at every turn, and quietly folded his tents once Dennis had been run out of the country.

But if the ideal of science is aspired to, a lot of good can come from it. A new scientific hypothesis can dazzle and capture the imagination, but that does not mean that it is accurate. As Einstein said, no theory is really accurate, as it will eventually die at the hands of a new fact, but the scientific method is a way to try groping forward. But if contrary evidence is not suppressed and is allowed to accumulate, it can point to new paradigms, as Kuhn noted.

The problem with FE, antigravity, and other technologies is their epochal effect on the human journey, so they are subjected to organized suppression as nothing else ever has. With that kind of suppression, entire areas of scientific endeavor and technological practice have been declared off-limits, which has made mainstream science largely irrelevant to the most important issues that humanity faces. Mainstream scientists need to relinquish the conceit that they operate in an environment of open and free inquiry. They are, as Fuller said, in a slave profession. Nevertheless, the process of science is a good one for winnowing the bogus from the genuine, and very little fringe theory survives much scrutiny. The fringes are filled with invalid hypotheses that are like bright shiny objects that trap people's attention and divert it from what is important.

Scientists rarely give up their cherished theories, no matter how falsified they are, and with the lay public, long-falsified hypotheses seem to live forever. There is still a Flat Earth society, for god's sake, and it is not a joke. I have done my time, poking into fringe areas such as the idea that the moon landings were faked, and all I have seen since 2001 on that subject is the same tired garbage continually recycled, "evidence" that fell apart under scrutiny long ago, and I suppose that even when people can book trips to the moon and bring back vacation videos, some will argue that humans never landed on the moon (and, of course, refuse to take the trip). That kind of behavior puts a fine point on the question of whether humanity is a sentient species. I have watched many people who poked into the fringes get trapped by stuff that even if valid (and is usually unlikely to be valid) does not amount to much. JFK was killed by a conspiracy and the federal government covered it up. You can take that one to the bank. But what is the point of knowing that, other than knowing to not trust official investigations (and realizing just how little power American presidents really have)?

I have been on the fringes of the Velikovsky controversy for nearly 20 years, and I consider the evidence of global celestial catastrophes in the Holocene to be highly equivocal, and in areas where I have dived deeply, such as the megafauna extinctions, the catastrophic explanation just does not hold up, other than the arrival of behaviorally modern humans being the catastrophe that wiped them out. Similarly, I have watched people disappear into the 9/11 rabbit hole and build their worldviews around highly dubious hypotheses. Could 9/11 have been an inside job, either engineered from the inside, encouraged, or allowed to happen? Absolutely, but as with JFK, we are never going to know exactly who was involved, but when Bush picked Henry "Cloak and Dagger" Kissinger to run the 9/11 commission, a pal in Manhattan no longer harbored much doubt that the federal government was somehow complicit.

Those games will not stop, not when we live in a world of scarcity and evil games are profitable. With FE and abundance, such games will no longer make much sense, and that is why Godzilla is vigilant on the FE front. He is addicted to his game and does not want it to end.

Having beliefs that are demonstrably false is actually a universal feature of all human societies. If we are going to turn the corner as a species, we need to get over that one. That Columbus's bloody record can be spun into heroic deeds is one of many such defects in understanding that I see in my great nation. Some myths and lies are akin to believing that Earth is flat. Basing beliefs on stories we are told, instead of basing them on experience, evidence, and logic, is how we get into trouble and hack at branches instead of seek the root.

Back to work.

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

Posted by Wade Frazier (here)
Hi Melinda:

I had my mystical awakening in Southern California before there was a New Age, and that was quite the scene. Spiritual hucksterism is as old as civilization, and the first religions were designed to form group cohesion to win wars. My pals in that scene today pronounce "New Age" to rhyme with "sewage." The New Age has largely become a way for male "leaders" to get paid and laid, which reflects our societies. I get the disgust with such practices that drive people into becoming materialists, but that is also missing the boat.

Spirituality, like any human endeavor, is conditioned by the material reality that it arises within. The idea that some kind of spiritual awakening will put us over the top is similar to thinking that some kind of new social organization is going to do the trick. The only "trick" is going to be rising standards of living driven by an abundant energy source. All the rest is wishful thinking that really does not understand the human journey very well.

