dialog re: A change of vision: returning to the Garden


Richard Moore

Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 21:10:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Jessica Markland <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden
To: •••@••.•••

Dear Richard:

I get so much out of your e-mails. Today I tried to
get a copy of The Story of B. Local library is
bringing it in from elsewhere. In the interim I have
got about 1/3 of the way through another, earlier book
of Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael". It's so clear, and makes
so much sense (the theme is similar to B)

  Quinn writes almost as well as you do, so I am not
sure which of you should be the new Messiah.

  I sincerely hope your optimism about the time being
right for this movement proves to be true. Keep on
doing what you are doing.


Dear Jessica,

Thanks for your kind words.  I do my best, but I cannot
agree that my writing is even a patch on Quinn's.  I believe
it is time for humanity to give up its fetish for messiahs
and its search for salvation.  We are our own salvation,
each of us in our own way, each part of the fabric of
society and of life.  You, too, must become 'B'.  It is by
waking up from our Tak delusion that we make the time right
for the movement.


From: "John Bunzl" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
References: <a05010401b6d892f660d0@[]>
Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 07:28:08 -0000

Dear Richard,

Again, an excellent piece of writing which gives each of us
a compass by which to re-check our positions on the journey
you so rightly describe is underway - and we ARE moving in
the right direction and the potential for success IS there
for all the reasons you outline.

The key to success, I think, will be greater understanding.
As the vortex of corporate globalisation strengthens its
grip, its muscles and sinews are already becoming more
defined and therefore more visible. What is now only dimly
discernable to the movement as a bunch of effects or
symptoms which we don't like will develop into a greater
understanding of how the vortex actually works and,
therefore, what its key drivers are and how we can disarm
and neutralise them. Since now, generally speaking, the
movement only sees symptoms, it should not surprise us that
it is, largely, a reflection of those symptoms: a rag-tag
and fragmented army of NGOs and activist groups each
addressing a particular but independent aspect of the
globalisation vortex. We need to move on to root causes and
maybe Cyberjounal might invite a discussion on the subject
of 'what do we see as the root cause?'

Schumacher said: "Everything in this world has to have a
STRUCTURE, otherwise it is chaos" - and I'm afraid our
growing movement is no exception. Perhaps, therefore, we
should return to Schumacher to see what he has to say on the
subject of large-scale organisations: "The large
organisation [our growing anti-corporate globalisation
movement?] will consist of many semi-autonomous units, which
we may call quasi-firms. Each of them will have a large
amount of freedom, to give the greatest possible chance to
creativity and entrepreneurship.

The structure of the organisation can then be symbolised by
a man holding a large number of balloons in his hand. Each
of the balloons has its own bouyancy and lift, and the man
himself does not lord it over the balloons, but stands
beneath them, yet holding all the strings firmly in his
hand." In the case of the current movement, however, the
balloons are still floating all over the place.

Writing like yours helps bring them together!

It's a privilege to be working with you.

all the best


Dear John,

Thanks for your contribution.  You raise several issues that
I hope will be developed further in our list dialog.  I
think the search for root causes has been part of our
mission from the beginning, and your voice is welcome as we
continue that journey.  When you talk about 'semi-autonomous
units' I think you are very much in the right direction. 
Hierarchies are the enemy of freedom and the friend of
domination.  But we've been so thoroughly conditioned to
think in term of hierarchies that it's difficult to escape
from that mindset.  Why do you think in terms of one man,
holding all the balloons in his hand?  Yes the balloons are
all over the place, and they need to be brought into synergy
and harmony.  But let us accomplish that with decentralized


BTW> Please checkout John's website: http://www.simpol.org.

Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:52:28 -0600
From: Teresa Hawkes <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden


rkm wrote:
    > Quinn helps us understand that such harmonization has
    always been central to being human - except within the
    deviant Tak cultural branch. The time has come for 'The
    Great Remembering'.

Non-Taker peoples have always tried to tell us this as we
marched over them in the last 10,000 years. Now that one of
our own, Quinn, has managed to say it to us in a way that
makes us able to hear this basic message, can we abandon the
quintessential Taker stance of superiority and let others
tell us truths we need to hear without needing the
intervening blessing of Taker voices and institutions to
make it okay to listen and act upon what we hear....

can we listen to the women who have always told us this.
can we look into our own children?
this message was always there in their eyes
before we trained it out of them.

can we see this truth in the beasts who serve us
and their wild cousins just before they die under our guns
and before our bull dozers?

can we listen at last
to the wisdom of "natives" everywhere -
the endless list
of all those we have closed our ears to?

can we simply listen instead of formulate, postulate,
control, dominate and proclaim?

this is the meme that will save us all.

Teresa Hawkes
The Oracular Tree
Establish the habit of reverence.


Theresa - we're listening!  - rkm

Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 13:03:37 +0100
From: Bob Ocegueda <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: rkm> The myth of human dominion and the birth of the Takers

Hi Richard,

Excellent stuff!... as usual.

When will this article be posted on the web so I can link to
it in my messages?




