Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Prayer 2.0

Divine mother who art the source from which all life springs,
Thy unfathomable love embraces all the ten thousand things.
What must be born and grow,
You nourish and nurture;
What must decay and die,
You harvest and devour.
When my cup is empty it is at your bottomless well that I fill it,
That I may drink deep the waters of your inspiration,
And with your hands become mine shape the world in reflection of your infinite beauty.

Cosmic Father who art the Heavens,
Hallowed be Thy infinite names,
Teach me today my daily lesson,
And correct me in my errors,
As I correct those who error below me.
Grant me the courage to seek truth,
The discernment to see it,
And the wisdom to act in accordance with it,
That I may model my kingdom within upon yours above.
For thou art the ultimate answer,
And the final destination.

For together thou art the beginning, the end, and all points in between,
One and not-two, indivisibly present,
The matter, the light, and the gravity,
The disintegration, the change and the evolution,
The power, the will, the wisdom, and the way.
As we are in god is in us,
So help me to become,
For I am a human becoming.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

We're Holarchists, not Anarchists

Anyone likely to read this will no doubt agree with me when I say that most of the established hierarchies by which we order our civilization are not just superfluous but actively detrimental to the health of our species and the planet. I speak of the hierarchies we know as corporations, governments, religions, and yes, even the mafia. The sad truth arising from the study of human nature is that whenever a hierarchy manifests, whenever power begins to orbit about a single center, the human predator known as the psychopath is ineluctably drawn to the sweet allure of that power, like a pederast to a smooth young boy. Should the hierarchy persist, it will inevitably be infiltrated by a growing number of primary and ultimately secondary psychopaths; the process of ponerization will proceed apace, the hierarchy will inevitably be turned to destructive purposes and ultimately destroyed.

It would seem that if one wanted to design a society optimized for the neutralization of psychopathic behaviour, the issue of hierarchy cannot be avoided. The only certain long term defense would be to do without hierarchies to whatever degree is practical, for if there is no hierarchy to infiltrate the individual psychopath's range of influence will be greatly frustrated. When hierarchies cannot be avoided, they would have to be fluid, temporary, and task-specific, 'adhocracies' as Alvin Toffler called them.

A lot of people would call what I'm talking about here anarchism, a word that thrills a few and scares many with its associative imagery of imagery of black bloc street fighters tossing rocks and molotovs at riot police and dreadlocked hippies with bloodshot eyes passing a joint around a drum circle. Okay, I'll admit it: both of those images bring a smile to my face. Anarchist is certainly a label that's been applied to me in the past on numerous occasions, but while it's a label I've often accepted it's not one I've ever felt really comfortable with.

The problem - beyond the massive number of mostly negative associations that have attached themselves to the word - is that anarchy implies a state of violent disorder. No matter how much one might point out the benefits and attractions of everyone just staying home, growing their own food, harvesting their own power, and doing their own thing more or less as they will, people will always point out that while that's all very well and nice, what's to stop some band of raiders coming by with some AK-47s and shotguns and taking all your stuff, raping your daughter and feeding you to pigs? You can be damn sure you wouldn't hold off those hellhounds on your own, and with no government there to save you with its police and its army you're taking your life in your hands.

Of course, no one ever stops to think how often this happens even though we do have police departments and armed forces, and how often those very establishments create the very conditions that then require their presence (most especially they've been good and ponerized.)

So, I don't like to call it anarchism. Anarchy's what you get when you're dealing with man in his current state: weak, ignorant, and afraid, a domesticated slave indoctrinated from birth into a self-defeating meta-context he barely comprehends. Take off the leash and he's liable to be so unnerved he'll kill the guy next to him for a sandwich. It's not entirely the modern human's fault that she finds herself in this state: the metacontext she inhabits has been designed specifically to keep her in this victim state. The strategy is simple, even if the tactics are complex beyond possibility of human undertaking: our cultures are set up so as to obscure as totally as possible certain fundamental truths governing the nature of the universe. I'm not simply talking about physics here; this is deeper, something from which physical law as we understand it emanates.

When those laws are understood - and they are undoubtedly few and very, very simple - when those laws are held deep in the hearts of a majority and form the context by which they live their lives, what sort of a society do you think will grow from that? It certainly isn't anything you could call a mere anarchy, for such a society would be ruled, not by any merely human agency but by the fundamental and eternal laws of the cosmos. And yet it would be so unlike the hierarchical civilizations we have built up to now, for no hierarchy would be justified or even needed when all are conscious of the place they occupy within the vastness of creation. I thus propose that the term holarchy be adopted to describe such a society, for reasons that willl become clear, I hope, shortly.

