Resistance Is Not Futile Part 2 : Power and Protest

Photo editing by Charles Garrett

"The strong man he will kneel down

Whilst angels strip him of cloak and crown

Through bitter lips come vile breath

He is the last one to confess

There will be no pity for him

We must kill him where he stands

No there will be no mercy for him

Nor for any of his clan..."

~ Sixteen Horsepower ~

In the early 1970's, my parents kept one of those large, off-white, leather-bound, illustrated, coffee-table edition, family bibles, with a picture of Jesus on the front cover, in our living room.  Curious, and an avid reader, I poked my nose into it often, particularly when it served the dual purpose of garnering an approving reaction from Mom.  The heft and feel of the big volume gave the tome an undeniable air of importance in my small hands, and the illustrations were vivid, fiery replications of classic religious paintings.  The texture of the thick pages, and the thumping noise that they made when large sections of them would fall together, stay with me still, like when you smile and no one is around... 

After skipping about for a bit and looking at my favorite pictures, I would normally settle in and start reading at the beginning.  The thrilling stories contained within the Book of Genesis never failed to hold my rapt attention.  Tales of Creation, the Garden of Eden, and Noah's Ark, all provided mountains of imagination fodder...but, it was the saga of the Tower of Babel that truly fascinated me.

Wikimedia Commons

Genesis 11:1-9 ~ New International Version (NIV) ~ The Tower of Babel:

1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there. 3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” 5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” 8 So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

**Author's Note: To my young mind, there existed no extra-biblical sources of information beyond the country pulpit.  We had five television channels, Mom and Dad, relatives, older-siblings, and friends, from which to draw further inspiration and information.  I didn't know one iota about the history of the Middle East, existence of apocryphal texts, Masoretic texts, the Talmud, commentaries, other religions, etc.  When reading the text, my brain was processing it all in the most literal, exoteric manner possible.**

 Wikimedia Commons

These nine verses have historically been pondered and debated for many reasons, including the Tower's possible location, the penalty for hubris, structural feasibility, the identity of God's apparent companion(s), and the origin and migration of people, language, and culture.  While these topics and concerns are interesting, it was verse six, which resonated greatest with me as an imaginative youth. The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."  

That was heady stuff!  Humans could accomplish ANYTHING, when working together in harmony.  The fact that God felt threatened enough to act, in order to stop them, was all the evidence I needed. It all seemed to hint at some hidden power.

Over the course of my life, I have continued to contemplate Genesis 11:6, and consider the nature of human power throughout each experience, including parent/child/sibling/friendship dynamics, employer/employee relationships on both sides, street fights, sporting competitions of all types,  hunting various species in various environments, testing myself against nature, romantic relationships, military service, running a large sales force,  public speaking, entertainment, and trying to quit smoking, among a myriad of others.  I've often heard it said that, "Knowledge is Power."  Although I will concede that knowledge is potential power, or a type of power, in a broader sense I disagree.  Rather, it's the definition of power in Genesis 11:6 that has proven reliable through my 52 years:

Power = Organized Effort

Remember that time a country about the size of the State of Oregon nearly conquered the world?  Gandhi (pictured below) promoted the Hindu concept of ahimsa, and through organized passive resistance, eventually achieves complete independence from British rule.  Lech Walesa (pictured below) spearheaded the concept of Solidarity:  an independent trade union movement in Poland that developed into a mass campaign for political change and inspired popular opposition to communist regimes across eastern Europe during the 1980s.

Furthermore, it takes but a moment's consideration to realize that this concept operates on multiple levels and existential planes.  The power dynamic that concerns us most today, of course, is the relationship between the super-rich, ruling elite class, < 1%, their governmental mouthpieces (one and the same in many instances), versus the great majority of the human population, > 99%.

When you consider the question, why does the majority consent to this tiny minority, ruling and controlling them in ways they find undesirable and less than optimal, you must realize that more than mere money is necessary to accomplish this on a continuous basis.  This type of incredible power and perpetual control by a select few requires an extreme level of organized effort.  How could it reasonably be otherwise?  Consider the behind the scenes shenanigans in the 2016 general election as a tiny sample, from coordinated 'fake news' campaigns, to possible international, and inter-agency collusion.

