old conversation with Carl on “our casino economy”

bcc: Carl Freestone <freestonepeaches@gmail.com>,
Flora Schule <floraschule@yahoo.com>,
Robert Menkemeller <robertm@inc-inc.com>,
ttommyvee@aol.com,
Bren Jacobson <bren.jacobson@gmail.com>
date: Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:49 PM

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vDAVZTb08Y_7MUDXuWt4533Mg6hMOz-wdzLXw7Wpwp0/edit

 

Carl Freestone <freestonepeaches@gmail.com>

3/24/09

to me

Great Article again. Your imagery isn’t really imagery. I never have looked at our whole economy as being a “casino economy” but I see that it is. I don’t want to be part of it.

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Carl Freestone <freestonepeaches@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:46 AM, J.R. <144jr144@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Carl Freestone <freestonepeaches@gmail.com> wrote:

Great Article again. Your imagery isn’t really imagery. I never have looked at our whole economy as being a “casino economy” but I see that it is. I don’t want to be part of it.

You call it “our economy.” It is what it is. You are as clear as you are about what it is.
You, as clear as you are, say that you do not want to be part of “our economy.” That is something you say, with a focus on “your part” in “our economy” and then perhaps rejecting or resisting or judging against that. Maybe you would first focus your attention on how you are a function (part) of some other process.
It’s like the game “red light, green light”. I don’t like getting caught all the time. In that game it is usually the one who moves forward slow and steady, making imperceptible movements that wins the game. Usually, the one who runs real fast gets caught. But it was always irritating to me the few times when the one who ran real fast would win. I don’t know any other process that I want to replace the game with. But I am looking. The new game would have to work for me as well as everyone else without oppression being a part of the equation.
You center your creation on a negation or resistance and you create only destruction?
Ecologically, your organism is like a protein or mite on the surface of the earth. Economically, your organism is still like a protein or mite on the surface of the earth, through your cooperation with other proteins or mites- your social interactions with them- are still simultaneously economical and ecological.
That sounds a lot like the line in Matrix, where Agent Smith says, “you humans are like a virus…” Maybe compared to God, I am like a protein or mite. But then I am told that I am made in his likeness and image.
God is a three letter word, a metaphor, one unit of language. Yes, you have been told that you are made from the model or mold of… language.
Those are distinct contexts or filters, but you as an organism is the same content. If you choose to limit your experience of yourself to a particular contextual filter at a particular time, that is what you chose until you choose something else.
Your part has been exactly what it has been. Maybe you can operate without any part/acting role/function in that particular system (“organism”),
How does a protein or mite operate without any part/acting role/function in the system it finds itself in?
I said maybe.
but that may leave you with certain results and circumstances that you value- or not.
Someone who exerts no formal influence- like a child or housewife that simply follows the instructions of those who more formally participate in “our economy”- live on the generosity and productivity of others, and, in the case of a housewife, within an informal exchange and often a formal contract of marriage. Even marriage is a contract. Further, even though the “slave” exerts no influence over their activities, they still participate.
If you had the land, livestock, and any relevant military sufficiency to hunt and gather and grow your sustenance directly from the earth and interact with no people at all, you probably would still interact with people. No matter what you do, there would be risk. Risk means probabilities- even possibilities. Consider that you cannot opt out of risk.
Further, you cannot opt out of life. It has you. You have it. It is you. You are it.
Consider that you have had it that money is evil. Money is money.
Evil is “trading aliveness for survival”, according to Werner.
Then evil is a distinction regarding a way of doing things. If you make evil wrong, did you miss the point entirely?
If you have made a dichotomy between the linguistic units “survival” and “aliveness,” I would direct you to stop. Survival is surviving. Aliveness is living.
They are not opposites. They are distinct contexts. Get it.
That’s fine. Maybe there is some distnguishing to do in regard to what you have told yourself about money that frightened you, since money itself is a piece of paper- like a check. Unless you got a bad paper cut once from a check, I wonder if there is something else that you have been fearing that if you just go ahead and fear now, then you can be done with the fear.
You can get that little round tokens of coins are just little round tokens of coins- and that sometimes some people will allow you to influence their behavior if you bring them a bunch of those “tokens of appreciation and influence” and ask for them to give you some perfectly good bulk grains or a perfectly good chiropractic adjustment simply for a bunch of tokens or a piece of paper. They will even let you play a few rounds at that roulette wheel with those tokens, and you have many alternatives as to how you invest those tokens. You can invest them in roulette spins, in bulk grains, in services, in hiring employees, in a computer, in diapers, in gold, or in more paper (or some other tokens, like nickels instead of dimes- I hear that dimes are twice as good).
What part of yourself have you been rejecting, resisting, or judging? Create how you have been doing that… with you as the source, and suddenly it is entirely optional.


Carl

Advertisements

%d bloggers like this: