Why not cut the BS and just put it as concise as possible:
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
We got our life to live
The way we want to be
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
Who feels it knows it
Bob marley
And God will guide me
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your bullshit
Were back to set it free
Confronting the negative
Back to the primitive
Fuck all you wannabes
You dont mean shit to me
Let it bleed
Tribal
Primitive
Primitive
Primitive
Primitive
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
We got our life to live
The way we want to be
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
How it used to be
Check your reality
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
Fuck all you wannabes
Aaaaaarggghhh
Back to the primitive
Fuck all your politics
Forever we will be
What we want to be
Monday, August 17, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
First Post: What this blog is about
When we decided the newspapers were shit and there was no saving it, we started reading "alternative" news online.
When we decided that TV was shit and there was no saving it we turned to YouTube.
When we decided that the Government was shit and there was no saving it we...
Will the quote be that we created our own, "alternative infrastructure" once again?
We say that we don't want their problems, their authoritarianism. That we can do it better if we work together. But think about all the effort that goes into moving a behemoth that's already there? Would that effort be better spent creating a NEW infrastructure? One that's not tied to the old bureaucracies and could take over for the old one once it matured?
That's what happened in East Germany and Russia in 1989, when the Berlin wall fell, seemingly on its own. The established infrastructure was broken for so long that by then everything was "Black Market/KGB" run because eventually that was the ONLY way to get anything accomplished. The bureaucracy of the state could not fulfill its duty but it was not like it was a surprise to anyone.
Not to draw a moral equivalency here, but lets look at another group who is dissatisfied with the current global power structure and what they are doing about it. The reason the Muslims are such a threat is that they carry with them their own autonomous government, where ever they go. This of course is the "Sharia Law" that is ostensibly based on their interpretations of religious text. Again, I don't mention it to venerate the beliefs but rather the METHOD. They don't give a damn about anyone else's "laws" or "codes" but their own. They have a mobile culture they haul with them into "Western" countries. They set it up as they damn well please and have a whole system of viceroys and proctors separate from the established Western infrastructure.
I believe that this model of "parallel infrastructure" can be used to create the sustainable culture that is on the tip of everyone's tongue - and is a far more effective way to bring relevant change, unburdened from the past, rather than trying to beat up the 800 LBS gorilla to share his bananas with us.
We will find our own damn bananas!
And when we share them, make the other guy obsolete. Just like how Napster, bit-torrents, alternative news sources blogs and video sharing took the "side door" and rendered the old media infrastructure obsolete. Almost "overnight". Or at lest a lot quicker then they ever thought it would. And we achieved something that would have never been possible if we had to ask AOL-Time-Warner for "permission" first.
As Americans, we love to latch on to the "latest and greatest" be it DVDs or HDTV, the people are sophisticated consumers, just as we were raised to be, but very willing to "change brands" when the "what's in it for me" card is played.
So then, my proposal is simple. The minarchist model of government proposed by Thomas Jefferson, a society of gentlemen farmers co-operating under the Rule of Law and a physical infrastructure not dis-similar in material from the "Old West".
We can have simple buildings, one "main street" -and its fine if its a dirt road. Just enough to support the local micro-economy. Considering that research shows that human's are programmed to work closely and maintain social relationships with give or take 60-200 people, that is the natural size of a community.
"Employment" wouldn't matter so much if every town needs a shoe-maker, a tailor, a general store, a doctor, a boarding house etc. And if some one falls on hard times its much more easy and natural to help some one you know personally, directly, and with resources like food and clothes rather than dollars. Additionally, when the State takes your money and then doles it out, it warps the situation and makes the State "savior" instead of the community or tribe, distorting the feeling of connection between philanthropist and benefactor.
No one would force anyone to join a town or a community. I mean, free association is our right. Its also the right of people to run their towns pretty much the way they want and to have who they want in the tribe. But that doesn't mean peoples rights are any less respected, rather it simply acknowledges the fact that most people want to be around people they can get along with!
When we decided that TV was shit and there was no saving it we turned to YouTube.
When we decided that the Government was shit and there was no saving it we...
Will the quote be that we created our own, "alternative infrastructure" once again?
We say that we don't want their problems, their authoritarianism. That we can do it better if we work together. But think about all the effort that goes into moving a behemoth that's already there? Would that effort be better spent creating a NEW infrastructure? One that's not tied to the old bureaucracies and could take over for the old one once it matured?
That's what happened in East Germany and Russia in 1989, when the Berlin wall fell, seemingly on its own. The established infrastructure was broken for so long that by then everything was "Black Market/KGB" run because eventually that was the ONLY way to get anything accomplished. The bureaucracy of the state could not fulfill its duty but it was not like it was a surprise to anyone.
Not to draw a moral equivalency here, but lets look at another group who is dissatisfied with the current global power structure and what they are doing about it. The reason the Muslims are such a threat is that they carry with them their own autonomous government, where ever they go. This of course is the "Sharia Law" that is ostensibly based on their interpretations of religious text. Again, I don't mention it to venerate the beliefs but rather the METHOD. They don't give a damn about anyone else's "laws" or "codes" but their own. They have a mobile culture they haul with them into "Western" countries. They set it up as they damn well please and have a whole system of viceroys and proctors separate from the established Western infrastructure.
I believe that this model of "parallel infrastructure" can be used to create the sustainable culture that is on the tip of everyone's tongue - and is a far more effective way to bring relevant change, unburdened from the past, rather than trying to beat up the 800 LBS gorilla to share his bananas with us.
We will find our own damn bananas!
And when we share them, make the other guy obsolete. Just like how Napster, bit-torrents, alternative news sources blogs and video sharing took the "side door" and rendered the old media infrastructure obsolete. Almost "overnight". Or at lest a lot quicker then they ever thought it would. And we achieved something that would have never been possible if we had to ask AOL-Time-Warner for "permission" first.
As Americans, we love to latch on to the "latest and greatest" be it DVDs or HDTV, the people are sophisticated consumers, just as we were raised to be, but very willing to "change brands" when the "what's in it for me" card is played.
So then, my proposal is simple. The minarchist model of government proposed by Thomas Jefferson, a society of gentlemen farmers co-operating under the Rule of Law and a physical infrastructure not dis-similar in material from the "Old West".
We can have simple buildings, one "main street" -and its fine if its a dirt road. Just enough to support the local micro-economy. Considering that research shows that human's are programmed to work closely and maintain social relationships with give or take 60-200 people, that is the natural size of a community.
"Employment" wouldn't matter so much if every town needs a shoe-maker, a tailor, a general store, a doctor, a boarding house etc. And if some one falls on hard times its much more easy and natural to help some one you know personally, directly, and with resources like food and clothes rather than dollars. Additionally, when the State takes your money and then doles it out, it warps the situation and makes the State "savior" instead of the community or tribe, distorting the feeling of connection between philanthropist and benefactor.
No one would force anyone to join a town or a community. I mean, free association is our right. Its also the right of people to run their towns pretty much the way they want and to have who they want in the tribe. But that doesn't mean peoples rights are any less respected, rather it simply acknowledges the fact that most people want to be around people they can get along with!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)