So, while particular 'conspiracy theorists' may well be crazy (and surely offered up for your consumption as such), and specifically inaccurate, in premise they are not wrong.  In virtually every power situation, conspiracy of some form is required, by definition.  It may be likened to 'uninformed consent,' but maybe misinformed is more accurate.

Many institutions (as we have recently witnessed), like the electronic media, are used to promote continual disharmony and confusion,  Often, you will see this disguised brilliantly, but falsely, as freedom of choice and promotion of diversity (rather than the false dichotomies/false dilemmas they are).  It's Republican or Democrat, Black or White, Christian or Muslim, male or female, gay or straight, tastes great or less filling, Coke or Pepsi, and we're all part of it. Our language gets involved in a big way, of course.  For example, when the War Department changes its name to the Defense Department, when protections are called regulations, or taxes are called incentives...it's all part and parcel of the process of control.  "Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

Photo by Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images)

Photo by Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

Power wielded in the form of organized effort has been observed more recently, in the case of the non-violent Native American protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline, and the non-violent (global) Women's March on Washington (both pictured above).  The first has thus far succeeded in delaying construction of the proposed pipeline, and the second reportedly incensed all the right people (if possibly for all the wrong reasons...these particular protests were so important on so many levels, that they require separate posts to properly deconstruct, coming soon).  Regardless, make no mistake, as in the Genesis 11:6 example, our earthly 'lords' understand extremely well how outnumbered they are, and they are desperately afraid of something.  "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."  

We MUST continue to put love of one another first, to support and celebrate each others' successes and failures, to take advantage of the cultural momentum, organize our efforts, wield our power effectively, and move together in a direction that leads to a better, more inclusive, sustainable world.  It's undeniable that we have the cultural momentum, and we must keep it.  As Cory Panshin astutely observes,

"...one thing I think yesterday's marches show us is that protest is about to go beyond the stage of spectator sport -- the made-for-TV 1960s model with parades, chants, colorful costumes, and occasionally giant puppets -- and become a participatory event.  

Call it the cosplay model, if you will. Everybody wants to be Princess Leia or Captain America. Everybody's grown up on movies and comic books that tell us the most satisfying thing in the world is to dust some Nazi-vampire-zombies. And even the tiniest towns are just raring to get into the act."

Protest had better stop being a spectator sport.  If you can't protest, support protesters.  The alternative:  those earthy lords and their loyal hordes will do everything they can to 'scatter us across the face of the earth.'

RM

Thoughts On The Creation Of The State

*Author's Note:  This post (placed here for sharing and quick reference purposes) comes from a lot of places:  My childhood conversations with my father and other travelers long since passed, my anthropological pedigree, some educated speculation, because I love revealing esoteric wisdom in the form of "what-if" stories, a lifetime of the road less traveled, and a great majority is freely adapted, and/or stolen verbatim from the works of  Manly P. Hall, Hakim Bey, Plato, and others much wiser than I.  Is this how it all happened?  Is this how it really is?  Who knows?! It's just another story...*

The Rise of the State

A long, long time ago (no one remembers precisely who, where, or when) the science of mathematics was discovered by ancient women and men...  

This allowed them to count, organize, integrate, and classify natural phenomena.  They could quantify time, eliminate generalities, increase accuracy and precision, map and find locations, and formulate solutions to problems on multiple analytical and operational scales.  As the universe and its machinations were slowly revealed, it became understood that certain laws and rules normally applied, and that nothing happened through accident.  Effect followed cause as sure as night followed day.  

They soon began to track the movements of celestial bodies, as Astronomy (and Music) was impossible before Math.  Vigilant observation of the stars eventually produced predictable patterns.  In the time lost to history, this combination of applied mathematics and astronomy heralded the formation of what has been described as Astro-theology (astrotheology) and defined by some as "Religion based upon the supporting evidence of Nature."

Natural cycles like the four seasons were recognized and timed.  The zodiac and ecliptic became known.  The 25,920 year precessional cycle was tracked and contemplated.  The universe was recognized as a wonderfully complex network of apparent clockwork precision that was ruled by....what?  

Since humans possess only the ability to investigate the physical properties of reality, eventually it was determined that the physical universe itself is just...a symbol...created and ruled by processes, which are not directly observable,  So, through rigorous contemplation of forces, which were physically observable, it was decided that there must be unseen powers at work influencing the operation of the observable universe/reality.  Natural observations were therefore symbolic representations of invisible realities.  Consequently, morals and values were originally developed based on the symbolic representation of the results of natural examination.

