Thread: What is your definition of Freedom - Is a Utopia possible

YEs, thank you. And this discussion is about Utopia, not american indians. I was just pointing out that we need to look to our ancestors and our default way of life as a natural species. In order to live in harmony with this planet, which I think is a requirement for a Utopia, we need to re-learn and re-member that we are a part of nature just like the wolf and the deer and we need to become a part of the ecosystem from inside the ecosystem like the Indians were instead of studying the ecosystem as an outsider and making stupid decisions from an outsider's perspective of what the ecosystem needs.

Right now, in the town nearest me, they are planning on cutting down the last stand of old-growth forest in our watershed to expand the ski runs on the mountain. They are motivated by money, but none of the townsfolk want it done. There is no democracy happening here. Our drinking water will be affected, this space is also a bridge between two mountain ranges and the only place where the wildlife can cross, also it is the home for many endangered animals and animals endemic to this area. And it will all be gone in about a month. This is not Utopia. But it is capitalism. You see, the economy is a fake ecology. We make decisions in this modern world by how it will affect the economy but not how it will affect the environment. The environment, the ecology, is the real economy.

Building a house in a watershed is detrimental because in order to build a house you need to clear some land. You need to cut down some trees, which hold the rivers together and hold all the dirt, sediment, and toxic minerals out. Now, let us assume that you found a meadow in the watershed to build in and you didn't need to cut down any trees. You will still have to shit. And everything that is in the watershed ends up in the drinking water. YOu know how in places like India you have people bathing and washing their clothes in the river and downstream people depend on the water for drinking and they all get cholera or dysentery and die. If you have a road to your house that ends up in the water along with the exhaust and fumes and oil from your car. The reason why the life expectancy increased and the population increased was because people realized that you need clean water to drink. The population remained around the same in Europe until they learned about keeping people out of the watersheds. Then the population started increasing exponentially.

Who deserves to live in a fascist state? Those who would fuck over their neighbors for their own benefit. Those too lazy to do the right thing when the right thing is necessary. Those who want to profit off of their neighbor's misfortune. People who directly or indirectly require people to suffer for their own selfish benefit. People who don't stand up to their fascist government. Right now in the U.S.A. at least we live in a fascist government. And it is spreading globally. This whole economy collapse might just be a conspiracy to tie the last knot.

All societies were democratic and anarchistic before 5,000 years ago. The chief is not like our president. The chief is not a leader by any political power. He is a leader because he helps people come to their own decisions together and agree. He has no mandate, he is not elected, he doesn't inherit the position. He doesn't tell anybody what to do. If the people are undecided he is undecided. The decision making for the community or tribe is made by reaching a consensus. The consensus means that everybody agrees. It doesn't mean majority rule. It means everybody agrees. If your house is infested with cockroaches and you have no suitable food to eat your whole family will agree to move to a better place. It isn't that the Dad or Mom makes the decision. Even the children will agree. If there are no Buffalo or a neighboring tribe wants to kill you and take your food and they are stronger than you the whole tribe will agree to move. If the white people are coming and pushing you back and killing all the buffalo and infecting you with smallpox the people will reach a decision to either keep retreating or fight back. I don't see why it is so hard to believe that people can agree to survive when their survival is at stake. It isn't like they have to have a council about how many feathers are to be in somebody's hair.

So, socially and politically and ecologically many things need to change in order for a Utopia to exists out in the open. Right now if you build a Utopia out in the open the SWAT team and the ATF will firebomb your community and make up some bullshit reason. The changes that need to occur (but not enforced through corporal punishment, but by education) are that people need to know what is good for each other and the community, and need to be mature enough to choose the right thing, and people need to suck it up and get over their emotional baggage. Lots of emotional healing needs to take place, globally. People need to learn to communicate openly, people need to learn to listen without defense and speak without offense. People need to learn not to take trivial things personally. People need to banish the fliers.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

YEs, thank you. And this discussion is about Utopia, not american indians.

Well you said that your perfect society is a tribal one and used the example of American Indians, so don't act like your the victim of sidetracking.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

I was just pointing out that we need to look to our ancestors and our default way of life as a natural species.

Why because it was the first way? Why assume that tribal living is the "natural" way? Why isn't today a "natural" way?

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

In order to live in harmony with this planet, which I think is a requirement for a Utopia, we need to re-learn and re-member that we are a part of nature just like the wolf and the deer and we need to become a part of the ecosystem from inside the ecosystem like the Indians were instead of studying the ecosystem as an outsider and making stupid decisions from an outsider's perspective of what the ecosystem needs.