Bob - it'll be online in about a week - rkm

Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 01:07:17 +0800
To: •••@••.•••
From: Betty Daly-King <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden

Dear Richard,

Have you read Jared Diamond, "Guns, Germs and Steel" - I've
been told some of my theories sound similar to Diamonds, so
now I'm requesting it from library because I like having my
ideas reinforced and beautified!  Previews read like it is
something you would get your teeth into.



Betty - yes, I did sing my teeth into that one.  It was the _other 
world-shaking book I read this year 

From: "Jeff & Diana Jewell" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: RE: cj,rn> recap of rkm's 'philosophy'
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 17:32:46 -0800

Richard, once again your 'philosophy' is a masterfully concise
overview of the complex history that has brought humankind to
this place and time.

However, I find the thrust of your thinking decidedly too
utopian.  While acknowledging the brilliance of your
conceptions, and the utility of idealism and simplicity in
informing the great movement which decent societies must now
pursue as probably the greatest test of mankind, I
respectfully suggest that I don't believe it plausible that we
can get there [i.e. as per your vision] from here -- at least
not in any discernible direct path over the next generation.
If so, it seems necessary to me to adopt a longer term
strategy of incremental progress, defining intermediate goals
that are attainable,  and pushing as hard as possible to build
momentum based on a string of visible successes won through
concerted activism and increasing popular solidarity.

To think of deposing capitalism anytime soon is wishful
thinking in the extreme.  The world of today is ruled by
people whose interests and belief systems are strongly aligned
with those of global capitalism, and their highly advanced
systems of domination are quite capable of suppressing or
accommodating any 'dangerous classes' that may arise, as
history has shown.  And the rest of the people are essentially
powerless, effectively leaderless, uninformed or disinformed,
and more concerned with survival or prosperity than freedom or
political protest.   While I certainly agree that capitalism
is inherently and increasingly unsustainable -- and must be
superceded with an ecologically sustainable [and hopefully
moral] system sometime in this century -- it is very unclear
what the successor system will or should be, and what forces
will emerge to establish it.

At this point, some forms of fascism may be the most likely
outcome, given the lessons of history and the mosaic of
current trends.  Indeed authoritarian systems that can
successfully represent themselves as benevolent dictatorships
are probably quite acceptable to most people -- if not
preferable to democratic regimes that are seen as more
bureaucratic and less efficient.  For those of us who cherish
freedom as the foundation of decent societies, it is suggested
that the great cause of our time should be a global movement
to achieve 'real' democracy [i.e. as per Lincoln's definition
of government of, by and for the people] -- rather than trying
to displace capitalism.

As progressive activists well understand, to achieve real
democracy in the face of capitalism would of course be truly
revolutionary.  But it could hardly be branded as radical
heresy [as an assault on capitalism clearly would be] by the
ruling regime -- since it supposedly exists -- indeed as the
distinguishing feature of our proud heritage, and cornerstone
of our freedom.  And if we can actually achieve something
resembling real democracy, the solidarity built in this great
cause would well prepare the future generations for the next
stage in the human struggle -- perhaps then to dismantle the
capitalist system, presuming that a consensus arises as to
what the successor system should be.

Regarding this key point of strategy and goals for the
movement, I would much prefer it if future history may show
that you are right and I am wrong.  I also want to salute the
wisdom of many others who have contributed to the pursuit of
truth and progressive change through the cj-list.  But there's
a risk that the range of views may be too narrow, and more
constructive criticism would probably benefit us all.

With great respect,

Jeff Jewell,
North Vancouver, BC, Canada.


Dear Jeff,

Nice to hear from you!  I'll think of you and Diana when I
visit Tahiti Nui's later this year.  I can understand your
pessimism regarding the prospects for radical
transformation. My own view is that radical transformation
will be difficult, but that incremental transformation is
downright impossible.  The system just isn't fixable. 
Capitalism is a carnivore, and you can't turn it into a
herbivore without killing it.  Any attempt to reform it
simply makes it function less effectively.  You'd get total
economic collapse before you'd get any significant benefits
of the kind we would all like to see.

If you have no idea at all about how radical transformation
might be brought about, then of course deposing capitalism
would seem like wishful thinking.  That's why my own
investigations for the past few years have been devoted to
understanding how such a transformation might come to pass.
You seem to dismiss without comment the suggestions I have
offered in that regard.  Why?



Richard K Moore
Wexford, Ireland
Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance 
email: •••@••.••• 
URL: http://cyberjournal.org

    A community will evolve only when
    the people control their means of communication.
    - Frantz Fanon

    "One cannot separate economics, political science, and
    history. Politics is the control of the economy. History,
    when accurately and fully recorded, is that story. In most
    textbooks and classrooms, not only are these three fields of
    study separated, but they are further compartmentalized into
    separate subfields, obscuring the close interconnections
    between them" -- J.W. Smith, The World's Wasted Wealth 2,
    (Institute for Economic Democracy, 1994), p. 22.

Permission for non-commercial republishing hereby granted - BUT 
include and observe all restrictions, copyrights, credits,
and notices - including this one.