When scarcity stops being the song that everybody sings, everything will change, and radically, including spiritual practice...

Well said Wade. Thank you.

A great deal of self-help, motivational material that talks about manifesting abundance is (in practical terms) really just about helping yourself to a piece of a dwindling pie - at someone else's expense.

The American (or any other economy's) Dream - where you too can help devastate the environment, oppress people you've never met, and blame your government for any ill-effects that turn out to be visible at some point.

I dislike hearing it touted in popular culture as a cure to poverty, and I feel uncomfortable (even pained) when I hear people cling to it because they are so desperate to get off the wheel they're on.

The answer, as you continue to reiterate, is the spiritual approach to a technological solution. I like having a spiritual perspective. But I like having it with a warm home that's well built, with the lights on and the taps working.

I've come across, from strangers, a fearful response to the FE topic in the form of believing that it's only attractive to the middle class upwards because such parties would wish to safeguard their little piles of affluence. But it reminded me of the perspective Joe Bageant developed, when he talked about the middle class's duty not to let those in a tougher financial bracket rot, and the problem with ignorance being "the darkest kind of prison." I see no more considerate way to address the injustice of the class divide than striking at the root of the problem.

We all have more in common fundamentally than things that set us apart.

And as Bageant put it, in one context :

"If The Man tells you when to go to work, when you'll get your break, when you'll get your lunch, how much you'll get paid, whether or not you'll get benefits and when to take a walk when he doesn't need you - I'd say that's working class and about 70% of Americans fall into that."

Source : http://youtu.be/n9J-Dy0OcKw

Bageant also differentiated between 'the money economy and the real economy.' I wonder what he would have made of free energy, given enough years to mull it over.

Some of his essays are available here :

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/essay-list.html

I've just read AMERICA: Y UR PEEPS B SO DUM?, Understanding America's Class System, and The Iron Cheer of Empire. And they're all good.

[Nine]

"So I had to stop and think: what is the problem here? Why could not work be the highest want in life?

This question made me realize that I was thinking with my scarcity mindset ON. I see work as a form of slavery and servitude. Work is something that you do so you can survive, and if you are lucky, you will get a few days off each year to do what you want with your time. And even then, you are conditioned to spend your savings on vacation trips and so on, and you will get right back on the grind. Of course that could not be the highest want in life!"

From Ilie,

If I might, I worked for a huge federal agency and got force ably downsized recently and the first thing that people ask me about my "young" retirement is what do I do....

To answer that... "nothing" was better than what I did or who I did it for..... bottom line....

Federal pensions are funded like forever...I mean its tied to the Fed and their BS so its tied to the Military and so its tied to the political critters....

Ilie just pointed out the truth of the matter which is the idea of forced servitude for folks that basically despise you because you cost to much to keep.

Is that not the bottom line in Capitalism? We simply cost to much to keep and must be cut and disposed of?

This is what the scarcity doctrine says at least to me but of course I spend my retirement time reading dangerous essays about reality like what our dearest Wade posts....

It is simply time to cut such idle time wasting and cut such programs and put folks like me back into that labor system....work is good for you and the harder the better....as it were....

And so when I look at politics I often wonder about the Middle class and how they go along with cuts to basic retirement programs and school programs and programs for the poor and how the elite gets working class folks to vote against their interests. It is astounding to me.

Just look at the base income inequalities in American Society.

And I just had to have a belly laugh at the fact that Walmart corp had a decline in sales due to the fact that the Tea party repubs cut the snap program. You see, only the very poorest of the poor shop at Walmart with there GMO horrible food but what else can one do when you have no money?

It simply is amazing to me....

However dearest Wade the pace here is hard for me sometimes. I must have some time to wade through all of your links in your post to me.

And the other thing I wish to express is the issue of conspiracy theory's.

"Similarly, I have watched people disappear into the 9/11 rabbit hole and build their worldviews around highly dubious hypotheses. Could 9/11 have been an inside job, either engineered from the inside, encouraged, or allowed to happen? Absolutely, but as with JFK, we are never going to know exactly who was involved, but when Bush picked Henry "Cloak and Dagger" Kissinger to run the 9/11 commission, a pal in Manhattan no longer harbored much doubt that the federal government was somehow complicit."




Many folks become distracted by them.



I think that this is management of the herd.

