stray
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:15
|
|
Squid Tempest wrote:
Whilst I can see the advantages and, indeed, need to connect to the wider community, surely in-fighting is counter-productive, and leads to breakdown in the dynamics of any movement?
No its not counter productive, because there is still an assemblage of groups and ideas spreading through society that at some historical point have had a common root, common reaction, or common event (and therefore a common identification and empathy).
|
The Sea Cat
|
Edited Feb 15, 2012, 16:17
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:17
|
|
stray wrote: The Sea Cat wrote:
The 'K' is the traditional hermetic spelling, adopted by Crowley for that reason, and it's just as worthy of discussion and is indeed part of the world of metaphysics.
I'm well aware of what Crowley said (as in I've read all the Equinox, 777 essays and Magick when I was much younger, but have in adulthood come to the personsl opinion that its all internally inconsistent bollocks), but that doesn't actually make it a fact. Crowley is hardly er.. reliable. Anyhoo I was taking the piss about this angsty defensive discussion, so lighten up on the 'manners' accusation.
I obviously misread your humorous intention, so I apologise for the manners remark. I agree about Crowley, perhaps a genius, but also quite unpleasant and dodgy. Israel Regardie described him as 'a genius with the emotional developement of a ten year old boy'. I think that sums him up.
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:25
|
|
What holds it together though, if there is too much in-fighting? Doesn't any movement need to grow if it is to spread into the wider community? Or can that still happen if a movement fragments? Sorry, I don't quite get where you're going...a bit slow this afternoon.
|
Toni Torino
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:31
|
|
Is in-fighting defined as acts of aggression or simply debate?
|
stray
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:32
|
|
The Sea Cat wrote: Israel Regardie described him as 'a genius with the emotional developement of a ten year old boy'. I think that sums him up.
haha yep. On a slightly more serious note, arguments like the homeopathy argument you guys are having are becoming increasingly upsetting to me. I too side with squid in that I have little time for homeopathy. However, I too also know people well for whom it seems to have had a very beneficial effect, for whatever reason. Now I don't argue with them about it, cos doing so is directly challenging not only another persons personal experience but also their interpretations of their experience. Which is just.. OUCH... isn't it ? Attempting to rationalise what 'really' happened to help them etc, is also to me just .. ouch too.. Also the reasons behind doing that to someone are to me a purely defensive knee-jerk on the challengers part. At best, its an attempt to rationalise somebody elses experiences and interpretations into your world view in order to make you feel comfortable. At worst its an attempt to 'fix' the other persons stupid ideas. While this is completely acceptable when it comes to political discussions (dealing with racists etc, etc) I don't think it is acceptable when it comes to the emotional discussions of health, beliefs or diet. I dunno why though, I'm not being rational in making this distinction, its just my own thing I guess. I think it also relates to my hatred of psychology too though ;) Anyhow I think the most positive thing to do is always to accept that the other persons experiences (and their interpretations of them thereof) are going to make you uncomfortable. Deal with the discomfort shrug and move on.
|
Kosmischeboy
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:32
|
I believe 'waxing your hawk board' could be considered a euphemism in some counties....
And if not it should be....
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:36
|
|
well said. as I mentioned, I must admit I knew I was guilty of exactly that, but just couldn't resist...sometimes these things are a bit red-rag-to-a-bull. I must learn a little more self-control!
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:37
|
|
Personally I'm thinking of the sort of disagreements that lead to splits.
|
stray
|
Edited Feb 15, 2012, 16:44
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:41
|
debate or fisty cuffs ? *shrug* doesn't matter. One group becomes two or more groups, or shrinks, people move on *shrug again*. The point is to stop thinking about some amorphous unwieldy 'movement' but to think of a loose assemblage of ideas, people and resources changing things. Even perhaps without contact or knowledge of each other. An assemblage at its edges constantly deterritorialises and reterritorialises its enviroment and the people it connects with.
What I'm saying I guess is to think about collective action and political ideas in those terms. To form groups and perform actions with that in mind. That the group or action itself is not actually important but its affect further down the line to other groups and actions are.. Engineer your actions and your groups to influence/energise the groups and actions that come after, do not try and hold-it-together. Accept the transient nature of political groupings and actions, so instead identify and promote any long term strategies, tactics or ideas that can inform other groups and actions. If you don't see your group, or action, capable of pushing something further downstream to others then bail on it, pack it up and go home. See yourself and your group as one part of an unidentifiable, evolutionary whole that is tweaking the accepted ideas and social structure rather than just blasting out and following a rigid (identifiable, breakable and exclusive) manifesto.
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Psychedelic Revolution
Feb 15, 2012, 16:47
|
|
Aha! I think I see what you're getting at now, and I rather like that. It puts me in mind of (you'll hate this) Fripp's "small mobile intelligent units".
|
