Comment

If you want to create change, talk to the corporations not the government.

Our society is mechanized by capitalism, the corporation a microcosm of the machine—the machine created and operating for the benefit of a few people at the top.

Since corporations own politics, through lobbying and campaign funding, the overarching machine includes all of us. We are all caught in the web. We are all cogs.

There is preferably little contact between the CEO and the cogs of a massive corporation. Likewise there is preferably little interaction between the people and those unelected professional political managers and experts that presidents and elected representatives call on when they need advice on a particular legislative matter. These are the people who really run things, the wizards of this Oz. After all the people they advise are simply politicians, not experts in business, economics, psychology, and international relations like themselves.

We are expected to remain silent. Let the machine work its magic. We are aware of the machine, but we are hypnotized into believing that noone created the machine, that the machine simply exists. We equate it with "the market"— a collective but independent and now global entity that we really have no control over.  The invisible hand.

Indeed, the people that created the hand want to keep it invisible. But we have hands too. We can manipulate the system for the greater good. 

The people in power would like us to think that they have no power, that they are victims of the machine to. They must submit themselves to the power of the free market. They are just trying to survive like everyone else.

The world isn't fair, they say. But that's not true. Nature always finds balance, a sort of natural justice.

It's the system that isn't fair. And they created the system.

They use concepts like social darwinism, survival of the fittest, and free markets to justify their indifference to the life and survival of those they manipulate in their profit machine.

It's true, the machine is almost too big to effect. It has proven to be too big to fail.

The traditional processes of representative democracy move like molasses, the range of the conversation and choices given rarely have to do with what we want, but rather concern what they want.

But there is an achilles heal. The stock market. An economic body that is so malleable to public and analyst opinion that it can crash simply because of collective sentiment or fear. It’s all about perception and feeling. That's something we can effect.

Corporations are slaves to the stock market. That's why they constantly seek short-term profit rather than sustainable growth or investment in the future.

Voicing dissent and disgust via blogging, social media, email campaigns, and live protest—directed straight at the corporation—is the most effective way to create change. After all, the corporations are running this show, not elected officials. When politicians catch wind of these direct actions, they'll jump on board too. But we can't wait for them.

My favorite corporate enemy is Monsanto. The people are affirming the bad name Agent Orange, GMOs, and monocropping already have.

Comment

1 Comment

10 Amazing Facts About the American Government's Psychic Program- Project Stargate

Transient

1. The American government used psychics in operations and experiments for over 20 years, with total funding of $20 million—eventually known as Project Stargate.

Transient

2. Starting in the 1970s, psychics were researched and trained at Stanford Research Institute (SRI).

Transient

3. Psychics produced detailed renderings of secret Soviet bases, the whereabouts of Red Brigade terrorism hostages in Italy, and the location of victims in the Israeli/Iran hostage crisis.

What color are my knickers?

What color are my knickers?

4. A media frenzy ensued when  the Project Stargate was declassified in 1995 (Ted Koppel's Nightline, ABC, The Washington Post, The New York Times, etc.)

Hey, Joe.

Hey, Joe.

5. On ABC's Nightline, one of the operatives, Joe McMoneagle was put to the test by ABC anchor Ted Koppel. He proved the authenticity of remote viewing in front of millions.

Remote view me anytime, Djuna.

Remote view me anytime, Djuna.

6. In 1984 SRI psychic researchers organized successful 10,000-mile remote viewing experiments between Moscow and San Francisco with a famous Russian healer Djuna Davitashvili.  Djuna successfully described where a colleague would be hiding in San Francisco, the experiment closely guarded by the USSR Academy of Sciences. 

Drawing's (right) accurately illustrating a crane inside a Russian underground base from remote viewing psychics.

Drawing's (right) accurately illustrating a crane inside a Russian underground base from remote viewing psychics.

7. The project began in 1974  when psychics accurately described a secret Soviet weapons laboratory in the far reaches of Siberia. The trial was so accurate that a formal Congressional investigation was launched to determine if there had been a breach in National Security. There hadn't been.

