Monday, March 13, 2017

The Most Quakerly Season

Winter, for me, like Spring, Summer and Autumn, is the most Quakerly of Seasons.

Winter is not a saeson of cold and death.

Rather, it is a Season of hope and certainty.

As I peck out these words, the longer days and warmer air brings forth each plant in its turn.  The earliest of red camellias are followed by mid-season varieties; cream, white, bi-colour. At the same time, the star-flowered Magnolias appear in bloom before their tulip-flower siblings appear.

Garria Elliptica, the males at least have shown their tassles long before the willows.

All winter long these appearances have been latent. Now green springs forth from brown.

The winter carols, mid-way through accented with the joy of Christmas Carols, foretell The Kingdon nascent, latent, 'Thy will on eath be done, as it is in Heaven.'

Not life after death, life always present: latent in the seemingly dead. Reality in the waiting.

So, just as in the stillness of a centred, gathered Meeting for Worship in the manner of Friends (Quakers), the presence is in the midst. Life onnearth, as it is in Heaven.

Not 'Pie in the sky, when you die.'  But, latent here, Latent, hear!  Just as in The Kingdom Parables that the infant Jesus was born to tell us. And to be murdered.

Or, the attempt to murder him.

On the insistence of those frightened of change for the better.

Demanding that Jesus be murdered ('I find no fault in him'): murdered in fools attempts to silence truth.

No way!

Truth lives: latent or active.

Just as we are blessed to live in a time, two-hundred years on from the time when Antoine Laurent Lavoisier and John Dalton applied the Principle of Simplicity in order to bring order out of Alchemy; to birth modern, systemstic chemistry.

An order out of confusion that has given experienced meaning to latency: latent heats of fusion, of evaporation, of phase changes generally.

Latent, ' that which is present. but hidden' brought forth.

The Kingdom, here. Hear, emergent! Here in the plan for wholeness called the plan for Co-operative Socialism.

Do you recoil?  Recoil from those worldly words?

Of an end to exploitation of 'the one' by 'the other'?

Thy will be done on earth.

As it is, as described to us, for us, then *by* us, co-operatively in those Kingdom Parables, in that plan for Co-operative Socialism.

Just as the Mustard seed, 'The smallest of all seeds which *when placed* in *prepared ground* brings forth a tree so large that *all* the birds of the air may find shelter there.

To rest, sleeping. Latent. To, tomorrow, do Our Father Creator's work. Tomorrow. Not when we die.

Tomorrow.

Which is 'By Tuesday!'  Not waiting. Latency brought forth to action.

Now, here. Hear!

Aesthetic in-spiration, out-spiration. I hope!

My friend Nina Miller prompts me to offer:

You are looking for new aesthetics.

Here are two thoughts.

First, the future has to be Co-operative.

And thus, Co-operative Socialism.

So, an aesthetic of and for Co-operative Socialism has to be part of that. Probably not emergent from a Co-operative Socialist world but, if not in advance of such emergence, co-emergent with it.








Secondly, Co-operative Socialism is an emergent synthesis of the unity of the individual and the whole. An emergent synthesis of Wholosophy.

Wholosophy is the triple intersection of religion, science and economics on a Venn diagram.





Each the three double intersections (science/religion, economics/religion and religion/science are also regions of liminality: places which are simultaneously both such doubled characteristics.












The future is that place of triple liminality: of wholosophy and wholeness.

Which may be termed, 'You, me, we, us': the liminality of all-ness, of wholeness, of unity.

Occupy foundered because the arts communites didn't become a unity of one diverse art community.  The arts of protest become just a circus of 'what-is' blah protest.

True art re-members (puts back together) and re-presents the wholeness of what we were in 'The Garden', and need to re-become in The Garden.

Not as part of the whole, but a 360°, 24×7 aspect of the whole.

Not stewards of creation (Genesis) but co-operative caregivers to, and care-receivers from, the wholeness.

So the aesthetic of emergence emerges as the aesthetic of celebration.

A Celebration of what is becoming: from what has been, through what is, to what is offered to us: as wholistic noirishment: Co-operative, true, Socialism.

By Tuesday!

Woo-hoo!

Ps, thanks for asking!

http://www.co-operativesocialism.org/money-driven-capitalism-is-rooted-in-our-fears-and-needs/

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Obedience is better


 In regard to the item just below this:

A) capitalism relies on five scams, only:

  1) That land can be owned and then 'lent' upon payment of rent

  2) That money can be owned and lent upon payment of interest

  3) That knowledge can be owned and used to receive profit

  4) That some people's work can be paid more than other people

  5) Above all, that 'ownership' is permitted (rather than seen for what it: theft)

In terms of English history:

   1) above = 1066 (when the new theives stole from the old theives, who . . .)