It distracts from the main idea that all is driven by energy interests.

Conspiracy exists there is no doubt....

But doing things that are local and productive might just be harmed obsessing upon such things.

Now, the truth about America is in your fine essay about the American empire. What a brutal look at our American history.

None dare call that a conspiracy....

Nine

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Melinda:

As you know, I have written plenty about Bageant at Avalon (1, 2, 3, etc.). I thought that I wrote about him, or referred to his work, on my site, but see that I did not. He probably heard of Dennis, as Dennis went after the Bageant crowd. I never met a progressive like Bageant that ever really gave FE the time of day, usually because of Level 3 thinking. Joe wrote very capably about how the local oligarchy (at the county and state level) worked on behalf of the national oligarchy, keeping the masses in line, so I doubt that he would have found the idea of Godzilla so threatening, like it is with "progressives," who prefer to believe that Godzilla does not exist. With Dennis, getting past his redneck stuff is not easy, so I wonder how Joe reacted to it.

Yes, so much of the "progressive" and "New Age" message does not address the root of the problem at all. As Fuller said, all political ideologies are about who gets how big a slice of the scarce economic pie. In the New Age economy, books like What Color is Your Parachute? are about finding your niche in the rapacious capitalist order, not finding an alternative to it. That is a big, big subject that I have wrestled with for nearly 30 years. Again, the entire issue rides atop energy scarcity, and energy abundance would initiate the paradigm shift that almost nobody can even imagine today, or is willing to even try.

"Progressives" like Chomsky have identified facets of the issue, but I never saw one of them really see the big picture, and this is part of the conundrum that Brian and I encountered over the years, and I finally had to conclude that their ideological commitments blinded them to the bigger picture, and the light bulb went off in Brian's head when I wrote that (see his first Camelot interview). With the progressives, it was structuralism that is rooted in materialism, with the crowd that Bageant writes about, it is conspiracism. With New Agers, it is some kind of fairy tale view of the world rooted in narcissistic denial. What they have in common is thinking like a victim. With all of them, their orientation to Godzilla is either denial or obsession, and the obsession is rooted in a denial of how we all have made Godzilla's bed for him, as we play the scarcity and fear game.

You might think that a "spiritual" perspective would get past the victim's mindset and begin to think like a creator, but I have almost never found it. In one way or another, everybody thinks like a victim, which is why personal integrity is the world's scarcest commodity. So it is, in a world of scarcity and fear. With a truly loving perspective, we would acknowledge our role in today's grim reality and change it. We cannot change it until we accept it and our role in it. Only a loving perspective can do that.

Reading Fuller is when some paradigmatic light bulbs finally went off, and his observation of failure and scarcity being hardwired into human consciousness over the long human journey made a loud click in my head when I read it. Because Bucky saw Adam's first FE gizmo just before he died, and knew what was likely in store for Adam, I would like to think that my work would be something that Bucky would have instantly understood.

I was just reading yesterday that the median American worker income is $28K per year. I do not know how they survive in history's richest and most powerful nation.

Hi Nine:
Yes, I move fast.

Taking off the scarcity glasses is no easy trick.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

In my daily financial reading, writers are focusing more and more on the real economy and Peak Oil, such as with this article. While it is nice to see more economic writers glimpse reality beyond neoclassical delusions, they are only describing the problem, not solutions. The reality of my journey and those of my fellow travelers is too far outside of their notions of reality.

I have tried to reach people like that, without success, and Heinberg's denial was perhaps the most bizarre of all, as he actually wrote about FE a little, but then did not want to know more about it, to later call FE an illusion. That is typical in those circles, as I discovered the hard way. They are hooked on scarcity, and even those who would seem natural allies are deeply hooked on their scarcity-based perspectives. It was after having the door slammed in my face a hundred times, and Brian O having similar experiences, that I realized that if any group was going to really understand the FE issue and do something about it, I was going to have to roll my own, and my choir idea is the outcome of that process.

Shedding the insidious scarcity assumptions that underlie our "thinking" is the hard part, but it begins the heart, which I eventually discovered the hard way. When I get challenged on the validity of that harsh lesson, if the challenger is honest enough to have a rational conversation about it, the objections always lead back to fear and scarcity underlying people's motivations, and their minds then follow their hearts. It is that kind of "thinking" that drove Brian to wondering if humanity was really a sentient species. The mind follows where the heart leads. Eliminate scarcity and its resultant fear, and everything radically changes.