Remote peer review.

Remote peer review.

8. Data from formal scientific Stanford Research Institute investigations over the course of 20 years were highly statistically significant—thousands of times greater than chance. The results were published in prestigious scientific journals—Nature, The Proceedings of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and The Proceedings of the American Academy of Sciences.

This movie sucked.

This movie sucked.

9. In 2009 the Hollywood Film Men Who Stare at Goats—starring  George Clooney,Ewan McGregor, Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey—satirized the Stargate Project. Unfortunately the movie’s farcical nature served only to make a joke out of the program's research legacy spanning two decades. 

Or is it?

Or is it?

10. In 1995 the Stargate Project was terminated, not because the psychic phenomenon didn’t exist—it was statistically verifiable. But the techniques were varied and results often vague. In the words of the final report “Though a statistically significant effect has been observed in the laboratory…we conclude that continued use of remote viewing in intelligence gathering operations is not warranted.” With drones who needs psychics? 

For more information, see this Reality Sandwich article on Project Stargate, from which these points were based.

1 Comment

Comment

A-theism, A Bridge Between Atheists and Religion

artwork by Gower Parks from England and the Octopus 1928, by Clough Williams-Ellis.

artwork by Gower Parks from England and the Octopus 1928, by Clough Williams-Ellis.

Is it necessary to believe in God to be spiritual? 

Maybe not.

Many folks these days consider themselves to be spiritual but not bound to any particular religion. Around 25% of American’s fall into this category according to numerous polls, while one pole illustrates that 72% of millennials identify as spiritual but not religious. We can assume that many of these folks do believe in God. But many may not.

Being spiritual without a particular belief in God isn’t new. Some traditional religions are basically atheist, or rather a-theist—a term we’ll explore. 

Taoist spirituality lacks an anthropomorphic God. Instead what they call the Tao—literally “The Way”—functions as a universal law or essence. The Way is not a conscious thinking being like you or I, but it maintains a sort of intelligence or consciousness. Most importantly, it gives birth to all things and maintains natural order in the physical and spiritual universe. 

The Buddhists also lack an anthropomorphic god at the the top of their philosophical pyramid, although the concept of spirit remains—as do various deities and etheric beings that are subject to the to natural cycles of change and suffering, just as humans are. Despite there being no God, there is life after death—or at least awareness after death. The spiritual hierarchy of reality is throned by none other than consciousness itself.

Outside of these traditions, what does an a-theist spirituality look like? 

An a-theist spirituality sees the world as utterly connected and beautiful. Some sort of spirit pervades everything. Non-local consciousness is real in this world. A-theist spirituality affirms the the existence of psychic phenomena. 

The theist loves to proclaim that “God is in everything”. But at the same time, our concepts of a celestial giant often don’t fit into our experience of the natural world, or even the spiritual world. We can’t envision a big fat God in an orange, or even a majestic redwood tree. In order to “see God in everything” we are asked to imagine each physical object is a tentacle of a giant God-octopus, its head somewhere off in the sky.

I use the term a-theist, inspired by my uncle, a former professor of anthropology, whose self-proclaimed atheism often irked my Catholic family. One day, when I was older, I asked him about it. He said, “I’m not agnostic, because that’s like saying that I don’t know. do know what I believe. I say I’m a-theist because, like the Buddhists,  I don’t believe in a personal God.” 

If we cut off the head of the octopus, the tentacles still wiggle. 

So what’s making the tentacles move? What is the intelligence that remains in all of life, though it doesn’t have any sort of head? Equally distributed life force. Holographic creative essence. The big bang with every point as its center.

Biblical authors may have got the garden part of the God story correct. Perhaps God is more plant-like, than Octopus-like. In a spiritual garden every node holds the intelligence of the total organism equally. There is no head. There is no master-brain. But there is natural intelligence and spirit. Nonlocal consciousness.

The a-theist looks at any object or living being as if it were a god.