Now, I'm not going to say I know what all those laws are. I have some idea, and I'm willing to bet a lot of you are on the same page as me on this: free will and personal responsibility are high on the list of fundamental concepts, here, as is karma. Anyone who's read the Handbook for the New Paradigm knows the acronym AIAB (Attraction, Intent, Allowance, Balance), a handy shorthand for what it maintains are the only four laws you have to know. Maybe that's the full list and maybe it isn't; at this point that's not important. All that we need to know is that those laws exist; they are relatively simple; and that when they are followed, they produce Results.

A society following such universal laws would govern itself through maintaining a natural harmony with the way of the universe. It could not be otherwise. There would be no need for legislatures: their sole function is to make laws, and the laws of creation have always been, will always be, and can never be modified. No need for courts: when natural law is violated, its judgement is instantaneous. And none for police: after all, nature corrects violations of its own accord. Armies would similarly fall out of use: what use war, when all is in balance? Likewise there would be no place for a mafia, for the conditions that create crime in the first place would cease to exist: no man who understood free will or balance would try to harm his brother, and no woman who took to heart allowance and attraction could fail to help a sister in need.

Imagine, for a moment, that such a society might be created, in microcosm, not just in one place on the earth but in dozens, hundreds, thousands. Small communes, villages, associations, networks: loosely connected or tightknit, localized or distributed, but consisting always of people who know the laws, understand them, seek to live by them.

Indeed, you don't have to imagine it because for all the talk of impending armageddon that clouds the modern mental landscape, those microcosms of what I'm talking about already exist, dotted around the globe, like seeds that have been planted just in time within the cracked interstices of the crumbling Machine. I have a feeling a lot of you have glimpsed this even in your own personal associations, and more rather than less in recent times: a growing reliance on friendship and gifts and less on commerece and money. I assure you it is a trend that will intensify. As the ponerized hierarchies rage in their death throws, they shall prepare the earth for the growth of those seeds that survive into the next phase of human civilization, if in truth civilization is even the right term. Once the hierarchies die, as they will and of their own accord, the new society will blossom: unified in understanding, galactic in its orientation, a holarchy that reflects the whole of the cosmos at every level within itself down to the minds of the humans who compose it.

Friday, January 9, 2009

The Hypersecond

Sometimes, it feels like the internet's talking to me, trying to tell me things. A moment ago, posting a comment on the latest post at Smoking Mirrors, the verification word was 'hypersec'. My brain couldn't help but interpret that as 'hypersecond', and then immediately after ask itself, 'what in the heck is a hypersecond?'

Time is a nonlinear, fractal thing. It is not the mere ticking of a clock: a clock is nothing more than a machine that attempts to bound infinity within a circle, slice it into arcs, and count them as they pass. A convention, a piece of sophistry, useful but not fundamental. No, time, if you really look at it, is history. Some moments have more of it than others, for in some little changes - little can change - whereas in others there is great ferment, great potential for change. There are moments that are full of peace, which achieve a kind of timelessness (or, one might better say, make the eternal timelessness more perceptible than usual); in other moments, chaos reigns, and since things can go off any which way nothing seems to last for very long at all.

Mathematically, one might picture the entire history of a universe as a vast static structure in an n-dimensional phase space, where n is the number of particles, and thus each point represents a potential material state of that universe. Time appears as connections between the points: points in close proximity to others are close in time, whereas points that are more distant are more separated in time. One might expect the structure that emerges to be very complex, with some points connected to a great profusion of other points, while some points stand all but isolated from the larger structure. The number of paths that can be negotiated through the structure are essentially infinite, each appearing to itself as a consistent and logical timeline.

There's also the possibility of a point from which all other points can be reached. Imagine if you will a sort of still center, a moment of infinite potential when literally anything can happen ... and so, from which, everything happens. It need not be merely the beginning of the universe (though it would be that), nor would it be the end (though in a very real sense it would be that, too.) Looking at such a moment as either the source or the goal of any given timeline wouldn't be quite correct, however; in and of itself, it has no essential superiority over any other moment, for all are equally necessary to the whole. Not a beginning or an end but rather a junction, where all moments meet and and from which any trajectory can be chosen. That moment is the hypersecond.