Looking for those needles…

Best,

Wade

[Melinda]

"I was just reading yesterday that the median American worker income is $28K per year."

That is insane.

At the post you linked to :

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...dollars-a-year

the author wrote :

"We are witnessing the slow-motion destruction of the middle class, and very few of our leaders seem to care."

I've been seeing this destruction in the UK for years, and even trying to warn those (in my own circle) who may have thought they were safe. Doesn't take long before it hits people's pockets and becomes unavoidably clear.

The middle class (as it used to be) was in a unique social, political position. Well-off enough to have the time, education and comfort that is more conducive to considering the needs of others (as Bageant touched on.) But not so well off as to be far removed from the lives of people who are less fortunate. People who share the workplace, transport, local facilities and amenities. People the middle class deals with directly because it can't afford to pay intermediaries, and because it wouldn't wish to create that distance.

I empathise with the point you made in post #4130 :

"I was the last kid on my block to get a cell phone, and also a smart phone, and both times, others essentially forced me into it. I saw those technologies as electronic leashes in my professional life, and about all that I saw people do in their private lives was chatter with them."

I'm lucky enough, at the moment, not to feel pressured into having a smart phone for professional purposes.

One of the downsides (as you acknowledged) with that kind of tech is that whilst it seemingly makes people's lives easier it can slowly (sometimes imperceptibly) draw them apart. From the resultant lack of social interaction (as people engage with their phones rather than with each other) to using the tech to deal with life online rather than in person, face to face or voice to voice. You can take a conspiracist angle on why it's been foisted as a cultural shift from the corporations, or you can simply make the choice not to be diluted / distracted by the tech.

Technology makes a hurried life easier, goods cheaper, and people of like mind easier to find. It also makes other viewpoints easier to access to broaden our world view. But we have to be vigilant so that it doesn't simply line our prison walls with velvet.

A world of abundance isn't born of that sleep-walk into stasis.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I was surprised when that search box on my home page did not return any Joe Bageant results. I then did it in Windows Explorer for my site's files, and still no results. I do mention Bageant, and it must be because the word "Bageant" is in link that the searches do not pick it up. That is a flaw in the search functionality, IMO.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi Melinda:

The middle class was born of rising standards of living due to increased energy usage. That Peak Oil article that I referred to is one of those that connects the dots between the real and financial economies, unlike neoclassical economics that treats it all as some kind of social phenomenon.

As energy use has declined, so has the USA's middle class. We have even seen a return to slavery, with the prison labor situation: people who did not commit what a reasonable person would call a crime are incarcerated and then corporations can use a truly captive labor force that they pay about $1.5 an hour for. Microsoft was caught using prison labor here in the 1990s to ship their product, when Bill Gates was the world's richest man and a Golden Boy.

Yes, the middle classes think that they somehow escaped the lower rungs (partly by exploiting peoples abroad), but they are slipping back down as energy use declines.

It all about energy. Everything else is noise.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As a brief addendum to Melinda's observation on the UK's declining middle class, North Sea oil is what stimulated the UK's economy. North Sea oil production peaked in 2001, and has declined ever since. It will decline to about a third of the peak by 2020, which is not far off. So, of course, the middle classes are going to feel the pinch in the resultant standard of living decline.

Again, it is always energy that drives economies, although people are generally too blind to see it. The USA reached Peak Oil in 1970, and the USA's standard of living began declining with the 1973-1974 oil crisis. But the masses focus on derivative and egocentric ideas like money and never see it coming or understand why. And that is just how Godzilla likes it. As long as people have literally no idea of how the world really works, they are easily manipulated.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Reading pages that link to my site is becoming a chore, but I asked for it.

I updated the vaccination section of my medical racket essay when I did my essay updates. That essay is prominently presented on this site, and this vaccination primer is a good one. I was talking to a relative just last week about the mercury that is still in vaccines (she brought it up, not me). It is mind-boggling. Mercury as medicine has a long, sordid past, and it is still with us, along with fluoridation and other bright ideas that are coincidentally financial windfalls for various interests. As my pal Ralph Hovnanian wrote, we are living in a medical dark age.

Back to chores.

Best,

Wade