Everything is divine. The a-theist sees that, fully appreciating each living being and each physical part of the universe as truly miraculous due to its mere existence. When we see the world this way, we can seek to learn from it, and really learn about it—instead of always brushing it off as just a part of God, another clone tentacle.

Trying to see God in everything—instead of seeing the spirit or consciousness in everything—can be a conundrum since we are often taught that God is a mystery that we can’t possibly understand. Therefor, when I look at the orange and say “this is a part of God” the theist program sends my mind away from the object and into the concept of God—which is a confusing haze since I simultaneously believe I can’t possibly understand God. 

My mother, a Catholic school teacher—who went to Catholic school her whole life, including Catholic university—tells the true story of a student so distraught over the concept of God that it was giving him intense headaches. He couldn’t stop thinking about the big fat man in the sky. 

The monsignor came to talk to him one day. He said, “Have you ever made a hole in the sand at the beach and watched a wave fill up the hole? Do you think the whole ocean could fit in that tiny hole?” 

“No,” the boy said. 

The monsignor said, “Well that hole is like your brain. You can’t possibly fit all of God in there.”

The boy, feeling he had official permission, finally stopped thinking about God. His headaches went away.

There are multiple ways to understand this story. It illustrates the infinite nature of the divine. The rational mind often has a hard time grappling with the implications of infinity. Similarly, concepts of quantum physics and non-local consciousness may not sit well with it.

In addition, maybe the infinite universe can’t fit within the finite concept of God. Maybe that contributed to the boy’s headaches. Conceptual pains would understandably increase if one was contemplating the reality of an imaginary anthropomorphic meme.

As a concept—a program—God just doesn’t work. It makes our mental, and spiritual, computers malfunction. A program is a set of commands for achieving a certain calculation. The program of God might actually be a virus that causes us to bypass healthier programs that actually work—like spirit and nonlocal consciousness.

Some historical religions that also saw the God program as virus.

The Gnostics, branches of both the Judaic and Christian lineages, had interesting ideas that mirror our a-theist conversation. 

They believed that the God of the Old Testament was in fact a demiurge, an egoic creator god, that functioned much like a demon. The demiurge was a sort of fallen angel that constructed a false world, a world of illusion similar to that expressed by buddhist concept of Maya. The demiurge sought to enslave the human spirit in its program of hard matter. 

The supreme good—the truth behind the world’s illusion—was, rather, Sophia. Sophia stood for wisdom, the divine feminine essence that permeated the universe. Sounds a lot like the concepts the Tao and nonlocal consciousness doesn’t it?

Feminine Conceptions of the divine provide better spiritual programs.

As stated,the Gnostic concept of Sophia is female. Similarly, the Tao concept has a female tonality, referred to by Lao Tzu as the mother of all things.

Our biblically derived concept of God, however, reflects the ancient male ego engaged in tribal aggression. Tribal battles speckle history, the victor’s deity becoming God, the enslaved culture’s god lowered to the status of demon—or feminized sub-deity if it were lucky. Furthermore, the champion was most often depicted as a warrior-god. No doubt, Yahweh and other male gods were mere cosmic projections of earthly chieftains or big-men.

The goddesses of ancient religions, on the other hand, are often depicted as the mothers and protectors of nature, fertility, and love.

Modern Goddess worshippers, some inspired by women’s rights and neopaganism, are often ambivalent on the issue of monotheism. It doesn’t really matter to a Goddess worshipper whether there are one or many Goddesses because a goddess functions much like nature herself, giving birth to other goddesses and gods the way nature gives birth to myriad flora and fauna. She doesn’t have the macho “there can only be one!” attitude. There can be many.

An anthropomorphic Goddess figure is not the one and only answer to our quest for a vessel of the infinite. However, concepts of the divine feminine serve as a better program for an integral form of spirituality that values, love, nature, justice, and nourishment—without the male concepts of ownership and divine supremacy.

A-bridge. 

The a-theist’s beliefs posit them somewhere between their dogmatic comrades on both sides—traditional religionists and materialist atheists. But they’re also a bridge between the two. The proponents of the divine feminine don’t need the bridge, as they already know how to swim.