Thursday, January 8, 2009


Recently I came across a new discipline, calling itself 'synchromysticism'. It's a divinatory method for the 21st century, scrying into the prodigious output of every kind of media and hunting for symbolic clues to the future. Taking its cue from synchronicity, the idea that events may take place in an acausal fashion influenced by other events in the future (or in parallel timelines) as well as in the past, synchromysticism takes the position that if that is the case, we'd expect to find things whose explanation is not mere coincidence. At times resembling a wild magpie hunt for correspondances, the main difficulty would seem to be confirmation bias (though I sometimes wonder if confirmation bias is not simply a flaw within human perception, but an indication of an underlying way of the cosmos, that reality becomes what we believe it to be in a very real, physical sense.) Combing the endless torrent of media and for the clues requires creativity in itself, but also a deep knowledge of symbolism, and the discipline to see not just what one wants to, but what is actually there.

I've linked to some synchromystics in the sidebar, The Cleaver and The Blob: the former merely talks about it, while the latter really does it.

It's still an open question to me whether or not synchromysticism is a useful art or merely a novel form of postmodern masturbation. The latter would be an easy position to take, for as of yet I'm unaware of any useful information to have come out of it. Whether or not such information can be found even assuming it's there is debatable. As a case in point, there are three instances I know of in which 9/11 appears in some way before the fateful day: an episode of the Simpsons, in which the family goes to New York and Bart unaccountably holds up a 9 next to the World Trade Center and laughs; an episode of the short-lived X-Files spinoff Lone Gunman, in which the entire plot more or less resembles what actually happened that day; and The Matrix, in which Neo's passport expires on 09 11 2001. It's hard to credit that the Lone Gunman episode resulted from anything other than a leak from the national security state to the script writers, so close is the correspondance, and the case can certainly be made that the other two instances resulted from similar sources. Whether the origin was transdimensional or merely clandestine, from neither the Simpsons nor the Matrix would it have been possible to forsee the kickoff of the fascism superbowl on that day, at least not without a lot of other data to draw on.

Now, I'm not saying that renders synchromysticism useless, merely very difficult to use accurately. As with any kind of scrying, be it Tarot, crystal balls, the I Ching, or cabala, pulling out straight answers from the source material is difficult at best, and without a pretty sound intuition along with a solid familiarity with the divinatory material, it can be impossible. Learning everything there is to know about the Book of Changes is one thing; studying every movie, TV show, comic book, video game, etc., out there is flat-out impossible. If you watch a lot of trailers you might be able to get a high level symbolic overview of what the TV programs are programming into the mass mind, but if it's clues you're after, you actually have to dive in and watch things. So in addition to the qualities of creativity, knowledge, and discipline already listed, discernment must be added, because if you choose the wrong thing to look at, you may not find what you're looking for.

Or is that the whole point? Not looking for something, but simply looking and trying to really see, without prejudice as to what should be there? Alert for whatever hyperdimensional easter eggs have been hidden inside the media, might you be able to view without being sucked in: remaining detached, conscious and critical even while the flow of flickering imagery attempts to lull you into a suggestible hypnotic state?

Now, strictly speaking, synchromysticism isn't just this discipline I've been outlining. Or if it is, it's a poor name for it, if only because synchronicity would be expected to be pervasive throughout one's life and not simply a feature of the media. Synchronicities are found even in the events of one's day to day life, for instance, as well as throughout all the works of man. One that I just noticed myself, while in conversation, is this: octopus and cactus readily come to mind as two nouns whose plurals, octopi and cacti, end in i. What's another one? Well, I'm sure you all know the plural: illuminati, whose singular is illuminatus. There are other nouns, of course, that have follow this pattern, though precious few of them. And aren't the similarities beyond grammar striking? The illuminati are like an octopus in society, their tentacles stretching everywhere; while at the same time (and I'm using some poetic license here, I admit) they protect their power with their lies just as a cacti protects its water with its thorns. (I also admit to being somewhat flummoxed as to how the platypi fits into this.)

Now, is that a synchronicity? Or merely a coincidence? Certainly no useful information resides in it ... but the mere fact that I noticed it might indicate that a hyperdimensional influence directed the words to form as they did, specifically to plant that correspondance there. Whether they did or not, I don't know.