   2) above = 1545 when Henry VIII legalised usury for the first time in England

   3) above = between those dates 'Kings' (ie Mafia bosses) granted 'Letters Patent' to create Commercial Monopolies (eg in trade to, eg, India)

   4) above = again during the time of feudalism, 'Positions at Court' were created - and much sought after - to secure Pensions (higher-than-normal payments for work done to protect the said Mafiosi: remember Scicily was part of The NormannEmpire, so the term Mafiosi is not unreasonable).

  5) above = 15,000 years' ago when 'Adam and Eve' first took (stole) from the Creation and, thus, 'invented' the sin of 'property'.

Oh, and there is a ps . . .

And the ps is that the claim to 'ownership' of one's 'self' is also theft.

The Creator, through The Creation, lends us a few atoms - often for as short a time a breath* - in order to 'be' in the space that we occupy at no rent for three score years and ten.

The Creator then feeds us, clothes us, warms and nourishes us, houses us in sunshine.

In our sin (initiated by Adam and Eve at the Neolithic catastrophe: when property=ownership=theft was invented and co-invented with ususry) we stumble.

Once we have given up all notions: that property and usury are just. And once we have voluntarily moved backmtomthe Garden, where Co-operative Careship - rather than theft, rape and murder = capitalism - is normal,,shall we thrive.

It's called gellasenheit, yieldedness, obedience.

Ooooh!

Sunday, March 5, 2017

Love loves, hence Co-operative Socialism

Dangerous stuff; me, me, me.

Losing attachment to wanting stuff, yes, unbeing what we are, impossible.

Letting go of our hurts, likewise.

Acting to not produce hurts, yes.

Hence the plan for Co-operative Socialism.

Not the impossible: Personal Salvation.

Impossible, since we are all aspects of one body.

So, healong 'one' is not possible without healing the One that is the unity of all.

Without yieldedness to the Creator/God/Good/The Divine (ie practicing gellasenheit, total yieldedness, true humility), we are not fully connected as an aspect of The All.

We are, in that state of a-lone-ness, just as a free radical in chemistry: broken away; with an unpaired electron,,an un-attached valency, alone.

So, the God/spell of 'Personal' Salvation is as impossible as the God/spell of 'Personal' Prosperity.

Unless 'The All' propers, nothing prospers, every aspect suffers because every aspect is in-extricably a part of the whole.

It's a wholeness thing.

Hence the plan for Co-operative Socialism: as an end to possession/theft and usury (rent, interest, profit, greater income than any 'other').

Gellasenheit rather than pride. Contribution rather than accummulation.

'What can I give?', rather than 'What can I get?'

All our valencies and electrons (re-)connected as a fully-bound aspect of the all: the liberty to be, by discardingbthe liberty to not be: to suffer in the hell of a-lone.

Simple, really.

Possessions possess

Pride becomes proud

Humility humbles

Love loves

God is.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Draft Model Motion on Co-operative Socialism to Labour Party Branches,etc

Draft Model Motion on Co-operative Socialism to Labour Party Branches, Co-operative Partyy branches, Trades Councils, etc.

Drafted by John Courtneidge
0795 099 6418  courtj@myphone.coop  Also on Facebook and Twitter

1) The objective of the Labour and Co-operative Movement is, as Clement Attlees wrote in 1937, 'The establishment if the Co-operative Commonwealth' (see his book 'The Labour Party in Perspective, Left Book Club, Victor Gollancz, Chaper 6);

2)  To that end, we need an economic plan, suitable for the 21st Century, that produces the Co-oprative Commonwealth and that is, therefore, consistent with the Co-operative Values and Principles, as contained in the 'Statement on the Co-operative Identity' and as refreshed, periodically, by The International Co-operative Alliance (see www.ica.coop);

3)  Such a plan, termed 'Co-operative Socialism', has been gathered together, with that end in view, and may be seen in an Occupy London web-page (by web-searching the phrase "Co-operative Socialism") and discussed in papers archived at the web-page for The Campaign for Interest-free Money (www.interestfreemoney.org);

4)  This plan has already been adopted by Labour Action for Peace, by Occupy London and by the Bromley Branch of The Co-operative Party;

5)  We [include your organisation's name here] also adopt this plan for Co-operative Socialism: with a view to promoting it to our related organisations and to write to our MPs, both organisationlly and as individual constituents, to see if they support and promote this plan and, if not why not.