A-theist spirituality is intimately engaged with nature. It values science but isn’t blinded by its biases.  All is truly one in the a-theist universe—holographic without the weight of some central star to orbit around. Every point of the universe is the center of the universe, a reality philosophers and astronomers can agree upon.

For the spiritual a-theist, free of God,  various possibilities emerge: meditative bliss, cosmic interconnectivity, lucid dreaming, out of body experiences, healing at a distance. These are benefits both the religious and the atheist have most likely yet to enjoy. (Actually quite a few fundamentalists, religious and atheist, run to either end of the spectrum after being spooked by endeavors in spiritual exploration.)

Perhaps skeptics and materialist atheists shut themselves off to psi phenomenon, and spiritual practice in general, due to an underlying resistance to traditional concepts of God. They sweep all nonlocal spiritual phenomenon under the magic carpet, assuming an irremovable connection of all things nonlocal and spiritual to God. If this is the case, could the consciousness movement budge a bit? Maybe then the materialists might be more willing to explore the emerging scientific phenomenon of nonlocal consciousness.

Our friends on the other-other side of the fence need some help too. The traditional religionists need mystical connection to spirituality rather than dogma structures and threats of celestial punishment. They also need to see the natural world as good, ie. divine. When God is separate from man and nature, threatening us to follow his law, we sacrifice the the sanctity and beauty of life on earth for imagined rewards in heaven. And we destroy our precious resources because we think it really doesn’t matter what happens here.

When you free yourself of someone else’s God—whether it be the big fat man in the sky, a big fat machine of exclusively-material evolution—or an octopus—magical things happen. All of nature blossoms—holographically divine. You’ll want to make the world a better place…maybe even heaven on earth.

 
 


Comment

Comment

Bad Futurism- Do you want a better future where humans live in harmony with nature? These materialist geeks don't.

Transient

When we delve the depths of contemporary futurism, a dangerous dualism becomes apparent. 

Futurism is a loose term. Many self-proclaim the title. The vague umbrella—overtly recognized or not—includes forward thinking scientists, engineers, science-fiction writers, mystic receivers of futuristic revelation, artists, filmmakers, and even marketing consultants.   

Ironically, those who claim to be the most rational, skeptic, and scientific may be the most dangerous. In this article I'll explore—in a totally biased semi-fictional narrative—the dichotomous futuristic visions presented by materialist techno-optimists vs. the more spiritually openminded.

How did we get here?

In the last century, science began to understand the true foundations of matter. Humans mined the quantum realm, presenting scientific theories that stirred the mystic's age-old fantasy of becoming one with everything. Our power to manipulate the physical world to our own ends reached its pinnacle. We've successfully engineered ecosystems (not always for the better), towering cities, global transportation and international commerce. We also create, on a different scale, with microchips and the processing power they make available. Indeed, when we conceive of technology now, we often think of software, the internet and its world of information.

The various data—personal, social, and commercial—accrues at a furious rate as processing power improves exponentially. Singularity is near.

Meanwhile, despite this exciting realm of pure information, the environment plunges deeper into crisis, and our inoculated environmentalism falls deeper into one of those too-long naps it shouldn't have taken late mid-afternoon.

But our dual futurists have different visions of where this is all going.

Even our techno-optimist seeks an escape from the mountain of exterior knowledge he downloads daily, juggles, and regurgitates. However, he seeks his rapture not away from, but through, technology. He fantasizes about merging with the machine, uploading his mind onto a computer. He believes technology can and will solve everything.

This brand of futurist sees the quantum realm, but through Google goggles. Though he's read up on all the quantum physics discoveries of the last century, the information just doesn't quite settle in. The quantum fields smudge on his screen, becoming particles. He sees the world as physical chunks, not waves. It's easier that way. 

Now that our pragmatist has found his particle, he can get back to what he really cares about—what he might build with it. Computers, microscopic video cameras, fast cars, speedboats, rocket ships; virtual reality video games, prescription methamphetamine for the modern businessman.  Reality is starting to look like his techno-fantastic dreams. 