As knowledge increased, those who possessed it quickly understood that power came along with it.  This power could be used for either good or evil purposes, depending upon the inclination of the powerful.  Historically speaking, the misplaced use of power has caused unknowable harm to humankind.  Power (knowledge) in the wrong (unethical) hands, and the temptations that accompany it are obviously potentially quite dangerous.  Like Pandora's box though, once the genie of knowledge is out of the bottle, it can't be put back in again.  To solve this dilemma, certain dedicated ancient scholars with advanced knowledge resolved to keep it, and any new knowledge they obtained, secret until an individual had proven themselves worthy, through trials, tests, and initiations, to receive it.  

These elect custodians of knowledge, these "philosopher-priests," unselfishly believed that knowledge existed only to serve humankind, not as a tool to control and enslave it.  They disdained material wealth and the temptations of the flesh which accompany it.  It was understood that a system must be created and utilized to disseminate knowledge to proven-worthy recipients in a carefully controlled environment, lest the knowledge be lost upon the death of the original custodians, or used in an unethical manner detrimental to humanity at large.  Today, we call this ancient instructional system "the mystery schools."

Neophytes were put through years of progressively rigorous discipline and ethical testing before knowledge would be imparted to them.  Thus it was ensured that knowledge deemed crucial to the advancement of humankind wouldn't be misused through greed, selfishness, or ambition.  To the philosopher-priests of the mysteries, ignorance was defined as the inability to accurately discern right from wrong.  Woe to any who 'dwell in darkness.'  The newly indoctrinated priesthood would then establish their own academies, in order to perpetuate the proper dissemination of the sacred wisdom.

The birth of the State is also shrouded in a certain mystery. Something went wrong somewhere.  The old myths (based on reciprocity & redistribution) collapsed before the power of a new "story" based on separation and accumulation.  However it occurred, eventually a portion of this knowledge became known by the people at large; entering the domain of the profane.  Ambitious, unethical men, lacking both complete knowledge and the wisdom to wield it, created their own systems of religious thought and groups of adherents.  Backed by armies and wealth, they toppled the old power structure.  The mystery schools and their acolytes were forced to relegate themselves to an underground existence, which arguably persists to this day.

The precise instant is lost, although the true State lurches into archaeological view sometime around the 4th millennium BCE in Sumer & Egypt. In both cases the realms of war and religion seem to have coalesced to produce figurative and literal pyramid structures, seemingly impossible to conceive without tribute and/or slavery. The centrifugality of the shamanic social is gradually supplanted by the centripetality of power and wealth until a crisis point is reached.  This results in the catastrophic emergence of a "priest-king" and a nascent bureaucracy, the infallible signs of the true State.

The Problem of Money $$$

Even the most primitive king can only be defined by the creation of scarcity and the accumulation of wealth.  This 'double process' can only be reproduced in symbolization. Generally this means that the king is somehow "sacred" and personally symbolizes the very motion of energy in or between surplus and scarcity. But this motion must be impeded if the energy-transfer can only take crude material form (actual cows or jars of wheat etc.). The essential exchange of protection-for-wealth that defines the true State must be symbolized in order to transcend what might be called the inherent egalitarianism of the material, its recalcitrance, its natural resistance to accumulation. "Protection" moreover has no overt material base, whereas wealth does.  Hence, the State will be at a disadvantage in the exchange unless it can present its power in symbolic (non-material) form, as nothing for something.

In the remote past we can discern money in the symbolic exchange and social construction of the sacrifice. When the tribe grows beyond the point where it can re-create itself in the sharing of a sacrificial animal, for instance, we might surmise that one's "due share" could be symbolized by some token. Once the "spiritual content" of these tokens is transferred to an economic sphere outside the sacrifice, the existence of the tokens would then facilitate the "creation of scarcity" by symbolizing the accumulation of wealth. When the symbolic counters themselves are then symbolized by writing, we can speak not only of money but of banking: the centralization of debt at the socio-religio-political focus of power, the Temple.  Thus money would precede the State in this scenario. To put it crudely, money exists for 4000 years before it mutates into a form that makes possible the emergence of the true State.