6)  We will share the information so gathered with Labour Action for Peace (LAP), so that LAP can share this information publicly.

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Goverments Decide on Sustainability So Politics Matters

Those Feb 2017 UK by-elections. Check the data. Not the spin.

Copeland                                             Stoke Central
Con gain from Labour                         Labour hold

%vote Change from 2015 General Election:
* = ELECTED
Con*        +8.5%                                  Con         +1.8%
Lab          -4.9%                                   Lab*        -2.2%
Lib-Dem  +3.8%                                  LIB-Dem +5.7%
UKIP        -9.0%                                  UKIP        +2.1%
Green      -1.3%                                  Green      -2.2%

Turn-out (ie % of registered electors that voted):

51.33%   ( -12.5% cf GE2015)         38.2%  (-11.7% cf GE2015)

My commentary follows references to data.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copeland_by-election,_2017

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_by-election,_2017

http://www.ukpolitical.info/by-election-turnout.htm

http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout15.htm

Commentary

1) The  Labour vote did not evaporate in either case, contrary to the propaganda by the capitalists

2) The Tories played a blinder again by selecting a woman candidate who had worked in the local industry: nuclear power and reprocessing. And by pointing out the long-held anti-nuclear credentials of Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn.

3) To finish the Copeland remarks, the UKIP vote looks mostly to have switched back to its traditional home ,the Conservatives (ie UKIP -9.0% ,Conservatives +8.5%) with the prresently-typical protest vote going to the Lib-Dems and not the Greens).

And the turn-out moved down by 12.5%, to 51.33%,  from the 2015 General Election level (which, at 63.83% was almost the same as the turn-out average in England of 65.8%).

4) In Stoke Central (which was a much  more 'high prrofile' election due to the presence of a well-publicised UKIP candidate and a re-standing Muslim candidate for the Lib-Dems). the turn out at both the 2015 General Election (only 51.26%, then) and this by-election (36.7%, down, therefore, from 2015 by 11.7%) reflected/es the run-down economic status of many ex-industrial, mostly northern and midlands Constituences, that were used and deserted by the New Labour project of Tony Blair, Peter Madelson, Gordon Brown, JohnPrescott, Neil Kinnock, etc.

5) To round-out the Stoke Central commentary, the UKIP efforts mostly  failed despite the media coverage, etc. The two protest votes moved as in Copeland (LD up, Green down: neither by much).

6) The bigger picture:

The two by-elections were  caused by resignations of two anti-Corbyn, pro-Remain, Blair/Mandelson-promoted New Labour MPs (whether they are members of The Labour Friends of Israel I don't know: that pro-Zionist group has along-standing hatred of Jeremy Corbyn's pro-Palestinian position).

Their resignations certainly appear to have been coordinated by the pro-Remain, pro-capitalist factions (which likely the involvement, if not coordination, of the Chatham House pro-capitalist network).

As such it was a failed attempt to 'get rid of' the Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell project for democratic and co-operative socialist.

A project that is heartened by the outcome.

Not least that the Blairite candidate in Copeland was defeated.

One step back, but two steps forward (at least!)

Friday, February 24, 2017

A Call for a Needs'-based Politics,Rather than a Rights'-based Politics.

What's needed is a 'Needs-based politics' (ie Co-operative Socialism) rather than a 'Rights'-based politics' (ie any formmof managed capitalism = 'Social' Democracy = fascism (ie a collusion of 'elites' and states = eg the WTO, The 'World' Economic Forum, the Chatham House/Council on Foreign Relations/PowerCorp etc.

When 'I' wrote the 'Four Needs' essay (see the papers'section at www.interestfreemoney.org) there a) wasn't a needs-based Needs Theory and b) the overarching economic need (for income equality and equity - as adumbrated by 'The Spirit Level' - see www.equalitytrust.org.uk - and Richard Wilkinson's earlier books).

What we now know is that, for sustainability, happiness, health and properity for all, the world needs to move to a zone of maximum equality and equity - Aubrey Meyer's concept of 'Contraction and Convergence' (see lower down this page earlier this week).

I know that my distaste for Rights'-based Politics is going to elicit discussion, so let's leave my support and justifcation for the better option - Needs'-based Politics - to then.