As technology advances further, however, "reality" just isn't good enough anymore.

The everyday world is stale compared to the vastness of the imagination, stale even in comparison to the 3D gesture-sensing entertainment future-minded individuals prefer to consume. 

Exploring ways to continually fix reality, active participation in one's own evolution becomes necessary. Possible solutions include DNA manipulation and cyborg add-ons. 

But alas, this fellow has been polluting that which he sought to fix for quite a while now. Thus, we have no other choice but to label him the Bad Futurist.

His building block understanding of the world may be the only thing that needs fixing.

What if the building blocks are made of consciousness?

To this point, some dare not venture. Though quantum physics discoveries and a growing list of scientific experiments offer ample evidence of non-local consciousness—a non-material field from which human awareness finds its source—whole communities of supposedly forward-thinking individuals turn a blind eye to the facts. Our Bad Futurist is one of them. 

But there is a utopian visionary with the bravery to embrace the implications of the quantum realm—the Good Futurist.

She's a cultural engineer, a visionary seeker who embraces technology, but also history, and our greatest heritage: Planet Earth. She sees nature as something technology should mimic, not fix. Furthermore, she questions the idea of progress, while recognizing those culturally and technologically advanced cultures of the past. Frankly, she finds our modern culture, economics, and politics to be savage in many ways.

This Good Futurist sees consciousness as the supreme technology.

She knows that an internet-like system has been available for aeons to those who venture to meditate and to learn the mechanics of consciousness-based healing. The human body, human mind, and human spirit make up the most advanced mobile device the world has ever seen. Current technologies, like b-day reminding iPhones and wifi, merely imitate the inherent technologies of the mind-body-spirit. Yes, I'm talking about psi phenomenon—telepathy, remote viewing, and the vastly altered states offered up by meditation, yoga, and dream practice.

The Bad Futurist seeks transcendental experiences too.

He seeks ever higher states of consciousness brought on by intellectual stimulation, entertainment, adventure, power, and maybe even drugs. He seeks virtual realities that will free him from the mundane body and stressful physical world. He attains weightlessness during trips to outer space that cost him $250,000.

Like his counterpart, he also sees his body and brain as technology—albeit hardware, not spiritual software. Accordingly, he seeks an upgrade. 

The Bad Futurist soon finds himself chasing the ultimate prize, coveted by alchemist and bored billionaire alike. Immortality. 

The spiritualist has an interest in immortality as well, but it's different. Evidence of reincarnation suggests immortality is already ours. Meditation makes the eternal realm more tangible in the here and now. In addition, the Good Futurist may live a perversely long and vigorous life due to a moderate diet and emotional well-being. 

The alternate life-extension method is DNA manipulation and cyborg add-ons to the human body. As we look a little deeper, it becomes clear that extreme techno-optimists seek a prize more illusive than the modern health-conscious alchemist's—physical immortality.

If vampiric plans for physical immortality fail, there's plan B—uploading the human mind into the body of a robot avatar. Alternatively, we might hook ourselves up to a computer and mentally travel into a sphere of purely digital existence, like Tron or The Matrix. And let's not forget manipulation of the cellular atomic core to attain a state of pure electro-magnetic frequency. If we can manipulate the nuclear core of matter, we can, by all means, manipulate our body's matter to reach a higher state. (I once heard a futurist and professional media figure actually propose this.) 

Meanwhile, the Good Futurist says, "I'm already there." And she got there without DNA manipulation, prescription drugs, or cyborg add-ons.

Whose Utopia? 

To the Good Futurist, humanity's next step is a world of creativity, spiritual exploration, expanded consciousness, communal living, healthy ecosystems, fair and just economics, real-time democracy, and long life through natural means. With a dash of automation, rapid worldwide transportation, and tasteful gadgetry.