Why do you classify man as not being apart of nature now? You don't seem religious but I could be wrong. Well not according to Omnis but whatever. Man is a product of nature and he has a nature. We have evolved into who we are today, we still have a nature and we are still a product of nature. Do you think that because we don't live on straw mats or mud huts that we have lost who we are?

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

Right now, in the town nearest me, they are planning on cutting down the last stand of old-growth forest in our watershed to expand the ski runs on the mountain. They are motivated by money, but none of the townsfolk want it done.

Profit = happy people. Well unless they are given money by the government. If they were I would be protesting this along with you but not for the same reasons.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

There is no democracy happening here. Our drinking water will be affected, this space is also a bridge between two mountain ranges and the only place where the wildlife can cross, also it is the home for many endangered animals and animals endemic to this area. And it will all be gone in about a month. This is not Utopia. But it is capitalism. You see, the economy is a fake ecology. We make decisions in this modern world by how it will affect the economy but not how it will affect the environment. The environment, the ecology, is the real economy.

Honestly, unless you are drinking straight from the river I don't see how you can get disease-ridden water. Water is at least cleaned before it reaches your home. Which endangered animals live there? I wouldn't call capitalism an "ecology." It's not really a science. Well it could be if you consider social studies, social sciences. There is room to debate over that. I don't really see an "economy" in the environment basically because animals and rocks don't have goals nor ends or the ability to apply means towards ends. Again, room to debate if that is true with primates.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

Building a house in a watershed is detrimental because in order to build a house you need to clear some land. You need to cut down some trees, which hold the rivers together and hold all the dirt, sediment, and toxic minerals out. Now, let us assume that you found a meadow in the watershed to build in and you didn't need to cut down any trees. You will still have to shit. And everything that is in the watershed ends up in the drinking water.

You know the Romans made this interesting invention. It's call "plumbing."

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

YOu know how in places like India you have people bathing and washing their clothes in the river and downstream people depend on the water for drinking and they all get cholera or dysentery and die. If you have a road to your house that ends up in the water along with the exhaust and fumes and oil from your car. The reason why the life expectancy increased and the population increased was because people realized that you need clean water to drink. The population remained around the same in Europe until they learned about keeping people out of the watersheds. Then the population started increasing exponentially.

Haha, yes, the population burst experienced in Europe was because of watershed trespassing enforcement. Come on, are you serious? If so at least so evidence for such a claim. Actual urban sanitation is a late 19th, early 20th century concept. Sanitation existed before then, with things like Roman plumbing, but mass populace sanitation is a fairly new concept in relative terms.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

Who deserves to live in a fascist state? Those who would fuck over their neighbors for their own benefit. Those too lazy to do the right thing when the right thing is necessary. Those who want to profit off of their neighbor's misfortune. People who directly or indirectly require people to suffer for their own selfish benefit. People who don't stand up to their fascist government. Right now in the U.S.A. at least we live in a fascist government. And it is spreading globally. This whole economy collapse might just be a conspiracy to tie the last knot.

That is so ambiguous it could be anyone you deem.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

All societies were democratic and anarchistic before 5,000 years ago. The chief is not like our president. The chief is not a leader by any political power. He is a leader because he helps people come to their own decisions together and agree. He has no mandate, he is not elected, he doesn't inherit the position. He doesn't tell anybody what to do. If the people are undecided he is undecided. The decision making for the community or tribe is made by reaching a consensus. The consensus means that everybody agrees. It doesn't mean majority rule. It means everybody agrees. If your house is infested with cockroaches and you have no suitable food to eat your whole family will agree to move to a better place. It isn't that the Dad or Mom makes the decision. Even the children will agree. If there are no Buffalo or a neighboring tribe wants to kill you and take your food and they are stronger than you the whole tribe will agree to move. If the white people are coming and pushing you back and killing all the buffalo and infecting you with smallpox the people will reach a decision to either keep retreating or fight back. I don't see why it is so hard to believe that people can agree to survive when their survival is at stake. It isn't like they have to have a council about how many feathers are to be in somebody's hair.

Again, which tribe are you presenting? You are making this blanket statement about how all chiefs are such and such a way. At least narrow down who you are highlighting.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

So, socially and politically and ecologically many things need to change in order for a Utopia to exists out in the open. Right now if you build a Utopia out in the open the SWAT team and the ATF will firebomb your community and make up some bullshit reason.

Hey, we agree on something! This is weird...what do I do? Hooray?

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

The changes that need to occur (but not enforced through corporal punishment, but by education) are that people need to know what is good for each other and the community, and need to be mature enough to choose the right thing, and people need to suck it up and get over their emotional baggage. Lots of emotional healing needs to take place, globally. People need to learn to communicate openly, people need to learn to listen without defense and speak without offense. People need to learn not to take trivial things personally. People need to banish the fliers.