If we look to the future, we can see even more clearly that money exists beyond the State. In a situation where money is "free" to move across borders in defiance of all political economy, as in neoliberal free-market internationalism, the State can find itself abandoned by money, and re-defined as a zone of scarcity rather than wealth. The State remains by definition mired in production, while money attains the transcendence of pure symbolization.

The true sleight-of- hand however, lies in the fiat-money machinations of the central banks. When all thrones in the world were hopelessly in debt to their own self-created central banks, the focus of power shifted. When governments resign their ancient role of protection, money breaks free at last.  Governments can now provide only nothing for nothing.  Their power is shattered.

Money, the State, and Religion are all powers of oppression, but not the same power of oppression. In fact, when deployed against each other, they can act as powers of liberation. Money "buys freedom" for example; the populist State can suppress the banks, thus freeing its citizens from "money-power"; and religion has been known to deploy its "higher morality" against both economic and political injustice.

Moreover, the State does not appear all at once in its "absolute" form. If "primitive" societies possess institutions which successfully prevent the emergence of the State, the eventual emergence of the State cannot erase these institutions all at once. The "early" State must still co-exist with "customs and rights" that enable Society to resist its power.  The anthropology of "Society against the State" can be extended to a sociology of historical State systems, where some potent institutions and mythemes work against the total accumulation of power.

Money is also held in check in "pre-modern" cultures, not just in so-called "primitive" societies (where money simply fails to appear), but also in quite complex State systems. "Classical civilizations" such as Mesopotamia, Greece, Mesoamerica, Egypt and even Rome retained structures of redistribution of wealth to some extent, if only as bread and circuses; no one could have conceived of a "free" market in such circumstance, since its obvious inhumanity would have violated every surviving principle of reciprocity, not to mention religious law.

It was left to our glorious modern era to conceive of the State as absolute power, & money as "free" of all social restraint. The result might be called the Capital State: the power of money wedded to the power of war. The State appears to know that it was already secretly beaten long ago (all thrones hopelessly in debt...) and has capitulated without a whimper to the triumph of Mammon. With a few exceptions the nations are now falling all over themselves in their eagerness to "privatize" everything from health to prisons to air and water to consciousness itself. "Protection", the only real excuse for the State's existence, evaporates in every sphere of government's influence, from tariffs to "human rights". The State seems somehow to believe it can renounce not only its vestigial power over money but even its basic functions, and yet survive as an elected occupying army!  Even the US, which boasts of itself as the last and final "superpower", is little more than a mercenary force at the bidding of international Capital, capable only of serving the interests of oil cartels and banks. National borders must survive so that political hirelings can divert taxes to "corporate welfare"; and so that huge profits can be made on arbitrage and currency exchange; and so that labor can be disciplined by "migratory" capital. Otherwise the State retains no real function; everything else is empty ceremony, and the sheer terrorism of the "war on crime" (the State's post-Spectacular war on its own poor and different).

RM

UPDATE:  In his writings, Hakim Bey calls the State the quintessentialization of hierarchy & separation, which can, and must, replicate itself on every level of experience from the individual psyche to the laws of nations (achieved via symbolism/language via the medium of $$ in my example). Bey also describes a situation, WHICH I BELIEVE this anarchist has just experienced. Becoming institutionalized, like religion, the State has simply failed to "go away" In fact, in a bizarre extension of the thesis of "Society against the State", we can even re-imagine the State as in institutional type of "custom & right" which Society can wield (paradoxically) against an even more "final" shape of power, that of "pure Capitalism". 

I feel that this perfectly describes the general election process I just personally went through. Here I find/found myself defending "the State's existence" as the Protector of vulnerable populations...the existence of the State's Protection as 'rights.' Since the State is a force of oppression, the cognitive dissonance becomes obvious. This is where the argument blossoms among the anarchists; and it is also the argument between the ideological conservatives (moderates) and the civilizational conservatives. In the end, I'm forced to conclude that what this argument really boils down to is teleological vs. deontological...restated...whether or not one believes that life possesses intrinsic value. This qualifies my 'horror' of the Christians...supposed to appreciate it all...it's all "God's Creation," yet they have abandoned altruism in droves...teleological vs. deontological...seems to encapsulate the whole ballgame.