The alternate future entails continual domination of the biosphere, manipulation of natural systems and the human genome, science for profit (not the advancement  of mankind), and manic states brought on by pharmaceutical drugs without bothering to recognize the tried and true power of consciousness. Oh, and vampire-like immortality, cyborg add-ons, and robot avatars. Sexy.

Whose future sounds more crazy?

Comment

Comment

Your Mind Isn’t All In Your Brain. It Isn’t All In Your Body Either.

WHAT IS NON-LOCAL CONSCIOUSNESS?

The mind is not limited to your physical body— consciousness is the essence of all things. This understanding is in direct opposition to the materialist’s worldview.

Now scientists are confirming what mystics have known for millennia.

The findings of the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research explain it well:“[T]here exists a much deeper and more extensive source of reality, which is largely insulated from direct human experience, representation, or even comprehension.”

They call this domain the “Source.”

As stated in the resultant Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research book Filters and Reflections- 

"We reject the popular presumption that all modes of human information processing are completely executed within the physiological brain, and that all experiential sensations are epiphenomena of the biophysical and biochemical states thereof. Rather, we … regard the brain as a neurologically localized utility that serves a much more extended “mind,” or “psyche,” or “consciousness” that far transcends the brain in its capacity, range, endurance, and subtlety of operation, and that is far more sophisticated than a mere antenna for information acquisition or a silo for its storage. In fact, we … contend that it [extended mind, psyche, consciousness] is the ultimate organizing principle of the universe, creating reality through its ongoing dialogue with the unstructured potentiality of the Source. In short, we subscribe to the assertion of [astrophysicist] Arthur Eddington nearly a century ago: “Not once in the dim past, but continuously, by conscious mind is the miracle of the Creation wrought.”

Comment

Comment

"LOST VEGAS"- This Poem Was Created As The Result of A Random Tweet



Emily Calvin (@KITTEHMIEN) tweeted a request for inspiration, we responded. She answered back with this.

LOST VEGAS

The curse of the human ability to articulate, without understanding the implications

of, the question, “Who are you?” rests at the very heart of humanity’s existential crisis.

I asked Las Vegas, “Who are you?”

It answered, “Streets of neon lights; debauchery, sex, and gambling; night

life; the freedom to express the human draw toward heathenism; the crime scene of

Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing; Hunter S. Thompson’s playground.”

Then Las Vegas asked me, “Who are you?”

And I answered, “A heathen; an obsessive traveler with horrible social

anxiety; a masochist; Hunter S. Thompson’s birthday twin; a homebody.”

The question, “Who are you?” is not to be confused with the subtext that often

nonverbally communicates, “Please tell me you’re whoever I want you to be.”

So I asked Las Vegas, “Who do you want me to be?”

And it answered, “The female Hunter S. Thompson with slightly more

discretion.”

And Las Vegas asked me, “Who do you want me to be?”

I answered, “Free from the corruption of money and greed.”

And when the answer to, “Who are you?” is incongruent with the answer to “Who do

you want me to be?” we must then ask what needs to change and why, in order to

challenge the integrity of who we really think we are or want to be.

So finally, I asked Las Vegas, “What would you change about me and why?

And Las Vegas answered, “I would throw out your intuition and give your

a set of balls; I would rid you of your fear of going too far; I would rid you of your

fear…because I would like to see you loosen the fuck up and learn that fun does not

always lead to tragedy. I would like you to be less focused on the appearance of our

city and more focused on what our city, and any city, has to offer to artistic, creative,

hedonistic minds like yours.”

Then Las Vegas asked me, “What would you change about me and why?”

And I answered, “The neon lights; the overstimulation; the pathetic

attempt to mask the misery of debt and addiction…because I would like to see less

corruption and more love. I would like Las Vegas to cater to a people focused less

on partying for partying’s sake and more on transforming a culture of excess into a

culture of free, artistic expression.”

But the only valid answer I have found to the question, “Who are you?” is, “I am

whoever I want to be, wherever I am and whatever I’m doing.”

- Emily Calvin

emilycalvin.com

@KITTEHMIEN

Comment